Old Orthodox Wiki - Recently Updated Pages

Blessed John the Merciful of Rostov

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:20:34 CST

From: http://molonlabe70.blogspot.com/2009/09/blessed-john-hairy-and-fool-for-christ.html

Commemorated on September 3

Blessed John the Merciful of Rostov (also known as "the Hairy") struggled at Rostov in the exploit of holy foolishness, enduring much deprivation and sorrow. He did not have a permanent shelter, and at times took his rest at the house of his spiritual Father, a priest at the church of the All-Holy, or with one of the aged widows.

Living in humility, patience and unceasing prayer, he spiritually nourished many people, among them St Irenarchus, Hermit of Rostov (January 13). After a long life of pursuing asceticism, he died on September 3, 1580 and was buried, according to his final wishes, beside the church of St Blaise beyond the altar.

He had "hair upon his head abundantly," therefore he was called "Hairy." The title "Merciful" was given to Blessed John because of the many healings that occurred at his grave, and also in connection with the memory of the holy Patriarch John the Merciful (November 12), whose name he shared.

Questions about Nil Sorsky

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:49:35 CST

I like Nil Sorsky and I don't want to criticize him any more than necessary, but I have learned some things about him that make me question his sainthood.

First of all, he apparently was not canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church until the 19th century, and he has not been canonized by any Old Believer group to my knowledge. Second, his position was rejected by the Stoglav sobor, and I don't want to go against Stoglav without more information. Third, his ascetic teachings are considered to be "along the lines of" Gregory Sinaite (contemporary of Gregory Palamas) on hesychasm, and thus should be considered part of the debate about hesychasm.

For these reasons, I can't consider him a saint.

The Culture of Old Believers of Baltic States

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:18:38 CST

From http://www.ldm.lt/Naujausiosparodos/Old_Believers_b.en.htm

The Culture of Old Believers of Baltic States Museum of Applied Art, 10 03 2005–19 06 2005
About Old Belief The Short History of Old Believers in Lithuania The first Old Believers in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Mass Emigration from Russia. The Establishment of Old Believers’ Parishes in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania The Old Believers and their numbers	The formation of Old Believers’ Communities in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Peculiarities of ecclesiastical organisation and religious doctrine The Old Believers in the Society of the Grand Duchy The Old Believers in Lithuania in the 19th and 20th centuries

About Old Belief

The term ‘Old Belief’ (Russian staroobryadchestvo, staroverye) refers to the churches and religious communities that do not recognise the reforms launched in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 17th century by Patriarch Nikon (1652-1666). The Old Belief is a peculiar eschatological variety of Russian Orthodoxy. From the established Russian Orthodox Chruch it differs not so much in its doctrine as in its rites and observances. The priestless Old Believers also have peculiar ecclesiastical structures of their own as well as their own interpretation of certain elements of the Holy Writ and the Tradition. The Old Believers traditionally cross themselves with two fingers, and they recognise only pre-reform icons, liturgical books and observances, and the eight-armed cross. The priestless Old Believers have no regular clergy (and no three-level hierarchy as the Orthodox Church has), and their liturgies and religious observances are conducted by ‘spiritual fathers’ (Russian dukhovny otets or nastavnik) elected among the parishioners themselves. The early Old Believers were characterised by their hostility to all things secular, especially the State and a society ruled, as they thought, by the Antichrist, their refusal to entertain any contacts with ‘wordly people’ (with whom they would not eat, drink or pray together), their anxious expectancy of the ‘world’s end’, their rigid asceticism, their abidance by old traditions, rites and lifestyles, etc. The sociocultural changes of the 19th and 20th centuries as well as internal debates among the Old Believers led to a weakening of their eschatological way of thinking, a relaxation of their ascetic way of life and a more conciliatory attitude towards things secular. An important difference in comparison with the official Orthodox Church is that among the Old Believers (especially the priestless ones) laymen may play a prominent role.

The Old Belief has never been monolithic either organisationally or with regard to religious teachings. As early as the 17th century, the Old Belief split up into two main branches: priestly and priestless Old Believers. The former recognise the institution of priesthood, whereas the latter hold that since the Antichrist took over, there is no ‘true’ clergy left. Both among priestly and priestless Old Believers there used to be a multitude of movements and sects, such as the fugitive priestless Old Believers, the Order of Belokrinitsa, the Chapel movement (chasovennoe dvizhenie), the Pomorians, the Fedoseyans, the Filippians, the stranniki, the spasovtsy and many others. Most of these had become extinct before World war I.

At present there are more than ten different Old Believer’s churches and religious organisations, established in Russia, Belarus, the Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvija, Estonia, Poland, Romania and other countries. According to estimations of Russian researchers, the overall number of Old Believers in Russia and elsewhere approximates two millions, though others consider it to be over three millions. The official names of the two priestless Old Believers’s communities are Russian Orthodox Church of Old Believers (since 1988 this is the name given to the priestly Old Believers in Russia and other CIS countries who recognise the clergy of the Order of Belokrinitsa; their administrative centre is the Rogozha convent in Moscow; another centre of this denomination, and their metropolitan see, is in Braila, Romania); and the Old Orthodox Church (these are the successors of the priestly Old Believers who did not recognise the Order of Belokrinitsa established in 1746 but instead set up their own ecclesiastical hierarchy, headed by archbishop Nikola Pozdeyev, in 1923; since 1963 their administrative centre is Novozybkovo in the Bryansk District, Russia). Active communities can be found in Russia, the Ukraine, Moldova, Romania and other countries.

Nowadays the most widespread movement among the priestless Old Believers is that of the Fedoseyans (fedoseevtsy). In the early 20th century they were (alongside the Chapel movement) the most important group of priestless Old Believers, with about 2,5 million followers according to some data. However, in the 19th and especially in the early 20th century many priestless parishes recognised religious marriages and became Pomorians (pomortsy). Nowadays, the Fedoseyans have no official structures uniting and leading their parishes. Traditionally, however, their most prestigious religious centre is the Preobrazhensk convent of Moscow, called The Old Pomorian Celibate Christian Community of Old Believers. The official name of the Pomorian community of priestless Old Believers is Old Orthodox Pomorian Church. It has parishes in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Belarus, the Ukraine and Russia (in these countries they are headed by National Councils and Spiritual Commissions), the USA, Brasil and elsewhere.

The Short History of Old Believers in Lithuania

The first Old Believers in the Grand Duchy

of Lithuania

The first Old Believers settled in the lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 1650s and 1660s, in areas now belonging to Latvia and Belarus. In 1660, the first Old Believers’ prayer house was established in Liginiški, the present-day town of Daugavpils. About 1685, Old Believers began to settle in Vetka, near Gomel’ (in the province of Minsk), which later on, in the first half of the 18th century, was to become one of the important religious centres of priestly Old Believers in the Grand Duchy.

As far as we know, the first mention of Old Believers’ settlements on the territory of present-day Lithuania in the historical sources goes back to 1679. According to the so-called Degučiai Chronicle, an important monument of the Old Believers’ written tradition, a certain Trofim Ivanov, a captain of the fusiliers who took part in the siege of the Solovki Monastery on one of the islands in the White Sea, deserted from the army, driven by remorse for the cruel treatment of the monks of Solovki, and became one of the first Old Believers settling in Lithuania.

Yet between 1679 and 1710 the number of Old Believers’ settlement in present-day Lithuania was still small. It is the Degučiai Chronicle that provides us with reliable data on the first Old Believers’ prayer house established in Lithuania. It was erected in the village of Puščia, near Kriaunos in the present-day Rokiškis District. The first minister in the parish of Puščia seems to have been Afanasy (or Antony) Terentyevich (1668-1775), who is known to have held this office also in two other parishes in Lithuania and South-Eastern Latvia (Liginiškės and Baltrukai). In the first half of the 18th century priestless Old Believers’ parishes were established in the North-West of the Grand Duchy and also in Courland. Priestly Old Believers’ parishes predominated in the East of the Grand Duchy.

Mass Emigration from Russia.

The Establishment of Old Believers’

Parishes in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

As was the case with Protestantism in Western and Central Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, the Old Believers’ movement of the 17th and 18th centuries paid little heed to the borders and political divisions that ran across Eastern and Central Europe. In the 18th century the Old Believers’ world already encompassed a huge territory spreading from the environs of Kaunas and Tartu in the West to the settlements scattered over the vast expanses of Siberia in the East.

The establishment of Fedoseyan communities in the Grand Duchy in the 18th century was caused by mass emigration of Old Believers as a result of disturbances among the Russian peasantry. One of the principal causes of emigration was the religious persecution of Old Believers in their home country. An important factor was the tolerance shown to dissenters by the rulers, the gentry and the Catholic Church in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Moreover, the doctrine of Fedosy Vasilyev and his followers was preached with success in the Commonwealth.

In the first decade of the 18th century the peasant and Old Believer movement gained a hitherto unwitnessed impetus in Russia and reached the Commonwealth, which has a large stretch of state border in common with this country. The Russian government was forced to deal with the problem of peasant emigration. At first, it tried to stop it by means of administrative measures. In 1716, Czar Peter I issued a decree granting the Old Believers ‘unqualified’ freedom of religion, but in return for this leniency the Old Believers had to pay twice the usual amount of taxes to the State if they stuck to the ‘Old Rite’ and refused to embrace the Orthodox State religion.

In the first half of the 18th century, the motives inclining Russians to emigrate to the Grand Duchy were of various kinds. For many peasants and small tradesmen, the main motive (as had been the case with previous waves of migration from the Principality of Muscovy) was the hope of finding a better place to live abroad, to improve their economic conditions, to escape the taxes and tributes levied by the State as well as the arbitrary rule of landlords and officials. Some of them were attracted or enticed by the generosity of the Lithuanian gentry, who welcomed new settlers on their estates and often offered them protection. Emigration to the Grand Duchy was also favoured by geographical conditions, because there was a long stretch of common border between Russia and the Commonwealth, and in the 18th century it was not effectively controlled on either side.

Religious motives, however, werer paramount. When asked to explain their reasons for emigrating, the Old Believers often mentioned religious persecution in Russia as well as the ecclesiastical authorities’ ‘harsh and cruel’ endeavours to restrain their parishioners or to force the Old Believers back into the fold of the Synodal Church. Part of the Russian Old Believers wished to keep intact and openly to practice their form of worship. In the Life of Feodosy Vasilyev we read that his ardent wish was “diligently to devote his soul to the ancient tradition of the Holy fathers”. The emigration of priestless Old Believers was also encouraged by their eschatological way of thinking as well as by their conviction that with the ‘end of the world’ at hand, it was impossible to live in a society and a state governed by the Antichrist; the Old Believers’ philosophy of life induced them to see themselves as perpetual refugees.

In the first three decades of the 18th century there were large groups of Russian immigrants not only in the Eastern lands of the Grand Duchy (present-day Belarus), but also in the North-West (present-day Lithuania). The flood of emigrants from Russia reached its culmination in the 1710s and 1720s. By 1760 there were at least eight Old Believers’ parishes in present-day Lithuania, judging by the number of prayer houses. Most prayer houses could be found in the North-East and the East of Lithuania.

According to several sources, nine new Old Believers’ churches were erected in the lands of present-day Lithuania between 1760 and 1795. We have exact data for Dudiškės (now in the Trakai District, 1763), Palivarkas (now in the Zarasai District, 1763). Švilpiškės (now in the Rokiškis District, 1786); at the close of the 18th century there were Old Believers’ churches in Rimkai, now in the Jonava District, Svetorėčė, now in the Utena District, and Puščia, now in the Anykščiai District. In the same period, prayer houses seem to have been in use in Sipailiškis, now in the Rokiškis District, Perelozai, now in the Jonava District, and Švenčionys. In all, there were at least 16 Old Believers’ parishes in the lands of present-day Lithuania at the end of the 18th century (judging by the number of prayer houses).

In the late 18th century Russian emigrants could be found in all districts of the provinces of Vilnius and Trakai as well as of the Duchy of Samogitia, whose centres are on present-day Lithuanian territory. It was precisely between the 1770s and the 1790s that the most important Old Believers’ colonies in the North-East (Puščia, Stirniškės, Degučiai, Palivarkas, Samaniai etc.) and partly also those of Central Lithuania (Paežeriai, Perelozai, Baltramiškis etc.) and South Lithuania (Dudiškės etc.), the majority of which still exists nowadays, established themselves.

The formation of Old Believers’ Communities

in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Peculiarities

of ecclesiastical organisation and religious doctrine

Unlike Protestantism, the Old Belief was everywhere a minority religion, nowhere a State religion. Owing to the repressive policies of the Russian government and the spiritual pressure of the Russian Orthodox Church, several millions of Old Believers were discriminated and declared unwanted members of society in their own country. This was the reason why, in the early history of the Old Believers, most successes in the religious, demographic and literary domain were achieved precisely in the emigrant communities of the Grand Duchy and of the Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth in general. If we could use modern concepts when dealing with the past, we could say that the history of the Old Believers gives us a picture of their exceptional mode of being, unhindered by borders or spatial limitations, and perhaps even of the situation of religious and/or ethnic minorities in East and Central Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries generally.

Approximately until the middle of the 18th century the geographical distribution of Old Believers in Russia, The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the rest of Europe corresponded more or less to their doctrinal divisions. The priestless Old Believers were strongly represented in the provinces of Novgorod and Pskov, in Pomorye, Estonia, Livonia, Courland and the Northern and Western regions of the Grand Duchy, whereas the priestly Old Believers predominated in Central and Southern Russia and in the Eastern part of the Commonwealth. In the 18th century, waves of both priestly and priestless emigrants (Fedoseyans, Pomorians, Philippians etc.) entered the Grand Duchy. Yet Fedoseyans were still the most numerous group, and in the North-Eastern parts of the Grand Duchy they made up the absolute majority. (From 1823 onwards, the Fedoseyans of Lithuania gradually began to recognise religious marriages and by the first years of the 20th century nearly all Old Believers’ parishes in the country were of the Pomorian denomination.)

The Fedoseyans established their monasteries and parishes with prayer houses in the Grand Duchy. Some of them became centres of religious culture. Between 1699 and 1708 there were two Old Believers’ monasteries in the lands of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They were established near the village Rusanovo in the environs of Nevel’ (now in the Nevel’ District, Russia). Their founder was Feodosy Vasilyev (before 1669–1711), one of the most influential originators of the priestless Old Believers’ (Fedoseyan) movement. This community was one of the first spiritual centres of the priestless Old Believers of the Commonwealth and Russia. Both convents consisted of churches, cells, utility buildings and poorhouses and they housed some 600 men and 700 women and girls. The basic features of the Rusanovo convent were protracted liturgies, the ‘angelical’ way of life, rigid discipline, obedience to the spiritual father, the cult of work and community of goods. Yet the Fedoseyan community life (fedoseevskoe obshchezhitye) differed strongly from that of the Russian Orthodox monasteries. There were no consecrations or vows; and celibacy was based on considerations of doctrine rather than on voluntary decisions of individual members of the community.

The religious, theological, polemical and missionary activities of Father Feodosy and his followers in the Rusanovo convent gained them a reputation not only in the region but far beyond its borders, and not only among Old Believers but in the whole Russian society. The years spent in the Grand Duchy were the most creative ones in Feodosy Vasilyev’s life. He corresponded and polemised with Andrey Denisov, the spiritual leader of the Pomorian convent of Vig (in Pomorye, the present-day Petrozavodsk District in Russia) and one of the more talented theologians of the early Old Belief. It was during this polemic that the basic tenets of the priestless movement were formulated (belief in the Christian God and the Holy Trinity, the conviction that the Antichrist had seized power over the world, the rejection of an organised clergy, the administration of certain sacraments by laymen ‘if need arise’, and the cult of the Holy Tradition), and certain points of disagreement with the Pomorians of Vig were discussed (concerning the inscription on the Cross, the recognition of marriages concluded prior to adherence to the Old Belief, and the extent to which one was allowed to have dealings with people of different religion). In 1707 Feodosy Vasilyev wrote his polemical theological treatise Oblichenye (Accusation), an answer to a work entitled The Significance of the Coming of the Antichrist and of the End of the World by S. Yavorsky, metropolitan of Ryazan’ (1703). In this treatise, Feodosy expounds the doctrine of the Spiritual Antichrist. He argues that the Antichrist should not be identified with a physical person but is the renouncement of Christian faith, the evil spirit itself. The reign of the Antichrist had begun in Western Europe (with the Schism dividing the Christian Church in 1054), then spread to the East (with the Union of Brest in 1596), finally to reach Muscovy in 1666, with the ‘renouncement of the true Orthodox Christian belief’.

Unlike the gloomy and pessimistic eschatology of the radical Old Believers and other, related religious movements of the 17th century (whose followers often died voluntarily on the stake), the eschatological element in Feodosy Vasilyev’s teachings is not turned against the world: it is more than just negation of the ‘heresy’ of the Nikonian Church, and it is not just an apocalyptic interpretation of the harsh persecutions inflicted upon the Old Believers as ‘the end of the world’. In the context of the early 18th century, when Russian society was being modernised, eschatology was an essential element of Feodosy’s religious philosophy; it was a means of understanding the changing world and its single components: the Church, time, man, the State, society etc. This explains the antinomy characteristic of Feodosy’s understanding of the world, in which a decided rejection of this world goes together with no less decided acceptance of it. This world, whose beauty and visual diversity are transitory, is doomed and must give way to the kingdom of God, which is ‘not of this world’. In the light of the kingdom of God this world appeared and was understood as being ‘near to its end’. Even fleeing before the Antichrist, Feodosy and his followers did what they could to organise ideal communities, to polemise with the predominant Orthodox Church and to disseminate the Old Belief, even though the priestless Old Believers’ ministers preached the end of sacred history and the approaching kingdom of God.

During the reign of Peter the Great, the cruellest forms of harassment of the Old Believers were abandoned and Russian aristocrats and statesmen began to call on Feodosy from time to time for a talk about the ‘Holy Matters (i.e., the dogmas and rites) of the Old Church and the novelties introduced by (patriarch) Nikon’. Among them were Boris Sheremetev, boyar and general; prince Alexander Men’shikov, favourite of the Czar; S. Naryshkin, boyar and diplomat. During the Northern War the Fedoseyan convent of Rusanovo was plundered several times by both Commonwealth and Russian troops. That was why Feodosy decided to retreat to a more remote place, and in 1708 he returned to the Pskov District in Russia with part of his followers. There, on prince Men’shikov’s estate, he established two Old Believers’ monasteries. In 1711 he applied for official leave to move to a more suitable place, viz. to Ryapino near Tartu. Then, unexpectedly, Feodosy Vasilyev was arrested in Novgorod, handed over to metropolitan Yov, and soon after that, on July 18, 1711, he died (or, according to another version, was killed) in the archpriest’s prison.

The monastery of Gudiškės (in the present-day district of Ignalina), which flourished between 1728 and 1755 (or 1758), was another important centre of Fedoseyans influencing the development of the Fedoseyan community not only in the Commonwealth but also in Russia. In 1752 the so-called ‘Polish Sobor’ of Gudiškės adopted the statutes which would became famous in the history of the Fedoseyan movement. They sanctioned Fedosy Vasilyev’s teachings and severely censured the so-called ‘new marrieds’, i.e., those who recognised marriage in church. This meant a turning point in the history of the Fedoseyan movement. Henceforth the ‘moderately radical’ priestless fraction became more radical. According to the new statutes, the Fedoseyans were not allowed to hold common prayers or to have any contacts with the Pomorians of the Vig convent, who, under the pressure of the Russian authorities, had consented to pray for the wordly rulers in 1737. It gradually became clear that the traditionalist tendencies had only still more strengthened the priestless Old Believers’ feeling of religious identity and increased the relatively closed character of their community. This was why new currents made themselves felt among the hard core Fedoseyans in the second half of the 18th century (Philippians, titlovtsy), and the early 19th century brought more internal division as regional varieties of the Fedoseyan movement appeared, opposing the Lithuanian (commonly called ‘Polish’) Fedoseyans to those of Moscow, Riga or Kazan’.

The second half of the 18th century saw the growth of a third religious centre of priestless Old Believers whose influence extended over the Grand Duchy and Courland: that of Degučiai in the present-day Zarasai District. The convent and parish of Degučiai were founded in 1756 (or 1758) as part of the monks from Gudiškės settled there, and they existed until the middle of the 19th century. According to incomplete data of the 1790 population count on the territory of the civil (Roman Catholic) parish of Salakas, 581 of its inhabitants were Russians, probably Old Believers, which amounts to 8.4%. The local ‘spiritual fathers’ did much to advance and disseminate the Old Belief among the Russian immigrants of present-day North-East Lithuania, South-Eastern Latvia and North-Western Belarus. The clearest proof of the authority the Degučiai parish enjoyed in the whole country was the conferment of the honorary title of ‘common shepherd of the Old Orthodox Christians of Lithuania and Courland’ on its spiritual father *** Tanaev.

In the second half of the 17th century and in the 18th century, as priestless Old Believers’ parishes spread all over the Grand Duchy, a Fedoseyan ecclesiastical organisation emerged. The Fedoseyan community of the Grand Duchy was structured like the old Orthodox Church, without the three-level hierarchy. One of the peculiarities of religious life among the priestless Old Believers was the constant partipation of both laymen and spiritual fathers in the life of the parish and the church. The parishes were autonomous and functioned as basic units in the structure of the church. The institution of minister or spiritual father was introduced quite early among the Fedoseyans, at the close of the 17th century. The position, rights and obligations of the ministers were regulated by the resolutions of the Gudiškės Sobor of 1752. The Fedoseyans of the Grand Duchy and Courland had their peculiar spiritual ‘hierarchy’. From 1678 until the middle of the 19th century they used the title of ‘common shepherd of the Old Orthodox Christians of Lithuania and Courland’, which, in their view, clearly showed the hereditary character of this pastoral function, handed down by the old Russian Orthodox Church, and the fact that it was kept alive by bestowing this title on one of the meritorious spiritual fathers of the region. In the early history of the Old Believers’ community of the Grand Duchy there was also another body that helped to conduct the affairs of the community: the Sobor. This was an assembly of ministers and representatives of the parishes, called to settle matters of canon law, ethics, administration of the parish and internal discipline.

For the priestly Old Believers of the Grand Duchy, an important centre of both religion and culture was Vetka near Gomel’, in the voivody (province) of Minsk. Old Believers began to settle in Vetka, which was the property of a nobleman called Halecki, about 1685, as Empress Sophia and Patriarch Joachim began to use military force against the Old Believers in the region of Starodub, a Russian town some 15 km from Vetka. In 1695 a priest under monastic vows called Feodosy, together with two secular priests, Alexander and Grigory, consecrated the first priestly Old Believers’ church here, and began to hold regular liturgies in it. Halecki protected his dependants from the Russian authorities’ endeavours to bring them back by force of arms. That was why in course of time 14 large settlements of merchants and tradesmen arose in the environs of Vetka, which became known as the Old Believers’ Jerusalem. In the early 18th century some 40,000 people lived here, and there were several convents for men and women. In an unsuccessful attempt to restore the old ecclesiastical hierarchy among the Old Believers, the religious leaders of Vetka set out to find a bishop. They turned for help to Chrysanthos, patriarch of Jerusalem, to Anthony, metropilitan of Iasi, and finally to Paisios II, patriarch of Constantinople.

This search for a bishop was put to an end in 1735 by the first expulsion of the Old Believers of Vetka. At the command of Empress Anna Ivanovna five Russian regiments marched into Commonwealth territory and led away some 10,000 to 14,000 Old Believers. They destroyed a lot of old icons and the unique library of the Lavrent’ev monastery. Soon the Old Believers returned to Vetka, erected a new church and founded a new men’s cloister. The second expulsion of Old Believers from Vetka took place in 1764, when two Russian regiments commanded by major Maslov led away almost 20,000 Old Believers who were to be deported to Siberia. Part of the Old Believers escaped repression and settled in other places of the voivody of Minsk. To this day, the statutes and traditions of the Old Believers’ church of Vetka have not lost their historical and canonical significance for the Russian Orthodox Church of Old Believers. Vetka has created its own characteristic school of icon painting, in which the heritage of the Yaroslavl’, Moscow and Imperial schools is combined with the younger technique of gilt blanks (zolotoprobel’noe pis’mo). The influence of the Vetka school of icon painting is still felt in the work of the contemporary Old Believers’ icon painters of Lithuania.

The Old Believers in the Society of the Grand Duchy

One of the principal causes of the emigration of Old Believers was the more favourable religious and social climate they found in the Grand Duchy. In the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Old Believers were a new religious group which, in a country where the Counter-Reformation had triumphed, could not fail to attract the attention of the King and the Roman Catholic Church. In 1690 a State commission led by A. Poltev was appointed in order to ‘examine the new religion’. The commission found that there was nothing ‘schismatic’ about the Old Belief and that the Old Believers ‘did not belong to the category of sectarians dangerous to the State and the Church’. Some authors have faith in the evidence of the sources stating that king John Sobieski issued a proclamation ‘concerning the liberty of the Old Believers to live in Poland and their absolute independence of the Roman Catholic clergy in all matters of doctrine and rite’, even though no such document is actually extant. Thus, in the eyes of the government officials and Roman Catholic hierarchs of the Polish-Lithuanian gentry republic, an Old Believer was a free person come from abroad in search of asylum, with only a moderate measure of ‘heretical’ views.

Essentially, the Old Believers enjoyed religious freedom in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 18th century. A good illustration of this freedom of religion was the favourable response count Chodkiewicz gave in 1771 to a petition by group of priestly Old Believers requesting permission to settle in the village of Chernobyl, which was his property. The Old Believers wanted to practice their religion without impediments, to have their clergy and monastics, and to build their churches and monasteries. Unfortunately, no similar petitions are extant from Lithuania proper. In 1779, according to some authors, the authorities granted the Old Believers the right freely to practice their religion in the present-day region of Suwałki and Seinai. There can be no doubt that part of the nobility of the Grand Duchy, such as the Radziwiłł, Tyzenhauz, Czartoryski and Chreptowicz families, whose members often held high offices, welcomed Russian emigrants on their estates, knowing that at least part of them were Old Believers. A resolution adopted by the Warsaw Confederation of 1573, later included in the Third Lithuanian Statute (1588) granted estate owners the right to decide to which religious denomination their dependants should belong. Making use of their status of patrons, the Roman Catholic gentry of the 17th and 18th centuries could allow or forbid the Old Believers living on their estates to practice their religion, and they could compel the Orthodox to become Roman Catholics or Uniates.

The benevolent attitude of the officials, gentry and Roman Catholic clergy of the Commonwealth towards the Old Believers may have had several causes. First, the Old Believers’ religious beliefs and way of thinking were relatively acceptable to them. No doubt the Old Believers, who accepted the Christian dogmas, had more chance of being well received in Poland and Lithuania than the country gentleman Kazimierz łyszczyński, who privately sympathised with atheism and was beheaded and burnt about the same time (1689), or the nobleman Andrzej Grudziński (died 1678), who liked to state that he accepted no religion but, if ever he should get to Heaven, would then also learn which faith was the right one and embrace it. The Old Believers also made a better impression than the so-called ‘Arians’, i.e., the Antitrinitarians who had been banished from the country some 40 years earlier (1658-1660) and, in the words of the Diet’s Bill of Rights, were ‘followers of a dangerous heresy’.

Another, and perhaps even more important, if not the principal reason for this relatively sympathetic attitude towards the Old Believers was the local landowners’ economical and partly political interest. The Grand Duchy had been going through a period of war, catastrophic depopulation and economical decline since the middle of the 17th century, and the early 18th century brought the Northern War, with famine and pestilence in its aftermath. In sum, the country had lost about half of its population and badly needed an increase in people and workforce. Moreover, the spontaneous migrations of at first thousands and later on hundreds of thousands of Russians through East and Central Europe became almost uncontrollable. As if this was not enough, the Counter-Reformation continued its successful offensive against Orthodoxy during the reign of John Sobieski. In the outcome of the Treaty of Andrusovo (1667), out of four Orthodox dioceses only one, that of Mogilyov, was left, whereas the Uniates had no fewer than nine dioceses. We can thus say without much exaggeration that the Old Believers, so harshly persecuted at home, were welcomed in the Commonwealth as enemies of the hostile Russian State and radical opponents of the Russian Orthodox Church.

A third reason, also of great importance, was that the first Old Believers were aliens, and that their religion (both in the 17th century and later) virtually never spread to other ethnic and denominational groups. In this respect, the Old Believers were similar to the Jews, Muslims and Karaims of Lithuania. Fourthly, though most of them were freemen, the Old Believers belonged to the lower layers of society, and therefore they attracted little attention in the Polish-Lithuanian gentry republic. Most Old Believers were peasants or small town dwellers, and they were neither prepared nor able to perform an active role in the social and political life of the country. Initially they did not even reach Vilnius, the vital centre of the country and the ‘holy city’ from which the predominant religion was at that time able to ban all other religions. (An Old Believers’ parish was established in Vilnius in 1830.) In the public life of the country the Old Believers marked their presence, albeit episodically, in the second half of the 18th century, when their merchants began to commission religious and polemical books in the printing house of the Uniate Monastery of the Holy Trinity in Vilnius.

A fifth reason for this tolerance towards Old Believers could have been the rationalist and anticlerical influences affecting the nobility, especially in the second half of the 18th century. A sixth factor could have been the territorial isolation of the Old Believers, who tended to establish themselves in the northern and eastern peripheries of the Grand Duchy, relatively far from the political and cultural centres endowed with a symbolic value, such as the capital Vilnius. Generally speaking, the Old Believers enjoyed much greater acceptance than the Antitrinitarians, Protestants and Orthodox. A certain tolerance towards the Old Believers was in harmony with the image of a ‘haven of tolerance in Europe’ cultivated in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. One should not forget, however, that the religious tolerance of the 18th century Commonwealth was limited, because tolerance was in all respects a rare virtue in this country.

In the 18th century the return of the Russian refugees was a question frequently touched upon in the correspondence and talks between diplomats and other officials of Russia and the Commonwealth. It was under the pressure of Russian diplomats that in 1754 August III issued a proclamation summoning the estate owners of the country not to give shelter to Russian emigrants on their lands and to send those who were ‘hiding from justice’ back to Russia. The local gentry, however, did not haste to send back the emigrants and sought ways to avoid this.

The emigration of Russian subjects to the Commonwealth caused much commotion in Petersburg. The government of Catherine II sought to get the emigrants back both by exercising diplomatic pressure on Warsaw and by sending troops to bring them back by force. Russian politicians even claimed that the 1772 partition of Poland was a means of seeking compensation for the financial and economic losses caused by the emigration of Russians to the Commonwealth. According to the then minister of foreign affairs of Russia, N. Panin, about 300,000 Russians were living in the Commonwealth before its partition, not counting the descendents of Russian emigrants who were born in the Commonwealth. Contemporary Polish and Lithuanian sources mention much smaller numbers of Russian refugees, singling out only the Old Believers, who are stated to have been 100,000 in number before the 1772 partition. In the 1770s the emigration from Russia was a constant, though not central topic of diplomatic exchanges between the Commonwealth and Russia.

As several Old Believers’ communities established themselves in the Grand Duchy in the 18th century, diversity within this traditionally multicultural society became still more pronounced. At a time when the tradition of Eastern Christianity was in decline or underwent a transformation in the Commonwealth, the Old Believers revived it (though in the case of the Fedoseyans, Philippians and Pomorians not without certain modifications), enriching it with specific elements of old Russian Orthodoxy and Russian culture. The most remarkable contributions the Old Believers made to the religious and cultural life of the Commonwealth were the theological concepts of the early priestless movement, their social practice and their impressive achievements in religious publishing.

The priestless Old Believers of the second half of the 17th century and the 18th century took a very specific view of the Church, the State and society in general. They were convinced that the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church and the sacraments they administered were no longer filled with divine grace, because the Antichrist had seized power in the world. Part of the priestless Old Believers treated the Antichrist anthropomorphically and saw him embodied in Patriarch Nikon and, later on, in Czar Peter I. Most of the Fedoseyans and Pomorians imagined the Antichrist as a spiritual principle, manifesting itself in the renouncement of old Russian Orthodoxy – for that was how they viewed the 17th century Church reforms. For them, it was an evil spirit. The Russian Old Believers, part of whom emigrated to Poland and Lithuania, also sought to loosen or even completely sever all links with the dominant Orthodox Church and with the State, they refused to serve in the army, to appear in court etc. They preferred to form their own communities, founded on original theological principles, common labour and collective property, in secluded places such as Rusanovo or Gudiškės, which became centres of the Fedoseyan movement in the first half of the 18th century. (In the middle of the 18th century the name of one of the more radical branches of the Old Believers’ movement, the Philippians or, in Lithuanian, piliponai, spread all over the Commonwealth as a general term referring to all Old Believers, even though there were several other denominations in the country as well: mainly Fedoseyans, Pomorians, Philippians and fugitive priestly Old Believers.)

The printing of Old Believers’ books in the Commonwealth, which achieved its culmination in the second half of the 18th and in the early 19th century, was an exceptional phenomenon in the history of book printing and book art. In the cultural history of the Grand Duchy it is important as a manifestation of the tradition of Eastern Christianity and Eastern Slavonic culture. According to the Polish scholar Mrs. Z. Jaroszewicz-Pieresławcew, the Old Believers’ book production may help us to retrace ‘the interaction of the cultures of East and West’: these repeatedly reprinted religious books, instruments in the campaign against Nikon, combined elements of Uniate (Cyrillic) and Polish typographical art, because the printers did not always ... [leidėjai nevisada griežtai laikydavosi spausdinimo palapiui taisyklės].

In addition to the Commonwealth’s traditional centres of Eastern Slavonic book printing, Vilnius and Ostrog, Old Believers’ books were printed in Mogilyov (1733–1773), the Uniate monastery of Vilnius (1767–1812), Suprasl’ (1777–1791), Pochaevo (1782–1795), A. Tyzenhauz’s printing house in Grodno (1781–1792), and P. Dufour’s printing house in Warsaw (1785–1788 and 1798). They were not only new editions of works printed before Nikon’s reform, but also liturgical books compiled by the Old Believers themselves as well as collections of documents reflecting the history of the Old Believers’ struggle and polemical writings attacking the official Orthodox Church. The initiators of this tradition of book printing in the Commonwealth were the priestly Old Believers of Kaluga. (With the exception of the years 1785–1787, the printing of Old Believers’ books was prohibited until 1905.) An important role was played by the local merchants who entertained close contacts with businessmen in Russia and abroad.

Vilnius took a leading position in the Old Believers’ book printing. It was in the Uniate Holy Trinity Monastery in Vilnius that the first book published by the Old Believers came out in 1767: it was The Sermons of Avva Dorotey, a reprint of a book published in Moscow in 1651. Between 1767 and 1812 no fewer than 50 titles were published in Vilnius by the Old Believers. Most of them are editions of the Bible (the Gospels and the Psalter) or prayer books such as the Horologion or Breviary (Russ. Chasoslov), the Shorter Horologion (Russ. Chasovnik), the Hexameron (Russ. Shestodnev), and also writings of a didactic, hagiographical or edifying nature (the Primer, the Gospels for Instruction, The Life and Miracles of Nikola the Thaumaturge). In all, the Old Believers published some 150 titles in the Commonwealth in the 18th and early 19th centuries, an impressive number for those times. The number of copies was not small either: in Suprasl’, some books were printed in several thousand of copies. Part of these books were in use among the Old Believers of Lithuania.

In social, legal and ethnoreligious respect the Old Believers living in the Commonwealth could be considered a separate estate or social group: this was the view taken by the Polish historian T. Korzon (1897) as well as by Norman Davies (1998) in their Histories of Poland. When in 1808 the Russian Senate debated on the status to be granted to the Old Believers in the lands of the former Commonwealth, some of the more liberal senators argued that both the Old Believers and the rent-paying tenants were socially and legally distinct groups that had no pendant in Russia, where most of the population were serfs.

