What was the cause of the schism in the Russian Church in the 17th century? #

The schism began with Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov’s desire to reform the Russian Church through Patriarch Nikon, modeling it on contemporary Greek and Ukrainian practices.

The 17th-century reforms affected not just a narrow circle of specialists but every member of the Church. They touched upon familiar and deeply ingrained elements: the sign of the cross, the name of the Savior, the Creed, and well-known prayers and books, such as the Psalter.

The real objectives of the reform were not ecclesiastical but political. The goal was not so much to eliminate or correct errors in church books—something the Russian people largely agreed with—but to change and unify all the rites and customs of the Russian Church according to the models of the Greek and Little Russian (Ukrainian) Churches. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was captivated by the idea of becoming the ruler of all the Orthodox in the East, akin to the Byzantine emperors.

At that time, neither the Greeks nor the Ukrainians had independent states. The Greeks were under Turkish rule, and the Ukrainians were under the Poles. For these groups to seamlessly integrate into a unified state, it was necessary to ensure that no significant differences existed between their church traditions and those of the Russian Church. However, the unification was carried out not according to Russian Church traditions but based on those who had been under the influence of heretics. Naturally, this sparked protests within Russian society. The Greek Church had signed the Union of Florence with the Catholics in 1439, and a similar union was concluded at Brest-Litovsk in 1596. Since then, anyone from these territories, whether clergy or lay refugees, fell under suspicion regarding the purity of their faith. After the Time of Troubles in the early 17th century, a series of anti-Latin councils were held in Moscow. The baptismal practices of immigrants from Ukraine and Belarus (whether by immersion or sprinkling) and Greek prayers were scrutinized. Only after such checks were Greek and Little Russian clergy allowed to serve in the Russian Church. During this period, the idea of “Moscow as the Third Rome” took hold: “Two Romes have fallen, and a fourth shall not be.” The Russian Church bore the burden of safeguarding the purity of Orthodoxy. Now, however, there was a proposal to change everything in the Russian Church according to the practices of those the Russians themselves had previously scrutinized for orthodoxy.

But that was not all. Following the reform, it was not enough to adopt questionable practices; it was also necessary to anathematize all the rites and customs of the Russian Church as heretical. The reformers claimed that everything in the Russian Church was wrong, alleging that our forefathers did not know how to pray, make the sign of the cross, or even pronounce the name of God correctly. The very idea of the Third Rome was rejected. Everything, down to the smallest details, now had to be done as the Greeks did—those who had recently come to Moscow as beggars now became teachers of the Church. The same applied to Ukraine, where throughout the 18th century, only Ukrainians were appointed as bishops. Naturally, those with a shred of conscience who were unafraid of persecution stood against this “reform,” which was essentially the execution of the Russian Church. As the holy martyr Archpriest Avvakum said:

“They have plundered my Mother Church, and should I remain silent?” — Holy Martyr Archpriest Avvakum

As a result, a resistance movement arose against the destruction of the Russian Church, and its participants faced severe persecution. When it was impossible to silence all dissenters, they were declared schismatics and state criminals. Thus, the schism in the Russian Church came to pass.

— Priest Yevgeny Gureyev