In the second half of the 17th and in the 18 century the Old Believers were freemen in the Commonwealth: they had the right to move to another landlord’s estate. In the Grand Duchy, freemen could rent land and farmsteads belonging to Crown, Church or private estates. The main occupation of the Old Believers was agriculture. Some of them were craftsmen or were engaged in such trades as carting, joinery, flax cultivation, horticulture or forestry. Some of the Russian emigrants were merchants or small townfolk. Part of the Old Believers lived without a written lease, and later on, especially in the first half of the 19th century, when the management of manors became increasingly based on the corvée, this was used as a pretext to reduce them to serfdom. (The Constitution of 1791 gave the State the right to interfere with the relations between landlords and tenants.)

The Old Believers and their numbers

In 1772 there were probably between 100,000 and 180,000 Old Believers in the Commonwealth. After the partition of 1791, there were still between 100,000 and 180,000 Old Believers left in the country, which amounted to 1.1–2 % of an overall population of 8.790.000.

(Generally speaking, the investigators’ estimations of the number of Russians in the Commonwealth are not based on statistics but on the more or less argued opinion of official or private observators. That is why the figures strongly diverge and the numbers cited by one source may be from three to ten times greater than those of others. So, for instance, count N. Panin declared in 1772 that there could be as many as 300,000 or more Russian subjects in the Commonwealth, not counting their descendants born in emigration. Contemporary Russian sources tended to give unbelievably high estimates of the number of Russian emigrants in the Commonwealth. Court Counsellor A. Svečin, who visited the Commonwealth on official duty in the first years of the 18th century, claimed that there were ‘hosts of hosts’ of them – nearly a million. In 1762 the merchant M. Yakovlev, an Old Believers established in Toropets but originally coming from the Commonwealth, wrote to the Senate in St-Petersburg that ‘in the lands of Poland and Turkey there were no fewer than 1,500,000 Old Believers, counting only men, without their families’, and that ‘in Poland alone there were more than a million of them’. However, Polish sources from the same period, and modern Polish historians, cite much smaller numbers. According to Tadeusz Korzon, there were about 100,000 Old Believers living in the Commonwealth after the first partition. Another Polish historian, W. Wielhorski, estimates the number of Old Believers in the Grand Duchy at the close of the 18th century at about 140,000).

The Old Believers in Lithuania in the 19th and 20th centuries

In 1795, what was left of the territory of the Commonwealth of Two Peoples was divided between Russia, Prussia and Austria. This was the Third Partition that put an end to the existence of the State. From free citizens of an independent country, the Old Believers turned into objects of persecution by the Czarist authorities (this persecution would last until 1905), a group of ‘schismatics’ at the western outskirts of an Empire where the dominant religion was Russian Orthodoxy.

In the course of the 19th century, the Russian policy with regard to Old Believers went through several stages. Initially, the Czarist rule did not appear to be very oppressive. Alexander I (1801–1825) seemed to be an enligtened and magnanimous ruler, and the first decennia of his reign raised hopes that the plight of the Old Believers in Lithuania and in Russia itself would change for the better. He was the only Russian Emperor ever to visit the Old Believers of Lithuania (1814). On those years the authorities turned a blind eye to the building of churches by Old Believers and to the activities of their communities and convents throughout the empire.

In the early 19th century, the parish of Degučiai was still a famous religious and cultural centre of the Fedoseyans, as it had been in the second half of the 18th century. In 1819, the spiritual father of the Degučiai community was awarded the honorary title of ‘common shepherd of the Old Orthodox Christians of Lithuania and Courland’. In 1822, a marriage ceremonial was designed for the first time in Degučiai, and from 1823 church books were kept, registering baptisms, marriages and deaths. This means that the Degučiai parish recognised the concept of marriages without priestly sanction (Russ. bessvyashchennoslovny brak). In the history of the priestless Old Believers’ communities of Lithuania, the year 1823 sealed the end of the Fedoseyan epoch and the beginning of a new Fedoseyan-Pomorian epoch. (The more moderate teachings of the New Pomorians would finally prevail among the Old Believers of Lithuania in the early 20th century.)

These changes in the Old Believers’ community coincided with the renewal of the policy of severe religious and civil discrimination of the Old Believers (now numbering about 8,000,000 people in Russia according to unofficial data) during the reign of Nicholas I. This policy could not fail to affect Lithuania’s Old Believers. A whole system of discriminatory measures was designed, including the creation of secret committees for Old Believers’ affairs in Petersburg and in 22 other provinces. Many new laws, often absurd, were passed in order to hamper the religious and social life of the Old Believers. Between 1825 and 1855, out of 33 well-known Old Believers’ prayers houses in Lithuania, 13 were closed down and 8 were destroyed. The more prominent spiritual fathers were arrested, put into prison or forbidden to leave their parishes. The Old Believers’ prayer house in Degučiai was closed down in 1840 and subsequently converted into a Russian Orthodox church.

In the second half of the 19th century, the situation of the Old Believers began to improve. Public opinion became more tolerant with respect to them, and the authorities began to grant them more civil rights. A law passed on May 3, 1883, gave the Russian Old Believers freedom to practice their religion, while still maintaining the ban on its overt ‘manifestations’ (such as walking in procession with the sun, ringing bells or, in the case of priests and spiritual fathers, wearing certain types of ecclesiastical garments). After the insurrection of 1863–1864, the Russian administration in Lithuania adopted a double-faced policy with regard to the local Old Believers. On the one hand, the Czarist authorities still sought to induce or compel them by various means to embrace the ‘unified belief’ (Russ. edinoverye) or official Russian Orthodoxy. On the other hand, they also began to cajole the Old Believers, who were, after all, Russian-speaking people who had preserved their Russian cultural tradition, hoping to use them in their policy of Russification. Although the Old Believers shared in some of the economical advantages which the Russians enjoyed in Lithuania, still the repressive Czarist policies and the restriction of their civil rights bred discontent among them. That is why they never allowed themselves to be made an instrument in the Czarist authorities’ policy of Russification of the country.

It was not until March 17, 1905 that Czar Nicholas II issued his decree on liberty of religion, and the Old Believers had to wait for the manifesto of October 17 of the same year in order to see their civil rights restored. For the first time, these acts gave the activities of the Old believers’ parishes in Russia a legal foundation. A decree of October 17, 1906, laid down procedures for the establishment of new parishes as well as the rights of the parish members and their leaders. In the early 20th century, the spiritual and cultural life of the Old Believers in Russia livened up, and some even speak of a renaissance of the Old Belief. Short-lived though it was (it lasted only some ten years), it still left indelible traces in the cultural tradition of Russia’s Old believers.

It was about that time (late 19th and early 20th century) that the Old Believers’ parish of Vilnius, led by Aristarkh Pimonov, became the religious centre of the Pomorians. In 1901, the first assembly of spiritual fathers of the Pomorian parishes took place in Vilnius. It was also in Vilnius that an assembly of spiritual fathers and representatives of the parishes of present-day Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland and Belarus was held on January 25–27, 1906. On the eve of World war I there were no fewer than 45 Old Believers’ parishes in the provinces of Vilnius and Kaunas. Out of these, 11 were established after 1905. There were between 81,000 and 100,000 Old Believers in these provinces.

World War I put an end to this period in the history of the Old Believers.

For the first time in history, the authorities of the independent Lithuanian State officially recognised the Old Believers as a religious organisation. On May 20, 1923, the government issued Provisional regulations concerning the relationship between the organisation of Old Believers of Lithuania and the Lithuanian Government, whereby the autonomy of the Old Believers’ Church was recognised. From 1925 onward, the government regularly granted the Old Believers’ Church a certain finacial support. The ministers were remunerated by the State for keeping church books. The historian of the Old Believers, Ivan Prozorov, describes the 1920s and 1930s as a period of unrestricted freedom of religion and complete equality in rights with the other religions of Lithuania.

Between 1918 and 1940, Kaunas was an important centre of religious and cultural life for the Old Believers. On May 6, 1922, the first assembly of the Pomorian Old Believers’ Church of Lithuania took place in this city. An administrative body was elected: The Central Council of Old Believers. Vasily Prozorov became its first president. From 1934 till 1938 this office was held by Aristarkh Yefremov and from 1938 till 1941 by Ivan Prozorov. In 1923, the Council appointed the so-called Spiritual Commission composed of five spiritual fathers. They had to deal with matters of canon law. In all, eight assemblies of the Lithuanian Old Believers were held in Kaunas in the 1920s and 1930s. In 1937, there were 42,485 Old Believers in Lithuania, which amounts to some 2% of the population. There were 53 active Old Believers’ parishes, served by 51 spiritual fathers.

When World War II broke out and Lithuania recovered part of the Vilnius region on October 10, 1939, the number of Old Believers’ parishes on Lithuanian territory grew to 60, and the number of faithful to some 70,000–80,000. In June 1940, however, the whole country was occupied by the Soviet Union. The first spell of Soviet rule in 1940 and 1941 was heavy in consequences for the Old Believers of Lithuania. In June 1941, many Russian Old Believers was deported to Siberia together with Lithuanians, Poles and Jews. Among them were the president of the Council, Ivan Prozorov, and his predecessor Vasily Prozorov.

Between 1941 and 1944 Lithuania was under German occupation. All inhabitants of the country suffered from the atrocities of Nazi rule. Almost the whole Jewish community was exterminated. But along with Jews, Lithuanians, Poles and Romanies, the local Russian population was also affected, especially those who had collaborated with the Soviet partizans or given them support, and those who had sympathised or were suspected of having sympathised with the Soviet regime (among them, there were relatively many Old Believers or descendants of Old Believers). Many hundreds were shot, e.g., in the neighbourhood of Rokiškis, Užusaliai, Bagdonys and Palivarkas, where the Nazis and their accomplices, recruited among the Lithuanians and other local inhabitants, held mass executions. Many Russian Old Believers were sent to Germany for forced labour. In the spring of 1941, some 10,000 Old Believers from the Suwałki region in Nazi occupied Poland were moved to Lithuania. Here, their situation was initially rather difficult. On November 23, 1943, the Old Believers of Lithuania held their assembly and elected a new Supreme Council as well as a Spiritual Court. Lithuanians, Poles, Russians and even Jews in the ghettoes – all tried to keep up some form of religious and cultural life in their communities. It was really life in the shadow of death.

The years of Soviet occupation, just like those of the occupation by Czarist Russia, were not uniform in character. The most tragical period was that between 1944 and 1953. The Soviet authorities did not allow the Old Believers to create a common religious centre for the Pomorian Old Believers of the Soviet Union, and they also tried to hamper the activities of the Supreme Council of Old Believers in Vilnius. The mass deportations of inhabitants of Lithuania did not spare the Russian Old Believers either. Almost one fifth of the spiritual fathers, and many of the faithful, were arrested and deported. Among them was the president of the Supreme Council, Ivan Romanov. Between 1945 and 1955 more than ten prayer houses were closed down, a few of them were destroyed. In face of the repressive Soviet policies against the Old Believers, the Spiritual Court adopted, in May 1948, an ambiguous resolution stating that ‘The Old Believers’ Church, guided by the Holy Writ ... has always recognised and recognises Soviet rule as sent by God’. Anxious to find a modus vivendi with the communist régime, the leaders of the Old Believers’ Church became involved, from the early 1950s onward, in the Soviet peace movement, which served mainly purposes of propaganda. After Stalin’s death (1953), and especially after 1956, the pressure of the Soviet régime abated somewhat, but it still remained what it had been – totalitarian and oppressive.

Between 1948 and 1965, Fyodor Kuznetsov (1869–1965), spiritual father of the Vilnius parish, became president of the Supreme Council. He combined this function with that of chairman of the Spiritual Commission. After his death, he was succeeded by Yosif Nikitin (1905–1996), spiritual father of the Kaunas parish. Ivan Yegorov (1905–1998) became president of the Supreme Council in 1969 and was twice reelected afterwards. Whatever the conditions in which it functioned, the Supreme Council of Vilnius was, in Soviet times, the only religious centre of Pomorian Old Believers in the whole Soviet Union. Since 1954 the Supreme Council publishes, together with the Old Believers’ parishes of Riga and Moscow, the annual Almanac of the Old Believers’ Church.

At the initiative of the Supreme Council in Vilnius, three important assemblies of Old Believers where held in 1966, 1974 and 1988. They were attended by spiritual fathers and other representatives of Pomorian Old Believers’ parishes from Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, the Ukraine and Russia. Many of them recognised the spiritual authority of the Supreme Council in Vilnius. In 1971, the Russian Orthodox Church lifted the anathema it had once cast on the ‘old rite’. This did away with the principal cause of three centuries of animosity between the branches of Russian Orthodoxy and opened the way for a diologue between Orthodox churches. A solemn assembly of the Pomorian Old Believers’ Church was held in Vilnius in 1988 to celebrate the 1000th anniversary of the Christianisation of Russia.

The situation of the (predominantly rural) Old Believers’ parishes in Lithuania was negatively affected not only by Soviet anti-religious policies and persecution of the church, but also by collectivisation, industrialisation and urbanisation. Between the 1940s and the 1980s the number of faithful and of spiritual fathers in the rural parishes fell dramatically, though the number of officially registered parishes did not reflect this process. In 1948, there were 56 Old Believers’ parishes, more than 50 spiritual fathers and nearly 88,700 faithful in Lithuania. In 1969 there were still 56 parishes left, but in 1992, for a number of 51 parishes, there were only 11 spiritual fathers and, according to data of the Old Believers’ community leaders, slightly more than 33,000 faithful. Then, however, a process of dynamic growth of urban Old Believers’ parishes set in, especially in such towns as Vilnius, Kaunas, Klaipėda, Zarasai and Panevėžys. In Soviet Lithuania, the Old Believers’ Church was second only to the Roman Catholic Church with respect to the number of parishes.

After Lithuania had recovered its independence, on November 22, 1990, the Supreme Council of the Old Believers adopted a new statute for the Pomorian Old Orthodox Church of Old Believers. The Old Believers’ Church has to meet new and difficult challenges in the domain of catechisation and of social and ethical policies. Thousands of Russian Old Believers in Lithuania put their hopes in it success. Yet the Old Believers’ Church need a lot of time to cure the ailments and repair the damages caused by 50 years of communist rule. The way of thinking and the moral behaviour of people accustomed to live in a climate of godlessness, lack of responsibility, blind submissiveness and perpetual falsehood have been deeply affected. Moreover, the Old Believers’ Church of Lithuania has to face new and complicated problems: scissions within some parishes, competing fractions within the leadership of the Church, material difficulties as a consequence of economic recession and the failure to obtain restitution of immovable property once belonging to the church.

In 1995, the Lithuanian government recognised the Old Believers’ Church as one of the nine traditional denominations of the country. The Old Believers’ regained the autonomy they had enjoyed between 1918 and 1940. According to incomplete data of the 2001 population count, there are more than 27,000 Old Believers in Lithuania (0.78% of an overall population of 3,484,000). We may assume that the number of people descending from Russian Old Believers’ or mixed (e.g., Russian and Lithuanian Catholic) families, having some Russian blood in their veins and/or having connections with the tradition of the Old Belief, is considerable greater. At present, there are 59 Old Believers’ parishes in Lithuania registered by the Supreme Council of the Old Orthodox Pomorian Church in Lithuania.

Grigorijus Potašenko.
Translated from the Lithuanian by Axel Holvoet

No Longer Numbered Among the Nations

John_Alden — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:02:03 CST

Resistance to the Census

...behold, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations. Numbers 23:9

This page was created for the purpose of gathering more information on the thread, Resistance to the Census. Thank you Nathan for the good suggestion.

Posted to the initial thread on Wednesday, August 5th, was this line.

"A liberal group called ACORN, which is involved in voter registration, will be involved in the 2010 census."

This is my understanding as well, ACORN was in some trouble over voter registration and it is odd that it would now be given such Census authority. If I recall correctly it was suggested that there was some mishandling from the side of President Obama with regard to ACORN. It all sounds like a big mess, truly antichrist. This photo below has been passed around in a disapproving manner.

The KJV Bible contradicts itself in the two census accounts of King David.

2 Sam 24:1 says God was the inspiration, 1 Chr 21:1 says Satan was.

There is no contradiction in the Septuagint (the version Jesus read from in the Temple), both of the references in it say that Satan instigated it. So I side with the Septuagint reading, due to such agreements.

After David was deceived by Satan to take the census a plague was sent by God.

According to census figures the world population hit 6,666,666,666 in May, 2008.

There are other types of censuses too, like the Federal-State Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, which all tell their own sad stories.

Here are some responses that can be offered to Census Agents questions:

"No such Persons at this location."
(They are looking for State and Federal Residents and we should not be counted among such people.)
[Being called a Resident is an Office we do not want to fall into.]
Tell them you are "not a U.S. Citizen."
(We should often be renouncing even any implied earthly national citizenship's.)
Tell any 'would be' census takers that no person's here take part in their worldly census.
(The word "person" has been brought down to use from the idea of an actors persona, and we ought not to be going around acting, that is, being a hypocrite.)

Should a Census form find its way through the mail to you, don't open it. If you opened it, reseal it. On the front, write, "No residents at this address." Then send it back.

If the Census Bureau telephones, simply say, "Nobody is here to answer your questions." If questions persist just repeat the idea over, "I'm sorry, there is no one here to answer your questions."

The government considers us all criminals until we accept their contract (papers and/or plastic), because without such things they have no justification for abusing/persecuting us. If we accept the governments requirements then we are abusing ourselves. So if it makes the government feel better let them Try us for our Faith to see if our Faith is True, for it is better to be abused for Righteousness sake than as Sinners.

If we are to take a stand for what is right we must renounce the desire to be a Subject Citizen of worldly nations, we ought to seek the protection that comes from Above.

May we practice good things so that we are ready the next time we are faced with such a situation.

I did find this Diary of a Census Resister

Lying is inherently evil, but Rahab the Arab delivered her own life and that of her family by deception for a good cause, so there are exceptions. She was an outsider at the time of her deception. She repented and then joined the people of God once and for all. She never needed to be deceptive again.

The government is greatly lying with money, taxes and other fictions of law and are worse than any white lie to save our lives. Sometimes even white lies cannot be used to save our own skin. Being led of God is what I am talking about.

Pro 23:1-3 When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what is before thee: And put a knife to thy throat, if thou be a man given to appetite. Be not desirous of his dainties: for they are deceitful meat.

There was a Wall Street Journal article from August 8, 1989 by James Bouvard that headlined, "HONESTY MAY NOT BE YOUR BEST CENSUS POLICY"

Here is the U.S. Census Law, if anyone is interested, it looks like there are fines of $100 to $500 for violating this law:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode13/usc_sec_13_00000221----000-.html

In 1960 two people were prosecuted for resisting the census, one person in 1970, I am not certain about the other censuses. In 1980 it was 83% of households that voluntarily mailed back their census forms, in 1990 only 78%. The more intrusive goverment becomes, the less information it will get. It is said that if you do not fill out the form the officials will fill it out themselves by asking your neighbors.

For easy reference the first two postings in the thread (that inspired this page) are shown below in their entirety:

Resistance to the Census

Wednesday, 3:15 PM EDT by ndvanderhoofven

I was just reading about resistance to the census. A liberal group called ACORN, which is involved in voter registration, will be involved in the 2010 census. I think that Old Believers have resisted censuses based on I Chronicles 21, and they believed that being counted was tantamount to being enrolled in the books of the Antichrist. It also made them more easily subject to special taxes such as the beard tax. Anyways, I just wanted to add a quick note - this topic might deserve its own page.

RE: Resistance to the Census

Thursday, 12:43 AM EDT by John Alden

Greetings brother Nathan,
I have never talked with any Census worker ever in my life. During the 1990 and 2000 Census' were both times when I did not always have a residence, so I never talked to any Census worker back then for that reason. So far I have not seen any Census worker for the next Census and will not go to them at all, but rather avoid them. I quit signing government papers years ago. I am participating less than ever with the antichrist world system. If pressed by a Census worker I might tell them it is against my religion and leave it at that. Fortunately I do not really exist. I do not even have my own Internet connection, so they would have a difficult time numbering me. I have actually thought a lot about this over the years and will post more of my thoughts here soon. I know of some Old Believers who live in a rather distant location and were visited by a Census worker doing work in advance. The worker said there was this mail box out at the highway and that they needed information about it. The response the Old Believer gave was that they do not do the Census, saying further that they did not believe in it. The worker walked away saying they would be back. So now the Old Believer has decided to simply remove the mail box so as not to attract anything further. There are other ways to get postal items. I believe it was the Post Office who had been given charge to keep track of people and where they go. In my many talks with the Old Believers at this location with the mail box I mentioned how the Postal System was not good , and they completely agree. Be encouraged by these things, knowing that there are some Old Believers who do in fact reject the idea of the Census. For centuries governments have had difficult times counting the Old Believers, now is no different. I am willing to die for what I believe in. Feel free to start a page, I have a photo and perhaps other things I would add to it.
Forgive, brat Ioann

I would refer to the Nonconformity page one step above this one in the site directory, which is where the discussion thread began from.

I do not agree with all the ideas of Alex Jones, but everyone gets a few things right. I disagree with having guns or keeping gold. This link to Infowars will take you to a news article of theirs about how a, "...Survey...is in addition to the census..." which asks, "if they have a toilet that flushes." I remember telling my dad a few years ago that I could write a book on the evils of flush toilets, as I have not had one for some amount of time. I live a far more minimalist lifestyle than most people do. If you ask me, the more we do the worse things are. There are Old Believers in the USA that do not have running water, all the water I use here is carried by hand and I do not use much. The chemicals so often used with flush tolilets are contaminating and destroying this world. The Fifth Amendment is supposed to assure that those in the USA can be secure in their homes, they do not have to answer the door if they do not want to.

_____________________________

The Doomsday Book

William the Conqueror ordered a great survey which spared no one and there was no appeal from it. William wanted to insure that he was getting all his taxes from everyone. It was completed in 1086. It was called The Doomsday Book and recorded how much land everyone owned and how many people worked there. The numbering of animals, pastures, mills and fish ponds were also included.

For an upated edition please refer to my posting here.

Kursk Root Icon

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:27:16 CST

From: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-tradition/message/134067

The Kursk Root icon was discovered September 8, 1259, by a hunter outside the
town of Kursk, Russia. He found the icon lying face down by the root of a tree.
When he lifted it he saw that the image of the icon was similar to the Novgorod
"Znamenie" Icon. With the appearance of this icon immediately there appeared its
first miracle. Just as the hunter lifted up the holy icon from the earth, right
then, at that place where the icon lay, gushed forth a spring of pure water. The
hunter decided not to leave the icon in the forest, placing it instead in a
small, ancient chapel.

The icon was transferred to the city of Ryl'a and put in a new church erected in
honor of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos. But the icon soon disappeared
and returned to its initial place of appearance. The people of Ryl'a made
several attempts to bring the icon to their city, but it repeatedly returned to
its former place. Everyone then realized that the Theotokos preferred the place
of the icon's appearance.

The special help granted by the Mother of God through this icon is associated
with important events in Russian history. Several copies of the icon were made,
which also were glorified.

==========================================
From: http://www.kurskroot.com/kursk_root_icon_history.html

The Wonderworking Kursk Root Icon of Our Lady of the Sign

In the 13th century, during the dreadful period of the Tartar invasion of Russia, the devastated province of Kursk was emptied of people and its principal city, Kursk, became a wilderness. Now, the residents of the city of Rylsk, which had been preserved from invasion, often journeyed to the site of Kursk to hunt wild beasts. One of the hunters, going along the bank of the river Skal, which-was not very far from ruined Kursk, noticed an icon lying face down on the ground next to the root of a tree. The hunter picked it up and found that it was an icon of the Sign, such as was enshrined and venerated in the city of Novgorod. At this time, the icon's first miracle was worked, for no sooner had the hunter picked up the sacred image than there immediately gushed forth with great force an abundant spring of pure water. This took place on September 8th in the year 1295.

The hunter constructed a small wooden chapel and placed the newly manifested image of the Mother of God therein. The residents of Rylsk began to visit the place of the manifestation of this holy object and the icon was glorified by miracles all the more. Prince Vasily Shemyaka of Rylsk ordered that the icon be brought to the city of Rylsk itself and this was done in a solemn manner, for the people of the city went forth to met the icon of the Mother of God; but Shemyaka himself declined to attend the festivities and for this reason was punished with blindness. The prince, however, repented and straightway received healing. Moved by this miracle, Shemyaka constructed a church in the city of Rylsk in honor of the Nativity of the All-Holy Theotokos, and there the miraculous icon was enshrined on September 8th, the day of its manifestation, appointed as the annual feast date.
But the icon vanished in a miraculous manner and returned to the place of its original appearance. The residents of Rylsk continually brought it back, but each time it returned to its former place. Then, understanding that the Mother of God was well pleased to dwell in the place of the manifestation of her image, they eventually left it there in peace. Innumerable pilgrimages streamed to the site and services of supplication were celebrated there by a certain priest whose name was Bogoliub and who dwelt at the site of the wooden chapel and struggled there in asceticism.

In the year 1383, the province of Kursk was subjected to a new invasion of Tartars. They decided to set fire to the chapel, but it refused to burn, even though they piled up fuel all around it, and so the superstitious barbarians fell upon the priest Bogoliub, accusing him of sorcery. The pious priest denounced their foolishness and pointed out the icon of the Mother of God to them. The malicious Tartars laid hold of the holy icon and cut it in two, casting the pieces to either side. The chapeI then caught fire and the priest Bogoliub was carried off a prisoner.

In his captivity, the God-loving elder kept the Faith, placing his hope on the all-holy Mother of God, and his hope did not fail him. Now, one day as he was guarding flocks and passing the time by singing prayers and doxologies in honor of the Mother of God, there passed by some emissaries of the Tsar of Moscow.

They heard this chanting, arranged to ransom the priest from captivity, and Bogoliub returned to the former site of the chapel. There he found the pieces of the miraculous icon which the Tartars had cast away. He picked them up and straightway they grew together, although the signs of the split remained. Learning of this miracle, the residents of Rylsk gave glory to God and to His all-pure Mother. Again they attempted to transfer the holy icon to their city, but once more the miraculous image returned to its former place. A new chapel was then built on the original site of the icon's appearance and here it remained for about 200 years.

The city of Kursk was revived in the year 1597 at the command of Theodore Ivanovich of Moscow. This pious Tsar, who had heard of the miracles of the icon, expressed his desire to behold it, and in Moscow, the icon was greeted with great solemnity. The Tsaritsa, Irene Theodorovna, adorned the holy icon with a precious riza. At the command of the Tsar, the icon was set in a silver-gilt frame upon which were depicted the Lord of Hosts and prophets holding scrolls in their hands. The icon was subsequently returned and, with the close cooperation of the Tsar, a monastery was founded on the site of the chapel. A church, dedicated to the Life-bearing Spring, was built above the same spring that had appeared when the icon was first revealed and the monastery attached to it was called the Kursk Root Hermitage in honor of the manifestation of the icon at the root of the tree.

During an invasion of Crimean Tartars, the icon was transferred to the cathedral church of Kursk, and an exact copy was left at the Hermitage. Tsar Boris Godunov bestowed many precious gifts for the adornment of the icon and even the pretender, the false Dimitry, who desired to call attention to himself and to win the support of those who lived in the vicinity of Kursk, venerated this icon and placed it in the royal mansions where it remained until the year 1615.

While the icon was absent from the city of Kursk, the grace-bearing aid of the Mother of God did not forsake that city, for when in the year 1612 the Poles laid siege to Kursk, certain of the citizens beheld the Mother of God and two radiant monks above the city. Captured Poles related that they, too, had beheld a woman and two radiant men on the city walls, and that this woman made threatening gestures at those who were conducting the siege. The citizens then made a vow to construct a monastery in honor of the all-holy Theotokos and to place the miraculous icon therein. The besiegers were quickly put to flight and in gratitude to their heavenly helper, the people of Kursk built a monastery in honor of the all-holy Theotokos of the Sign

.In 1676, the icon of the Mother of God of the Sign was borne to the Don River to bless the forces of the Don Cossacks. In 1684, a copy of the miraculous icon of the all-holy Theotokos of the Sign was sent to the Monastery of the Root by the sovereigns and great princes Ivan and Peter Alexievich. This copy was set in a silver-gilt frame and a command was made that this copy be borne wherever Orthodox warriors went into battle. In the year 1812, the Kursk Civic Society sent to

General Kutuzov a copy of the miraculous icon of Kursk, setting it in a silver-gilt frame. The commander expressed his gratitude to the citizens of Kursk and his belief that Kursk would remain free, thanks to the protection of the Queen of Heaven.

In March of 1898 a group of anarchists, desiring to undermine the faith of the people in the wonderworking power of the icon, decided to destroy it. They placed a time bomb in the Cathedral of the Sign, and at two o'clock in the morning a horrendous explosion rent the air and all the walls of the monastery were shaken. The frightened monastic brethren rushed immediately to the cathedral, where they beheld a scene of horrible devastation. The force of the blast had shattered the gilded canopy above the icon. The heavy marble base, constructed of several massive steps, had been jolted out of position and split into several pieces. A huge metal candlestick which stood before the icon and been blown to the opposite side of the cathedral. A door of cast iron located near the icon had been torn from its hinges and cast outside, where it smashed against a wall and caused a deep crack. All the windows in the cathedral and even those in the dome above were shattered. Amid the general devastation, the holy icon remained intact and even the glass within the frame remained whole. Thinking to destroy the icon, the anarchists had, on the contrary, become the cause of its greater glorification.

Every year on Friday of the ninth week after Pascha, the icon of the Sign was solemnly borne in procession from the Kursk Cathedral of the Sign to the place of its original manifestation at the Kursk Hermitage, where it remained until September 12. On September 13, it was again solemnly returned to the city of Kursk. This procession was instituted in the year 1618 in memory of the transfer of the icon from Moscow to Kursk and to commemorate its original appearance.

During the Bolshevik revolution, the icon was removed from the Cathedral of the Sign on April 12, 1918. Search was made for the icon but without result. The holy object was discovered under the following circumstances: Not far from the monastery there lived a poor girl and her mother who for three days had not had anything to eat. At that time Kursk was controlled by the Bolshevik regime. On May 3, the girl, a seamstress, went off to the marketplace in search of bread. Returning home at about one o'clock in the morning, she passed by a well which, according to tradition, had been dug by St. Theodosius of the Caves. There, on the edge of the well, she beheld a package wrapped in a sack, and when she opened it, in the package she found the sacred icon, which apparently had been left there by those who had stolen it.

At the end of October 1919, when the White Russian Army was evacuating the city of Kursk, twelve monks of the monastery transferred the icon to the city of Belgorod, from which it was again transferred, first to Taganrog and Ekaterinodar, and then to Novorossiisk. During the evacuation, with the permission of Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky who was then President of the Higher Ecclesiastical Administration in Southern Russia, the icon was taken aboard the steamship St. Nicholas by Bishop Theophan of Kursk on March 1, 1920, and was transported to the city of Thessalonica. On April 3, Bishop Theophan took the icon to the city of Pec, the ancient capital of Serbia. For four months the icon remained in Pec, and in September, at the request of Baron Wrangel, it was returned again to the Crimea. A year after departing from the city of Kursk, on October 29, 1920, the holy image against left its native land during the evacuation of the White Army and those Russian people who refused to submit to the Soviet regime. After arriving again in the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croatians and Slovenes, with the blessing of Patriarch Dimitry, the holy icon remained with Bishop Theophan in the Serbian monastery of Yazak on Frushkaya Mountain. From the end of 1927, the icon was to be found in the Russian church of the Holy Trinity in the city of Belgrade.

With the blessing of the Synod of Bishops, Bishop Theophan bore the icon around to various places where Russians of the diaspora dwelt. During World War II, when Belgrade was subjected to bombardment and other tribulations associated with the war, the miraculous icon became a rampart of hope for all that approached it with sincere prayer.

The steadfast companion of those Russian people who did not accept the satanic authority, this great and ancient holy object, which remained in Moscow during the dreadful turmoil of the 17th century, was removed from Yugoslavia in the autumn of 1944 together with those who again fled the godless regime. From ruined Vienna, the icon was borne to the tranquil city of Carlsbad to which the Synod of Bishops had been evacuated. With the approach of the Bolsheviks it was again transferred to Munich in the spring of 1945. The holy icon proved to be an unending consolation to many thousands of people who were experiencing all the trials and tribulations of the latter years of World War II. From Munich the icon was borne to Switzerland, France, Belgium, England, Austria, and many cities and camps in Germany itself. Subsequently, the icon was transferred to the New World where it had its permanent residence first in the New Kursk Hermitage in Mahopac, N.Y., and then in the Synod's Cathedral Church of the Mother of God of the Sign in New York City, the residence of the First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. At present, by decree of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, a festival is held in honor of the icon at the New Kursk Hermitage in Mahopac, N.Y., on the Sunday nearest the feast of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos, and in the Synod's Cathedral of the Mother of God of the Sign in New York City on November 27/ December 10.

Former Alabama pastor charged with sex abuse of boys

fatman2021 — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:46:43 CST

ANDALUSIA - Prosecutors plan to seek multiple life sentences if they get a conviction against a former Andalusia pastor accused of sexual abuse and torture of young boys on camping trips.

Covington County deputies arrested 54-year-old Ralph Lee Aaron on Wednesday on 152 counts of ******, sexual abuse, sexual torture and possession of obscene matter involving children. Aaron was fired as pastor of Grace Christian Fellowhip Church after he was arrested and held on $24.2 million bond.

His attorney, Al Smith of Andalusia, did not immediately return a phone message Thursday.

Most of the counts involved possession of obsence material. District Attorney Greg Gambril said there were three counts each of ****** and sexual torture, which he said involved a sex toy.

The Wall of Shame

fatman2021 — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:38:43 CST

There is no abstract available for this page revision.

Russian Old Believer communities

fatman2021 — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:37:40 CDT

Russian Old Believer communities
Nikolaevsk, Vozneseka, Razdolna, & Kachemak Selo Four Russian Old Believer communities are located on the southern Kenai Peninsula. The first to be founded was Nikolaevsk, a 10-mile drive east of Anchor Point, following the North Fork of the Anchor River. Established in 1968 by five families, with the financial support of the Tolstoy Foundation of New York, Nikolaevsk has grown to about 300 residents. The village's roots date back to the early 1900s, when Old Believers were seeking a place to worship openly in the way of the Old Rite Russian Orthodox (Staro-Obrachestvo). They journeyed into China, then on to South America, Oregon and Alaska, as well as other points around the globe. Beginning with 640 acres and tents for shelters, Nikolaevsk's founding families carved out their new home. The first naturalization of Nikolaevsk residents was held at the Anchor Point School in 1975, with a large crowd of well-wishers on hand. Today, the community has a public school for students in kindergarten through 12th grade that come from the village and the neighboring area. There is a post office, small restaurant serving Russian food, lodging and the beautiful Church of Saint Nicholas. After years of depending on firefighting and emergency response from Anchor Point, villagers opened a new fire station in 2008. Visitors to Nikolaevsk are asked to heed signs stressing the slow speed limit and to request permission before taking pictures. Three additional Russian Old Believer villages are located east of Homer. Voznesenka is situated beyond the end of the paved East End Road, a distance of approximately 23 miles from Homer. Razdolna can be reached by taking a gravel road that turns off East End Road. The village is about 25 miles from Homer. The homes in each of these villages are spread across a hillside overlooking the head of Kachemak Bay. Voznesenka School has students in kindergarten through 12th grade and Razdolna School has kindergarten-10th grade students. Kachemak Selo is nestled near the mouth of a stream, between the beach and a canyon. There is no road to the village. Residents, as well as teachers at the preschool-12th grade school, travel by foot, four-wheeler or vehicles with four-wheel drive to reach this small settlement. Russian is the first language spoken by many of the children, with English learned after they enter school. Clothing is of a colorful, traditional style, with men and boys wearing embroidered shirts and handwoven belts, women and girls wearing ankle-length dresses. After arriving on the Kenai Peninsula, many Russian Old Believers became commercial fishermen, building their own boats and spending long summer hours fishing Alaska's waters. Since then, others have opened their own businesses on the Kenai Peninsula and in other Alaska communities. Privacy and preserving their lifestyle are important to Russian Old Believers. Keep that respectfully in mind when visiting one of their communities. Planning a trip to homer? visit our Service Directory and find all the resouces you will need to have a great time in Homer.

Beginning with 640 acres and tents for shelters, Nikolaevsk's founding families carved out their new home. The first naturalization of Nikolaevsk residents was held at the Anchor Point School in 1975, with a large crowd of well-wishers on hand.

Oddities of St. John of Kronstadt

ndvanderhoofven — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 01:04:32 CDT

John of Kronstadt (1829-1908), who was canonized by the new-ritualists as a saint, had some features of his life that to say the least were odd. Separate from the fact that he was a new-ritualist, he doesn't seem of the same character as earlier saints.

First, his marriage. He married Elizabeth, the daughter of a priest, and after the marriage ceremony announced to her and without her consent that they were to remain virgins and live as brother and sister. This was very difficult for her to accept. He should have had the decency to inform her before the wedding or give her an annulment. She grew hostile towards him and this affected her spiritual life - later in life she refused to keep the fasts and showed disrespect for the teachings of the church. The reason for the marriage was apparently so he could "inherit" her fathers position as priest. His unilateral decision blurred the meaning of marriage.

John of Kronstadt was hostile to the old believers and wrote an essay in 1855 at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy called "On the Cross of Christ in denouncing imaginary Old Believers".

John of Kronstadt was a charismatic invidual who developed a cult following of thousands, mostly of women. His followers, known as "Ioannites", venerated him as Christ (a practice which he condemned). They lived in communities where they did not marry, (or if married, lived apart from their spouses). They ran shelters where they encouraged other followers to send their children. The children would be put to work making wreaths, which would be sold for high prices since they were supposedly blessed by Father John and had miracle-working powers. Some parents received letters asking for large sums of money, and they became suspicious and called the police who investigated. This became a scandal and the press used the opportunity to parody Orthodox beliefs. ("A Prodigal Saint: Father John of Kronstadt and the Russian People").

Father John was so popular that he developed his own way of doing public confession. After preparing the crowd, he would announce in a loud voice "Repent", and then they would wail and loudly yell out their private sins. (Source: "A Spiritual Portrait of Saint John of Kronstadt", at http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/john_kronstadt_k_zaitzev.htm).

Some women were given a special blessing: "It was regarded as an immense honor to be singled out in a company and addressed by Father Joann; and a friend of mine told me, in open triumph, that he had once walked up to her and kissed her with a holy kiss. It meant some sort of blessing, but precisely what she had not decided. Not another priest in Russia could have kissed a woman of the highest society in company like that and escaped the natural consequences, much less have been thanked for such a flagrant breach of propriety ..." (http://orthodoxhistory.org/?p=1017).

He would pray for all, regardless of their beliefs: "During the service many notes and telegrams were brought to the altar with requests for praying for this or that person. They arrived from various Russian cities and from abroad. Father John prayed for all. His prayer helped Orthodox Christians, Protestants, Catholics, Judaists and Muslims. Everybody felt attracted by Father John because they understood that the God he was praying to was a God of mercy and love."(http://www.vor.ru/English/Christian_Message/program_7.html).

Father John would always dress very luxuriously. He wore robes made of very expensive thick silk material, and his cassocks were made of silk and velvet. He wore coats made of valuable furs. These were all gifts from his followers.

Father John ministered to the dying Tsar Alexander III in 1894 and soon became popular with the aristocracy. He also served at the wedding and coronation of Tsar Nicholas II.

His links with Rasputin, while denied, are inescapable. He gave a blessing to Rasputin in 1903, and allegedly asked for a blessing in return. It is asserted, and denied, that he introduced Rasputin to the Imperial Family and chose him as his successor. Even if he had no links to Rasputin, Father John created the role of "Russia's spiritual father", and upon his death left a vacuum, which was filled by Rasputin.

He was canonized in 1964 by the ROCOR largely for political reasons - to disavow the revolution and to show support for the restoration of the monarchy.

Metropolitan Peter

ndvanderhoofven — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:33:08 CDT

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Peter

Saint Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow and all Russia (Russian: Пётр; died on December 20, 1326) was the Russian metropolitan who moved his see from Vladimir to Moscow in 1325. Later he was proclaimed a patron saint of Moscow. In spite of the move, the office remained officially entitled "Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'" until the autocephalous election of St. Jonah in 1448.
Peter was born in Galicia–Volhynia. He founded a monastery on the Rata River, tributary to Western Bug, and became its abbot. In 1308 king Boleslaw-Yuri II of Galicia nominated and the Patriarch of Constantinople appointed Peter to the vacant see of Kiev and all Rus'. Mikhail Yaroslavich, Grand Prince of Vladimir and Tver, wanted to advance his own candidate for this position. Peter's nomination caused prolonged animosity between Mikhail and Peter to the point that the latter had to ask for protection from the Prince of Moscow in 1325.
Peter's alliance with Moscow helped assert his own authority and contributed to the rise of the House of Moscow. Peter transferred his metropolitan duties from depopulated Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow, where he received property estates. The move strengthened the political position of Moscow and established it as the spiritual capital of fragmented Russia.
After Peter's move to Moscow, the Cathedral of the Dormition and several other stone churches were built by Ivan Kalita in the Moscow Kremlin. The foundation of the Vysokopetrovsky Monastery in Moscow is ascribed to Peter. He also authored a few sermons and epistles. He is credited with painting a wonderworking icon of the Theotokos known as the Icon of the Mother of God of St Peter of Moscow (commemorated on August 24).
After his canonization by Metropolitan Alexis, his veneration was propagated all over Moscovy. Accordingly, many churches were dedicated to Peter the Metropolitan in Moscow and other cities of Russia. His feast day is celebrated on August 24 (the translation of his relics to the Dormition Cathedral in Moscow) and October 5 (in common with Metropolitans Jonah and Alexis)

External links

Catholicos

fatman2021 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:24:20 CDT

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Catholicos (plural Catholicoi) is a title given to the head bishop of an autonomous region under the Patriarchate of Antioch in the ancient Syrian church. A Catholicos in all respects is equivalent to a Patriarch in powers, but, in precedence, defers to the Patriarch of Antioch. The word 'Catholicos' is a transliteration of the Greek καθολικός, pl. καθολικοί , meaning concerning the whole, universal or general.
There existed 4 Catholicoi in the ancient church[when?]:

Catholicos of the East in Persia/India
Catholicos of Etchmiadzin in Armenia
Catholicos of Iberia in Georgia
Catholicos of Caucasian Albania in Azerbaijan

All these 4 ancient catholicates were independent Autocephalous provinces under the Papal supervision of the Patriarch of Antioch prior to the creation of the Catholicos.
A Catholicate or Catholicosate (at times spelt as catholicossate) is the area of responsibility (territorial or otherwise) of the catholicos, considered a leader within any of the several churches of Eastern Christianity, especially those regarded as Oriental Orthodoxy.
In the Eastern Catholic Churches not of Byzantine Rite, Catholicos is equivalent to a Major Archbishop.
Autocephalous Churches of East Syrian Rite

The following are autocephalous Churches of East Syrian Rite that claim succession to the Catholicos of the East of Selucia-Ctesiphon of the Church of the East. These Churches were named Nestorian in the West (not a self-identification):

Catholicos of Assyrian Church of the East
- Mar Dinkha IV is the current Catholicos-Patriarch of the Assyrian Church of the East.
Catholicos of Ancient Church of the East
- Mar Addai II is the current Catholicos of the Ancient Church of the East.

Eastern Catholic Churches of East Syrian Rite

The following are Eastern Catholic Churches of East Syrian Rite that claim succession to the Catholicos of the East of Selucia-Ctesiphon of the Church of the East:

Catholicos of the Chaldean Catholic Church of the East
- Mar Emmanuel III Delly is the current Catholicos-Patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church of the East (in full Communion with the Pope.)
Catholicos of the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church in India
- Mar Varkey Vithayathil is the current Catholicos-Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church (in full Communion with the Pope.)

Oriental Orthodox Church

In the 6th century, on initiative of Mar Jacob Baradaeus, a hierarchy of the Syrian Orthodox was erected in the present Iraq to serve the Christians who were not passed under the Catholicate of the Church of the East. The main See was placed in Tikrit and the rite used was the one of Antioch, i.e. the West Syrian Rite. The first head of this hierarchy was the Great Metropolitan Ahudemeh (559-575). From the 7th century the title used was Maphrian (or Maphryono). In the 12th century the See was moved to Mosul and from the 13th century the title became Catholicos of the East. After the massacres of Tamerlane, the Maphrian was forced to leave Persia and this title was used for the general vicar, with nominal right of succession, of the Patriarch of the Syrian Orthodox Church.

In 17th century many Christians of the Kerala region in India decided to leave the Church of Malabar, the local Church that has always been in connection with the Church of the East and that from the second half of 16th century was under the control of the Portugueses, and to pass under the hierarchy of the Syriac Orthodox Church. They left the East Syrian Rite to adopt the West Syrian Rite. The title of Catholicos of the East for an Indian hierarchy was used from the 20th century. The following heads of Orthodox Church claims succession to the Catholicos of the East.

Catholicos of Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
- Catholicos Baselios Marthoma Didymus I is the current Catholicos of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church.
Catholicos of Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church
- Baselios Thomas I is the current Catholicos of the Jacobite Syrian Orthodox church.

Eastern Catholic Churches of West Syrian Rite

The following are Eastern Catholic Churches of the West Syrian Rite:

Catholicos of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church (in full Communion with the Pope).

Catholicos Baselios Cleemis is the present Catholicos of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church. According to the jurisdictional tradition of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church the Major Archbishop has since used the term "Catholicos".

Armenian Apostolic Church

Likewise, the head of One Holy Universal Apostolic Orthodox Armenian Church also bore the title Catholicos.
The Catholicos of Etchmiadzin presides over the Supreme Spiritual Council of the Armenian Apostolic Church and is the head of the world's 7 million Armenian Orthodox Christians.

Catholicos of Etchmiadzin (Chief Shepherd and Pontiff to all Armenians dispersed throughout the world) of the Armenian Apostolic Church,
- Karekin II is the current Catholicos of the Armenian Apostolic Church.

There is a Catholicos residing in Antelias, Lebanon:

Catholicossate of the Great House of Cilicia (Since 1441).
- His Holiness Aram I is the present Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia

The primacy of honor of the Catholicossate of Etchmiadzin has always been recognized by the Catholicossate of Cilicia.
There once was a Catholicos in Akhdamar, a position that has since been abolished:

Catholicos of Akdamar Island (1116-1895)

Armenian Catholic Church

Catholicos of the Armenian Catholic Church (in full Communion with the Pope).
- Nerses Bedros XIX is the current Catholicos-Patriarch of the Armenian Catholic Church. His full title is officially "Patriarch Catholicos of the House of Cilicia"

Catholicos of Iberia

The title of catholicos is also used in the Georgian Church, whose head carries the title Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia.

Catholicos of Georgian Orthodox Church
- Ilia II is the current Catholicos of the Georgian Orthodox Church.

Catholicos of Caucasian Albania

Historically, the title of Catholicos was also used by the chief bishop of Caucasian Albania. With the Islamic invasion this church deteriorated and the provinces came under the Catholicos of Etchmiadzin.

Armenian Church Divine Liturgy

fatman2021 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:51:50 CDT

SOORP BADARAK	THE DIVINE LITURGY
CHOIR: (& Congregation)"KHORHOORT KHORIN".	CHOIR: (& Congregation)"HYMN OF VESTING".
Khorhoort khorin, anhas, anusgisbn, vor zartaretzer zverin bedootyoont, ee harakasd anmadooytz loosoyn, kerabantz parok zdasus hreghinatz.	O MYSTERY DEEP, inscrutable, without beginning. Thou hast decked thy supernatural realm as a chamber unto the light unapproachable and hast adorned with splendid glory the ranks of thy fiery spirits.
(On special occasions, when a Bishop is the celebrant, after vesting, singing of the "Hymn of Vesting" is intermitted and verses of Hrashapar Asdvadz ("Glorious God") are sung, during which time the celebrant, together with his deacons, will proceed to the main Altar, where he will wash his hands, at the same time, reciting aloud Psalm 26, "I will wash my hands" in antiphon with the protodeacon.)	(While the choir is singing the Khorhoort Khorjin, the Priest being vested, together with his deacons, steps in front of the sanctuary and washing his hands, recites silently in antiphon with the deacon, Psalm 26.) (If a Bishop is the celebrant, see opposite page)
CHOIR: (& Congregation)"KHORHOORT KHORIN". TAKAVOR YERGNAVOR, zegeghetzi ko ansharjh bahia, yev zergurbakoos anvanud koom bahia ee khaghaghootyan.	CHOIR: (& Congregation) HEAVENLY KING, preserve thy Church unshaken and keep the worshippers of thy name in peace.
PRIEST: Yev vasun surpoovoh Asdvadzadznin parekhosootyann, Der, ungal zaghachanus mer yev getzo uzmez.	PRIEST: By the intercession of the Holy Mother-of-God, O Lord, receive our supplications and save us.
DEACON: Soorp Asdvadzadzin yev zamenayn soorpus parekhos arastzook ar Hayr ee hergins, zi gametzyal voghormestsi yev kutatzyal getzoostzeh zahraratzus yoor. Amenagal Der Asdvadz mer, getzo yev voghormia.	DEACON: Let us make the Holy Mother-of-God and all the saints intercessors with the Father in Heaven, that He may be pleased to have mercy and compassion and save His creatures. Almighty Lord, our God, save us and have mercy.
PRIEST: Ungal, Der, zaghachanus mer parekhosootyamp Surpoovoh Asdvadzadznin anarad dzunoghi miyadzni Vortvo ko yev aghachnok amenayn surpotz kotz. Loor mez Der yev voghormia, nerya, kavya, yev togh uzmeghus mer. Arjhanavorya kohootyamp paravorel uzkez unt Vortvo yev unt Surpo Hokvuyd. Ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen. (turning to the congregation) Khosdovanim arachi Asdoodzoh yev surpoovoh Asdvadzadznin yev arachi hark yev yeghpark, zamenayn meghus zors kordzyal yem. Kanzi megha khorhurtov, paniv yev kordzov yev amenayn meghok zor kordzen martik. Megha, megha, aghachem uztzes. Khuntretzek vasun im hasdoodzoh uztoghootyun.	PRIEST: Receive, O Lord, our supplications by the intercession of the Holy Mother-of-God, the immaculate birthgiver of Thine only begotten Son and by the supplication of all The Saints. Hear us, O Lord, and have mercy; forgive, expiate and remit us our sins; make us worthy to thank and glorify Thee with the son and with the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen. (turning to the congregation) I confess before God and before the Holy Mother-of-God and before you, fathers and brethren, all the saints and before you, fathers and brethren, all the sins that I have committed; for I have sinned in thought, word, and deed and with all the sins that men commit. I have sinned, yea, I have sinned: I pray you, beg of God forgiveness for me.
DEACON: Voghormestzi kez Asdvadz huzorn yev toghootyun shnorhestzeh amenayn hantzanantz kotz, antzelooyn yev ayjhmoos, yev harachagayen purgestzeh yev hasdadestzeh hamenayn kordzus baris, yev hankoostzeh uzkez ee hantertzyal gyansun. Amen.	DEACON: May God almighty have mercy upon thee and grant thee forgiveness of all thy transgressions of the past and present, and may He deliver thee from those of the time to come and may He confirm thee in all good works and give thee rest in the life to come. Amen.
PRIEST: Azadeztseh yev uztzez martasern Asvads, yes toghtzeh zamenayn hantsans tzer. Datzeh jhamanag abashkhareloh yev kortzeloh zbaris. Ooghestzeh yev zarachaga gyanus tzer shnorhok Soorp Hokvuyn, huzorn yev voghormatzun, yev numa park havidyanus. Amen.	PRIEST: May God, that loveth men, set you also free and may He remit all your transgressions; may He give you time to repent and to do good works; may He direct also your life in the time to come by the grace of the Holy Spirit, the mighty and the merciful, unto Him be glory forever. Amen.
CHOIR: Hishestsir yev zmez arachi anmah karin Asdoodzo.	CHOIR: Remember us also before the immortal lamb of God.
PRIEST: Hishyal lichik arachi anmah karin Asdoodzo.	PRIEST: Ye shall be remembered before the immortal lamb of God.
ACOLYTE: I - Aghaghagetzek ar Der amenayn yergir, dzarayetzek Dyarn oorakhootyamp.	ACOLYTE: I - Cry unto the Lord all ye lands. Serve the Lord with gladness.
ACOLYTE: II - Mudek arachi nora tzundzootyamp, dzanerook zi na eh Der Asdvadz mer.	ACOLYTE: II - Come before His presence with joy, know ye that He is the Lord our God.
ACOLYTE: I - Na arar uzmez, yev voch mek eyal, mek jhoghovoort yev Khashn arodi nora.	ACOLYTE: I - It is He that hath made us and we were not by ourselves; we are His people and the sheep of His pasture.
ACOLYTE: II - Mudek unt troons nora khosdovanootyamp, yev orhnootyamp ee hargus nora.	ACOLYTE: II - Enter into His gates with thanksgiving; and into His courts with praise.
ACOLYTE: I - Khosdovan yegherook dyarn, yev orhnetzek zanoon nora.	ACOLYTE: I - Give thanks unto the Lord; and bless his name.
ACOLYTE: II - Kaghtzer eh Der, Havidyan ee voghormutyun nora; hazke minchev hazk eh jushmardootyun nera.	ACOLYTE: II - The Lord is gracious, His mercy is everlasting; and His truth endureth from generation to generation.
ACOLYTE: I - Park Hor yev vortvo yev hokvuyn surpo.	ACOLYTE: I - Glory be to the Father amd to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
ACOLYTE: II - Ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen.	ACOLYTE: II - Now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
DEACON: Soorp yegeghetzyavs aghachestzook uzer, zi sovav purgestzeh zmez ee meghatz yev getzoostzeh shnorhiv voghormutyan yooro. Amenagal Der Asdvadz mer, getzo yev voghormia.	DEACON: By the Holy Church let us beseech the Lord that through her may He deliver us from sin and may save us by the grace of His mercy. Almighty Lord, our God, save and have mercy.
PRIEST: Ee mech dajaris yev arachi Asdvadzungal yev baydzaratzyal soorp nushanatzs yev soorp deghvooys, khonarhyal yergyughiv yergirbakanemk; Uzsoorp yev uzhrashali yev uzhaghrogh zderutyoond ko paravoremk, yev kez madootzanemk zorhnutyun yev zpars, unt Hor yev unt Hokvoyd Surpo, ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen. (and going up to the Altar, the Priest shall say antiphon, Psalm 43) Muditz arachi seghano Asdoodzo arr Asdvadz vor oorakh arneh zmangutyoon im.	PRIEST: In the midst of this temple and before these holy symbols accepted by god and glorified, and before this holy place, we humble ourselves and bow down in fear. We glorify thine holy, wondrous the and triumphant dominion and unto the thee with the Father and with the Holy Spirit we offer blessing and glory, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen. (and going up to the Altar, the Priest shall say antiphon, Psalm 43) I will go unto the altar of God, unto God, who maketh by youth joyful.
DEACON: Tad ara intz, Asdvadz yev irav ara intz ee tadasdani imoom.	DEACON: Do judgment for me, oh God; and do justice to me in my cause.
PRIEST: Hazkeh vor voch eh soorp ee marto meghavoreh nenkavoreh, purgya zis.	PRIEST: From the unholy generation; from the sinful and deceitful man deliver me.
DEACON: Too, Asdvadz huzorich im yes Unter moratzar zis, unter durdoom kunam yes ee neghel tushnamvo imoh.	DEACON: Thou art, O God, the giver of my strength, why hast thou forgotten me? Why go I so heavily while my enemy oppresseth me?
PRIEST: Arakya, Der, zlooys ko yev uzjushmardutyoon ko, zi arachnortestzen indz yev hantzen zis ee lyarn soorp yev ee hargs ko.	PRIEST: Send out, O Lord, thy light and thy truth that they may lead me; and bring me unto Thine holy hill and unto Thy dwelling.
DEACON: Muditz arachi seghano Asdoodzo arr Asdvadz vor oorakh arneh uzmangootyoon im.	DEACON: I will go unto the altar of God; unto the God who makes my youth joyful.
PRIEST: Khosdovan yeghetz kez orhnootyamp Asdvads, Advadz im.	PRIEST: I will give thanks unto Thee with praises, O God my God.
DEACON: Art, unter durdoom yes antzn im, gam unter khroves zis, hoosah ar Asdvadz, khosdovanya numa, purgich yeresatz imotz Asdvadz eh.	DEACON: Then why art thou so heavy, o my soul, and why dost thou youth disquiet me? Put thy trust in God, give thanks unto Him, the deliverer of my countenance is God.
PRIEST: Park Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvooyn Surpoh.	PRIEST: Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
DEACON: Ayjhm yev misht yev havidyans havidenitz, Amen. Yev yevus khaghaghootyan uzDer aghachestzook. Orhnestsook uzHayr Dyarn meroh Hisoosi Krisdosi, vor arjhani arar zmez gal ee deghvodsus parapanootyan yev yerkel zerkus hokevorus. Amenagal Der Advadz mer, Getzo yev voghormia.	DEACON: Now and forever unto the ages of ages, Amen. Again in peace let us beseech the Lord. let us bless the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath made us worthy to spend in this place of praise and to saying spiritual songs. Almighty Lord our God, save and have mercy.
PRIEST: Ee hargi surpootyan yev ee deghvotsus parapanootyan, hreshdagatz pnagaranis yev martgan kavaranis, arachi Asdvadzungal yev baydsaratzyal soorp nushanatzus yev soorp deghvooys, khonarhyal yergiughiv yergrbakanemk, uzsoorp yev uzhrashali yev uzhaghtogh uzDerootyoonut ko orhnemk yev paravoremk, yev kez unt yergnayin zorsun madootzanemk zorhnootyun yev uzparus, unt Hor yev unt Hokvooyt Surpoh, ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyanus havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: In this dwelling of Holiness and in this place of praise, in this habitation of angels and the house of expiation of men, before these symbols accepted by God and glorified, and before this sanctuary, we humble ourselves and bow down in fear, we bless and glorify thine Holy, wondrous and triumphant dominion, and together with the heavenly hosts we offer blessings and glory unto Thee with the Father and with the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
CONGREGATION SITS (If the celebrant be a Bishop, the hymn "CHOSEN OF GOD" is usually sung while the Bishop is praying in silence.)	CONGREGATION SITS (If the celebrant be a Bishop, the hymn "CHOSEN OF GOD" is usually sung while the Bishop is praying in silence.)
The Curtain is drawn, MEGHEHTI SHARAGAN is sung, according to the proper of the day. Then the Curtain is opened, and the Priest censes the Sanctuary, and in procession returns to the Altar, while the Choir sings.	Curtain is drawn, if celebrant is a priest, and HYMN of CENSING according to the proper of the day is sung. After which the curtain is withdrawn and the Choir sings one of the appropriate processionals, below, while the Bishop or Priest is censing the Sanctuary.
CONGREGATION STANDS	CONGREGATION STANDS
CHOIR: PAREKHOSOOTYAMP mor koh yev goosi ungal zaghachanus kotz bashdoneyitz. Vor kerakooyn kan zerginus baydsahrahtsootser soorp yegeghetzi aryamp kov Krisdos, yev usd yergnaynotzun garketzer ee sma ztass arakelotz yev markareyitz soorp vartabedatz.	CHOIR: hymn of Censing ( usual processional ) through the intercession of thy virgin mother accept the such applications of thy servants, also ordained within her, after the pattern of the heavenly hosts, the orders of the apostles, of prophets and of Holy teachers.
Aysor jhoghovyal task kahanayitz, sargavakatz, tubratz yev gugherigosatz, khoong madootzanemk arachi ko Der, horinag usd hnoomun Zakaria. Ungal arr ee mehnch zkhunganuver makhtans, vorbes zbadarakus Abeli, zNoyi yev zAbrahamoo.	This day we, ranks of priests, deacons, clerks and it clerics herein assembled, offer incense before thee, O lord, as Zacharia did of old. Accept from us our prayers with offerings of incense, as the sacrifice of Abel, of Noah and Abraham.
Parekhosootyamp verin ko zorats, mishd ansharjh bahya zators haygaznayans	three the intercession of thy supernal hosts maintaining ever unshaken the throne of Armenia.
(or) OORAKH LER soorp yegeghetzi, kanzi Krisdos arkayn yergnitz aysor buhsagyatz uzkez khachin yoorov, yev zartaryatz zahmoorus ko skancheli parokn yoorov. (Variable)	(or) REJOICE, O HOLY CHURCH (variable) for Christ of the king of heaven has this day crowned the with his cross, and has adorned his bulwards with his wonderous glory.
(or) HRASHAPAR ASDEVADZ, or AYSOR JHOGHOVYAL, or KHORHOORT MEDZ, or AYSOR HARYAV EE MERELOTZ. (according to the proper of the day)	(or) GLORIOUS AND EVER-PROTECTING GOD, or ON THIS DAY WERE ASSEMBLED, or GREAT AND MARVELOUS MYSTERY, or THIS DAY IS RISEN FROM THE DEAD. (according to the proper of the day)
DEACON: Orhnya, Der.	DEACON: Bless, Lord.
PRIEST: Orhnyal takavorootyunn Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvooyn Surpoh, ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: Blessed be the Kingdom of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and forever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
CHOIR: Miyadzin Vorti yev pant Asdvadz yev anmah eyootyun, vor hantzun arer marmnanal ee surpoohvo Asdvadzadznen yev ee mishd goosen. Anpopokhelit mart yeghyal, khachetzar, Krisdos Asdvadz mer. Mahvamp uzmah gokhetzer. Mint ee Surpo Yerortutenen, paravoragitz unt Hor yev Surpo Hokvooyn getzo uzmez.	CHOIR: (INTROIT) ONLY-BEGOTTEN SON and word of God and being immortal who didst deign to become incarnate through the Holy Mother-of-God and the ever virgin. Thou, unchangeable as thou art, didst trample down death by death. O Christ our God, who art one of the Holy Trinity, in glory equal with the Father and the Holy Spirit, save us.
DEACON: Yev yevus khaghaghootyan uzDer aghachestzook. Ungal, getzo yev voghormya. Orhnia, Der.	DEACON: Again in peace let us beseech the Lord. Receive, save and have mercy. Bless, Lord.
PRIEST: Orhnootyun yev park Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvooyn Surpo, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen. Khaghaghootyoon amenetzoon.	PRIEST: Blessing and glory to the father and to the sun and to the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen. Peace unto all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooyd koom.	CHOIR: And with thy spirits.
DEACON: Asdoodzo yergurbakestzoo.	DEACON: Let us bow down to God.
CHOIR: Arachi ko Der.	CHOIR: Before thee, O lord.
PRIEST: Der Asdvadz mer, voro garoghootyunud ankunin eh yev parkud anhasaneli voro voghormootyunud anchap eh, yev kuhtootyoonud anpav, too ust arad martasirutyanud koom nayatz ee jhoghovoortus ko yev ee dajarus ays soorp. Yev ara unt mez yev unt aghotagitzus mer aradabes zoghormutyoon ko yev uzkututyoon.	PRIEST: O Lord our God, whose power is unsearchable and the glory inscrutable, whose mercy is immeasurable and the compassion inexhaustible, do Thou, according to Thy abundant love of man, look down upon this thy people and this holy temple and make abundant Thy mercy and with Thy pity unto us and unto them that pray with us.
Zi kez vayeleh park, ishkhanutyun yev badiv, aijhm yev misht yev havidyzns havidenitz. Amen.	For unto thee is fitting glory, dominion, and honour, now and forever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
DEACON: Der takavoryatz, vayelchootyun uzketzav....	DEACON: The Lord reighneth, He is apparelled with majesty.
CHOIR: (HAROOTYAN SAGHMOS, Jashou Psalm and Hymn proper to the day) KOVYA YEROOSAGHEM uzDer, Haryav Krisdos ee mehrehlotz, Alleluya. Yegayk jhoghovoort, yerkehtzek Dyarn Alleluia. Park Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvooyn Surpoh. Aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen. Harootzehlooyn ee mehrehlotz, Alleluia, vor zashkharhus loosavoryatz. Alleluia.	CHOIR: (Midday Psalm and Hymn, proper to the day) Resurrection Day, Psalm Praise the Lord O Jerusalem, Christ is risen from the dead, Alleluia. Come ye peoples. Sing unto the Lord, Alleluia. Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and always and unto the ages of ages. Amen. To Him that is risen from the dead, Alleluia. To Him that enlightened the world, Alleluia.
(or) DER TAKAVORYATZ vayelchootyun uzketsav. Vor anpavehli haghtogh zorootyamp takavor yes yergni yev yergri Krisdos Asduvadz orhnapanemk uzkez, Vor parragtzootyamp unt hor verorhnis hanmahitz yev khonaryal marmin uzketzar parratz takavor, Orhnapanemk uzkez. Park Hor, yev Vortvo, yev Hokvooyn Surpoh, ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz, Amen. Vor garoghabes uzmah gokhetzer yev harootzyal loosavoretzer soorp zegeghetzi anmah ehyootyun. Orhnapanemk uzkez.	(or) The Lord is King, thou art infinite, victorious is might, king of heaven and earth, O Christ our God, we glorify Thee, Thou who, being co-equal in glory with the Father, art extolled by the immortals, yet Thou didst humble thyself, King of Glory as though art, by taking human body. O glorious King, we glorify Thee. Thou who with might didst trample death, and rising (from the dead) thou didst illuminate thy holy church; O immortal being, we glorify thee.
PRIEST: Zi ko eh garoghootyiun yev zorootyun yev park havidyans. Amen.	PRIEST: For thine is the might and power and glory, unto the ages. Amen.
DEACON: Broskhoomeh.	DEACON: Let us attend.
CHOIR: SOORP ASDVADZ, Soorp yev huzor, soorp yev anmah, (vor haryar ee mehrelotz) Voghormia mez. (according to the proper of the day) - 3 times.	CHOIR: Holy God, Holy Almighty, Holy Immortal, (who didst rise from the dead) (according to the proper of the day) Have mercy upon us.
DEACON: Yev yevus khaghaghootyan uzDer aghachestsook.	DEACON: Again in peace, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vasun khaghaghootyan amenayn ashkhari yev hasdadootyan Surpoh Yegeghetzvo, uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: For the peace of the whole world and the stability of the holy Church, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vasun amenayn soorp yev ooghapar yebisgobosatz, uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: For all the Holy and Orthodox Bishops, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vasun Hayrabedin meroh Dyarun Karekini Surpaznakooyn Gatoghigosi genatz yev purgootyan hokvoh norin, uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: For the Life of our Patriarch Karekin II, and for the salvation of His soul, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
[--optional below this line--]	[--optional below this line--]
DEACON: Vasun vartabedatz, kahanayitz, sargavankatz, tubratz, yev amenayn ookhdi mangantz yegeghetzvo, uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: For doctor, priests, deacons, clerks and for all the league of the children of the church, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vasun barebashd takavoratz yev Asdvadsaser ishkhanatz, zoravaratz yev zoratz notzin, uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: For pious Kings and for God-loving princes, captains and their armies, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vahsun hokvotzun hankootzelotz, vork jushmarid yev ooghigh havadov ee Krisdos nunchetzin, zDer aghachestsook.	DEACON: For the souls of them that are at rest and have fallen asleep in Christ in the true and right faith, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Remember Lord, and have mercy.
DEACON: Yev yevus miapan vasun jushmarid yev soorp havadooys meroh, zDer aghachestsook.	DEACON: Again with one accord, for our true and Holy faith, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Zantsinus mer yev uzmimyanus Dyarn Asdoodzo amenagalin hantzun arastsook.	DEACON: Let us commit ourselves and one another unto the Lord, the almighty God.
CHOIR: Kez Dyarnt hantzun yeghitsook.	CHOIR: Let us, O Lord, be committed unto Thee.
DEACON: Voghormyatz mez, Der Asdvadz mer, usd medzi voghormootyan koom, asastsook amenekyan miyapanootyamp.	DEACON: Have mercy on us, O Lord our God, according to they great mercy.
[--optional above this line--]	[--optional above this line--]
CHOIR: Der Voghormia. (3 times)	CHOIR: Lord have mercy. (3 times)
PRIEST: Zi voghormatz yev martaser yes Asdvadz kolov, yev kez vayeleh park, ishkhanootyun yev badiv, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz, Amen.	PRIEST: For thou art being God, art merciful and man-loving, and unto thee is fitting glory, dominion and honour, now and always and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
CONGREGATION SITS	CONGREGATION SITS
(JASHOO KIRK - by a Reader, according to the proper of the day, followed by the Choir singing the Alleluia of the day).	A reader reads from the book of Prophets and of the Apostles, and the Choirs sings the Alleluia of the day.
CHOIR: Alleluya, alleluya, haryav Asdvadz yev tzurvetzan amenayn tushnamik nora.	CHOIR: Alleluia, Alleluia, God arose, and all His enemies scattered.
DEACON: Alleluia Orti [RISE/STAND]	DEACON: Let us rise.
PRIEST: Khaghaghootyun amenehtzoon.	PRIEST: Peace be to all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooyt koom.	CHOIR: And also with thy spirit.
DEACON: Yergyughadsutyamp luvarook.	DEACON: Hearken ye in reverence.
PRIEST: (Or Deacon) Surpo Avedaranis Hisoosi Krisdosi vor ust Mateosi.	PRIEST (or deacon): The Holy gospel of Jesus Christ according to Matthew.
CHOIR: Park kez der Asdvadz mer.	CHOIR: Glory be to thee, O Lord our God.
DEACON: Broskhoomeh.	DEACON: Let us attend
CHOIR: Ahseh Asdvadz.	CHOIR: God doth speak.
DEACON: (reads the Holy Gospel)	DEACON: (reads the Holy Gospel)
CHOIR: Park kez Der Asdvadz mer.	CHOIR: Glory to Thee O Lord our God.
ALL: HAVADAMK ee mi Asdvadz/, ee Hayrn amenagal/ Hararichn yergni yev yergri/ yereveliatz yev anerevootitz/ Yev ee mi Der Hisoos Krisdos/ Vortin Asdoodzo/ dzunyaln hAsdoodzo Horeh/ miyadzin/ aysinkun eyooteneh Hor/ Asdvadz hAsdoodzo/ looys ee looso/ Asdvadz jushmarid hAsdoodzo jushmardeh/ dzunoont/ yev voch araradz/ Nooyn inkun ee punooteneh Hor/ vorov amenayn inch yeghev hergins yev ee verah yergri/ yerevelik yev anerevuytk/ Vor haghakus mer/ martgan/ yev vasun mero purgootyan/ ichyal ee hergnitz/ marmnatzav/ martgatzav dzunav gadaryalabes/ ee Maryama surpo goosen/ Hokvovun Surpov/ vorov eyar marmin/ zhoki/ yev zmid/ yev zamenayn vor inch eh ee mart/ jushmardabes yev voch gardzyok/ Charcharyal/ khachyal/ taghyal/ yerort avoor harootzyal/ yelyal ee hergins novin marmnovn/ nusdav unt achmeh Hor/ Kalotz eh novin marmnovn yev parok Hor/ ee tadel uzgentanis yev uzmeryals/ voro takavorutyan voch ko vaghchan/ Havadamk/ yev ee Soorp Hokin/ haneghn yev ee gadaryalun/ vor Khosetsav horenus yev ee markares yev havedaranus/ Vor echun ee Hortanan/ karozyatz arakialsun/ yev pnagetzav ee soorpsun/ Havadamk/ yev ee mi miyayn/ untanragan yev arakelagan soorp Yegeghetzi/ ee mi mugurdutyun/ habashkharootyun ee kavootyoon yev ee toghotyoon meghatz/ Ee harootyun merelotz/ ee tadasdann havidenitz/ hokvotz yev marmnotz/ arkayootyunn yergnitz/ yev ee gyansun havidenagans.	ALL: (recite the Nicene Creed in full). We believe in One God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only begotten, that is of the substance of the Father. God of God, light of light, very God of very God, begotten and not made; Himself of the nature of the Father, by whom all things came into being in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate, was made man, was born perfectly of the Holy Virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit. By whom he took body, soul and mind, and everything that is in man, truly and not in semblance. He suffered and was crucified, and was buried and rose again on the third day and ascended into heaven with the same body and sat at the right hand of the Father. He is to come with the same body, and with the glory of the Father to judge the quick and the dead, of Whose kingdom there is no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the uncreated and the perfect, who spoke in the law and the prophets and the Gospel, Who came down upon the Jordan, preached to the Apostles and dwelt in the saints. We believe also in only one, catholic, and apostolic , holy Church, in one baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; in the resurrection of the dead, and in the everlasting judgement of souls and bodies, in the kingdom of heaven and in the life eternal.
DEACON: Isk vork asen er yerpemun horjham voch er Vortin, gam er yerpemun horjham voch er Soorp Hokin, gam teh hocheyitz yeghen gam hailmeh eyooteneh asen linel Vortin Asdoodzo yev gam uzSoorp Hokin, yev teh popokhelik yen gam ailailelik, zain bisisn nuzoveh gatoghigeh yev arakelagan soorp Yegeghetzi.	DEACON: As for those who say there was a tome when the Son was not, or there was a time when the Holy Spirit was not or that they came into being out of nothing, or who say that the Son of God or the Holy Spirit be of different substance and that they be changeable or alterable, such doth the catholic and apostolic Church denounce.
PRIEST: Isk mek paravorestzook vor harach kan uzhavidyzns yergirbanakanelov surpo Yerortootyann yev mi Asdvadzootyann Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvuyn Surpo, aijhm yev misht yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: As for us, we shall glorify Him who wast before the ages, worshipping the Holy Trinity, and the one Godhead , the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages, Amen.
DEACON: Yev yevus khaghaghutyan uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: Again in peace, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der, voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Yev yevus havadov aghachestzook yev khuntrestzook ee Diarne Asdoodzo yev ee purgchen mermeh, Hisoos Krisdos, ee jhamoos bashdaman yev aghotitz, zi arjhani untoonelutyan arestze. Luvitze Der tzayni aghachanatz merotz, ungaltzi uzkhunturvadzus urditz merotz, toghtze uzhantzanus mer voghormestzi ee vera mer. Aghotk mer yev khunturvadzk hamenayn jham mustzen arachi medzi derootyan nora, yev na datzeh mez miaban miov havadov yev artarootyamp vasdagel ee kordzus baris; zi zoghormootyan uzshunorhus yoor arastze ee vera mer; Derun amenagal getzoostze yev voghormestzi.	DEACON: Again in faith, let us beseech and ask of out Lord God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, at this hour of service and prayers, that He may make them worthy of acceptance; may the Lord hearken to the voice of our supplication; may he receive the requests of our hearts; may he forgive our trespasses and have mercy upon us; May our prayers and requests at all times enter into the presence of His great majesty and me he grant us to labour in good works with one accord, in one faith and in righteousness, that he may send down upon us the gifts if His mercy. May the Lord almighty save us and have mercy.
CHOIR: Getzo, Der.	CHOIR: Save, O Lord.
DEACON: Uzjham soorp badarakis yev zaradchaga orus khaghaghootyamp antzootzanel havadov, ee Diarne khuntrestzook.	DEACON: That we may pass this hour of Holy sacrifice and the day now before us in peace and in faith, let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Shnorya, Der.	CHOIR: Grant, O Lord.
DEACON: Uzhreshdag khaghaghootyan bahaban antzantz merotz ee Diarne Khuntrestzook.	DEACON: The angel of peace guard our souls, let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Shnorya, Der.	CHOIR: Grant, O Lord.
DEACON: Uzkavootyoon yev uztoghootyoon hantzanatz merotz ee Diarne khuntrestzook.	DEACON: The forgiveness and remission of our transgressions, let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Shnorya, Der.	CHOIR: Grant, O Lord.
DEACON: Uzsurpo khachin medz yev garogh zorootyoonun hoknootyoon antzantz merotz ee Diarne khuntrestzook.	DEACON: The great and mighty power of the holy cross to help our souls.
CHOIR: Shnorya, Der.	CHOIR: Grant, O Lord.
DEACON: Yev yevus miaban vasun jushmarid yev soorp havadooys mero uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: Again with one accord for our true and holy faith, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der, Voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Zantzinus mer yev uzmimyanus Diarn Asdoodzo amenagalin hantzn arastzook.	DEACON: Let us commit ourselves and one another to the Almighty Lord.
CHOIR: Kez Diarnut hantzun yeghitzook.	CHOIR: Let us, O Lord, be committed unto Thee
DEACON: Voghormyatz mez, Der Asdvadz mer, usd medzi voghormootyan koom; asasrzook amenakyan miabanootyamp.	DEACON: Have mercy upon us, O Lord, our God, according to thy great mercy, let us all say with one accord.
CHOIR: Der, Voghormia. (3 times)	CHOIR: Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy.
PRIEST: Vorbes zi arjhanavork yeghitzook kohootyamp paravorel uzkez unt Hor yev Soorp Hokvooyt, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen. Khaghaghaghutyoon amenetsoon.	PRIEST: That we may be made worthy to give thee thanks and to glorify thee with the Father and with the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen. Peace unto all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooyd koom.	CHOIR: And with thy spirit.
DEACON: Asdoodzo yergirbakestzook.	DEACON: Let us bow down to God.
CHOIR: Arachi ko, Der.	CHOIR: Before thee, O Lord.
PRIEST: Khaghaghutyamp kov Krisdos purgich mer, vor ee ver eh kan zamenayn midus yev zbans, amratzo zmez yev anergyugh bahya amenayn chareh. Havasaria zmez unt jushmarid yergurbakoos ko, vork hokvov yev jushmardutyamp kez yergirbakanen. Vasn zi amenasoorp Yerortutyant vayeleh park, ishkhanutyun yev badiv, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Orhnyal Der mer Hisoos Krisdos. Amen.	PRIEST: With thy peace, of Christ our Saviour, which passeth all understanding and speech, defend us and keep us fearless from all evil; make us equal to they true worshipers, who worship thee is spirit and in truth; for unto the most Holy Trinity is witting glory, dominion and honour, now and forever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen. Blessed be our Lord, Jesus Christ.
DEACON: Orhnya Der.	DEACON: Bless the Lord.
PRIEST: Der Asdvadz orhnestzek zamenesyan.	PRIEST: May the Lord bless you all.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen. (Deacon removes the celebrant's crown)
DEACON: Mi vok herakhayitz, mi vok ee tehrahavaditz, yev mi vok habashkharoghatz yev hanmakritz mertzestsi Asdvadzayin khorhoorduz.	DEACON: Let none of the catechumens, none of little faith and none of the penitents nor of the unclean draw near unto the divine mystery.
CHOIR: MARMIN DEROONAGAN yev aryoon purgchagan ga arachi yergnayin zorootyoonkn hanerevooyts, yerken yev asen anhankisd parparov. Soorp, soorp, soorp, Der zorootyantz.	CHOIR: THE BODY OF THE LORD and the blood of the Saviour are laid up for us. The heavenly hosts invisible sing and say with unceasing voice: Holy, holy, holy, Lord of Hosts.
DEACON: Saghmos asatzek Diarn Asdoodzo mehroom, tubir, tzainiv kaghtzrootyamp zerkus hokevors.	DEACON: Sing Psalms unto the Lord God, ye clerks, sing spiritual songs with a sweet voice.
KNEEL or STAND	KNEEL or STAND
(Surpasatzootyoon, according to the proper of the day is sung) HRESHDAGAYIN garkavorootyamp lutzer Asdvadz, zko Soorp Yegeghetzi. The Bearer, who has carried around the sacred bread and the cup of immortality to the Altar, turns) In the absence of a Bearer or another Priest, the following parts are said inaudibly).	(The Hagiody according to the proper of the day is sung) WITH ANGELIC ORDER, thou hast filled, O God, thine Holy Church,? (While the Priest prays and the Hagiody is sung, the Bearer carries around the sacred bread and the cup of immortality to the Holy Table, and coming to the steps of the Altar, the bearer turns,? In the absence of a bearer or another Priest, the following parts are said inaudibly.)
PRIEST: Alelluia, alelluia.	PRIEST: Alelluia, alelluia.
BEARER: (or Deacon) Hampartzek ishkhank uzdroonus tzer ee ver. Hampartzin troonk havidenitz yev mdse takavor paratz.	BEARER (or deacon): Lift up your gates, O ye princes, let the everlasting doors be lifted up and the King of Glory come in.
PRIEST: Ov eh sa takavor paratz, Der huzor zorootyamp yoorov, Der garogh ee baderazmi.	PRIEST: Who is the king of Glory? The Lord string in His power, the Lord mighty in battle.
BEARER: Hampartzek ishkhank uzdroonus tzer ee ver, Hampartzin droonk havidenitz yev muddzeh takavor paratz.	BEARER: Lift up your gates, ye princes; let the everlasting doors be lifted up and the King of Glory come in.
PRIEST: Ov eh sa takavor paratz, Der zorootyantz.	PRIEST: Who is the King of Glory? The Lord of Hosts?
BEARER: Sa inkn eh takavor paratz.	BEARER: Even He is the King of Glory.
PRIEST: Orhnyal yegyal anvamp Diarn. Orhnyal vor kalotz eh.	PRIEST: Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.
CHOIR: Hazark hazaratz hreshdagabedk gan arachi Ko. Yev piurk piurotz hreshdagk bashden zkez, Der, yev ee mardgank hajetzar untoonil zornootyun, tsayniv khorhrtaganav; Soorp, soorp, soorp Der zorootyantz.	CHOIR: Thousands, thousands of archangels stand before thee, and myriads of angels minister to thee, O Lord; yet Thou art well pleased to accept praises from men in the mystical song, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of Hosts.
CONGREGATION RISES	CONGREGATION RISES
DEACON: Yev yevus khaghaghootyan uzDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: Again, in peace let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Yev yevus havadov yev surpootyamp gatzook haghotus arachi surpo Seghanooys Asoodzo ahiv. Mi khughjiv yev kaitaghootyamp, mi nungootyamp, khoramangootyamp, mi badranok yev khabeyootyamp mi yergmudootyamp yev mi terahavadootyamp. Ayl ooghigh varook, barz mudok miyamid surdiv, gadaryal havadov, lutzyal sirov, li yev aravelyal amenayn kortzovk parootyan gatzook haghotus arachi surpo Seghanoys. Asdoodo, yev kudtzook zoghormootyan shnorhus, havoor haydnootyan yev ee myoosankam kalusdyan Dyarn meroh yev purgohin Hisoosi Krisdosi, Getzoostzeh yev voghormestsi.	DEACON: Again in faith and purity, let us stand in awe and pray before the Holy Altar of God; not with evil conscience and offence, not with guile and cunning, not with deceit and wiles, not with doubt and not with little faith; but with a right conduct, a pure mind, a single heart, with perfect faith, being filled with love, full and abounding in all good works. Let us stand in prayer before the Holy Altar of God that we may find grace and mercy in the day of appearing and the second coming of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. May He save and have mercy.
CHOIR: Getzo, Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Save, O Lord, and have mercy.
PRIEST: Shnorhok yev martasirootyamp Dyarn meroh yev purgchin Hisoosi Krisdosi, unt voroom kez Hor, miankamayn yev Hokvooty Surpo, vayeleh park, ishkhanutyoon yev badiv, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen. + Khakhaghutyoon amenetzoon.	PRIEST: By the grace and everlasting kindness of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ with whom unto thee, O Father, and also to the Holy Spirit is fitting Glory, dominion and honour, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen. Peace unto all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooty koom.	CHOIR: And with The spirit.
DEACON: Asdoodzo yergurbakestzook.	DEACON: Let us bow down unto God.
DEACON: Voghchooyn dook mimyantz ee hampooyr surpootyan. Yev vork voch ek garoghk haghortil Asdvadzayin khorhurtooys, artroons yelek yev aghotetzek.	DEACON: Greet thee one another with a holy kiss. And ye that are not able to partake of this divine mystery have gone without the doors and pray. (The kiss of peace is passed throughout the congregation)
CHOIR: (VOGHCHOOYN) Krisdos ee mech mer haydnetzav, Vor enn Asdvadz asd pazmehtzav. Khaghaghootyan tsayn hunchetzav, Soorp voghchooyni hraman duvav, Yegeghetzis mi antzn yeghev, Hampooyrus hot lurman duvav, Tushnamootyunun heratsav, Sern huntanoorus supretsav. Art bashdonyaik partzyal uztsayn, Dook zorhnootyun ee mi peran. Miasnagan Asdvadzootyan, Voroom srovpekn yen surpapan.	CHOIR: (Kiss of peace hymn) Christ is in our midst hath been revealed. He who is God is here seated. The voice of peace hath resounded. Holy greeting hath been enjoined. Here the Church is become one soul. This kiss is given for a bond of fullness. The enmity hath been removed. And love is spread over us all. Now ministers, raising your voice, give ye blessings with one accord to the consubstantial Godhead, to whom Seraphim give praises.
(On Festival Days, the following is sung)	(On Festival Days, the following is sung)
DEACON: Vork havadov gayk hantiman soorp seghanooys arkayagan. Desek pazmyal zKrisdos arkayn, yev shoorch badyal zork vernagan.	DEACON: ye who stand with faith before the royal Holy Table, behold Christ the King enthroned and the heavenly hosts surrounding Him.
CHOIR: Vor hamparnamk zachs oonelov, yev baghadimk zays aselov: zmeghus mer mi hishestzes, ayl kutootyamp ko kavestzes. Unt hreshdagatzn orhnemk uzkez, yev unt surpots kotz, Der, park kez.)	CHOIR: We lift up our eyes and behold and we implore Him saying: Remember not out sins, O Lord, but in Thy pity forgive them. With the angels we praise Thee, Lord, and with thy saints, glorify Thee.)
DEACON: Ahiv gatzook, yergyooghiv gatzook, parvok gatzook, yev nayetzarook uzkooshootyamp.	DEACON: Let us stand in awe, let us stand in reverence, let us stand right and attend with good heed.
CHOIR: Ar kez Asdvadz.	CHOIR: To Thee, O God.
DEACON: Badarak Krisdos madchi anarad karn Asdoodzo.	DEACON: Christ, the spotless Lamb of God is offered in sacrifice of praise.
PRIEST: Shnork, ser, yev asdvadzayin surparar zorootyunn Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvooyn Surpo, +Yeghitzi unt tzez, unt amenesiant.	PRIEST: The grace, the love and the divine sanctifying power of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
CHOIR: Voghormootyun yev khaghaghootyun yev badarak orhnootyan.	CHOIR: Amen, and with Thy spirit.
DEACON: Uzduroons, uzduroons. Amenayn imasdootyamp yev uzkooshootyamp. Ee ver untzayehtzootsek uzmidus tser Asdvadzayin yergyughiv.	DEACON: The doors, the doors. With all wisdom and good heed. Lift up your minds in reverence of God.
CHOIR: Oonimk ar kez Der amenagal.	CHOIR: We lift them up unto Thee, O Lord Almighty.
DEACON: Yev kohantzarook uzDiarneh polorov surdiv.	DEACON: And give thanks unto God, the Lord, with the whole heart.
CHOIR: Arjhan yev irav.	CHOIR: It is meet and right.
(doors are closed, and no movement in the Church. Late comers must wait in vestibule.)	(doors are closed, and no movement in the Church. Late comers must wait in vestibule.)
PRIEST: Yev unt Serovpesun yev unt Kerovpesn, miyatzayn surpasatzootyamp horinel nuvakus, yev hamartzagabes gochelov aghaghagel unt nosin yev asel..	PRIEST: And, singing the song of the Holy, to make melodies in concord with the Seraphim and the Cherubim, and, boldly crying out, to shout with them and to say,?
CHOIR: SOORP, SOORP, soorp, Der zorootyantz. Li yen yergink yev yergir parok ko. Orhnootyun ee partzoons. Orhnyalk vor yergir yev kalotzd yes anvamp Diarn. Ovsanna ee partzoons.	CHOIR: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of Hosts. Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory. Blessing in the highest. Blessed art Thou that didst come in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.
PRIEST: Arek, gerek, AYS EH MARMIN IM, vor vasun tzer yev pazmatz pashkhi, ee kavootyoon yev ee toghootyun meghatz.	PRIEST: Take, eat, this is my body which is distributed for you and for many for propitiation and for the remission of sins.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Arpek ee sumaneh amenekyan, AYS EH ARYOON IM noroh ookhdi, vor haghakus tzer yev pazmatz heghani, ee kavootyun yev ee toghootyun meghatz.	PRIEST: Drink ye all of this; This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for you and for many for propitiation and for the remission of sins.
CHOIR: AMEN, HAYR YERGNAVOR, vor zordid ko yedoor ee mah, vasun mer bardaban bardiatz merotz, heghmamp aryan nora, aghachemk uzkez, voghormya ko panavor hodi.	CHOIR: Amen. (Hymn to the Father) Heavenly Father, who didst give Thy son unto death for us, debtor for our debts, by the shedding of His blood, we beseech Thee, have mercy upon Thy reasonable flock.
PRIEST: Yev uzkooys ee koyotz kez madootzanemk ust amenaynee yev haghakus amenetzoon.	PRIEST: And Thine of Thine unto Thee we offer from all and for all.
CHOIR: HAMENAYNEE Orhnyal yes, Der. Orhnemk uzkez, kovemk uzkez. Kohanamk uzken. Aghachemk uzkez, Der, Asdvadz mer.	CHOIR: (Hymn of blessing). In all things, blessed art Thou, O Lord. We bless Thee, we praise Thee, we give thanks to Thee, we pray unto Thee O Lord our God.
PRIEST: Khaghaghootyun amenetzoon.	PRIEST: Peace unto all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooyt koom.	CHOIR: And with thy spirit.
DEACON: Asdoodzo yergurbakestzook.	DEACON: Let us bow down unto God.
CHOIR: ARACHI KO DER. Vorti Asdoodzo, vor badarakial Hor ee hashdootyun, hatz genatz bashkhis ee mez. Heghmamp aryan ko soorp, aghachemk uzkez, voghormia aryamp kov purgyal hodi.	CHOIR: Before Thee, O Lord. Son of God, Who art sacrificed to the Father for reconciliation, bread of life, distributed among us, by the shedding of Thy Holy Blood, we beseech Thee, have mercy on Thy flock, saved by Thy Blood.
PRIEST: Vorbes zi yeghitzi sa amenetzoon mez nertzetzelotz, hantadabardootyun, ee kavootyun, yev ee toghootyun meghatz.	PRIEST: So that this may be to us all, who draw near thereunto, for acquittal, for propitiation and for remission of sins.
CHOIR: HOKI ASDOODZO, vor zparagtzi ko zkhorhoort ichyal ee hergnitz gadares ee tzerun mer, heghamp aryan sora, aghachemk uzkez, hanko zhokis mer nunchetzelotz.	CHOIR: Spirit of God who descending from heaven dost perform through us the mystery of Him that is glorified with Thee, by the shedding of His Blood, we beseech Thee, grant rest to the souls of us that are fallen asleep.
(Later-comers waiting outside may now come in)	(Later-comers waiting outside may now come in)
PRIEST: Unt vorus yev mez aytz arastzes parerar Asdvadz, aghachemk.	PRIEST: With whom visit us also, beneficent God, we beseech Thee.
CHOIR: Hishya Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
PRIEST: Asdvadzadznin Surpo Goosin Mariyamoo yev Hovhannoo Mugrdichin, Stepanosi Nakhavugayin yev amenayn surpotz, yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachemk.	PRIEST: Of the Mother-of-God, the Holy virgin Mary and John the Baptist, of proto-martyr Stephen and of all the saints, to be mindful in His Holy sacrifice, we beseech the Lord.
CONGREGATION SITS	CONGREGATION SITS
CHOIR: Hishya Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
DEACON: Arakelotz surpotz, markareyitz vartabedatz, mardirosatz yev amenayn hayrabedatz surpotz; arakelakordz yebisgobosatz, yeritzyants, ooghapar sargavakatz yev amenayn surpotz yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachemk.	DEACON: Of the Holy Apostles, the prophets, doctors, martyrs and of all Holy patriarchs, apostolic bishops, presbyters, orthodox deacons and of all the saints to be mindful in this Holy sacrifice we beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
DEACON: Orhnyal, kovyal yev paravoryal, hrashali yev asdvadzazart harutyan Krisdosi yergirbakanemk.	DEACON: The blessed, praised, glorified, marvellous and divine resurrection of Christ we worship.
CHOIR: Park, Harootyan ko, Der.	CHOIR: Glory to Thy resurrection, O Lord.
DEACON: Arachnortatzun merotz yev arachin loosavorchatz surpotzn Tateosi yev Partoghimeyosi arakelotzn yev Krikori Loosavorchin Aresdagisi, Vurtanisi, Hoosgan, Krikorisi, Nersesi, Sahagh, Taniyeli, Khatah, yev Mesrobah vartabedin yev Krikori Naregatzvooyn, yev Nersesi Glayetzvooyn, Hovhannoo Vorodnetzvoyn yev Krikori yev Movsesi Datevatzyatsn yev surpoh Krikorisyantz yev Nersisyantz, hovvatz yev hovvabadatsn Hayasdanyaytz, yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachemk.	DEACON: Of our leaders and first enlighteners, the Holy Apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew, and of Gregory the enlightener, of Aristakes, Verthanes, Yoosik, Gregoris, Nerses, Sahak, Daniel and Khad, of Mesrob the doctor, and of Gregory of Narek, Nerses of Kla, John of Orotni, Gregory and Moses of Tatev and of the Gregorians and the Nersesians and of all the pastors and chief-pastors of Armenia, to be mindful in this Holy sacrifice we beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
DEACON: Miyantznatzelotz surpotz, arakinaser yev asdvadznsooytz gronavoratzun, Boghosi, Andoni, Bogha, Magara, Vonopriosi, abba Margosi, Srabioni, Neghosi, Arseni, Yevakri, Barsama, Hovhanisyantz yev Simeonyantz, surpotz Vosgeyantz yev Sookiasantz, yev amenayn surpotz hartz, yev asha gerdelotz notzin unt diyezers, yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachemk.	DEACON: Of the Holy anchorites, the virtuous and God-instructed monks Paul, Anthony, Paulus, Macarius, Onophrius, the abbot Mark, Seraphion, Nilus, Arsenius, Evagrius, Barsumas, of the Johannesians, and of the Simeonians, and of the Oskians and of the Suckiasians and of all the holy fathers and of their disciples throughout the world, be mindful in this holy sacrifice, we beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya, Der, yev voghormya.	OIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
DEACON: Takavoratz havadatzelotz surpotzn, yev amenayn soorp, yev parebashd yev asdvadzaser ishkhanatz, yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachemk.	DEACON: Of the Christian kings, the saints Abgarius, Constantianus, Tiridates and of Theodosius and of all holy and pious kings and God-fearing princes, be mindful in this holy sacrifice, we beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya, Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
DEACON: Untanoor amenayn havadatzelotz, arantz yev ganantz, dzerotz yev dughayotz, yev amenayn chapoo hasagi havadov yev surpootyamp ee Krisdos nunchetzelotzn, yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachemk.	DEACON: Of all the faithful everywhere, of men and women, old and young and of every age, who in faith and holiness have fallen asleep in Christ, be mindful in this holy sacrifice, we beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya, Der, yev voghormya.	CHOIR: Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy.
CONGREGATION RISES	CONGREGATION RISES
PRIEST: Yevus aravel zEbisgobosabedun mer yev uzbadvagan Hayrabedn Amenayn Hayotz, uzDer, Der _______ yev vijagis mero parekhnam arachnortun uzder ________ Shunorhestzes mez unt yergayn avoors ooghigh vartabedutyamp.	PRIEST: And especially grant us to have out chief bishop and venerable Patriarch of all Armenians, Lord _____ and ______ Primate of Calif, for length of days in orthodox doctrine.
CONGREGATION SITS	CONGREGATION SITS
DEACON: kohootyun yev parapanutyun madootzanemk kez, Der Asdvadz mer, vasn soorp yev anmah badarakis vor ee verah surpo seghanooys. Zi uzsa mez ee surpootyun gentanutyan barkevestzes. Sovav shnorya uzser, zhasdadootyun yev zughtzali zkhaghaghootyun amenayn ashkhari. Surpo hegeghetzvo yev amenayn ooghapar yebisgobosatz. Yebisgobosabedin mero yev badvagan Hayrabedin Amenayn Hayotz, Diarun _(KAREKIN)_ SURPAZNAKOOYN GATOGHIGOSIN, yev vijagis parekhnam Arachnortin, Diarn _______Surpazan Yebisgobosin, Yev surpo Yegeghetzvooys hovvin vor uzbadarakus madootzaneh. Yev vasun zorootyantz yev haghtootyantz takavoratz Krisdoneyitz yev ishkhanatzun parebashditz aghachestzook. (optional) Yev khuntrestzook yev vasun hokvotzun hankootzelotz, yevus aravel vasun hankootzyal raboonabedatzun merotz yev shinoghatz surpo yegeghetzvooys yev vork unt hovanyan sorin yen hankootzyal. Azadootyoon yeghpartz merotz kerelotz yev shunor arachiga jhoghovurtyans, hankisd havadov yev surpootyamp ee Krisdos gadarelotz. Yeghitzi hishadag ee soorp badaraks, aghachem.	DEACON: Thanksgiving and glory we offer unto thee, O Lord, out God, for this Holy and Immortal sacrifice which si on this Holy table, that thou wilt vouchsafe it to be of holiness of life unto us. Through this, grant love, stability and the desirable peace to the whole world, to the Holy Church and to all Orthodox Bishops and to our chief bishop and venerable Patriarch of all Armenians, Lord KAREKIN CATHOLICOS, and our Primate, Lord _____, and to the Priest who offereth this sacrifice. (optional) Let us pray for the armies and for the victory of Christian Kings and pious princes. Let us also beseech and entreat the Lord for the souls of that that are at rest, and moreover for our prelates that are at rest and for the founders of the Holy Church and for them that are at rest under the shadow thereof. Let us ask deliverance for those of our brethren that are captive, and grace upon the congregation here present, and rest for them that have died in Christ with faith and holiness. Of those to be mindful in this Holy sacrifice we beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Usd amenayni yev haghaks amenetzun.	CHOIR: From all and for all.
PRIEST: Yev yeghitzi voghormutyoon medzis Asdoodzo yev purgchis mero Hisoos Krisdosi, unt tzez unt amenesian.	PRIEST: And the mercy of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ be with you all.
CHOIR: Amen. Yev unt hokvooyd koom.(SOLO)	CHOIR: (Soloist) Amen, and with Thy spirit.
DEACON: Yev yevus khaghaghutyan uzder aghachestzook.	DEACON: Amen. Again in peace let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der, voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Amenayn surpovk zorus hishadagetzav, yevus aravelabes uzDer aghachestzuk.	DEACON: By all the saints whom we have commemorated, again lest us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der, voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vasun madootzyal soorp yev asdvadzayin anmah badarakis, vor ee vera surpoh seghanoys, uzDer aghachestzuk.	DEACON: By the Holy, Divine and Immortal Sacrifice that hath been offered on this Holy Altar, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der, voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Vorbes zi Der Asdvadz mer, vor Ungalav uzsa ee soorp; hergnayin yev imanali yoor madootzarann, spokhanagn arakestzeh ar mez uzshnore yev uzbarkevs Hokvooyn Surpo. Uzder aghachestzook.	DEACON: That the Lord our God, who hath accepted it in His Holy, Heavenly and intelligible Altar, may in return send down upon us grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der, voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Ungal, getzo yev voghormia, yev bahya uzmez, Der, koyin shnorhid.	DEACON: Receive, save and have mercy and keep us, O Lord, by Thy grace.
CHOIR: Getzo Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Save, O Lord, and have mercy
DEACON: Zamenasurpoohi zAsdvadzadzinn zmishd gooysun Mariam hantertz amenayn surpovk hishelov, zDer aghachestzook.	DEACON: Making mention of the all-Holy-Mother-of-God and ever-virgin Mary together with all the saints, let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Hishya Der, yev voghormya. Der voghormya kez dyarnut hantzn yeghitzuk Der voghormia (3 times).	CHOIR: Remember, O Lord, and Have mercy. Lord have mercy. Be mindful Lord and have mercy. (3 times).
CONGREGATION STANDS	CONGREGATION STANDS
PRIEST: Yev door mez hamartzagatzayn parparov panal uzperanus mer, gartal uzkez, yergnavorut Hayr, yerkel yev asel	PRIEST: And grant us to open our mouths with cry of bold voice, to call upon Thee O Heavenly Father, to sing and say...
CHOIR: HAYR MER vor hergins yes, soorp yeghitzi anoon ko. Yegestzeh arkayootyun ko. Yeghitzin gamk ko, vorbes hergins yev hergri; Uzhatz mer hanabazort, door mez aysor. Togh mez uzbardis mer Vorbes yev mek toghoomk merotz bardabanatz. Yev mi danir uzmez ee portzootyun, Ayl purgya ee chareh.	CHOIR: Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
PRIEST: Zi ko eh arkayootyun yev zorootyun yev park havidians. Amen. + Khaghaghutyun amenetzoon.	PRIEST: For Thine is the kingdom and the power and glory, unto the ages. Amen. + Peace unto all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooyd koom.	CHOIR: And with Thy Spirit.
DEACON: Asdoodzo yergurbakestzook.	DEACON: Let us bow down unto God.
CHOIR: Arachi ko Der.	CHOIR: Before Thee, O Lord.
PRIEST: Krisdosiv Hisoosiv, Deramp merov, unt voroom kez Hokvooyd Surpoh yev Hor amenagali vayeleh park, ishkhanootyun yev badiv, ayjhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: Through Christ Jesus, our Lord, with whom unto Thee, O Holy Spirit, and unto the Father Almighty is fitting glory, dominion and honour, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
DEACON: Broskhoomeh.	DEACON: Let us attend.
PRIEST: Ee surpootyun surpotz.	PRIEST: Unto holiness to the Holy.
CONGREGATION KNEELS	CONGREGATION KNEELS
CHOIR: MIYAYN SOORP, Miyayn Der, Hisoos Krisdos, ee pars Asdoodzo Hor. Amen.	CHOIR: (HYMN OF ELEVATION) ONE IS HOLY, One is Lord, Jesus Christ, in glory of God the Father, Amen.
PRIEST: Orhnyal Hayr Soorp, Asdvadz jushmarid.	PRIEST: Blessed art Thou, Holy Father, very God.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Orhnyal Vortid Soorp, Asdvadz jushmarid.	PRIEST: Blessed art Thou, Holy Son, very God.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Orhnyal Hokid Soorp, Asdvadz jushmarid.	PRIEST: Blessed art Thou, Holy Spirit, very God.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Orhnootyun yev park Hor yev Vortvo yev Hokvooyn Surpoh, aijhm yev mishd yev havidians havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: Blessing and glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and forever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
CHOIR: AMEN, HAYR SOORP, Vortid Soorp, Hokit Soorp. Orhnootyun Hor yev Vortvo yev Surpoh Hokvooyn. Aijhm yev mishd yev havidians havidenitz. Amen.	CHOIR: (HYMN OF DOXOLOGY) THE FATHER HOLY, the Son Holy, the Spirit Holy. Blessing to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
PRIEST: Ee soorp, ee soorp, badvagan marmno yev hAreneh. Diarun meroh yev purgchin Hisoosi Krisdosi jashagestzook surpootyamp. Vor ichyal ee hergnitz pashkhi ee michi meroom. Sa eh gyank, hooys, harootyun, kavootyun yev toghootyun meghatz. Saghmos asatzek Diarn Asdoodzo meroom, saghmos asatzek yergnavor takavoris meroom anmahi, vor nusdi ee gars kerovbeyagans.	PRIEST: In Holiness let us taste of the holy, holy and precious body and blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Who, having come down from heaven, is distributed among us. This is life, hope of resurrection, propitiation and remission of sins, Sing psalms unto the Lord our God, sing psalms unto our Heavenly King, the Immortal, who rideth in cherubic chariots.
(Choir and Deacons alternately)	(The curtain is drawn and the kneeling choir and deacons sing LORD HAVE MERCY alternately).
CHOIR: DER VOGHORMIA (4 times)	CHOIR: Lord have mercy (4 times).
DEACONS: Der Voghormia (4 times)	DEACONS: Lord have mercy (4 times).
CHOIR: Amenasoorp Yerortootyun. Door ashkharhis khaghaghootyun. (or) Ari Asdvadz hartzun merotz, ler oknagan azkis hayotz.	CHOIR: Help, we beseech, unto ourselves. Unto this world, O grant thou peace. (or) God of our Fathers hasten, Lord, Refuge of the afflicted, thou.
DEACONS: Yev hivantatz pujhushgootyun, nunchetzelotz arkayootyun (or) Has oknootyun dzarayitz kotz, Ler oknagan azkis hayotz.	DEACON: Upon the sick bestow Thy health, unto our sleeping brethren, heaven. (or) Unto Thy servants aid vouchsafe. Be helpful to the race of Haik.
CHOIR: Der voghormia, Der voghormia Hisoos purgich, mez voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord, have mercy, Lord, have mercy, Jesus, our Saviour, Lord, have mercy.
DEACONS: Michnortootyamp soorp yev anmah yev genarar badarakis.	DEACON: By the mediation of this holy and immortal sacrifice.
CHOIR: Ungal Der, yev voghormia.	CHOIR: Receive, Lord, and have mercy.
CONGREGATION STANDS	CONGREGATION STANDS (Those who are ready for Communion come from their seats towards the Altar.)
DEACON: Saghmos asatzek Diarn Asdoodzo meroom, tubirk, tzainiv kaghtzrootyamp zerkus hokevors. Zi suma vayelen saghmosk yev orhnootyunk, alelook yev yerkuk hokevor bashdoniayk antertz ertov saghmos asatzek yev uzDer hergins orhnetzek.
CHOIR: ORHNYAL EH ASDVADZ, Krisdos badarakyal, pashkhi ee michi meroom, Aleluia. zMarmin yoor da mez geragoor, yev soorp zaryoon yoor tzogheh ee mez, Alelluya. Madik ar Der yev arek uzlooys, Alelluyah. Jashagetzek yev desek zi kaghtzr eh Der, Alelluya, (Orhnetzek uzDer hergins, Alelluya, Orhnetzek uzna ee partsoons, Alelluya) Orhnehtzek uzna, amenayn hreshdagk nora, Alleluya, Orhnetzek uzna amenayn zorootyunk norah, Alelluya.	CHOIR: Blessed is the Lord, Christ is sacrifices and shared among us, Alleluia. His body He gives us for food and he bedews us with His Holy Blood, Alleluia. Draw near to the Lord and take ye the light, Alleluia. O taste ye and see how sweet is the Lord, Alleluia. (Praise the Lord in the heavens, Alleluia. Praise Him in the heights, Alleluia). Praise ye Him, all His angels, Alleluia. Praise ye Him, all ye His hosts, Alleluia.
(the Curtain opens and Communicants come forward to the foot of the Altar to receive HOLY COMMUNION)	(the Curtain opens and Communicants come forward to the foot of the Altar to receive HOLY COMMUNION)
DEACON: Yergyooghiv yev havadov harach madik yev surpootyamp haghortetzarook.	DEACON: With fear and with faith draw near and communicate in holiness.
	(Private prayer before confession) O Lord, God of our salvation, who are merciful and compassionate, long-suffering and full of pity and repentance of the sufferings of mankind, who desirest not the death of the sinner but rather that he may turn from his wicked ways, and live. Do Thou, O Lord, by Thy bountiful mercy comfort Thy servants and grant them opportunity for repentance; be Thou propitious unto them by Thy Grace and make them members of Thy Holy Church, in order that their souls may be enabled through confession and repentance to enter Thy Holy Church, and with Thy flock bless and glorify the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, now and forever, world without end. Amen. CONFESSION (The Communicants kneel and make the sign of the cross.) In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. Amen. I have sinned against the all-holy Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; yea, I have sinned against God. PRIEST: Pay God grant thee forgiveness. I confess before God and before the holy mother of God, and before all the Saints, and before Thee, Holy Father, all the sins which I have committed. For I have sinned in thought, word and deed, willingly and unwillingly, knowingly and unknowingly. I have sinned against God. (Megha Asdoodzo.) PRIEST: May God grant thee forgiveness. I have also sinned by the sevenfold transgressions of the deadly sins; namely, by PRIDE and all its forms; by ENVY and all its forms; by ANGER and all its forms; by SLOTH (LAZINESS) and all its forms; by COVETOUSNESS and all its forms; by GLUTTONY and all its forms; by LUST and all its forms (omitted by children). I have sinned against God. (Megha Asdoodzo.) PRIEST: May God grant thee forgiveness. I have sinned against my Christian duties. I was found unworthy of it by my works. While knowing the evil, yet I willingly gave way to it and from good works I purposely kept away; woe unto me (3 times). I have sinned against God. (Megha Asdoodzo.) PRIEST: May God grant Thee forgiveness. Reverend Father, I hold thee as reconciler and intercessor with the Only-begotten Son of God, that by power given to thee, thou wilt release me from the bond of my sins, I pray thee. PRIEST: (ABSOLUTION) May God the lover of man have mercy upon thee, and grant thee forgiveness of all thy sins, both those which thou hast confessed, as well as those which thou hast forgotten. Therefore, with the priestly authority committed to me, and by the divine command that whatsoever ye loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, I absolve thee of all participation in sin, in thought, in word, and in deed, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and reinstate thee in the sacraments of the holy Church, that whatsoever good thou mayest do, may be accounted to thee for good and for the glory of the life to come. Amen. (Private Prayer after Holy Communion): We give Thee thanks, O Christ our God, who hast granted us such a taste of Thy goodness unto Holiness of life, Through it keep us holy and without sin, by dwelling among us, and grant Thy divine protection. Tend us in the pastures of Thy holy and benevolent will whereby being fortified against every while of the adversary, we may be counted worthy to hear Thy voice, and to follow Thee alone, out only victorious and true shepherd, and to receive from Thee the peace prepared for us in Thy kingdom of heaven, O our God, and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who are blessed with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and forever, world without end. Amen.
DEACON: (to the Communicants) Asatzek megha Asdoodzo. Havadamk ee Hayr soorp Asdvadz jushmarid, havadamk yev hortin soorp Asdvadz jushmarid. Khosdovanimk yev havadamk zi sa eh jushmarid, gentani yev gentanarar marmin yev aryoon Diarun meroh yev Purgchin Hisoosi Krisdosi vor barna uzmeghus ashkharhi.	DEACON: (to the communicants) And I say I have sinned against God. I believe in the Holy Ghost as true God. I confess and believe that this is true, living, and life-giving body and blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who taketh away the sins of the world.
PRIEST: (administering Holy Communion) Marmin yev aryoon Hisoosi Krisdosi yeghitzi kez ee kavootyun yev ee toghootyun meghatz.	(the PRIEST, kneeling, shall administer Holy Communion to the worthy believers one by one, and he will say in a low voice) The body and blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ be unto thee for expiration and forgiveness of sins.
(During communion, the Organist softly plays AYSOR ANJAR if there are many taking communion.)	(During communion, the Organist softly plays AYSOR ANJAR if there are many taking communion.)
CHOIR: Asdvadz mer, yev Der mer, yerevetzav mez, Orhnyal yegyal anvamp Diarn.	CHOIR: Our God and our Lord hath appeared unto us; blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.
PRIEST: Getzo, Der, uzjhoghovoortus ko yev orhnya uzjharankootyunus ko; Hovya yev bartzratzo uzsosa haisumhedev minchev havidyans. (The Curtain is drawn again)	PRIEST: Save Thy people, O Lord, and bless Thine inheritance; feed them and lift them up henceforth forevermore.
CHOIR: Lutzak ee parootyantz kotz, Der, jashagelov uzmarmin ko yev zaryoon; Park ee partzoons geragroghid uzmez; Vor hanabaz geragres uzmez, arakya ee mez uzhokevor ko zorhnootyun. Park i partzoons geragroghid uzmez.	CHOIR: (HYMN OF GLORY) We are filled with Thy good things , Lord, by tasting of Thy body and blood. Glory in the highest to Thee that hast fed us. Thou who continually dost feed us, send down upon us Thy spiritual blessing. Glory in the highest to Thee that hast fed us.
DEACON: Yev yevus khaghaghootyan uzDer aghachestook.	DEACON: Again in peace let us beseech the Lord.
CHOIR: Der voghormia.	CHOIR: Lord have mercy.
DEACON: Yev yevus havadov ungalyalk Asdvadzayin, soorp, yergnayin, anmah, anarad yev anabagan khorhurtooys, uzDiarneh kohatzarook.	DEACON: Having received in faith of the Divine, Holy, heavenly, immortal, pure and undefiled Mystery, again give thanks unto the Lord.
CHOIR: KOHANAMK UZKEN, Der, vor geragretzer uzmez, hanmahagan seghano ko. Pashkhelov uzmarmint yev zaryoont ee purgutyoon ashkharhi, yev gyank antsantz merotz.	CHOIR: (HYMN OF THANKSGIVING) We give thanks to Thee, O Lord, who hast fed us at The table of immortality, distributing The body and blood for the salvation of the world, and for life unto our souls.
CONGREGATION SITS The curtain is opened and the offering Plates are passed, after which the Celebrant delivers the SERMON. CONGREGATION RISES	CONGREGATION SITS The curtain is opened and the offering Plates are passed, after which the Celebrant delivers the SERMON. CONGREGATION RISES
PRIEST: Vor orhnes zaynosig, vork orhnen uzkez Der, yev soorp arnes uzhoosatzyals ee kez.	PRIEST: O Lord, who blesses them that bless Thee and hallows them that put their trust in Thee.
CHOIR: Orhnyal eh Asdvadz.	CHOIR: Blessed is God.
PRIEST: Getzo uzjhoghovurtus ko yev orhnya uzjharankootyoonus ko, uzluroomun yegeghetzvo ko bahya.	PRIEST: Save Thy people and bless Thine inheritance. Guard the fullness of Thy Church.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Surpya uzsosa vork voghchunetzin sirov uzvayelchutyun dan ko. Too uzmez paravorya Asdvadzayin zorutyamp kov. Yev mi toghur uzhoosatzyals ee kez.	PRIEST: Sanctify that that have greeted in love the beauty of Thine house. Do Thou glorify us with Thy divine power and forsake not them that set their trust in Thee.
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Uzkhaghaghutyoon barkevya amenayn ashkharhi, yegeghetzyatz, kahanayitz, takavoratz Krisdoneyitz,hayrabedootian yev hanrabedootian askis hayotz yev zinvorial mangantz merotz yev amenayn jhoghovurtyans.	PRIEST: Grant peace to the whole world, to churches, priests, Christian Kings and their men under arms, and to all Thy people,...
CHOIR: Amen.	CHOIR: Amen.
PRIEST: Zi amenayn doork parik yev amenayn barkevk gadaryalk ee veroost yen ichyalk ar ee ken, vor yes Hayr loosoh yev kez vayeleh park, ishkhanootyun yev badiv, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: For every good gift and every perfect bounty cometh down from above from Thee, who art the Father of Light and to Thee is fitting glory, dominion and honour, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
CHOIR: YEGHITZI Anoon Diarn Orhnyal, haisumhede michev hayidyan (3 times)	CHOIR: Blessed be the Lord's name from this time forth and evermore. (3 times)
PRIEST: Gadaroomun orinatz yev markateyitz too yes Krisdos Asdvadz Purgich mer, vor lutzer zamenayn hayragan dnorenootyunus ko. Litz yev uzmez Hokvovud kov Surpov.	PRIEST: Thou art the fullness of the law and of the prophets, O Christ, God, our Saviour, who didst fulfil all the economies willed of Thy Father; fill us also with thine Holy Spirit.
(If requiem services are performed, HOKOHANKIST, at this time)	(If requiem services are performed, HOKOHANKIST, at this time)
(THE LAST GOSPEL)	(THE LAST GOSPEL)
DEACON: Orthi.	DEACON: Arise.
PRIEST: Khaghaghootyun amenetzoon.	PRIEST: Peace unto all.
CHOIR: Yev unt hokvooyd koom.	CHOIR: And with thy spirit.
DEACON: Yergyooghatzootyamp luvarook.	DEACON: Hearken ye in fear.
PRIEST: Surpoh Avedaranis Hisoosi Krisdosi vor ust Hovannoo.	PRIEST: To the Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to John.
CHOIR: Park kez, Der, Asdvadz mer.	CHOIR: Glory to Thee, O Lord our God.
DEACON: Broskhoomeh.	DEACON: Let us attend.
CHOIR: Aseh Asdvadz.	CHOIR: God speaks. (The Priest reads the last Gospel, John 1:1-14)
PRIEST: Ee Horeh Loosoh. Ee usguzpaneh ehr Pann, yev Panner ar Asdvadz yev Asdvads ehr Pann. Nah ehr ee usguzpaneh ahrr Asdvads. Amenayn inch novav yeghev yev arants norah yeghev yev vochinch vor inch yeghevn. Novav gyank ehr yev gyankun ehr looys martgan, yev looysun ee khavaree ahnt loosavoreh yev khavar numah voch yeghev hasoo. Yeghev ayr mi arakyal hAsdoodzoh, anoon numah Hovhannes. Sa yegn ee vugayootyun, zi vugayestzeh vasun loosooyn, zi amenekin havadastsen novav. Voch ehr nah looysn, ayl zi vugayestseh vasun loosooyn. Ehr looysn jushmarid, vor loosavor arneh zamenayn mart, vor kalotz eh hashkhar. Hashkharhi er, yev ashkhar novav yeghev yev ashkhar uznah voch dzanyav. Hyoorsun yegn, yev hyoorkn uzna voch ungalan. Isk vork ungalan uznah yed notzah ishkhanootyun vortis Asdoodzo linel, vorotz havadastzen hanoon norah. Ooyk voch hareneh yev voch ee gamatz marmno, yev voch ee gamatz arrn, ayl hAsdoodzo dzunan. Yev Pann marmin yeghev yev punagetzav ee mez, yev desak uzparus norah, uzpars iprev uzMiyadzini arr ee Horeh, li shunorhok yev jushmardootyamp.	PRIEST: From the Father of Light: In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made that was made. Though Him was life, and the life was the light of men and the light shineth in the darkness and the darkness apprehended it no. There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came for a witness that he might bear witness to the light that all might believe through him. He was not the light but that he might bear witness to the light. There was the true light which lighteth every man that it to come into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world knew Him not. He came into His own and they that were His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the power to become the children of God, even to them that shall believe in His name; who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
DEACON: Park kez, Der Asdvadz mer. Soorp khachivs aghachestzook uzDer, zi sovav purgestzeh uzmez ee meghatz, yev getzoostzeh shnorhiv voghormutyan yooroh. Amenagal Der Asdvadz mer, getzo yev voghormya.	DEACON: Glory to Thee, O Lord, our God. By the Holy Cross let us beseech the Lord, that He may thereby deliver us from our sins and may save us by the grace of His mercy. Almighty Lord our God, save and have mercy.
PRIEST: Bahbanya uzmez, Krisdos Asdvadz mer, unt hovanyav soorp yev badvagan khachivud kov ee khaghaghootyan. Purgya hereveli yev anerevooyt tushnamvuyn. Arjhanavorya kohootyamp paravorel uzkez unt Hor yev unt Hokvooyd surpoh, aijhm yev mishd yev havidyans havidenitz. Amen.	PRIEST: Gurad us O Christ our God under the shadow of Thy Holy and Precious Cross in peace. Deliver us from enemies visible and invisible. Make us worthy to give thanks to Thee and to glorify Thee with the Father and with the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
CHOIR: Orhnetzitz uzDer hamenayn jham, Hamenayn jham, orhnootyun norah ee peran mer.	CHOIR: I will bless the Lord at all times; His praise shall at all times be on my lips.
PRIEST: Orhnyalk yegherook ee shnorhatz Soorp Hokvooyn. Yertayk khaghaghutyamp yev Der yeghitzi unt tzez unt amenesiant. Amen.	PRIEST: Be ye blessed by the grace of the Holy Spirit. Depart in peace and the Lord be with you all. Amen.
(At the conclusion, the congretation files up to kiss the Holy Gospel and leave the sanctuary quietly, while the organist plays an appropriate tune.)	(At the conclusion, the congretation files up to kiss the Holy Gospel and leave the sanctuary quietly, while the organist plays an appropriate tune.)

Armenian Church Library Online--Divine Liturgy Page I would like to express great gratitude to Michael Ibrahim of Australia who helped digitize this by typing in much of the English text.

[edit] The Transubstantial and Sacrificial Nature of the Badarak

Soorp Badarak means "Holy Sacrifice". From: http://www.armenianchurch.net Who is responsible for the armenianchurch.net site? This site was launched in July 2002 by the Communications Department of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern) under the direction of Mr. George Kassis, Director of Communications and Development. The site was redesigned in March 2004. Parts of the Badarak ceremony are pasted below. Important parts have been put in bold lettering. A Hymn about Holy Communion -- Marmeen deroonagan Like the Liturgy of the Word, the Eucharist also begins with a hymn to Jesus Christ. This first hymn of the Eucharist asserts that when we receive the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion, we are being joined to the same Son of God who is praised by the angels in heaven: "The body of the Lord and the blood of the Savior are present before us. The heavenly hosts invisibly sing with unceasing voice: Holy, holy, holy, Lord of hosts" [23]. Marmeen deroonagan reminds us that in Holy Communion we become one with Almighty God. We literally tap into the divine power of God, for whom "All things are possible" [Matthew 19:26]. The Procession with the Gifts of Bread and WineAnother similarity between the Eucharist and the Liturgy of the Word is that both begin with a procession. The deacon processes around the altar elevating the veiled chalice above his head. Like the procession with the Gospel in the Liturgy of the Word, this procession draws our attention and devotion to the bread and wine, which become for us the Body and Blood of Jesus. While the deacon processes around the altar the priest prays once again that God will make him worthy to preside over this sacrament: "€¦Cleanse my soul and my mind from all the defilements of the evil one; and by the power of your Holy Spirit enable me €¦ to stand before this holy table and to consecrate your spotless body and your precious blood" [24]. At the end of the procession, the deacon hands the gifts to the celebrant as they alternate verses from Psalm 24. Yet again, the words of the Psalm express our faith that the contents of the chalice will become for us the Lord, "strong in his power, mighty in battle." As the deacon hands the chalice to the priest he says: "This is the king of glory!" [Sa eenkn eh takavor parats] [25]. The Procession with the Gifts concludes with a proclamation by the deacon, leading into a prayer by the priest. On behalf of all those present he asks God to "grant this bread and this cup to be for us, who taste of them, a remedy of forgiveness of our sins" [26]. A Call to Attention: Let us Stand in Awe After the Kiss of Peace the deacons invite the people to give their undivided attention to the Eucharistic Prayer, the main prayer of the Badarak. In the course of this long prayer [29-39] the celebrant, praying on behalf of all the people, asks God to do for us just what Jesus promised at his last Supper: to fill us with His Body and Blood, the sacrament of His holiness and divine life, in the bread and wine of Holy Communion. In preparation for this important prayer, the deacons call on us to "lift up your minds in the fear of God;" to "give thanks to the lord with the whole heart" [29]. This is our cue to clear our minds of extraneous thoughts. We must now focus on God. At this moment nothing is more pressing and urgent than He. The Eucharistic Prayer The Eucharistic Prayer of the Armenian Church is attributed to the great fourth-century Egyptian theologian St. Athanasius, who strongly influenced Armenian theology. The Eucharistic Prayer of St. Athanasius is more than a simple prayer in the usual sense of the term. It is a poetic, highly theological declaration of the Armenian Church's understanding of God's intervention in human history, mostly in the person and deeds of Jesus Christ. The prayer retells the whole story of our salvation [29-32], focusing on the beginning and the end of Christ's life: his birth as a human being [29-30], and his death on the cross [30-31] as a sacrifice to God the Father for us. Christ's crucifixion led to his resurrection, by which he destroyed the permanence of death and replaced it with a new and never-ending life with God for those who choose to accept it. The Prayer is called "Eucharistic" because the story of our salvation in Christ pivots around Christ's last Supper [31-32]. It was during that meal in the Upper Room, on the night before his execution, that Jesus gave his disciples bread and wine, declaring them to be his Body and Blood. More important, Jesus told them that in this ritual meal, he had established "the new covenant in my blood" [32] a radically new relationship of love and fellowship between God and humanity. "Do this," he told them, "in remembrance of me" [1 Corinthians 11:24-25]. When we celebrate the Eucharist and receive Holy Communion, we recall and recommit ourselves to this new covenant in the Church. We rededicate ourselves to Christian life as children of God and heirs of eternal life with him. We renew our oath of baptism. Filled with Christ himself, we say, "Yes, Lord. I want to follow you and be with you in this life and for all eternity." Through the Eucharist, the Church offers us true inner peace, a real sense of belonging, and the true security that comes from being with God. The Eucharistic Prayer is therefore the Church's prayer of life in Christ. It is the unique ministry of the priest to offer this prayer to God on behalf of all the faithful. Over the centuries this prayer, the heart of the Divine Liturgy, has been covered over by deacons' litanies and hymns so that today much of the Eucharistic Prayer is offered inaudibly by the celebrant. It is important, therefore, that we realize that this Prayer is not "private," and it is not "the priest's prayer." It is the prayer of all the children of God, the Church, to their Father in heaven. The Preface Theologians refer to the first part of the Eucharistic Prayer as the "Preface" [29-30]. The Preface praises God for sending his son, Jesus Christ, into the world to be born, and to take on the condition of humanity in order to cleanse it and reconcile it with God the Father. This is the mystery of Christ's incarnation. It is the teaching of the Armenian Church that in the incarnation the process of our salvation already began as Jesus embraced humanity, purifying it and infusing it with his divinity." Like the divine master-builder building a new work," our Eucharistic Prayer declares, "[Jesus] made this earth into heaven" [29]. We see the same mystery revealed in the bread and wine of the Badarak. As the twelfth-century Armenian St. Nersess Lambronatsi wrote, "For our sake you became earthly that we may become heavenly. For our sake you became bread that we, by partaking of you, may be sanctified." The Last Supper After the Sanctus, the Eucharistic Prayer describes "the outpouring of [Jesus'] infinite loving-kindness to us" [30]. The Prayer recalls God's repeated attempts, detailed in the Old Testament, to coax mankind back from the vain and sinful distractions of this life to the loving security of God. This culminates in the sacrifice of God's only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, who died on the Cross as a redemption for our sinfulness. "The world-saving Cross...the occasion of our redemption" [30] is perpetuated for us in our celebration of the Lord's Supper. The Eucharistic Prayer narrates this event, quoting Christ's own words: "Take, eat; this is my body...Drink this all of you. This is my blood" [31 ]. Our celebration of the Badarak rests on the authority of these words of the Lord. We repeat the Lord's Supper in the Divine Liturgy not by any human authority, but because our Lord told us to do so [Mathew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20, 1 Corinthians 11:23-26]. Our Eucharistic Prayer declares: "Your only-begotten, beneficent Son gave us the commandment that we should always do this in remembrance of him" [31]. Our celebration of the Badarak rests on the authority of these words of the Lord. We repeat the Lord's Supper in the Divine Liturgy not by any human authority, but because our Lord told us to do so [Mathew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20, 1 Corinthians 11:23-26]. Our Eucharistic Prayer declares: "Your only-begotten, beneficent Son gave us the commandment that we should always do this in remembrance of him" [31]. The Epiclesis"Epiclesis" (eh-pi-clee'-sis) is the term theologians use to describe the next part of the Eucharistic Prayer. In the Epiclesis we call on God's Holy Spirit to come down "upon us and upon these gifts," so that they may become "truly the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" [34]. This is our main supplication in the Eucharistic Prayer. The Intercessions After the Epiclesis, in the presence of Jesus Christ in his Body and Blood, we pray to our heavenly Father for all of our daily cares and concerns. The Prayer lists them one by one. These subsidiary requests of the Divine Liturgy are called "Intercessions." We pray for peace in the world, for the stability of the Armenian Church, for our Catholicos, Bishops and clergy, for civil leaders, for travelers, prisoners, captives, for the sick and suffering, for temperate weather and sufficient food, for those who help the poor, for all the living and all the dead [35, 37,38-39]. The Prayer lists them one by one. These subsidiary requests of the Divine Liturgy are called "Intercessions." We pray for peace in the world, for the stability of the Armenian Church, for our Catholicos, Bishops and clergy, for civil leaders, for travelers, prisoners, captives, for the sick and suffering, for temperate weather and sufficient food, for those who help the poor, for all the living and all the dead [35, 37,38-39]. We should never underestimate the power of prayer. Jesus said, "If two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven." [Matthew 18:19]. There is no better time to ask our heavenly Father for whatever we need than during the Badarak, when we are assembled in the presence of Christ as the Church. While the priest silently makes these intercessions in the Eucharistic Prayer [35, 37, 38-39], the deacons chant a litany in which they recall the names of the great saints of the Church [34-37]. We remember that the saints already live in the presence of God in heaven. But they also invisibly participate in our liturgy. We ask them to intercede with God -- literally, to put in a good word for us -- so that He may hear our prayers and answer them. All of this is expressed in the refrain, Heeshya Der yev voghormya, "Be mindful, Lord, and have mercy." The Conclusion of the Eucharistic Prayer The great Eucharistic Prayer ends with a final reference to Holy Communion, a closing doxology in praise of the Holy Trinity, and of course, the seal of all prayers, Amen: "And having cleansed our thoughts, make us temples fit for the reception of the Body and Blood of your Only-begotten, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, with whom to you, O Father almighty, together with the life-giving and liberating Holy Spirit, is befitting glory, dominion and honor, now and always and unto the ages of ages. Amen" [39]. Two Hymns of Praise The priest's exclamation, Ee surpootyoon surpots, "Holiness for the holy" [42] is the original invitation for the faithful ("the holy") to come forward to receive communion ("holiness"). It is a relic from an earlier time when Holy Communion was distributed at this point in the Divine Liturgy. Eventually, two hymns were added here, before the distribution of Holy Communion. The first is addressed to Christ: Meeayn soorp, "The one holy" [42]. It is sung while the celebrant elevates the Eucharistic bread and the chalice over his head. The hymn is an acclamation that they are the Body and Blood of Christ. The second hymn is sung in praise of the three persons of the Holy Trinity: Amen, Hayr soorp, Vorteet soorp, Hokeet soorp [43]. Following this hymn, the priest turns toward the people with the chalice and proclaims it to contain "the holy, holy, and precious Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who, having come down from heaven, is distributed among us." The celebrant continues with an incisive affirmation of the power of the sacrament: "This is life, hope of resurrection, expiation and remission of sins." Finally, the priest asks the people to "Sing psalms to the Lord our God ... our immortal heavenly king" [44]. Finally, the priest asks the people to "Sing psalms to the Lord our God ... our immortal heavenly king" [44]. Confession and Absolution Sin is anything that distracts us from "undivided devotion to the Lord" [1 Corinthians 7:35]. In a stress-filled and secular world Christians tend to deviate from God, forgetting their responsibilities, but also their abundant blessings as baptized children of God. St, Paul writes that we must be "blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world" [Philippians 2:15]. When we fall short of this high calling, as we are bound to do, the Church provides a sacrament by which we can demonstrate our remorse and desire to return to the path that leads to God. The Armenian Church has many forms for reconciliation with God. The most direct vehicle is Holy Communion itself, which is given "for the expiation and remission of sins" [31]. There can be no closer meeting with the Lord in this life than receiving Him in the Eucharist. It is an ancient tradition of the Church that even before receiving Holy Communion the faithful have opportunities to examine their lives and confess to a priest whatever they have done that has distracted them from the life in Christ. The priest prays that God will absolve them of their sinfulness and restore their status as children of God. Today mental health professionals recognize the value of liberating ourselves of painful thoughts and feelings by sharing them with someone we trust. When we divulge our inner demons to someone, we can take control of them and be renewed. Confession offers all of this and more, the assurance of God's abiding acceptance and love. In America it has become the custom to offer a general confession and absolution immediately before Holy Communion is distributed [48]. Led by the deacons, the people read a prepared examination of conscience that helps each person reflect on whatever sins he or she has committed. Then the priest, not by his own authority, but by the "very word" of Jesus Christ [49], absolves the sins of all who have made confession. Holy Communion In the Armenian Church Holy Communion is distributed in the following manner. The communicant stands before the priest, makes the sign of the cross and says Megha Asdoodzo, "I have sinned against God." The priest then places a small particle of our Lord's Body and Blood -- the bread having been dipped into the wine -- directly into the mouth of the communicant. The communicant again makes the sign of the Cross and steps aside for others to approach the blessed sacrament. After all have received Holy Communion, using the chalice to imprint the sign of the Cross over the communicants, the priest imparts the blessing of Psalm 28:9: "Save your people, Lord, and bless your inheritance; shepherd them and lift them up from henceforth until eternity" [50]. The Prayer lists them one by one. These subsidiary requests of the Divine Liturgy are called "Intercessions." We pray for peace in the world, for the stability of the Armenian Church, for our Catholicos, Bishops and clergy, for civil leaders, for travelers, prisoners, captives, for the sick and suffering, for temperate weather and sufficient food, for those who help the poor, for all the living and all the dead [35, 37,38-39]. So to reiterate; the Badarak is a Sacrifice for the remission of sins. In the section above titled "The Eucharist Prayer" they are quoted to say, ""Do this," he told them, "in remembrance of me" [1 Corinthians 11:24-25]." The Badarak is not merely a remembrance of the Lord's final sacrifice but it is rather a re-sacrifice of the only Begotten of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. They place Him into "places made with hands", the bread and the wine, and they ingest the bread and wine to infuse Christ within them so that they may be absolved of their sins. And in summary, first we need to understand what the bread and wine becomes at the Badarak. The bread and the wine do not simply "represent" the body and blood of Christ in the Badarak, it actually "becomes" His body and blood. Here are direct quotes: In the section "A Hymn about Holy Communion -- Marmeen deroonagan": - "The body of the Lord and the blood of the Savior are present before us." In the section "The Procession with the Gifts of Bread and Wine" - "Like the procession with the Gospel in the Liturgy of the Word, this procession draws our attention and devotion to the bread and wine, which become for us the Body and Blood of Jesus." - "Yet again, the words of the Psalm express our faith that the contents of the chalice will become for us the Lord, "strong in his power … mighty in battle." As the deacon hands the chalice to the priest he says: "This is the king of glory!" In the section "A Call to Attention: Let us Stand in Awe" - "In the course of this long prayer [29-39] the celebrant, praying on behalf of all the people, asks God to do for us just what Jesus promised at his last Supper: to fill us with His Body and Blood, the sacrament of His holiness and divine life, in the bread and wine of Holy Communion." In the section "The Eucharistic Prayer" - "It was during that meal in the Upper Room, on the night before his execution, that Jesus gave his disciples bread and wine, declaring them to be his Body and Blood." In the section "The Preface" - "We see the same mystery revealed in the bread and wine of the Badarak. As the twelfth-century Armenian St. Nersess Lambronatsi wrote, "For our sake you became earthly that we may become heavenly. For our sake you became bread that we, by partaking of you, may be sanctified." In the section "The Epiclecis" - ""Epiclesis" (eh-pi-clee'-sis) is the term theologians use to describe the next part of the Eucharistic Prayer. In the Epiclesis we call on God's Holy Spirit to come down "upon us and upon these gifts," so that they may become "truly the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" [34]. This is our main supplication in the Eucharistic Prayer." In the section "The Intercessions" - "After the Epiclesis, in the presence of Jesus Christ in his Body and Blood, we pray to our heavenly Father for all of our daily cares and concerns." In the section "The Conclusion of the Eucharist Prayer" - "And having cleansed our thoughts, make us temples fit for the reception of the Body and Blood of your Only-begotten, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ," In the Section "Two Hymns of Praise" - "It is sung while the celebrant elevates the Eucharistic bread and the chalice over his head. The hymn is an acclamation that they are the Body and Blood of Christ." In the section "Holy Communion" - "The priest then places a small particle of our Lord's Body and Blood -- the bread having been dipped into the wine -- directly into the mouth of the communicant." So you see that the bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Christ. Why is this a problem and what are the results of such a claim? This is what we call transubstantiation. Where the elements of the bread and wine mystically turn into the real body and blood of Christ. Why? So that when the worshiper eats and drinks of it he is being "infused" with Christ's flesh and blood making him holy. They are actually eating the flesh of Christ and drinking His blood. Now onto the sacrifice: Also in the section "The Eucharistic Prayer" - "Through the Eucharist, the Church offers us true inner peace, a real sense of belonging, and the true security that comes from being with God." In the section "The Last Supper" - This culminates in the sacrifice of God's only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, who died on the Cross as a redemption for our sinfulness. The world-saving Cross...the occasion of our redemption" [30] is perpetuated for us in our celebration of the Lord's Supper." Also in the section "Two Hymns of Praise" - "Following this hymn, the priest turns toward the people with the chalice and proclaims it to contain "the holy, holy, and precious Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who, having come down from heaven, is distributed among us." The celebrant continues with an incisive affirmation of the power of the sacrament: "This is life, hope of resurrection, expiation and remission of sins." Finally, the priest asks the people to "Sing psalms to the Lord our God ... our immortal heavenly king" [44]." In the section "Confession and Absolution" - "The Armenian Church has many forms for reconciliation with God. The most direct vehicle is Holy Communion itself, which is given "for the expiation and remission of sins" - "Then the priest, not by his own authority, but by the "very word" of Jesus Christ [49], absolves the sins of all who have made confession." Also in the section "Holy Communion" - "After all have received Holy Communion, using the chalice to imprint the sign of the Cross over the communicants, the priest imparts the blessing of Psalm 28:9: "Save your people, Lord, and bless your inheritance;" So you see how the Badarak is definitely a resacrifice of Christ not just as a remembrance but an actual sacrifice to atone for sin.

The Armenian Liturgy Refutes Protestantism

fatman2021 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:34:07 CDT

The Armenian Church was established very early, around 300, by St. Gregory the Illuminator. This liturgy is doubtless ancient, and is celebrated by both Armenian Catholics and Armenian Orthodox. It is yet another powerful proof of the ancient, apostolic, CatholicFaith. It bears no resemblance to crackers-and-grape-juice-in-plastic-cupProtestantism, as the Calvinists would have us believe.It is, as with all the liturgies, full of"Catholic" stuff.The full Divine Liturgy can be read here.How long will they kick against the pricks, and act as if they are the inheritors of the Faith of theChurch Fathers? They only hurt themselves by attacking what they do not understand and thereby remaining out of communion with the Church and her saints.

A Brief Introduction to Armenian Christian Literature

fatman2021 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:18:06 CDT

THE FAITH PRESS, 7 TUFTON STREET, LONDON SWI, London, 1960 © Vardapet Karekin Sarkissian, 1960. CONTENTS FOREWORD ......................................................... page 5 PREFACE .......................................................................7 INTRODUCTION............................................................9 PART I. THE ARMENIAN TRANSLATIONS................13 1. Translation of the Holy Scriptures..................................13 2. Translation of Liturgies................................................19 3. Translation of the Patristic Literature............................20 PART II. THE ORIGINAL LITERATURE.....................31 I. The Main Branches........................................................32 2. Individual Writers..........................................................39 PREFACE THE present booklet is based on a paper which I read in S. Edmund Hall, Oxford, in the Trinity Term, 1958, at a meeting of the Oxford Branch of the Fellowship of S. Alban and S. Sergius. The text has remained almost unchanged. It reflects very clearly the characteristics of a talk rather than an exposition. The idea of its publication was too far from my mind when I prepared the talk. And its present appearance in print certainly cannot do full justice to the nature of the theme discussed in it. In fact, it is simply impossible to compress such a huge amount of material into such a tiny space. However, there were three reasons which seemed to me to justify its publication in the present form. Firstly, the urgent suggestions of some friends could not be disregarded or resisted. Secondly, there was hardly anything in English on this subject. Thirdly, more important than the first two, I thought that English students of Theology and Church History could find in it a first help in enlarging their knowledge of Christian Literature. It is not difficult at all to notice that the study of the Christian Literature generally is confined to its Grжco-Roman region. Although this is the major stream of Christian tradition especially in connection with Western Christendom, none-the-less, it would not be unimportant to know also of other streams comparatively of smaller importance but surely of distinct character and value. I thought also that this booklet could be equally of some help to the young generation of Armenians who are born or live in English-speaking countries, namely, in the United States of America. To many of them who are sincerely interested in the history of their Church and Nation this booklet may serve as a hint to the literary aspect of their Christian culture. It was for this third reason that the footnotes were added to the original text, first, to substantiate some of the statements made therein and, secondly, to point to further reading for those who might be interested in the subject with a deeper concem. The bibliographical data is chosen from the literature extant in foreign languages. This is, therefore, an 'Introduction' in the strictest sense of the term. In other words, a kind of preliminary treatise on a vast and richly varied subject. It may serve, I hope, as the basis for a study on a larger scale. The difficulties which I felt at almost every step of this study were, basically, twofold: firstly, the natural temptation of generalization which could not be avoided and, secondly, the selection which had to be made on almost every page of this paper. The indulgence of my readers can be the only excuse for the gaps I left and the deficiencies which resulted from such difficulties. I must thank Mr. John Chalikian who out of his love for the Armenian culture generously contributed towards the publication of this booklet. My thanks are due also to Revd. A. M. Allchin, M.A., B.LITT. (OXON) who read the manuscript through and made countless suggestions for the improvement of the English expression: and finally to the Revd. C. S. C. Williams, Chaplain of Merton College, Oxford, for his Foreword. VARD K. SARKISSIAN WYCLIFFE HALL June 18th, 1959 On the day of the Holy Translators SS. Sahak and Mashtots INTRODUCTION SOME seventy years ago an Anglican chaplain, A. Saunders Dyer, in the city of Calcutta, while vehemently protesting in a letter addressed to the editor of The Guardian against a statement charging the Armenian Church with the heresy of Eutyches, yet confessed that in his own parish, in India, the same kind of false impression was quite common among many Anglicans, and that there was a widespread ignorance noticeable both with the Armenians and Anglicans as to each other's Christian tradition. 'The ignorance,' he wrote, 'displayed by the Armenians concerning the Church of England is very great; but I think the English ignorance of the Church of Armenia is greater. Only the other day I was trying to interest a lady member of the Church of England - a communicant - in the Armenian Church, and she asked the question: 'And do the Armenians believe in our Lord Jesus Christ?' But now, obviously, this ignorance has passed on to history. I am sure that times are changed. The twentieth century has marked, indeed, a considerable advance in the way of mutual understanding. So there is no need for me to tell you that the Armenians are Christians-many of you would know even what sort of Christians they are! - by recounting the story of their

1 The Guardian, December 12th, 1888, p. 1899: 'The Armenian Church not Eutychian,' by A. Saunders Dyer. On the other side of the coin, Armenians also usually think of the Church of England as being one of the constituent bodies of the Protestant Churches which took their origin from the Reformation movement of Luther. J. M. Neale, the most amply informed English scholar on Eastern Christendom, speaking of the Anglican Memorial Church at Constantinople, through which he thought Anglicans might be better known to Eastern Christians, related the following interesting story as an example of ignorance or misinformation of the Armenians about the Anglican Church: 'The Memorial Church at Constantinople will, we hope, set forth our Church in a truer light than that in which Eastem eves have yet beheld it. It will soon be impossible for the most ignorant Armenian priest to tell his congregation, "You wish to know whether the English are Christians. They are Christians; they even have the Eucharist, such as it is. Once a year the minister goes up into the pulpit with a large basket, containing pieces of bread, on his arm. These he flings about among the people, who thus have a scramble for it in the church. They also have another religious ceremony, called the National debt, which consists in offering a large sum of money every year to the Emperor of the French; a ceremony much disliked, and murmured at by the people" ' (Essays on Liturgiology and Church History, pp. 256-7; see the whole chapter, 'Prospects of the Oriental Church,' pp. 256-82, London, 1863).

Christian life in the past or at the present time. What I do intend to do is again to say that they are Christians, but to say it in a different way; not by describing their Christianity or their history directly, but by trying to give you a picture~however schematical it may be - of their achievements in the field of Christian Literature. What is the place of the Armenian Christian literature in that vast field of Christian literary tradition which is so closely related to the whole civilization of mankind and has so deeply affected its life in the past centuries? This is the question to which I will try to give an answer in this paper, inadequate and incomplete though it must be within the limits of a single lecture. I chose this method of telling you something of the Armenian witness to Christ, because this literary aspect of the Christian tradition of the Armenians is often overlooked, owing to their tragic history especially in its latest phase during the first two decades of the present century. That history, in fact, has created a widespread and quite dominant impression of them as being a constantly persecuted, intermittently massacred and permanently suffering people. As Adrian Fortescue, a Roman Catholic historian of Eastem Christianity, puts it in a rather striking expression: their very name suggests horrors and blood.' 2 Or, as Archdale King in his study of the 'Rites of Eastern Christendom' says in a slightly different context: 'The history of Armenia makes sad reading.' 3 Though one may easily see the glorious aspect of Christian martyrdom in these massacres, as the Armenians them-

2 Adrian Fortescue, The Lesser Eastern Churches, p. 382, London, 1913. 3 Archdale A. King, The Rites o/ Eastern Christendom, vol. II, p. 533, Rome, 1947. So widely dominant has been this impression that in a dictionary such as the Ox/ord Dictionary of the Christian Church one can read: 'The Armenians have suffered persecution intermittently throughout their history, and a large proportion of the whole nation has been massacred by the Turks, and later by the Soviets, between 1893 and the present time' (see art. 'Armenia'). The great Norwegian explorer and philanthropist, Fridtjof Nansen, who had been deeply touched by the tragedy of the Armenian people, gives a PI'uurC of them by quoting a poet: 'Generation on generation Like the long dark billows They roll on and cease to be While Time slowly dies. Ah, why these holocausts of anguish, woe, and pain?' J. P. JACOBSEN (Quoted in Armenia and the Near East by Fridtjof Nansen, p.227, London, 1928.) It has been a touching experience to me to have come across people in this country who have told me so sympathetically that their knowledge of the Armenian people goes back to their early days of childhood and is connected with their experience of Sunday School life, when they were often asked to pray and to give their pennies to the suffering people of Mount Ararat. And I am afraid to say that with many of them that knowledge has remained there, being now only a moving souvenir of the Sunday School days!

selves do, none-the-less, it would be wrong and unjust to think of them as being everything in Armenian Christianity. There are other achievements of this Church which are, indeed, worthy of deep concern and genuine appreciation by the Christian Church as a whole, as well as by the particular branches or bodies in that Church. And one of these achievements is, undoubtedly, the Armenian Literature which, in its own way, is a living witness to the Christian faith made by this people so often forgotten or ignored. *** Let me first say what are the limits of my paper so that the subject of this talk may be clearly understood and placed in its proper context. By 'Armenian Christian Literature' here I understand everything written in the Armenian language, excluding the pre-Christian period and the non-religious domains of Armenian literature. Therefore, it must not be thought that the whole of the Armenian literature is being pictured or discussed here; although one is fully justified in thinking that the predominant aspect of the Armenian literature being Christian it follows that we have here the Armenian literature in its truest and best picture both in size and in depth, in quantity and quality, to use the ordinary expression. Another limitation to the content of this paper comes from my intention to confine this talk to the literature of that period which lies beween the fifth and the fourteenth centuries of Armenian Christian history; simply because there we have the most valuable part, the kernel of the Classical Literature.4

4 By this term we understand the literature written in the Armenian classical language in which Armenian literature was shaped and developed until the nineteenth century when the spoken vernacular came into predominance over the classical. The nineteenth century is the age of transition from the ancient classical to the modern literature. Whereas the latter achieved a very successful career, mainly under the influence of the French literature, the former was preserved in the Liturgy of the Church and in the writings of the Church Fathers.

The best way to put this huge amount of literature in an intelligible form, and within all the restrictions of such a short paper as this, is I think to divide it into two parts which are, by their very nature, quite distinct from each other: (I) The Armenian Translations, in which we will try to show the general Christian literature, more specifically the Patristic Tradition, as echoed and preserved in the Armenian language and tradition. (2) The Original Literature, which sprang up from that transplantation of the Christian literature in Armenia where it was given a shape of a national character and gradually took colour from the historical experience of the Armenian Church and nation. Part 1 THE ARMENIAN TRANSLATIONS THE term 'translation' as understood to-day - a very current technical means of rendering some books or articles from one language into another - cannot give us the full meaning which the word has in its historical setting in the case of the Armenian literature. This may be seen clearly through the following picture which gives us the mere sketch of the results of these translations: I. TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES The revolutionary age in the Armenian history is not the fourth century which was opened in Armenia with the official acceptance of Christianity as the 'established' religion of the country and the State (sometime between A.D. 278 and 313). 5 Although this is the greatest moment, the turning point of the Armenian history, it did not, in fact, very much affect the life of the people as a whole. It was an official, formal conversion which needed the deepening of Christian faith and practice in the life of the nation.6

5 Scholars and Church historians have displayed a large variety of opinions about the precise date. The generallly accepted one is A.D. 301. But from the early fifth century up to the present time they all agree that, as Sozomen the historian said it once and so briefly, The Armenians, I have understood, were the first to embrace Christianity' (see Eccl. Hist., Book II, ch. VIII, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd series, vol. II, p. 264); cf. L. Duchesne, The Early History of the Church, vol. III, pp.366-9, London, 1924; B. J. Kidd, A History of the Church, vol. III, p.429-20, Oxford, 1922; J. R. Palanque. L’Expansion Chrйtienne I, Les Eglises des Royanmes d’Extrкme Orient, in Fliche et Martin, Histoire de l'Eglise, t. 3, p.490, Paris, 1936. 6 Christianity had been spread in Armenia before this oflicial conversion which was the work of S. Gregory called 'the Illuminator,' the greatest Apostle of Armenia, and of King Tiridates III, one of the most eminent figures of Armenian political history. Actually the Armenian tradition traces the preaching of the Gospel in Armenia back to the Apostolic Age. S. Thaddeus (John 14:22-4) and S. Bartholomew (John I: 43-51) have been always regarded as the founders of the Armenian Church, which has been always called 'Apostolic.' All the historical evidence at hand points to an early expansion of Christianity in Armenia. The best documentary account of this early Christianity may be found in Fr. Tournebize, Histoire Politique et Religiense de' l'Armйnie - a special chapter, 'Etude sur Ia conversion de l'Armйnie au Christianisme,' pp.401-552, particularly pp.402-21, Paris, 1920; cf. Simon Vailhй, 'Formation de I'Йglise Armйnienne' in Echos d’Orient, t. XVI (1913). pp. 209-22, 193-211; Simon Weber, Die Katholische Kirche in Armenien, pp. 55-86, Freiburg in Breisgau, 1903. All these three scholars are Roman Catholics. It must be noted that there has been a constant tendency with Roman Catholic writers on the origins of Armenian Christianity to overlook the pre-Gregorian period of Armenian Christianity and to represent - under the influence of Armenian uniates - the Armenian Church as being founded by S. Gregory the Illuminator. The above mentioned authors have tried to give an account as complete as possible and as impartial as permissible. See a summary of this early history in Mgr. Malachia Ormanian, The Church of Armenia, first two chapters, pp. 3-7, 2nd edition revised by Bishop T. Poladian, London, 1955; cf. Erwand Ter-Minassiantz, Die Armenische Kirche in ihren Beziehungen zu den Syrischen Kirchen, ch. I, pp. 1-29, in the series Texte und Untersuchungen, vol. 26, Leipzig, 1904; P. Bedros Kassardjian, L'Йglise Apostolique Armйnienne et sa Doctrine, pp. 18-29, Paris, 1943. For the life and the work of S. Gregory the Illuminator, as related traditionally, see S. C. Malan, The Life and Times of S. Gregory the Illuminator, The Patron Saint of the Armenian Church, translated from the Armenian, Rivingstons, 1868. See the French translation of Agathangelos, the historian of the conversion of Armenia, in V. Langlois, Collection d'Historiens Anciens et Modernes de l'Armйnie, vol. I, pp. 105-94; cf. G. Garitte, Documents pour l’йtude du livre d'Agathange, in the series of Studi et Testi, No. 127 (1946), Rome. A schematic survey on the life and the work of S. Gregory is given in Butler’s Lives of the Saints, edited, revised and supplemented by H. Thurston, S.J., and D. Attwater, vol. III, pp.693-5, London, 1956.

And this was only possible by means of direct access to and constant communication with the sources or the fountains of the Christian faith - The Holy Scriptures. A Church without the Bible in the hands of her faithful could not stand very long and very firm in the midst of a pagan world. The Armenian Church Fathers were deeply conscious of the pressing necessity, of the absolute urgency of the translation of the Bible into Armenian. But the instrument-the Armenian alphabet-was lacking.7 So it was in the beginning of the fifth century when a Church divine, S. Mesrop Mashtots, succeeded in inventing an alphabet adequate to render in writing all the subtleties of the pronunciation 8 that the great

7 Up to the end of the fourth century the Christian worship was conducted in Armenia either in Greek or Syriac, according to the knowledge of the clergy and the areas of influence of these two languages and cultures in Armenia. In fact, the expansion of Christianity into Armenia was the result of a twofold activity carried on simultaneously by Syrian missionaries from Edessa and Nisibis (south-west of Armenia) and by Greek missionaries from Cappadocia, namely from Ciesarea, Sebastia and Melitene (north-west of Armenia). There was no written language. Or, at least, if there was any, as some Armenian scholars would contend to-day, its use had ceased, for one reason or another, during the first four centuries of Christian history in Armenia. 8 The famous French linguist, A. Meillet, characterizes the Armenian alphabet in the following words: 'The system of the Armenian alphabet is, as every one knows, a master-piece. Each of the phonemes of the Armenian phonetics has its own sign, and the system is so well founded that it has provided the Armenian nation with a definitive system of phonetics which has been maintained to this day without undergoing any alteration, or needing to receive any improvement, for it was perfect from the beginning' (taken from a letter, March 29th, 1936, written on the occasion of the celebration of the fifteenth centenary of the Armenian translation of the Bible - see the symposium of the addresses published in Paris, 1938). The history of the invention of the Armenian alphabet and the life of its author, S. Mesrop Mashtots, are related by Koriun, a disciple of the latter, in his The Life of Mashtots. French translation in V. Langlois, Hist. Arm., vol. II, pp. 9-16; a German translation by Simon Weber, 'Koriun: Beschreibung des Lebens und Sterbens des hl. Lehrers Mesrop,' in the Ausgewдhlte Schriften armenischer Kirchenvдter, vol. I, pp. 196-232, published in the series of Bibliothek der Kirchenvдter, edited by O. Bardenhewer and others, see vol. 57, Munich, 1927. Cf. other fifth century authors, Ghazar Parbetsi, chaps. 9, 10, 11, 18, see Langlois, Hist. Arm., vol. II; Movses Khorenatsi (usually known as Moise of Chorene), Bk. III, chaps. 52-4, 57-8, 60, 62, 67, see Langlois, Hist. Arm., vol. II. See a thoroughgoing study of the problems involved in the invention of the Armenian alphabet by P. Peeters, 'Pour l'histoire des origines de l'alphabet armйnien,' in Revue des Etudes Armйniennes, t. IX (1929), pp. 203-37; reprinted in the collection of the author's articles, Recherches d'Histoire et de Philologie Orientales, in the series of Subsidia Hagiographica, vol. I, pp. 171-207, Bruxelles, 1951; cf. R. Grousset, Histoire de l’Armйnie, pp.171-7, Paris, 1947.

work of translation followed under the wise guidance of S. Sahak, the learned Catholicos of the time. It was soon completed through the enthusiastic collaboration of the Church divines - 'Vardapets' - the disciples and assistants of the two great saints. The translation was first made from a Syriac version. But later, in the middle of the thirties of the century, it underwent a radical and detailed revision on the basis of a Greek - Septuagint - text which was brought from Constantinople by Armenian students who were completing their philosophical, theological and biblical studies in the imperial city. This new text had been considered as a more accurate and trustworthy copy than the Syriac version. The revision was such a radical and thorough one that the result was almost a new retranslation following the Septuagint Canon. It would take a big volume or a series of articles to study the various textual and historical problems involved in this translation. Again, it would take long pages to describe the stimulus and the permanent results of this version in Armenian history and literature. But what cannot be omitted is to point out that it meant for the Armenian people an entire transfiguration or transformation - if these expressions may be allowed - which was felt not only in the fifth century, but also in the succeeding centuries. In order to make this point more intelligible and clearer I draw your attention to a comparison between the Armenian Version and the Latin Vulgate by quoting the words of a great Armenian scholar and historian, N. Adontz: 'The Latin Vulgate,' he writes, 'did not have the same importance to the Latin countries as the Armenian Bible to the Armenian people. The Latin literature had been in existence for a long time when the Vulgate appeared; whereas the Armenian Bible inaugurated the beginnings of a new era in which the Armenian people learning for the first time the use of the pen came to take their place in the world of human civilization.' 9 What is the textual value of this translation? It is difficult for me to say. Biblical scholars and armenologists can give us a much more accurate appreciation of its textual value. F. C. Conybeare, the well-known English scholar and a distinguished armenologist, was deeply convinced of the high value of the Armenian translation. Speaking of the Old Testament he says: 'For beauty of diction and accuracy of rendering the Armenian cannot be surpassed. The genius of the language is such as to admit a translation of any Greek document both literal and graceful; true to the order of the Greek, and even reflecting its compound words, yet without being slavish, and without violence to its own idiom. We are seldom in doubt as to what stood in the Armenian's Greek text; therefore his version has almost the same value for us as the Greek text itself, from which he worked, would possess. The same criticism is true of the Armenian New Testament as well.' A recent study in the text of the Armenian version, done in a most thorough and masterly fashion, has confirmed the above statement. This time an Estonian scholar in exile, Arthur Vццbus, professor at the Chicago Lutheran Theological Seminary, has made an exhaustive investigation into the Armenian version in his imposing work, Early Versions of the New Testament. He tells

9 N. Adontz, The Armenian Bible and its significance. See it in Cйlйbration solennelle du quinziиme centenaire de la traduction armйnienne de la Bible, p. 48, Paris, 1938. The whole booklet is rich with penetrating remarks and considerations on the significance of the Armenian Bible seen from various angles. It is very characteristic that even foreign scholars of high standing have realized the immense importance and the tremendous role the Armenian translation played in the national life, literature and spirituality of the Armenian people. To quote one of them: ‘In the life of the Armenians, whose history is one of endless struggle and suffering, this translation work has had the greatest significance for the consolidation of the Christian religion and also for the transformation of the psychology of the nation' (Arthur Vццbus, Early Versions of the New Testament - Manuscript studies, pp. 137-8, Stockholm, 1954). 10 Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, vol. I, p. 152.

us that 'The ancient translators and revisers found this idiom (i.e. the Armenian language) to be an excellent instrument. To be sure, the Armenian language is poorer with regard to some verbal forms, and which are substituted by others; it is also poorer as to the particles and participles, but it has many advantages. It has three definite articles; it displays a great freedom in word-order, in some respects its flexibility surpassing even that of the Greek. This means that this elegant language was a good instrument enabling the revisers to render the Greek text as exactly as possible into classical Armenian. 'It is remarkable that the version shows more respect for the exact meaning of a word in a certain context than for a slavish and stereotyped translation. 'Therefore, all in all, as Conybeare once said, "for beauty of diction and accuracy of rendering the Armenian cannot be surpassed." Much earlier M. de la Croze called it "the Queen of the Versions' - certainly not undeservedly, and certainly not without keen competition.' 11

11 A. Vццbus, op. cit., pp.162-4; see the whole chapter IV, 'The Armenian Versions,' pp. 133-71. Felix-Nиve had already noticed the high textual value of the Armenian version. He wrote: 'The Armenian version of the Bible, carried out in the great literary century, is a capital work which has always enjoyed an authority both on account of its age, and of the profound work of its authors; it is quoted to this day in exegetical works. It has an eminent place amongst the classical texts' (L'Armйnie Chrйtienne et sa littйrature, pp.22-3, Louvain, 1888). Georges Cuendet, another expert on the Armenian text of the Bible, from the University of Geneva, has tried to show the accuracy of the Armenian translation in an interesting article: 'Exactitude et adresse dana Ia version armйnienne de la Bible' in Handes Amsorya (philological review of the Mekhitarist Community in Vienna), t. 49 (1936), col. 563-70. He says, 'The Armenian translation of the Holy Scriptures is an inexhaustible mine, whose treasures seem to be renewed the more one makes use of them, one question leading to another, and the solution of one problem opening up the way to further inquiries. The more this version is studied, the greater becomes one's admiration for it, and one becomes more and more convinced of the extraordinary efforts which must have been put into it by men of great intelligence. As has already been said with great justice (see Macler, Le Texte Armйnien de l'Evangile, 1919; S. Lyonnet, Le Parfait en Armйnien Classique, 1933) it is most interesting to analyse the work to which the translators gave themselves. They were skilful theologians, careful to reproduce the slightest details of the original; they respect its meaning rather than its form, being altogether convinced of the primacy of the spirit over the letter. Although a translation alwavi runs the risk of becoming a slavish copy of its model, the Armenian version almost entirely escapes this danger. On the contrary, it often becomes a veritable commentary of the original. Nothing is more fascinating than to go over this work of inte'ntetation by collating the Armenian translation with the Greek text. Owing to their extremely sure and sensitive feeling for their own language joined with their thorough and sometimes astonishing knowledge of Greek, they were able to banish all merely mechanical methods' (col. 565-4). He brings forth a number of examples in order to substantiate the above statement, and then he concludes, 'The Armenian version, remarkable from every point of view, is an original masterpiece. One does not know where to fault these writers, so exceptional was their penetration, so great their mastery of the subject. They undertook to nationalize the translation of the Bible, and they succeeded to such a degree that the whole of the Armenian literature goei back to this source' (col. 570). For the views of other foreign scholars of the nineteenth century see Fr. Karekin Zarbhanelian, Library of the Armenian Ancient Translation's, pp.238-44, Venice, 1889 (in Armenian). Here are some bibliographical indications for the study of the Armenian Bible: Frйdйric Macler, Le Texte Armйnien de l’Evangile d’aprиs Matthieu et Marc, thиse pour le doctorat иs Lettres prйsentйe а la Facultй des Lettres de l'Universitй de Paris. Paris, 1919. P. Louis Mariиs, 'La Texte Armйnien de l'Evangile,' an important review of Macler's book, in Recherches de Science Religieuse, t. X (1920), pp. 28-54. F. C. Conybeare, 'An Armenian Diatessaron?' in Journal of Theological Studies, vol. XXV (1923-4), pp.232-45. One of the most competent experts on the Armenian Bible text is P. S. Lyonnet, S.J. His studies are impressively numerous. Hereunder I list some important ones: 'Las versions armйnienne et gйorgienne du Nouveau Testament,' in Lagrange, Introduction а l'йtude da Nouveau Testament, 2nd part: Critique Textuelle, pp.342-75, 454-60, 525-8, 575-8, 622-5, Paris, 1936. 'La version armйnienne des Йvangiles et son modиle grec, l'Йvangile selon S. Matthieu,' in Revue Biblique, t. XLIII (1934), pp.69-87. 'Un important tйmoin du texte Cйsarйen de saint Marc: La version armйnienne,' in Mйlanges de l’Universitй saint Joseph (Beyrouth), t. XIX (1935), fasc. 2, pp. 23-66. 'Aux origines de l'Йglise armйnienne, la Traduction de Ia Bible et le tйmoignage des historiens Armeniens,' in Recherches de Science Religieuse, t. XXV (1935), pp. I7-87. 'Vestiges d'un Diatessaron Armйnien,' in Biblica, t. XIX (1938), pp. 121-150. 'La premiиre version armйnienne des Йvangiles,' in Revue Biblique, t. XLVII (1938), pp. 355-82. Les origines de la version armйnienne et le Diatessaron in the series of Biblica et Orientalia, No. XIII (1950), Rome. For his view on the textual value of the Armenian version see the first article of this list, p.348. E. C. Colwell, 'Slandered or ignored: The Armenian Gospels,' in Journal of Religion, vol. XVII (1937), pp.48-61. P. P. Essabalian, Le Diatessaron de Tatien et la premиre traduction des Йvangiles armйniens (in Armenian with a summary in French), Vienna, 1937. See two reviews of it: (a) S. Lyonnet, in Biblica, vol. XIX (1938), pp.214-16; (b) R. P. Casey, in Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. LXVII (1938), pp. 96-101. A. Vццbus, 'La premiere traduction armйnienne des Йvangiles,' in Recherches de Science Religieuse, t. XXXVII (1950), pp. 581-6. A general article by Fr. Tiran Nersoyan, The Bible in the Armenian Church - a lecture read at the Bible House, British and Foreign Bible Society, London, 1945. This short list of studies on the Armenian Bible fully justifies the assertion of the great armenologist in Louvain, Professor Gйrard Garitte: 'L'histoire de Ia version armйnienne des йvangiles est une des questions les plus controversees de la philologie biblique' (Le Musйon, t. LXV (1952), p. 151).

This is the reason, I believe, why the Armenian version is usually classified in the same category of Bible texts as the Syriac and Latin versions. In some ways it surpasses them, especially for the accuracy in rendering the original meaning of the text. It is taken into consideration in the second edition of the Greek New Testament recently published by the British and Foreign Bible Society 'with revised critical apparatus,' London, 1958.12

12 The Armenian manuscripts of the Bible are impressively numerous. Hundreds of them containing the entire text of the Bible or parts of it, especially the New Testament, may be found in various collections of Armenian manuscripts. The important ones are described by Fr. Karekin Zarbhanelian in his Library of Ancient Armenian Translations, p. 121-71. See also a list of them in S. Lyonnet, Vers. Arm. et Georg., pp.342-6. 'The Armenian Bible was first printed at Amsterdam in 1666, but from a single manuscript, and the printed text was in places adjusted to the Latin Vulgate. A later edition, issued in 1733 by Mechitar in Venice, was mainly a reprint of the edition of 1666. The first critical edition was issued in 1805 at Venice under the care of Zohrab, who used several codices, the best of them one written in the fourteenth century. The variants of the MSS. used are given under the text; but without distinguishing in which codex which variant is read. However, one codex of the Armenian Bible differs very slightly from another. Other editions have been published in Moscow, Constantinople and Venice during this century; those of Venice being particularly good and reliable' (F. Conybeare, in Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, vol. I, p. 154). For further information about the printed text of the Armenian Bible see S. Lyonnet, op. cit., pp.346-8. There has been no authorized translation of the Bible into Modern Armenian. Attempts have been made by the Church in the past, especially in the nineteenth century, but the tragic events of persecution and massacre hindered the work.. Now a translation is being carried on. It is hoped that it will be completed in 1965. Incidentally, the Armenian word for the 'Bible' is 'Astvadsashounch Matean,' or simply 'Astvadsashounch,' which means 'divinely inspired book' or 'the Breath of God,' surely taken from 2 Timothy 3:16. Vardapet Tiran Nersoyan has pointed out the significance of this appellation in a penetrating remark: 'Armenians seldom call the Sacred Book by that rather pale name “the Scriptures,” of onomatopa'ic origin and devoid of theological significance. They have taken S. Paul's description of it in 2 Timothy 3:16 and made that its name. Thus they call it "the Breath of God" (“Asdvadzashoonch” ). If a people has the immortal desire of the abundant life, it must needs go on breathing God’s Breath, with which it was quickened at the very moment of its creation. This Breath can be received through the Word' (The Bible in the Armenian Church, p. 1).

2. TRANSLATION OF LITURGIES The translation of the Holy Scriptures was only one of the phases - though the most important of all - of that great movement of assimilation of the richness of the Christian tradition, taken in its integrity, which characterized so singularly the fifth century Armenian culture. Besides the word of God, there was the experience of it as lived by the whole and one body of Christ's Church through the various ways of Christian worship. The third, but especially the foutth century marked the spiritual growth of the Church through the emergence and expansion of Liturgies, feasts and other ceremonies, and through all the elaboration and enrichment of the pattern of Christian worship. This part of Christian tradition also echoed in Armenia through the translation of the various Liturgies composed by Church Fathers, and used in the local churches in the different provinces and countries of the Byzantine Empire. Thus, the Liturgies of S. James, S. Ignatius of Antioch, S. Athanasius, S. Gregory of Nazianzus, S. Basil the Great, S. John Chrysostom, S. Cyril of Alexandria were translated into Armenian. It was in the general pattern of these Liturgies that the Armenian was shaped. The final result was a harmonious combination of elements taken particularly from the Liturgies of S. Athanasius, S. Basil the Great and S. John Chrysostom. There were additions of prayers composed by Armenian Church Fathers. Later, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, there were some influences from the Roman Missal brought by the Roman missionaries accompanying the Crusaders. Since then the Armenian Liturgy has remained almost unchanged.13

13 There are several English translations of the Armenian Liturgy. The number is over ten. The most generally known is the one contained in F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Oxford, 1896. A recent translation is made by Archbishop Tiran Nersoyan, The Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church, New York, 1952. This is the best translation which contains both the variable and invariable parts of the Liturgy, with a supplementary part containing a commentary and practical explanations of an encyclopжdic scope. The exhaustive historical study of the Armenian Liturgy is the work of Fr. Hovsep Gatergian, The Sacred Missals of the Armenians -translations of the Greek, Syriac and Latin Liturgies, with introduction and critical notes - edited with further additions by Fr. Hagop Tashian, Vienna, 1897 (in Armenian).

3. TRANSLATION OF THE PATRISTIC LITERATURE Here we have a highly impressive picture of Patristic literature where the Armenian tradition is at its best. It is needless to say what place and significance this Patristic literature had in the thought and life of the early Church. Its whole intellectual and spiritual vitality and richness were poured into the Armenian Church through the intensive activity of translation during the fifth century, 14 which, in its turn, gave a creative irnpulse to the thought and life of the newly christianized people of Armenia. The following selective list of Church Fathers whose works were partly or integrally translated into Armenian speaks of itself eloquently and has no need for comment, since it may give you, in this bare form, an idea of the extent of the literary achievements of this century in the field of translations: Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35 - c. 107). Aristides the Apologist (second century). Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130 - c. 200). Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170 - c. 236). Dionysius of Alexandria (d. c. 264). Gregory Thaumaturgus (c. 213 - c. 270). Eusebius of Cжsarea (c. 260 - c. 340). Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373). Gregory of Nazianzus (329-389). Gregory of Nyssa (c. 330 - c. 395). Basil the Great (c. 330-379). Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386). John Chrysostom (c. 347-407). Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 315-403). Evagrius Ponticus (346-399). Aphraates (fourth century). Ephraim Syrus (c. 306-373). Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444). Besides these Church Fathers there were others also whose works were translated into Armenian, particularly some works of Origen, others ascribed to Apollinarius and also works of Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia. But during the later controversies many of these translations were either destroyed or discarded after being suspected of heresy or condemned as such.

14 G. Bardy has recognized this intenSiveneaS of the literary activity in the fifth century and, seeing it in the context of the Christian literature as a whole, says: ‘The speed which the leaders of the Armenian Church displayed in appropriating all the works of the Fathers in their national language, is perhaps without parallel in the history of Christianity We must see in it both a measure of protection against the attacks and attractions which came from Persia, and a manifestation of independence of foreign Churches' (La question des langues dans l’Йglise ancienne, t. I, p. 36, Paris, 1948).

That is the reason why we know of them only through references in other authors or through partly survived scanty fragments. Now, the impact of these translations was not confined solely to the intellectual and spiritual enrichment of the Armenian Church Fathers and divines themselves. As might be expected, they also gave rise to an original literature which had its own successful career in the course of the later centuries as we shall see a little farther on. oreover, apart from their historical significance and influence, these translations have also a practical value relevant to the present time. It lies mainly in the domain of Patristic scholarship of to-day. Here the Armenian translations offer quite a considerable contribution to the textual study of the Church Fathers. And this in two ways: (a) By the sheer comparison of the Armenian versions with the original Greek or Syriac texts. Sometimes in them the original texts have been preserved in a less altered, therefore in a more accurate and faithful, form, owing to the fact that they were translated in such an early period as the fifth century. Thus, in many cases, the Armenian versions have cast light on passages or chapters or even books which have suffered later alterations, abbreviations or loss in their original texts. (b) It is well known that the Patristic literature has undergone a great deal of damage with the loss of entire works or books of many Church Fathers. The names of those lost books have survived and come down to us mostly through references to them or through citations from them preserved in various writings of Church Fathers and in the historical treatises such as the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius or in the Photius' Bibliotheca, or elsewhere. Now, some of these writings have been preserved in their Armenian translations; and thus, as the original texts are not available, the Armenian versions replace them and, therefore, Patristic scholars are given the fortunate possibility of studies on a larger field than the existing original texts would allow. In order to illustrate this statement I would draw your attention to three particular cases of such discoveries chosen from among others: (I) The work of Aristides of Athens which usually has been known under the name of 'Apology' 'was long considered lost. But to the glad surprise of scholars the Mekhitarists of San Lazaro in Venice published in 1878 a manuscript of the tenth century, an Armenian fragment of an Apology bearing the title, "To Imperator Adrianus Caesar from the Athenian Philosopher Aristides." The majority of the scholars accepted the fragment as the remains of an Armenian translation of Aristides' Apology mentioned by Eusebius' (EccI. Hist., Bk. IV, ch. 3). 15 (2) Again for the first time the Chronicle of Eusebius was made available to Patristic scholars through an Armenian version discovered in the beginning of the nineteenth century and translated into Latin. 'The first part of the Chronicle,' writes Bardenhewer, was unknown to us until the publication of the Armenian version. The Greek text of both parts has perished, save for some fragments.' 16 (3) But the most striking example is the discovery of some writings of S. Irenteus of Lyons, whose works seem to have been largely preserved in the Armenian translations. Thus, many fragments - thirty-two in number - were published and translated into

15 J. Quasten, Patrology, vol. I, p. 192. On the discovery of this fragment which revealed the character and content of Aristides' work for the first time, Cardinal Pitra, the famous Roman Catholic Patristic scholar, wrote the following words in a letter to the editor of the Armenian text: 'I would like to be among the first to express my gratitude to you, in telling you of the agreeable surprise and happy interest with which I read the precious and magnificent little work of S. Aristides . . . A rumour had reached me about the discovery of the Apology of Aristides. I imagined the Greek text and hoped anxiously for the confirmation of the rumour. However short may be that which comes to us from your inexhaustible Armenia, all is golden in it, and all speaks of the golden age of apologetics' (quoted in French in K. Zarbhanelian, op. cit., pp.319-20; Cf. J. Rendel Harris, The Apology of Aristides, pp.2-3, where he speaks of the high textual value of the Armenian translation. Texts and Studies, vol. I, No. I. See there also Renan's and Harnack's views. It was published under the following elaborate title: Sancti Aristidis philosophi Atheniensis sermones duo quorum originalis textus desideratur ex antiqua Armeniaca versione nunc primum in Latinam linguam translati, Venice, 1878. Later the work was discovered in its complete text in a Syriac version by J. Rendel Harris. It was published and translated by him in the series Texts and Studies (vol. I, No. 1), together with Greek original fragments edited and commented on by J. A. Robinson. The Armenian version is widely used therein. 16 Otto Bardenhewer, Patrology, p. 246, English translation by Thomas J. Shahan, Freiburg in Breisgau, 1908. It was published by P. Jo. Baptistae Aucher Ancyrani under the title Eusebii Pamphili Caesariensis Episcopi Chronicon Bipartitum, Nunc Primum ex Armeniaco textu in latinum con versum Adnotationibus Auctum Graecis Fragmentis Exornatum, Venice, 1818.

German in 1913.17 Also the fourth and fifth books of his famous Adversus Haereses have been found in a very accurate translation necessarily to be compared with the existing Greek text.18 But, above all, the entire treatise called The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching otherwise known only by its title as mentioned by Eusebius 19 was discovered in an Armenian version in 1907 by Karapet Ter-Mekerttschian, an eminent Armenian scholar, and edited with a German translation.20 It was received with a warm welcome in the circles of Patristic studies being translated into Latin,21 a second time into German,22 three times into English,23 into French, 24 Russian,25 Italian 26 and Dutch.27 It is impossible, in the scope of this paper, to include everything that is to be found in the Armenian tradition of Patristic literature.

17 Dr. Herman Jordan, 'Armenische Irenaeus Fragmente,' in Texte und Untersuchungen, vol. XXXVI, Leipzig, 1913. 18 They were published by Lic. Dr. Erwand Ter-Minassiantz, Irenaeus Gegen die Hдretiker - Buch IV u. V in Armenischer Version Entdeckt, Leipzig, 1910. 19 Eccl. Hist., V, 26. 20 Lic. Dr. Karapet Ter-Mekerttschian und Lic. Dr. Erwand Ter-Minassiantz, 'Des Heiligen Irenaeus - Schrift zum Erweise der Apostolischen Verktьndigung,' in Texte und Untersuchungen, vol. XXXI, Leipzig, 1907. 21 S. Weber, Sancti Irenaei episcopi Lugdunensis Demonstratio apostolicae Praedicationis, ex Armeno, vertit. proleg. illust.., notis locuplet., Friburg, 1917. 22 S, Weber, Des hl. Irenaeus Schrift zum Erweis der apostolischen Verkьndigung, in the series of Bibliothek der Kirchenvдter, vol. 4, Kempten-Munich, 1912. 23 (a) In Patrologia Orientalis, t. XII, faic. 5, by Bishop Karapet Ter-Mekerttschian and Dr. S. G. Wilson, with the co-operation of H.R.H. Prince Max of Saxony, D.D., D.C.L., Paris, 1919. (b) J. A. Robinson, The Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching, in the series of Translation of Christian Literature, IV: Oriental Texts, S.P.C.K., London, 1920. (c) J. P. Smith, s.j., S. lrenaeus.- Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, in the series of Ancient Christian Writers, No. 16, London, 1952. 24 In Patrologia Orientalis, t. XII, by Joseph Barthoulot, S.J., with an Introduction by J. Tixeront. Reprinted from Recherches de Science Religieuse, t. VI (1916), pp. 361-432. A recent translation appeared in Sources Chrйtiennes (No. 62) made by L. M. Froidevaux, Irйnйe de Lyon: Dйmonstration de la Prйdication Apostolique, with introduction and notes. Paris, 1959. 25 Made from the German translation by Professor N. I. Sagarda and published in the review Hristianskoe Ctenie, t. 87 (1907). See Smith, Irenaeus, pp.151-16, note 9; cf. K. Ter-Mekerttschian, The Seal of Faith, Introduction, p. xxxv, Etchmiadzin, 1914 (in Armenian). 26 Ubaldo Faldati, S. Ireneo, Esposizione della Predicazione Apostolica, Rome, 1923. See Quasten, Patrology, vol. I, p. 293. 27 H. U. Meyboom, Leyden, 1920. See Quasten, Patrology, p.293. See a very remarkable study on the terminology used in the 'Demonstration' by D. B. Reynders, Vocabulaire de la 'Dйmonstration’ et des Fragments de S. Irйnйe, Chevetogne, Belgique, 1958.

The three cases mentioned above are given as mere examples to illustrate what I only hinted at, i.e. the importance of the Armenian translations for the Patristic scholarship of to-day. But I think it is necessary to add that what is already discovered is not as significant in this respect as what may be yet discovered. I must confess that the study of the Armenian manuscripts is at present far from being completed. On the contrary, besides all the researches already made, the Armenian manuscripts constitute a vast field of a literature that has not yet been thoroughly investigated in terms of scientific method and co-ordinated study. Particularly unexplored are the Patristic texts. The number of the Armenian manuscripts is reckoned at roughly twenty thousand, most of them now being gathered and scientifically classified in the National Library of the Armenian Republic in U.S.S.R.28 Other important collections are to be found in the Armenian monastery of S. James in Jerusalem 29 and also in the well-known sister monasteries of the Armenian Uniate Brotherhoods coinmonly called Mekhitarist Communities in Venice and Vienna.30 Smaller collections may be found in the Armenian monastery of the Holy Saviour, in Nor-Djougha, Isfahan (Persia), in the Library of the Armenian Catholicossate of Cilicia in Antelias, Lebanon, in the Armenian Uniate monastery of Bzommar in Lebanon, and in the various European and American Libraries, namely in the Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris, the British Museum in London,

28 Excellent work is being done on the manuscripts of non-religious contents. Valuable new material has been found in historical, scientific, philosophical domains. I am sure if adequate attention also is paid to the religious, namely to the patristic, texts it will not be surprising to find new documents, fragments or complete texts of important value. 29 The preparation of the catalogue of the manuscripts was begun by Archbishop Ardavazt Surmeyan. The first volume was published by him in Venice, 1948. See a review of it by J. Moyldermans in Le Musйon, t. 64 (1951), pp. 236-40. Then it was continued by Bishop Norayr Bogharian, who already has published two more volumes in Jerusalem. The work is being pursued by him. 30 The catalogue of the manuscrints in Venice was prepared by Fr. Barsegh Sarkissian. Two volumes were published (Venice, 1914 and 1919). But the work was interrupted. See a very important article by J. Muyldermans on the Patristic value of the manuscripts, 'Rйpertoire de piиces patristiques d'aprиs le catalogue Armйnien de Venise,' in Le Musйon, t. 47 (1934), pp. 265-92. See also Idem, 'L'Apport des йditions Armйniennes de Venise а la Patristique,' in Bazmavep, pp. 386-98, 1949. The catalogue of the manuscripts in Vienna is a masterpiece of its kind. It is the work of the famous Armenian scholar, Fr. Hagop Tashian. It is published in Vienna, 1895.

or the Bodleian Library here, in Oxford. There are a few other manuscripts owned by individuals or cultural institutions.31 The reason why we were so categorical in the above statement is not purely a hypothetical one. In fact, a careful and searching look at the catalogues of the Armenian manuscripts justifies us in our assurance. I take as an example the following case. In a catalogue of the Armenian translations compiled long ago, in 1889, by a learned member of the Mekhitarist Community in Venice, entitled Library of Ancient Armenian Translations, already referred to, there is a great number of indications of homilies or fragments attributed to Church Fathers in the Armenian translations which have not been found in or identified with the works already known to scholars of the day, either in their original text or in any other translation.32 And it must be said that the author

31 The catalogue of the Armenian manuscripts in the Bibliothиque Nationale of Paris is made by F. Macler, Catalogue des manuscrits armйniens et gйorgiens de la Bibliothиque Nationale, Paris, 1908. The catalogues of the manuscripts in the British Museum and in the Bodleian Library of Oxford are prepared by F. C. Conybeare, (a) A Catalogne of the Armenian manuscripts in the British Museum, London, 1913; (b) Catalogue of the Armenian manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 1918 (partly done by Revd. Soukias Baronian). See a catalogue of some Armenian manuscripts in Europe by Archbishop Ardavazt Surmeyan, vol. I, Paris, 1950. The Armenian manuscripts in The Chester Beatty Library are now catalogued by Sirarpie Der-Nersessian, Professor of Byzantine Art at Dumbarton Oaks and member of the Faculty of Arts and Letters at Harvard University. A superb work preceded with an Introduction on the History of the Armenian Art, 2 vols., Dublin, 1958. See for an index of private and public libraries in Europe containing Armenian manuscripts the richly documented article by Jean Simon, S.J., 'Rйpertoire des Bibliothиques publiques et pivйes d'Europe contenant des manuscripts armйniens,' in Orientalia, t. II (1933), pp. 232-50. For a complete list of the catalogues of the Armenian manuscripts see H. DJ. Sirouni, 'Les Manuscripts Armйniens - Donnйes Bibliographiques,' in Studia et Acta Orientalia, vol.I (1957), pp. 265-80, Bucarest, 1958. 32 It would be interesting to illustrate this point by picking up some of these homilies (this term is used here in a very loose sense) or fragments marked in this catalogue of the Armenian translations. Following the author's alphabetical order we have this picture: Twelve homilies of S. Athanasius. Numerous fragments from the works known under the name of Apollinarius. Fifteen homilies of S. Basil the Great Seven homilies of S. Gregory the Theologian (Nazianzen). Two homil ins of S. Gregory of Nyssa. Seven homlies of S. Gregory Thaumaturgus. Five homilies of Dionysius of Alexandria. Fifty-nine homilies under the name of Epiphanius of Salamis. Nine fragments of S. Irenaeus. Twenty-nine homilies of Evagrius Ponticus. Thirty-eight homilies of S. Ephraim Syrus. Three homilies of S. Cyril of Alexandria. Seven homilies of S. Cyril of Jerusalem. Several fragments of S. John Chrysostom. It would be unreasonable to claim that what the author of the catalogue had noted in 1889 as preserved only in Armenian translation are still unidentifiable. Most of them have been found; or, perhaps, they existed but were missed by the author himself in spite of his wide knowledge of Patristic texts. But at the same time it is equally true, as we noted already that he had not seen all the Armenian manuscripts, but a very small proportion of them. In any case, the list here is given as a mere example in order to give us a general idea of the extent of the translations and their contribution to patristic studies.

of the catalogue, Fr. Karekin Zarbhanelian, had never seen the whole corpus of the Armenian manuscripts, but had used only the collection of his own monastery which is, by its size, only - and roughly - one-seventh of the total number of the Armenian manuscripts. He had consulted other catalogues of manuscripts and had used references which wcre, indeed, in a very poor state in his days as compared with the present catalogues and manuscript studies. Since 1889 many new manuscripts have been found in various places and new catalogues have been compiled which, in fact, widen the field of Patristic literature preserved in the Armenian translations. So, when all has been said by way of such a limitation, the importance of these translations remains far greater than a 'small people's literary activity in history.' And I believe that new researches in the Armenian manuscripts in the light of new studies in Patristic literature will still enlarge the sphere of the contribution of the Armenian translations to the general body of Christian literature. * * * It was not only in the fifth century that translating was a distinctive part of the intellectual and literary activity of Armenia. It soon became an integral part of the Armenian ecclesiastical history. Therefore, it must not be thought of as a work exclusively confined to the fifth century, the 'Golden Age' of Armenian history as it is so unanimously agreed and accepted. It is rather a process going on through the centuries and bringing fresh air in and giving new impulses to the Armenian intellectual and ecclesiastical life.33

33 'It is true,' writes the great Bollandist scholar, P. Peeters, 'that throughout the course of her history, Christian Armenia continued, as it had begun, to be a country of translators.' See 'Traductions et Traducteurs dans l'Hagiographie orientale а l’йpoque Byzantine,' in Analecta Bollandiana, t. 40 (1922), pp.241-98; see particularly pp. 265-76. Reprinted in Le Trйfonds Oriental de l'Hagiographie Byzantine, Appendice, pp. 164-218, Bruxelles, 1950.

In fact, the translations of the later centuries bear eloquent testimony to the close relationship and the constant contact of the Armenian literature with the literary achievements of the Greek Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches even in the intolerant historical circumstances of the Armenian people. The breach which came to separate the two main bodies of the Eastern Churches, the so-called 'Monophysite' and 'Orthodox' Churches, however, did affect disastrously the position and the future of Christianity in the East. It created an atmosphere of hardness and enmity between these two branches. Yet Armenians were never entirely cut off from the main stream of Christian intellectual life, particularly in the Churches of Constantinople and Alexandria, and, for the later centuries, even from remote Rome. Separation did not mean for them complete seclusion or enclosed isolation. Thus, to mention but the most important examples, the works known under the name of Dionysius the Areopagite and the writings of John of Damascus were studied among the Armenians through translations. Especially the works of the former were widely read and commented on by Armenian Church divines. There have been not less than three different translations of his works.34 Later, in the twelfth century, when the Armenians were brought into contact with the Roman Church through their associations with the Crusaders, they also came in touch with the literary and liturgical tradition of the Westem Church. So that in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries Letters of S. Gregory the Great, the Rule of S. Benedict, the Roman Ordinal and many other works were translated into Armenian. In the beginning of the fourteenth century two writings of S. Thomas Aquinas, On the Sacraments and Treatise on the Natures of Christ our Lord, were also translated.35 But in the later years of the fourteenth century and afterwards the Roman missionaries, chiefly Dominicans, in association with their Armenian converts tried to translate the whole liturgical literature of the Roman Church and to substitute it in practice for the Armenian pattern of worship.35a This attempt obviously

34 See K. Ter-Mekerttschian, The Seal of Paith, Introduction, pp. xxxii-iv. 35 See K. Zarbhanelian, op. cit., pp. 274-5; cf. I. Hausherr, 'Armenienne (Spiritualite'), in Dict. de Spiritualitй, t. I, cols. 866-7. 35a The most authoritative expert on these translations and, indeed, on the whole history of the Armenian Romanophiles or Latinisers of the fourteenth century, commonly called Unitores (see infra, pp. 46-7) is Professor M. A. Van den Oudenrijn, of the University of Friburg. See among many others the following articles and books. ‘Eine armeniache Ьbersetzung der Summa Theologica des hl. Thomas im 14. Jahrhundert’ in Divus Thomas, vol.8 (1930), pp.245-78. 'Traductions armйniennes de Ia Somme Thйlogique de S. Thomas d'Aquin,' in Bazmavep (1949), pp. 313-55. ‘Notes sur quelques Ouvrages armeniens de provenance dominicaine,' in Bazmavep, t. CIX (1951), pp. 40-3, 61-5, 113-17. Uniteurs et Dominicains d’Armйnie,' in Oriens Christianus, Bd. 40 (1956), pp. 94-112, Bd. 42 (1958), pp. 110-33 (to be continued). Der Traktat von den Tugenden der Seele, Ein armeniaches Exzerpt aus der Prima Secundae der Summa Theologica der hl. Thomas von Aquin (1337), mit Einleitung, lateiniacher Ьbersetzung und Glossar, Friburg, 1942, in the series of Collectanea Friburgensia. Eine alte armenische Ьbersetzung der Tertia Pars der Theologischen Summa des hl. Thomas von Aquin, Francke Verlag, Bern, 1955. Das Offizium des heiligen Dominicus des Bekenners im Brevier des 'Pratres Unitores' von Ostarmenien, 1935. Les Constitutions des Frиres Armeniens de saint Basile en Italie, Rome, 1940. In the series of Orientalia Christiana Analecta, No. 126. 'General Superiors of the United Brethren in Armenia during the Fifteenth century’ - a paper read at the Nineteenth International Congress of Orientalists at Rome, 1935. Extract from Handes Amsorya, t. LII (1938), pp. 66-78.

had gone far beyond the literary and intellectual interests of the Armenian Church divines who naturally came to oppose this infiltration of Latinism in the Armenian Church. In so far as they were concerned in the purely intellectual achievements of the Roman Church they encouraged the translations and were in favour of the relationship between the two Churches. Some of them even learned Latin and read Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas and other scholastics; and although they were influenced through their readings at least by the method of scholasticism, none-the-less, they never lost sight of the ethos of the purely Eastern tradition of their Church, with its own doctrinal, liturgical and spiritual characteristics. At this stage of the fourteenth century where this survey comes to its end,36 I think I am justified in saying that the Armenian

36 There could be added to this sketch of Armenian translations other parts also of Christian literature. To mention them: (a) The Acts of Martyrs or The Lives of Saints. See P. Peeters, Traductions et Traducteurs . . . , supra, note 33. (b) The correspondence between Eastern Patriarchs and Armenian Catholicoi. See in this respect the famous Book of Letters (Tiflis, 1901) - a series of documents of primary importance for the understanding of the Armenian doctrinal position in Christology. The first documents including namely the corresnondence between Acacius of Melitene. Proclus of Constantinople and Sahak the Armenian Catholicos, together with the 'Demonstration' of John Mandakouni, have been translated into French and published with an Introduction and critical notes by M. Tallon, S.J., 'Livre des Lettres, Ier Groupe: Documents concernant les relations avec les Grecs,' in Mйlanges de l’Universitй saint Joseph, Beyrouth, Liban, t XXXII (1955), Fasc. I. Published also separately. (c) The Collections of 'Church Canons' which may be found in manuscripts. There has been no critical and integral edition of thi' Armenian Canon Law. There are two important compilations in print: (i) Arsen Gheldjian, The Book of the Armenian Canons, Tiflis, 1913; (ii) Nerses Vardapet Meliktanguian, The Armenian Ecclesiastical Law, Shushi, 1903. For the study of the Armenian Canon Law it is necessary to take into account the Code of Mekhitar Gosh, edited by Vahan Vard. Basdamiantz, with Introduction and critical notes, Vagharshapat, 1880. A great number of Canons are translated in Latin and some in French. See Codificazione Canonica Orientale Fonti, Fascicolo VII: Disciplin Armena, Tesli vari di Diritto Canonico Armeno (secolo IV-XVII), compiled by G. Amadouni, Vatican, 1932. For the historical study of the sources see P. V. Hatzuni. An article on the sources of the Armenian Canons in the same Vatican oficial series, Fasc. VIII, Studi Storici sulle Ponti del Diritto Canonico Orientale, Vatican, 1932. See also the article of J. Mйcйrian, 'Chronique de Droit Armйnien,' in Mйlanges de l'Universitй de saint Joseph. Bulletin Armйnologique, 2me Cahier, IV, pp.238-46, Beyrouth, 1953. (d) Particularly Important are the two Compilations of Citations - Florilegium - from Church Fathers, chiefly of Christological content, gathered in the purpose of defending the christological position of the Church. These two collections of fragments have been considered as amply rich mines of patristic literature. They are: (I) Timothy Aelurus, Refutation of the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon, discovered by Karapet Ter-Mekerttschian in 1897. It was later published by him in collaboration with Erwand Ter-Minassiantz in Etchmiadzin, 1908. There has been no other complete text of this work either in Greek or Syriac. See for its importance F. Cavaliers, 'Le Dossier Patristique de Timothee Aelure,' in Bulletin de Litterature Ecclesiastique, t. XI (1909), pp. 93-111; J. Lebon, 'Version armenienne et version syriaque de Timothee Flure,' in Handes Amsorya, t. 40 (1927), pp.713-20. (2) The Seal of Paith ('Knike Havatoy'), discovered and published again by Karanet Ter.Mekerttschian, Etchmiadzin, 1914. See the article of J. Lebon, 'Les Citation Patristiques du "Sceau de Ia Foi," ' in Revue d'Histoire Ecclйsiartique, t. XXV (1929), pp. 5-32. Here he tries to identify the citations of the Compilation with the existing works of the Church Fathers. He confesses that there have remained some which he has not been able to identify (see pp. 31-2).

translations have, indeed, something to tell us about an 'Ecumenical' spirit or an openness to the outside Christian world characterizes, among many other features, the Armenian Church. This aspect is often overlooked in the careless statements so wid common with many Church historians of to-day about the 'isolation' of this Church from the Christian world due, as they think, to a strong sense of nationalism and a constant tendency of particularism. This latter feature of Armenian Church history has to be understood in the proper context of the circumstances of their history as well as against the background of general Church history. Part 2 THE ORIGINAL LITERATURE IN what I have said until now one cannot see anything purely or typically Armenian except, perhaps, that sense of communication with and openness to the universal Christian tradition on the one hand, and the language with the genuine use of it by the translators, on the other hand. As I noted above, this movement of translation was an intellect'aal stream which irrigated the soil of the Armenian cultural tradition and gave rise to a new and richer harvest. 37 The fifth century was a time when Armenia was divided politically and geographically into two sections: (a) Persian Armenia - the Eastern and largest part of Armenia under the overlordship of the Sassanid Empire, and (b) Byzantine Armenia - the Western provinces of the country under the rule of a Governor appointed by the Byzantine Emperor. Armenians were

37 Again I quote here P. Peeters, whose penetrating insight into the significance of the Armenian translations is, indeed stimulating: 'It must not be supposed that the Armenian people remained in' definitely in the role of pupils at foreign schools, and that they allowed a sort of intellectual domination by their neighbours to become established. Without playing on words one can say that a large part of the foreign literature which was assimilated did not come from outside; but rather it was the Armenians who went to find it outside their own frontiers. This makes a difference which ought to be accepted, even though it is usually ignored' (see Traductions et Traducteurs, p. 266). After giving some examples of how the Armenians continued to translate the Lives of the Saints in later centurici, he says: 'These few examples, which allow one to guess at a great many others, prove clearly that the line of the great interpreters of the golden age did not cease to perpetuate itself with successors on the soil of Armenia itself. But they are not adequate to account for the large eclecticism and openness of mind to which the amazing variety of the Armenian translations bears witness., This is due to more profound causes, which have too often been overlooked (ibid., p. 267). One of the basic explanations of this phenomenon he finds in the widespread diaspora of the Armenian people all along her history: 'At all times there were many Armenians outside Armenia. In ancient times, as to-day, this industrious and enterprising race was to be found on all the commercial routCS of the Ancient World and in all the important countries of the East and West. The successive break-ups of the Armenian states added still more to the somewhat unsettled mood of the people. From the beginning of the Byzantine period there were Armenian communities in Persia, in Mesopotamia, in the Holy Land, at Jerusalem, in the Jordan desert at Aleppo and Antioch and in Cyprus, later, from the tenth century onwards' they lived in Crimea, then in Poland, in Italy, in India, in a word, one c'ould say, everywhere, and this would be accurate without a trace of exaggeration' (ibid., pp. 267-8).

pressed on both sides. They were exposed to the danger of assimilation by the Mazdean Persians who were carrying On a carefully planned policy of dechristianization in Armenia in order to integrate it wholly into the Persian Empire with its Mazdean religion and culture. On the other side, the Byzantines were trying to draw them to their side with a closer relationship than the one which existed before. The only power which could maintain the unity of the nation was the Church with an expression of her own. The national culture was the key to it. This rnay explain to a large extent why the original literature started so enthusiastically and reached such a height - the 'Golden Age' of the Armenian literature - in such a short period of less than a century. For one reason or another the Armenian original literature was an established fact and, at the same time, had an astonishingly successful development during the fifth century. It was carried on in the later centuries in spite of the unhappy circumstances of the historical life of the Armenian people. Now, the only possible way to draw the picture of this literature is to use terms of an introductory sketch, however inadequate it may be, in order to grasp the whole field and the many particular branches in their distinct features and values at the same time. Therefore, in a first section, in this second part, I will try to give a general introduction to the various domains of the Armenian original literature. I. THE MAIN BRANCHES Hereunder I present a schematical picture of the main lines of the Armenian original literature: (a) The Sacred Poetry. It is largely embodied in the liturgical hymns used in the Church's worship. It may be found also and partly in individual writers whose poetical works are not included in the official hymnal of the Church or have only partly been included. There are pieces of sacred poetry in this hymnal which reveal a deep and touching spiritual devotion as well as a skilful art in expressing it in a most gracious way. The most beautiful of them have been recognized, for various reasons, in the hymns dedicated to S. Mary, the Holy Virgin, the hymns of the Epiphany and of Holy Week, as well as those of the Transfiguration, the Ascension and Pentecost. In the words of a Roman Catholic scholar of Christian spirituality these hymns are 'elevations to God, some of which must be included among the most beautiful in all mystical literature.' 38 (b) The Liturgical Literature. It contains the prayers, collects and whole services of Christian worship such as the Eucharist, the Divine Offices, the Sacraments and other services of special benedictions or of spiritual expressions. Although large parts of them are either direct translations from other, mainly Greek, liturgical traditions or derive from them in their form, yet there are many other parts in them which are the work of the Armenian Church Fathers themselves.39 (c) The Hagiographic Literature. To this field belong the Lives of the Saints and the Acts of Martyrs, not only of the Armenian saints and martyrs, but also of those venerated in the Church Universal before the split of the fifth century. Indeed, this part of the Armenian literature is considerably rich; a fact which may be explained mainly by two reasons: firstly, by the large number of national martyrs as a result of endless persecutions in the country and of the heroic endurance in the faith of the people and, secondly, by the immense influence and direct effectiveness of this type of literature for the consolation

38 I. Hausherr, 'Armйnienne' (Spiritualitй), article in Dictionnaire de Ia Spiritualitй Chrйtienne, vol. I, col. 875. The European expert on the Armenian hymns has been Felix-Neve, Professor in the University of Louvain in the last century who published an impressive volume on the Armenian Christian Literature' three-quarters of which are devoted to the study of the liturgical hymns 'under the title, L’Hymnologie Armйnienne. See his L’Armйnie Chretienne et sa Littйrature, pp. 46-247. See also N. Ter-Mikaelian, Das armenische Hymnarium-Studien zu setner geschichtlichen Entwicklung, Leipzig, 1905. 39 See the English translation of large parts of this liturgical literature in F. C. Conybeare, Rituale Armenorum, Oxford, 1905. For the history and description of the Armenian rites and ceremonies see R. Janin, Las Eglises Orientales et les Rites Orientaux, 4th edition, revised, pp. 313-33, Paris, 1955. See also the English translation. H. Denzinger, Ritus Orientalium, Coptorum Syrorum et Armemorum, in Administrandis Sacramentis, t. I, Wirceburgi, 1863; I M. Hanssens, Instituttones Liturgicae De Ritibus Orientalibus, t. II and III, Rome, 1930, 1932; S. Salaville, An Introduction to the Study of Eastern Liturgies, adapted from the French by J. M. T. Barton, London, 1938 (see many articles of the same author in Echos d’Orient, particularly t. XVI (1913), pp 28-31, t. XXXIX (1941-2), pp. 349-82. Alphonsus Raes, Introductio in Liturgiam Orientalem, Rome, 1947; Archdale A. King, The Rites of Eastern Christendom, vol. II, pp. 521-646, accompanied with a short bibliography.

and exhortation of the Christians. They had to be always nourished in their faith and strengthened in their faithfulness through the example of the martyrs, because martyrdom was a permanent line, an unbroken chain of events in the life of the people in Christian Armenia all along the centuries of her history.40 (d) The Exegetical Literature. This branch of Christian literature constituted the kernel of religious education in Armenia. In fact, for long centuries the Bible has served the Armenian people as the basis, the fundamental subject of their education and studies. So it is not difficult to imagine how large and all-inclusive was the sphere of exegetical science, combining within itself elements of philosophy and other branches of human knowledge. It is difficult to say at the moment what is or can be its contribution to the exegetical literature of the Christian Church as a whole, because its relation with the general patterns of exegesis in Eastern Christian tradition has not yet been investigated and studied as such. It is generally believed that on the whole it displays an allegorical and spiritualistic interpretation of the Scriptures rather than a literary or realistic attitude. It would not be surprising, I believe, to find both of these two exegetical traditions or schools as existing together in various authors and at different periods. (e) The Historical Literature. This section of the Armenian Christian literature has been the most extensively studied and, therefore, the most widely known. Not only because it constitutes

40 See Zarbhanelian, op. cit., pp.715-30. The ‘Lives of Saints' have been published in Venice by Fr. Mekerdich Avguerian, Complete Lives and Martyrologies of Saints, 1810-15. Twelve volumes. A French translation of some Armenian texts of the Lives of Saints' usually read in the Church for moral instruction and exhortation, is to be found in Patrologia Orientalis. The translation is made by Dr. G. Bayan in collaboration with Prince Max of Saxony, Le Synacaire armйnien de Ter Israel - a manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale' of Paris. See t. V, pp.345-556; t. VI, pp.181-355; t XV, pp. 293-438; t. XVI, pp. 1-184; t. XVIII, pp. 1-208; t. XIX, pp.1-150. The Armenian hagiographic literature has been the special field of study of the late great Bollandist scholar, R. Paul Peeters. See his articles gathered together in a posthum edition, under the title Recherches d’Histoire et de Philologie orientales, Bruxelles, 1951. These two volumes contain the articles published in various religious reviews with the exception of Analecta Bollandiana, where there are several other articles of his pen. See a very well documented and richly bibliographical essay on the hagiographic literature of the Armenian Church by J. Mйcйrian, S.J., 'Introduction а l'Йtude des Synaxaires Armйniens,' in Mйlanges de l'Universitй saint Joseph, t. XXX, Fasc. 4: Balletin Armenologique, pp. 99-188.

one of the richest departments of Armenian literature, but also, and especially, because it is not exclusively or primarily religious in its contents. In fact, the Armenian historiographers do not describe only the religious side of the Armenian history, but its political and cultural aspects as well. And, more than this, they provide us with quite a considerable amount of first-hand information about the peoples, religions and Churches in the neighbourhood of Armenia, and also about those who came into contact with Armenia at one time or another in the course of her history. Therefore it is not surprising that almost all the historical works have been studied by European scholars and historians and translated mainly into French. It is obvious, then, that interests other than the solely religious concern have had their place in the studies of Armenian historiographers who, indeed, have rewarded the sacrifices of the scholars by their contribution to the understanding of Eastern history.41

41 Hereto I attach a list of the main historiographers with a aelective bibliography of the important translations in foreign languages, largely in French: Agathangelos (4th-5th century). See V. Langlois, Hist. Arm., vol. I, pp. 97-194. Phaustus of Byzantium (4th-5th century). See Langlois, op. cit., vol. I, pp. 201-310. Eghishe (5th century). See Langlois, op. cit., vol. II, pp. 197-251. Another French translation by M. l’abbй Gr. Kabaragy Garabed, Sonlйvement National de l’Armйnie Chrйtienne an Ve siиcle contre la Loi de Zoroastre, Paris, 1844. A fragmentary English translation by C. F. Neumann, The History of Vartan and of the Battle of the Armenians, London, 1830. A new and complete English translation by D. H. Boyadjian, Yeghisheh: The History of Vartanank, New York, 1952. Lazar of Pharbi (5th century). See Langlois, op. cit., vol. II, pp. 253-368. Moses of Chorene (5th century?). See Langlois, op. cit., vol.II, pp.45-175. Also Le Vaillant de Florival, Histoire de l’Armйnie, 2 volumes - the Armenian text with French translation, Paris, 1836. Sebeos (7th century). See F. Macler, Histoire d’Hйraclius par l’йvкque Sйbкos, Paris, 1904. Ghevond the Historiographer (8th century). See G. Chahnazarian, Histoire des Guerres et des Conqaкtes des Arabes en Armйnie, Paris, 1856. Hovhan Catholicos (9th-10th century). See Saint-Martin, Histoire de l'Armйnie, published by Layard, Paris, 1841. Thomas Ardzrouni (9th-10th century). See M. F. Brosset, Collection d'Historiens Armйniens, vol. I, pp. 1-266. Stephanos Asoghik (10th-11th century). See E. Dulaurier, Histoire Universelle par Etienne Aзoghik de Daron, Paris, 1883 - only the first part; the second part is translated by F. Macler, Paris, 1917, preceded by an important introduction. Oukhtanes (10th century). See M. F. Brosset, Deux Historiens Armйniens, pp.206-351, St. Petersburg, 1870. Aristakes Lastivertatsi (11th century). See Prud’Homme, Histoire d’Armйnie, Paris, 1864.

(f) The Theological Literature. It would be wrong to think by this term that theology as we understand it to-day is the only subject of the works which come under this title. It is difficult to find in this literature theological themes treated in the way in which we find them treated usually in the theological books or essays of our time. Theological themes here are not treated in the systematic method or in the form of a particular technical language and style which we are accustomed to find in the books we call 'theological' to-day. 'Theological literature' here refers to that part of Armenian Christian literature in which theology is expounded through sermons or homilies, discourses, exhortations, refutations, commentaries and so forth. It is legitimate in this sense to look at the whole religious literature of the Armenian Church as a theological literature when this term is understood in its largest-and original meaning. If I draw this distinction between the other branches which I reviewed above and this 'theological' department which I consider now, it is merely because in the latter the doctrinal material is much more predominantly present than in the former. In this field of Armenian Christian literature our attention goes very naturally to the most important authors and works. To give some names: Mettheos Ourhayetsi (12th century). See E. Dulaurier, Chronique de Matthieu d’Edesse, Paris, 1858. Samuel Anetsi (12th century). See M. F. Brosset, Collection d’Historiens Armйniens, vol.II, pp.339-483. Vardan Areveltsi (13th century). See J. Muyldermans, 'La Domination Arabe en Armenie,' extrait de l’Histoire Universelle de Vardan-Йtude de Critique Textuelle et Littйraire, Louvain, 1927. Kirakos Gantzaketsi (13th century). See M. F. Brosset, Deax Historiens Armйniens, pp.1-205, St. Petersburg, 1870. Stepanos Orbelian (14th century). See M. F. Brosset, Histoire de Ia Siounie, 2 volumes, St. Petersburg, 1864-6. On the general characteristics of the Armenian historiography and also on some individual writers see Fйlix-Nиve, L’Arm. Chrйt. et sa Litt., the section entitled 'Des Principaux monuments de la Littйrature historique de l’Armйnie,' pp. 287-400. Also H. Berberian, 'Littйrature Armйnienne,' pp. 794-5, in Histoire des Littйratures (Encyclopйdie de Ia Plйiade), vol. I: Littйratures Anciennes, Orientales et Orales, edited by R. Queneau, pp.791-802, Paris, 1955. For the contribution of the Armenian historiographers to the study of the general history see, as an example, the first volume of Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, Documents Armйniens by E. Dulaurier. More than seventeen Armenian writers have been translated in extracts and commented on. Paris, 1869. For the appreciation of the value of this contribution see the views of some armenologists quoted by H. Thorossian in the Preface of his Histoire de la Litterature Armenienne, pp. 9-14. (i) The Stromateis (Hadjakhapatoum) - twenty-three homilies traditionally ascribed to S. Gregory the Illuminator. They are sometimes attributed also to S. Mesrop Mashtots (fifth century), the author of the Armenian alphabet.42 (ii) The Homilies (Djark) of S. John Mandakouni (fifth century) which have enjoyed a very high reputation and have been held in considerably high authority by the Armenian Church divines. Some of these homilies recently have been attributed to John Mayragometsi, a seventh century author, under whose name they have been found in many manuscripts. Most of the homilies have a moral character rather than strictly doctrinal, having been conceived with the idea and intention of Christian instruction. Important aspects of the people's daily life and ordinary beliefs and superstitions are reflected there. The volume is a mine the study of which can give a clearer picture of the Christian struggle with pagan customs and beliefs still persisting on the level of day to day life.43 (iii) A treatise On the Iconoclasts by Vertanes Kertogh (seventh century) which is reckoned the first written document preserved in defence of the veneration of images in the Christian Church.44 (iv) The five Christological Treatises of Khosrovik Targmanich (i.e. the translator) - eighth century - written against the later monophysite heretical doctrines concerning the corruptibility and

42 The best edition is that of Arshak Ter-Mikelian, Etchmiadzin, 1894. Another well known and commonly used edition is the one published in Venice, 1830. A German translation by J. M. Schmid, Reden und Lehren des heiligen Gregorius des Erleuchters Patriarch von Armenien, Regensberg, 1872. See also another translation, in parts, by E. Sommer and S. Weber, 'Ausgewдhlte Reden aus dem Hatachachapatoum,' in Ausg. Schr. der Arm. Kirchenvдter, vol. I, pp.254-318. Here these homilies are ascribed to Mesrop Mashtots. See a short notice in Fйlix-Nиve, L’Arm. Chret. et sa Litt., pp.248-55. 45 Published in Venice, 1860. A German translation by J. Blatz and S. Weber, 'Reden des armenischen Kirchenvдters Johannes Mandakuni,' in Ausg. Schr. der Arm. Kirchenvдter, vol.II, pp. 50-269. 44 The text is published in Sion (monthly review of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem) by Archbishop Eghishe Tourian (see 1927, pp.22-5, 61-3). A French translation by Miss Sirarpie Der-Nersessian who has studied the text scrupulously and commented on it in a masterly way (see 'Une Apologie des Images du septieme siecle,' in Byzantion, t. XVIII (1944-5), pp. 58-87). Her conclusion, which seems to be above any doubt or contest, is very important for the history of the Iconoclastic movement in the Eastern Church 'C'est ainsi, mais grace aussi au hasard, que la plus ancienne apologie des images addressee а des chrйtiens, qui se soit conservйe, est une ceuvre armйnienne du septiиme siиcle' (p.87).

incorruptibility of the body of Christ. They have not yet been given the attention they deserve in connection with the study of the later developments of monophysitism.45 (v) The works of Hovhannes Imastaser (John the Philosopher, otherwise known as John of Odsoun) - eighth century - namely his Treatise on the Church, Against the Paulicians and Against the Phantasiastae. All his works have been highly appreciated as being sound and well balanced expositions of Christian doctrine composed in the midst of conflicting heretical movements and also as being now most valuable documents on the history of those heretical movements in the East.46 (vi) The Exposition of the Prayers of the Liturgy and the Commentary of the Divine Offices of Khosrov Antzevatsi (tenth century) simply written and richly documented treatises very important especially for the historical study of the Liturgy and the Divine Offices in the Armenian Church.47 (vii) The works of Nerses Lambronatsi, an eminent figure in the twelfth century. The most important one is his Exposition 0/ the Holy Liturgy, a masterly essay of its kind. Being an ardent advocate of Christian unity Lambronatsi had acquired a wide knowledge of other Christian traditions. He could read Hebrew, Greek, Syriac and Latin very easily. He produced commentaries, theological treatises, and made translations of an incredibly wide range. A thorough study in his life and work will bring him to the forefront of the Armenian theologians as an outstanding figure especially in the ecumenical field.45

45 The text is published by Vardapet Karekin Hovsepiants (lately Catholicos of the See of Cilicia, Antelias), Khosrovik Thargmanich and his works, Etchmiadzin, 1903. Reprinted from the review 'Ararat' and preceded by a long introduction. 46 The Armenian text is published in Venice in 1834 accompanied by a Latin translation made by R. P. J. Aucher, Doinini Johannis Philosophi Oziensis Armenorum Catholici Opera. An English translation of the Refutation of the Phantasiasts is made by Leon Arpee in his A History of Arm. Christianity, New York, 1946. See Appendix II, Tractate of John of Otzun against the Phantasiastae, pp. 325-54. 47 The Commentary of the Divine Offices is published in Constantinople 1840. The Exposition of the Prayers of the Liturgy in Venice, 1869. There is a Latin translation of the latter made by Dr. P. Vetter, Chosroae Magni Episcopi Monophysitici Explicatio Precum Missae, E lingua Armeniaca in Latinam versa, Freiburg, 1880. See also the article of S. Salaville, 'L'Explication de Ia Messe de l'Arme'nien Chosrov-Thйologie et Liturgie,' in Echos d’Orient, t. XXXIX (1941-2), pp.349-82. 48 His works, especially the Commentaries and many translations from Latin, The Exposition of the Holy Liturgy has gone through various editions. The important ones are (a) the Jerusalem edition, 1842, and (b) the Venice edition, 1847. It is translated into Italian, Alcuini squarci del Commentano di S. N. Lambronese sulla Liturgia Armena, Venice, 1851. See for his life and work J. Karst, 'Nersиs de Lampron,' article in Dictionnaire de Thйologie Catholique, t. XI, col. 72-6, cf. H. Thorossian, Hist. de la Litt. Arm., pp. 537-40. See a short biographical notice in E. Dulaurier, Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, Documents Armeniens, t. I, pp. 557-603 accompanied by some extracts of Nerses’ ecumenical writings: 'Saint Nersиs de Lampron - Notice sur sa vie et ses йcrits.'

But I feel that I cannot go farther along this line, because I know that these names by themselves will not mean much to you. I chose them from among many others-not an easy choice, indeed! -in order to substantiate my previous statement on the 'theological literature' of the Armenian Church as taken separately from the other branches of the same literature. Now closing this sketch I come to the second section of this part of my paper. 2. INDIVIDUAL WRITERS Here I have taken up the names of four Armenian ecclesiastical writers to speak of them individually. I have done this for two reasons: (a) they represent in themselves different typical aspects of Armenian theological literature; (b) the significance of their works reaches, more distinctly, beyond the limits of a local, national literature out into the sphere of the inter-ecclesiastical. In other words, they belong, so to speak, to the universal tradition of the Christian Church. It is this second feature of their importance which makes me think that they may meet your interests in a more direct way than other representatives of the Armenian Christian literature. (a) Eznik of KoIb. An apologist of the fifth century he was trained in Constantinople for his higher education. On his return to Armenia between 432 and 435 - after the Council of Ephesus - he brought with him an accurate copy of the Greek Septuagint text of the Bible on which the revision of the former Armenian translation from a Syriac version was made. He then took a very active part in the work of translating, particularly in and through this radical recension of the Armenian Bible and through the translation of the Church Fathers with whose works he was so well acquainted in Constantinople. His literary work-a masterpiece of classical Armenian language - which fortunately has survived in a single manuscript, unicum - is a small book in which he tries to vindicate the truth of the Christian faith against almost all the kinds of attacks that were made on it from the various philosophical schools, from the pagan religious systems and from heretical sections within the Church itself. The treatise which now has come to be called Refutation of the Sects, is composed of four books: (i) Against the Pagans (ii) Against the Religion of the Persians-Mazdaism (iii) Against the Greek Philosophers (iv) Against the heresy of Marcion A careful and searching look at this sketch of his work will reveal that Eznik's chief concern is the Christian doctrine of God. The unity of thought which underlies all these sections of the book is the orthodox Christian conception of God defensively expounded against the background of non-orthodox conceptions. Here lies then the theological nature of the book.49 His task consists in examining all the existing ideas and theories on God as understood both in His transcendent being and in His personal nature revealed through His relation to the world and to mankind. Thus, pagan conceptions of God, the perpetual problem of evil, extensively dwelt upon, with all its implications and complications for the Christian doctrine of God, the Mazdean and Manichжan dualistic systems of theism, the Greek philosophical ideas as found in the different schools of Greek thought - Pythagoreans, Peripatetics, Platonists, Epicureans, Stoпcs, etc. - all these constitute the vast theme of Eznik's rather concise treatise which is a condensed, sound and vigorous vindication of Christian theism as opposed to all the conflicting and disturbing views referred to which seem to have been strongly responded to in Armenia. 50

49 This characterization of his work has been done for the first time in a masterly thesis on Eznik by a well-known French Patristic scholar and armenologist, R. P. Louis Mariиs, Le De Deo d’Eznik de Kolb-Йtudes de Critique Littйraire et Textuelle, Paris, 1924. Before him and with a distance of more than fifty years, Eznik's work had already served another scholar for a thesis, Ernest Mordant, Ezeik, Docteur Armйnien du Ve siйcle. These prйsentйe а la Facultй de Thйologie Protestante de Strasbourg pour obtenir le grade de Bachelier en Thйologie, Strasbourg, 1868. 50 It is obvious that Eanik did not write this book as a pure theoretical exposition of the Christian doctrine of God. He wrote it rather with a practical purpose, i.e. to refute all the doctrines which were actually and actively present in Armenia through representative persons, schools and sects. 'On the one hand, the spiritual need,' writes L. Mane's, 'aroused partly by the movements of pagan superstition still felt from time to time in the body of the Church, and partly by knowledge of the literatures and, on the other hand, the necessity of combating the pagan authorities which tried by propaganda efforts, both violent and peaceful, to control religious life, acted together and resulted in the production in the Church of S. Gregory of an original apologia of Christian truth. While the nation, troubled to its depth, listened to the mutter of the storm which was continually drawing nearer, in the bishop's residence at Bagrevand (Eznik is supposed to have been the bishop of the province of Bagrevand in central Armenia), a work of apologetics was coming to completion, which not only remains one of the treasures of Armenian literature, but which, by its penetration of mind, its accumulated knowledge and by its brilliance of style can take a place of honour among the intellectual productions of the classical era of the Fathers. I refer to the "Refutation of Heresies" of Eznik of Kolb' (op. cit., p.9).

It may be noted very easily that in Eznik's work there is revealed a very wide, encyclopedic knowledge of the most crucial philosophical and theological problems of the time. Eznik is well versed in Patristic literature from which he quotes easily and extensively combining all the citations in an original plan of his own and with a personal, direct approach to the problem.51 One of the greatest contributions of this author to modern scholarship consists in the first-hand material he provides on, for example, the Mazdean religion and the Marcionite heresy. His information on these two religious systems has, in fact, con-

51 One of the values of his book in the sight of the modern Christian scholar lies in this particular aspect of his work, in which many fragments of Church Fathers' writings have been preserved and reached us. Thus, scholars have been able to detect large quotations from Aristides, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Methodius of Olympus, Epiphanius of Salamis, Ephraпm Syrus and others. For example, speaking of the Treatise on Free Will of Methodius of Olympus, Quasten says: It is extensively quoted by Eanik of KoIb, the Armenian apologist of the fifth century, in his Refutation of the Sects, and thus large passages are preserved for us translated into his native language' (Patrology, vol.II, p. 134). This fact has given the impression that Eznik's work is devoid of originality. It is sometimes thought of as being simply an amalgamation or a juxtaposition of texts taken from here and there. But the reality is not what it appears to be at first sight. Thus the late P. Louis Mariиs at the end of his most scrupulous examination of Eznik's text with the strictly rigorous method of a detailed comparison of it with the works of Christian apologists, says in clear terms and with a definite conviction: 'However large are the citations, we have seen that by his way of using them Eznik was able to remain original.' Especially the plan and the whole conception of the work with its unity of thought and purpose are Eznik's own: 'This plan reveals a writer with the instinct of a philosopher and the piety of an intellectualist theologian. We can therefore await with confidence the results of the inquiries of those scholars who are busy tracking down Eznik's borrowings. We repeat, that even if one could prove that not one stone in the whole edifice was his own, Eznik none-the-less would remain its architect. The simplicity and boldness of the design of this small edifice places it among the most important works of the apologetic literature in this period, whether Greek or Armenian' (op. cit., pp. 92-3; cf. pp. 194-5).

siderably served the studies and investigations into them. 52 It is, indeed, a significant instance that in many ways and for more than one reason the attention of scholars has been often drawn to this little book which has been translated and studied with keen interest and high appreciation. 53 (b) S. Gregory of Narek. If in Eznik of KoIb we have a representative of the Armenian apologetic literature, in S. Gregory of Narek, otherwise known as Narekatsi, we have the highest expression of the Armenian mystical literature. Still to-day a popular saint in the Church of Armenia, Narekatsi was that author of the tenth century who exerted the deepest influence on the spirituality of the Armenian Church and gained an unequalled place in the piety of the Armenian people. His capital work is called The Book of Lamentations composed of a series of prayers which are, indeed, genuine mystical elevations to God. Popular Armenian piety has come to associate with this book a veneration normally reserved for a shrine or almost equal to that of an Icon in the Orthodox Church. Thus, pious people for long centuries have put it - and still do put it - under their pillows as a guard against the power of evil. They read

52 See among others the following books and articles A. Hamack, Marcion: Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott, Leipzig, 1924. See Texte und Untersuchungen, t. 45. Jean Riviere, Un Exposй marcionite de la rйdemption,' in Revue des Sciences Religieuses, t. I (1921) pp. 185-207, 297-323. R. P. Casey, 'The Armenian Marcionites and the Diatessaron,' in Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. LVII (1938), pp. I85-94. C. S. C. Williams, 'Eznik's Rйsumй of Marcionite Doctrine,' in Journal of Theological Studies, vol. XLV (1944), pp.65-73. E. C. Blackman, Marcion and his influence, London, S.P.C.K., 1948. For his contribution to the study of Zoroastrianism, see A. Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, Paris, 1944. Also R. C. Zachner, Zurvan - A Zoroastrian Dilemma, Oxford, 1955. S. Runciman, The Medieval Manichee-A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy, 4th edition, Cambridge, 1955. (Here Armenian writers of the later centuries also are consulted quite extensively.) 53 For the first time Eznik's work was published in Izmir (Smyrna) in 1762. Since then it has gone through many editions, mainly in Venice. It was first translated into French by Le Vaillant de Florival, Rйfutation des diffйrentes sectes des Paпens, de la Religion des Perses, de la Religion des Sages de la Grиce, de la secte de Marcion, Paris, 1853. The second part of the book, 'Against the religion of the Persians,' in V. Langlois, Mist. Arm., vol. II, pp. 375-82. A new and complete translation has been made by the late Pиre Louis Mariиs. Surely it will be the best of all. A German translation by J. M. Schmid, Des Wardapet Eznik von Kolb: Wider die Sekten, Vienna, 1900. Another one by S. Weber, Ezniks von Kolb: Wider die Irrlehren. See Armenische Kirchenvдter, vol. I, pp.25-180, Mьnich, 1927.

portions of it over a sick person. The reputation of its author's saintliness was so eminent in and after his lifetime that a writer of the twelfth century has given expression to it by speaking of S. Gregory of Narek as 'an angel in a human body' (Nerses Lambronatsi). This spiritual writer is a typical mystic. In his book we realize the disclosure of a rather peculiar aspect of mysticism. His work is entitled Lamentations (or Elegies) because in his elevations to the presence of God while communion with God brings him into the unspeakable joy of the divine life, yet, at the same time, it is for him the clear mirror in which human sinfulness, pitifulness and nothingness are revealed to him in and through his own person which he laments and deplores. The presence of God within him reveals him to himself in the truest condition of human frailty and misery. Thus, he sees himself unworthy and incapable - on his own merits - of that blissful enjoyment of God's presence in him. Hence his mind clings to and is absorbed by the idea of God's immeasurable power of grace as the only ground of spiritual firmness and safety for him. He pictures himself as thrown into a stormy sea with the body as a boat. The grace of God is that wind of peace in which his soul finds rest and comfort.54 This tragedy of human condition in his soul, his book excels in displaying with that ampleness and richness of expression which is undoubtedly his own and constitutes one of the greatest literary values of his work. 55

54 This persistent idea of grace in Narekatsi is one of the greatest theological themes in his book. It is not unworthy of attention to note that an Armenian protestant author suddenly caught by this predominant idea of grace in Narekatsi immediately is brought to think of Calvin, the great teacher of grace in the tradition of the Reformation. Referring to this mystic he says: Our writer, however, is a Calvinist before Calvin' (Leon Arpee, A Hist. of Arm. Christianity, p. 167). But he is, I believe the victim of a hasty conclusion, because the doctrine of grace in Narekatsi is neither scriptural (in the technical sense of this word) nor rational, but rat her experimental, mystkal, as being revealed to him through his own personal touch with the divine and through the taste of its essence and power. Perhaps S. Augustine may be taken as an example to understand the way of mysticism that is found in S. Gregory of Narek. In any case, comparisons cannot help us very much. 55 His work and its value have been noted by European scholars and have won their appreciation and admiration. Thus in 1886 Fйlix-Nиve was already advocating the translation of this book into a Western language: 'It is, indeed, one of the finest glories of this ancient Church but so far nothing has been done to make it known in the West. It would be no small service to the sacred literature to translate the works of this great theologian and mystic' (L'Arm. Chrйt. et sa Litt., p. 256). See the whole section: 'Saint Grйgoire de Nareg-Notice littйraire et bibliographique,' pp. 256-68. J. Karst, another armenologist, looks at S. Narekatsi from the background of the German mysticism in the Western tradition of Christian spirituality. He says: 'Gregory of Narek was essentially a philosopher of Christian-Armenian mysticism, the great master and doctor of the contemplative life, comparable wit h the great mystical theologians of the Western Middle Ages such as S. Bernard, Eckhard, Tauler, Suso. His philosophico.theological teaching - a characteristic it has in common with the German mysticism - is clothed in a language of great poetical charm; and although outwardly in the form of prose, it unfolds in canticles overflowing with fervour' ('Nareg ou Narйgatsi,' article in Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholiqne, t. XI, col. 24). The literary beauty of this work has attracted recently a French poet, Luc-Andrй Marcel, who being deeply caught by its profound poetical power gave, through the help of Armenian scholars and poets in Paris, an extremely graceful translation of some prayers, with a penetrating study, thus creating a widespread interest and admiration of the beauty of Narekatsi's poetry. See 'Gregoire de Narek,' edition des Cahiers dn Sud, Paris, 1954. It would be interesting to see where and how Luc-Andre' Marcel sees the value of Narekatsi's poetry. I translate a passage from his Introduction: 'Gregory of Narek deserves threefold honours. First, because he is a saint. And it seems that as the curtain falls on the tragedy of six thousand years of our era, it is good to consult all the great spiritual oracles if only by way of forewarning or understanding. Secondly, because he is a great poet, who raises the problem of the eflicacy of the poetry in a very acute form. Thirdly, because his work, which is perhaps in this respect unique, for more than nine hundred years had a magic power in the experience of a whole people: this is a phenomenon which nroves its surpassing value better than any purely iesthetic valuation' (pp. 19-20). See also Archag Tchobanian, 'Gregoire de Narek,' an article in Mercure de France, November (1900), pp.369-405. This is a literary analysis of Narekatsi's work with extracts translated into French. Cf. Idem, Poemes Armйniens Anciens et Modernes-Precede's d'une etude de Gabriel Mourey sur La Poйsie et l'Art Armйniens, pp.47-52, Paris, 1902. Two prayers are included in the text of the Armenian Liturgy. They are said by the priest in secret, behind the curtain, immediately after the Accession to the altar. They may be found in the English translations of the Armenian Liturgy. A French translation is being prepared for the series of Sources Chrйtiennes. We hope it will be published soon and justify, if done in both an accurate and graceful way, the expectations of the scholars. There have been several editions of the text. Commentaries have been written in order to expound the profound spiritual treasures of the book. Translations into Modern Armenian have been made in order to make it available to ordinary Armenian Christians. But we cannot go into bibliographical details.

(c) S. Nerses Shnorhali. In S. Nerses Shnorhali (i.e. 'the Gracious') - twelfth century - it is very difficult to distinguish between the theologian and the poet. No doubt he is equally both of them. In fact, his expositions of the doctrine of the Armenian Church are the clearest and the soundest of all the treatises on the doctrinal position of the Armenian Church. The hymns from his pen are the most beautiful ones in the Armenian Hymnal. In connection with his poetical works he is to the Armenian Church what a Romanus is to the Greek Orthodox Church, and much more than a Wesley or a Keble to the Anglican Church! His prayers may, indeed, be counted among the best pieces of Christian spiritual literature. Above all, a particular series of them, composed in twenty-four strophes and intended for private devotion, is translated into thirty-six languages and published in Venice. 56 But I will not take into account either of these two features of his work at the moment in order to draw the figure of this Church Father, because besides, or beneath, these two features there is one which may be, I suppose, much more relevant for to-day and, therefore, much more valuable in such a paper as this Nerses Shriorhali is the ecumenical figure par excellence of Armenian Church history and literature. His continuous negotiations with the Byzantine Emperor, Manuel I Comnenus (1143-80), for the reunion of the Armenian and Byzantine Churches constitute one of the brightest chapters in the history of the relations between the two Churches. The story is quite well known not to be dwelt upon. But it needs perhaps, and deserves surely, a remembrance. S. Nerses Shnorhali is deeply aware that the communion in jaith exists already between the two Churches, though they have different ways of expressing that same faith. These differences are related to their historical traditions which have not, however, obscured or destroyed the orthodoxy of their faith in the Person of Christ. The unity between them may be recovered and inter-communion restored beyond the words and formulae, if charity, good will and prayer become the driving forces in the course of the negotiations. 'Let us not examine,' he writes to the Emperor, 'in a spirit of enmity and with useless quarrels, as it was done until now, a procedure from which the Church derived no benefit in all these years but was rather harmed by it; let it be done in humility and calm. 57 He thinks that reunion must be preceded by prayers to prepare the way, because unity is not an end to be reached simply by human efforts and calculated policy, but by divine guidance. Then he suggests: Orders must be given that in all the Churches under your (i.e. emperor's) jurisdiction prayers be made to God that your good intention be not obstructed by Satan, the adversary of Good, and that God may fulfil it in His

56 Preces Sancti Nersetis Clajensis Armeniorum Patriarchae triginta sex linguis editae, Venice, 1882. 57 Quoted by Sirarpie Der-Nersessian, Armenia and the Byzantine Empire, p. 43, Harvard University Press, U.S.A., 1947.

mercy. We also, in our turn, have written to all our Churches in the East (i.e. Cilicia) and in Armenia Major (i.e. the fatherland of the Armenian people) ordering them to make the same supplication to God. Finally, let there be an end to this sickness which is of so long standing, and to the distress of God because of our divisions. Henceforth may God bind together the children of the New Sion in the love of unity, and let Him who is the source of our joy, God, rejoice with His angels because of our reconciliation,' 58 (d) S. Gregory of Datev. Finally, we come to the fourth writer whom I will not hesitate to name as the Armenian Scholastic-Gregory of Datev in the fourteenth century. He is the champion of Armenian orthodoxy, an ardent controversialist engaged in polemic with the Roman missionaries - Dominican and Franciscan friars - and Armenian 'Romanizers' whose sole mission in Armenia was to subjugate the Armenian Church to the authority of the See of Rome, and to make her accept all the dogmas as formulated and confessed in the Roman Catholic Church. Gradually they had achieved quite a wide expansion in the country; they began to gain foothold chiefly through their educational activities which attracted many Armenians

58 See his letter to the Emperor in the Collection of Letters, entitled after his famous Encyclical called Letter General, p. 105, Jerusalem, 1871. Cf. Sirarpie Der-Nersessian, op. cit., chapter II; also my article, 'L'Unitй Chrйtienne dans la Tradition de l'Йglise Armйnienne,' in Bulletin d'Orientations Oecnmйniques, No. 15 (1958) pp. I-II. For the historical account of the negotiations see P. Tйkйyan, Controverses Christologiques en Armйno-Cilicie dans la seconde moitiй du XIIe siиcle (1165-98) in the series of Orientalia Christiana Analecta, No. 124, Rome, 1939. This work must be read cautiously, because the author being an Armenian Uniate tends to take a biased view of the negotiations; cf. Ormanian, The Church of Armenia, chapter XIII, 'Attempts towards union,' pp.45-50; Leon Arpee, A Hist. of Arm. Christ., chapter XI, 'Controversies and overtures,' pp. 131-48, particularly pp. I40-8. So many and so varied are the works of St. Nerses Shnorhali that it is impossible to give a list of them here. Doctrinally and ecumenically the important one is the collection of his letters already referred to. A Latin translation of his works is made by J. Cappelletti, Sancti Nersetis Clajensis Armeniorum Catholici Opera, nunc primum ex armenio in latinum conversa notisque illustrata studio et labore D. Joseph Cappelletti, Venice, 1833, 2 vols. A French translation of his exposition of the Armenian doctrine addressed to Manuel the Emperor is to be found in E. Dulautier, Histoire, Dogmes, Traditions et Liturgie de l’Йglise Armйnienne Orientale, pp.49-86, Paris, 1855. For his literary work see Fйlix-Nиve, L’Arm. Chrйt. et sa Litt., pp. 26-86: 'Le Patriarche Nersиs IV dit Schnorhali ou le Gracieux' - envisagй comme йcrivain; cf. Thorossian, Hist. de la Litt. Arm., pp. 132-7.

desirous of learning from them the elements of Western cultural and scientific knowledge. But soon this hearty welcome of the Armenians to the missionaries was taken by the latter as a great opportanity of converting the Armenians into Latin Catholicism thus, in fact, changing colours instead of souls! The real missionary vocation, as designed by Christ (Matt. 28: 19-2O) was being confounded with a narrow proselytism. Even a religious community was established in order to carry on this proselytism in a systematic way; its members were recruited from the converted Armenian priests. It was later attached to the Dominican Order. Its special mission aimed at the union of the Armenian Church with the Roman through the total surrender and complete subjugation of the former to the latter. It took its name, Unitores, fFom the nature of its mission. Now, this meant going so far that it hurt the religious consciousness of the Armenian people and, therefore, met with strong opposition from the divines of the Armenian Church on theological grounds. Some of them, as we have noted already, had learned Latin and were acquainted with the scholastic theology of the time which was brought to the East by these missionaries. Gregory of Datev came forward as the most learned and distinguished theologian of this group of Armenian divines. So he led or directed the movement of defence and counter-attack. It is with this idea and to this end that he wrote his books-sermons and commentaries - of which the most important and the most influential was the Book of Questions which has often been recognized as equivalent in Armenian literature to the Summa Theologica of S. Thomas Aquinas in Latin medieval literature both in method and in content. Gregory's argumentation follows the same discourse of question and answer, of objection and solution given in numerical order as in the scholastic method used in the Western medieval theological literature. Actually, he was using the same weapon, taken from the hands of his adversaries, but in the opposite direction.59

59 The whole importance of this work may be detected from a judgment on its value by an Armenian Uniate writer: 'The books of this author, according to Mgr. Somal, which fate has preserved to us, are totally lacking in beauty, but rich in errors; their eternal oblivion would be an advantage for the Armenian literature and Church' (see I. Hausherr, 'Armйnienne' (Spiritualitй), in Did. de la Spiritualitй; t. I, col. 873; quoted from P. S. Somal, Quadro della Storia literaria di Armenia, Venice, 1829).

His work is a thoroughgoing exposition of Christian doctrine - with all its themes included - as confessed and taught in the Armenian Church; not, however, positively expounded but rather defensively, always being compared and often contrasted with the teaching of the Roman Church. 60 He stands constantly and firmly on the ground of the Armenian Church's doctrinal position but having his face turned towards the Roman Church, And this must be understood in the context of the historical circumstances we just outlined above. 61 An Armenian Patriarch once wrote at the end of his Commentary on the Book of Lamentations of S. Gregory of Narek, summing up the significance of his work: 'I built a clay door to a Golden Palace.' With the same words I conclude now this brief survey of the Armenian Christian Literature. I will be completely rewarded if this compendium may serve as a door, however 'clay' it may be, to introduce you into the Golden Palace of the Armenian Christian Literature. Its beauty will be revealed to an eye which penetrates deeper.

60 However his approach to the authority in theology may be interesting to quote: 'Now, the foundation of this work,' he writes in the preface of his book, 'shall rest upon the immovable rock Christ. And the whole structure shall be fortified by four pillars, the first erected by the apostolic preaching, the second by the prophetical witness, the third by the truth as elucidated by commentators, and the fourth by my readers' truth loving assent' (quoted and translated by Leon Arpee, A Hist. of Arm. Christianity, p. 577). 61 The Book of Questions has been published only once (Constantinople, 1729). Two other volumes also have been published of the same author. They are Collections of Sermons, mostly of doctrinal content and of polemical character, containing more than three hundred sermons on all the themes of Christian doctrine and moral teaching. No serious attempt has been made to study them thoroughly and against the background of the Western Scholasticism of the time, which is absolutely necessary for the understanding of S. Gregory's literary and theological heritage. No translation of any of his works is known to me. A brief account of his theology may be found in Leon Arpee, op. cit., chapter XIV, 'Gregory of Datev and the Armenian Summa,' pp. 175-6.

Prokhor Lebednik

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:17:01 CDT

From: http://wilstar.orthodox.ru/documents/40.html

PROKHOROV LEBEDNIK

? -1107

Monk Caves Monastery. Reverend.

He was born in Smolensk. Tonsured in Pechersk monastery by abbot John (1088-1103). He received his nickname from the fact that quinoa instead of bread consumed, making it chopped chaff from the dough. When famine in Kiev, he began to distribute to people they baked bread from the quinoa. And stolen from the Rev. bread becomes bitter as wormwood, and blessed by him, seemed sweet and better than the real thing.

Later, when because of the strife the prince Svjatopolka Izyaslavich (1093-1113) with the Prince of Volyn David Igorevich in Kiev was not Carpathian salt prp.Prohor was turned into ashes and salt to give it to the poor and needy. Svyatopolk, spurred by usury, decided to select the monastery all manufactured in this way the salt, but salt is stolen again turned to ashes. Then the prince repented of their sins and reconciled with the Reverend. Since Svyatopolk constantly addressed to the saint Prohor requests for prayer, and when the saint died, his own buried him in the Nearer Caves, near St. Anthony. In these caves, and his relics are at the present time. According to the results of anthropological research reposed at the age of 40-50 years.

Alipy of the Caves

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:12:44 CDT

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alipy_of_the_Caves

Alipy of the Caves (? - 1114) - (also known as 'Venerable Alypius') Eastern Orthodox saint, monk and famous painter of icons from the cave monastery of Kiev Pechersk Lavra. Saint Alipy was a disciple of Greek icon painters from Constantinople [1] and considered to be the first iconographer of the Kievan Rus. According to medieval sources, Alipy created his icons with the help of God and angels. The saint took part in creation of mosaic painting in Dormition Cathedral of the Lavra. Presumably, the artist also participated in the painting of murals in St. Michael's Cathedral in Kiev.[2] One of the icons painted by St Alypius survived and is now preserved in the State Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow. This is the Sven Icon of the Theotokos (feast days: May 3 and August 17). The saint died on August 17 around the year 1114. When his body was discovered, it was found that the fingers of his right hand were still formed in the Orthodox manner of making the Sign of the Cross. The feast day of Saint Alipy is celebrated in the Orthodox Church on August 17 (for those churches which follow the Julian Calendar, August 17 currently falls on August 30 of the modern Gregorian Calendar). He is also celebrated, in common with other saints of his monastery on September 28 (October 11), the "Synaxis of the Holy Fathers of Kiev whose relics lie in the Near Caves of Saint Anthony". His relics are preserved in Kiev Pechersk Lavra.

Ilya Muromets

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:09:44 CDT

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilya_Muromets

Ilya Muromets (Russian: Илья́ Му́ромец, literally Elijah of Murom) is a Kievan Rus' mythical hero. He is celebrated in numerous byliny (folk epic poems). Along with Dobrynya Nikitich and Alyosha Popovich he is regarded as the greatest of all the legendary bogatyrs (i.e., medieval knights-errant of Kievan Rus). (The three of them are represented together at Vasnetsov's famous painting Богатыри, as illustrated to the right.)

[hide]

Ilya in byliny

Statue of Ilya Muromets in Murom.

According to legends, Ilya, the son of a farmer, was born in the village of Karacharovo, near Murom. He suffered serious illness in his youth and was unable to walk until the age of 33 (till then he was laid on a Russian Oven), when he was miraculously healed by two pilgrims. He was then given super-human strength by a dying knight, Svyatogor, and set out to liberate the city of Kiev from Idolishche to serve Prince Vladimir the Fair Sun (Vladimir Krasnoye Solnyshko). Along the way he single-handedly defended the city of Chernigov from nomadic invasion (possibly by Polovtsi) and was offered knighthood by the local ruler, but Ilya declined to stay. In the forests of Bryansk he then killed the forest-dwelling monster Nightingale the Robber (Solovei-Razboinik), who could murder travellers with his powerful whistle. In Kiev, Ilya was made chief bogatyr by Prince Vladimir and he defended Rus' from numerous attacks by the steppe people, including Kalin, the (mythical) tsar of Golden Horde. Generous and simple-minded but also temperamental, Ilya once went on a rampage and destroyed all the church steeples in Kiev after Prince Vladimir had failed to invite him to a celebration. He was soon appeased when Vladimir sent for him.

Legendary stature

Ilya Muromets's name became a synonym of an outstanding physical and spiritual power and integrity, dedicated to the protection of the Homeland and People and over time has become a hero of numerous movies, pictures, monuments, cartoons and anecdotes. He is the only epic hero canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church.

Ilya Muromets (1914) by Viktor Vasnetsov.

Imperishable relic of saint Ilya Muromets in Near Caves at Kiev Pechersk Lavra.

Although the remains of Ilya Muromets are supposedly stored in Kiev Pecherski Monastery, his character probably does not represent a unique historical persona, but rather a fusion of multiple real or fictional heroes from vastly different epochs. Thus, Ilya supposedly served Prince Vladimir of Kiev (years of rule: 980-1015); he fought Batu Khan, the founder of Golden Horde (c. 1205-1255); he saved Constantine the God-Loving, the tsar of Constantinople, from a monster (there were a number of Byzantine emperors named Constantine, none of them contemporaries of Prince Vladimir or Batu Khan, and the one most likely to be called "God-loving" was Constantine XI, 1405-1453).

Ilya Muromets depictions

Viktor Vasnetsov's 1898 painting Bogatyrs (center figure).
Reinhold Glière's 1911 Symphony No. 3 (Ilya Muromets) in B minor, op. 42
Ilya Muromets is depicted on the 1913 Russian stamp.
Viktor Vasnetsov's 1914 painting Ilya Muromets.
Aleksandr Ptushko's 1956 film Ilya Muromets.
Liz Williams' Nine Layers of Sky (2003) writes a modern day account of Ilya.
Vladimir Toropchin's animated feature, Ilya Muromets and Nightingale the Robber, released on July 7, 2007. [1]

Kuksha of the Kiev Near Caves

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:05:27 CDT

From: http://molonlabe70.blogspot.com/2009/08/hieromartyr-and-venerable-kuksha-of.html

Hieromartyr and Venerable Kuksha of the Kiev Near Caves

Commemorated on August 27

The Hieromartyr Kuksha and Saint Pimen the Faster died after the year 1114. St Simon, Bishop of Vladimir and Suzdal (May 10), in a letter to St Polycarp, Archimandrite of the Caves (July 24), wrote of St Kuksha: "How can I worthily proclaim the glory of those saintly men dwelling in the holy Monastery of the Caves, in which pagans were baptized and became monks, and Jews accepted the holy Faith? But I cannot keep silent about the holy hieromartyr and Black-Robed Kuksha of this monastery. Everyone knows that he cast out devils, baptized the Vyatichi, caused it to rain, dried up a lake, performed many other miracles, and after many torments was killed together with his disciple Nikon."

The death of the hieromartyr Kuksha was revealed to St Pimen the Faster. Standing in the church of the Monastery of the Caves, he loudly exclaimed, "Our brother Kuksha was killed today for the Gospel." After saying this, he also surrendered his soul to God.

The Vyatichi, among whom the hieromartyr Kuksha preached and died, were pagans living along the River Oka, and they occupied the area of the Orlov and Kaluga districts. St Nestor the Chronicler (October 27), writing about the Vyatichi, was shocked by their brutal customs and he added that they live "only for the present day," remaining unacquainted with the Law of God, and making their own law instead.

The Hieromartyr Kuksha preached to the Vyatichi during the era of St Theoctistus, Bishop of Chernigov (August 5). He was buried, as was St Pimen the Faster, in the Near Caves. The Monks of the Near Caves are commemorated on September 28.

Isaiah of Rostov

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:59:01 CDT

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_of_Rostov

Isaiah of Rostov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Saint Isaiah of Rostov (fl. 1062 - died 1089 or 1090) was a Russian Christian missionary and bishop. His feast day in the Russian Orthodox Church is celebrated on May 15. Isaiah was born near Kiev. He was tonsured at Kiev Pechersk Lavra, and became abbot of Saint Dmitry's Monastery. In 1077, he became the second bishop of Rostov, succeeding Leonty of Rostov. As Christianity was not yet well established in the area, he spent his tenure converting pagans, destroying idolatry and encouraging the spread of Christianity.[1] The seat of Bishop of Rostov remained vacant for more than a century after Isaiah's death. Relics of Leonty and Isaiah were discovered in 1162 or 1164. In 1474 they were re-interred in a new cathedral of Rostov. The first historical reference to Isaiah appears in the Life of Theodosius of Kiev (Russian: Житие Феодосия Печерского).[2] According to the biographer of Theodosius, in 1062 prince Iziaslav I of Kiev selected Isaiah, a monk of Pechersk Lavra, to the newly instituted Demetrios Monastery, and in 1077 secured appointment of Isaiah as the Bishop of Rostov. Isaiah is mentioned in the Primary Chronicle twice: in 1088 Isaiah has consecrated St. Michael's church in Vydubitsy; in 1089 Isaiah and metropolitan John jointly consecrated the Church of Theotokos in Pechersk Lavra. Both these facts are reproduced in the Life of Isaiah of Rostov; these were actually all the facts available to the medieval biographer. He converted a routine mention of Isaiah' presence in Kiev in 1089 into a tale of magical instant flight from Rostov to Kiev and back. However, the year and circumstances of Isaiah' death remain unknown.[3] Life of Isaiah of Rostov exists in two versions; the second and larger version incorporates long quotes from earlier chronicles and scriptures and does not add anything to biography itself. 19th century historians attributed the first, brief, version to 13th century Rostov chronists. According to contemporary authors, it was actually compiled around 1474, the year of canonization.[3]

Iveron Icon of the Bogodoritsa

ndvanderhoofven — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:51:30 CDT

From: http://molonlabe70.blogspot.com/2009/10/translation-of-iveron-icon-of-mother-of.html

Translation of the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God to Moscow

Commemorated on October 13

The Iveron Icon of the Mother of God, located on Mount Athos, has been glorified by many miracles. Accounts of the wonderworking image were spread throughout Russia by pilgrims. His Holiness Patriarch Nikon (then still Abbot of the Novospasky monastery) asked Abbot Pachomius of the Iveron Monastery on Mt Athos, (who was in Moscow collecting alms for the Athonite monasteries) to supply a copy of the wonderworking Iveron Icon of the Most Holy Theotokos.

The Athonite monk Iamblichos painted the copy of the Iveron Icon, and after a year the icon was taken to Moscow, accompanied by monks of Athos. On October 13, 1648 it was solemnly greeted by a multitude of the people. The Iveron Icon of the Russian Orthodox Church was also glorified by the Lord with many miracles (February 12).

The Iveron Icon is also commemorated on February 12, March 31, and Bright Tuesday.

Old Orthodox Wiki - Recently Updated Pages

Blessed John the Merciful of Rostov

Questions about Nil Sorsky

The Culture of Old Believers of Baltic States

No Longer Numbered Among the Nations

Kursk Root Icon

The Wonderworking Kursk Root Icon of Our Lady of the Sign

Former Alabama pastor charged with sex abuse of boys

The Wall of Shame

Russian Old Believer communities

Oddities of St. John of Kronstadt

Metropolitan Peter

External links

Catholicos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Armenian Church Divine Liturgy

[edit] The Transubstantial and Sacrificial Nature of the Badarak

The Armenian Liturgy Refutes Protestantism

A Brief Introduction to Armenian Christian Literature

Prokhor Lebednik

Alipy of the Caves

Ilya Muromets

Contents

Ilya in byliny

Legendary stature

Ilya Muromets depictions

Kuksha of the Kiev Near Caves

Hieromartyr and Venerable Kuksha of the Kiev Near Caves

Isaiah of Rostov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iveron Icon of the Bogodoritsa

Translation of the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God to Moscow