Archpriest Avvakum on Prayer Outside the Temple
For centuries, Old Believers were able to perform divine services in the most constrained conditions. But the coronavirus epidemic has shown that 30 years of existence in relatively comfortable conditions have greatly affected these skills. We offer our readers material dedicated to the views of the holy martyr Archpriest Avvakum on divine services that can be conducted outside the walls of a church, for example, at home or in even more extreme circumstances.
The views of Archpriest Avvakum on liturgics and prayer are closely connected with his personal prayer and liturgical practice. In turn, Avvakum’s views, although not representing a complete coherent system, had a strong influence on the theory and practice of spiritual life in subsequent generations of Old Believers of various accords. Therefore, studying Avvakum’s prayer and liturgical views, using tools from both historical science and psychology, seems important.
For Archpriest Avvakum, not only prayer life in general, but also the daily liturgical cycle, forms an integral part of a Christian’s life.
Nevertheless, Avvakum’s liturgical practice is not rigidly tied to the liturgical space of the church (with the exception of the Liturgy, which canonically cannot be performed outside the church).
Particularly noteworthy is Avvakum’s testimony about his own liturgical life in conditions of exile: “Walking along, or dragging a sled, or fishing, or chopping wood in the forest, or doing something else, I recite the rule at that time—vespers, matins, or the hours—whatever comes up… And riding in a sled on Sundays at stopping places, I sing the entire church service, and on weekdays, riding in the sled, I sing; sometimes even on Sundays while riding, I sing.”
This situation was undoubtedly forced upon Avvakum. But at the same time, such a—albeit forced—freedom from the obligatory liturgical space is very important for Avvakum’s liturgical thinking overall.
It is precisely this freedom that allows Avvakum to lead a fairly full spiritual life practically in any conditions. Describing one episode of his imprisonment, Avvakum writes: “Sitting in darkness, I bowed to the four directions, not knowing east from west.”
Of course, according to the rules, Avvakum should pray facing east, but the inability to orient correctly does not stop him. He prays anyway!
With the same simple directness, yet fully in accordance with his convictions, Avvakum approaches his own priestly actions, which can also be performed in any conditions, as if in passing. For example, Avvakum writes: “I got up, found the epitrachelion in the mud and discovered the holy oil. After praying to God and censing, I anointed the infant with oil and blessed him with the cross.”
As we have already noted, Avvakum sees his Christian duty—and that of his spiritual children—in the maximum possible fulfillment, under conditions of persecution, of the prayer rule, including, where possible, the services of the daily liturgical cycle. Eschatological times and persecutions must in no way weaken prayer and liturgical discipline.
Avvakum writes to Morozova: “It seems to me that you have grown lazy about nighttime prayer. That is why I say this to you with joy—recalling the Gospel: ‘When they revile you and drive you out, rejoice on that day and leap for joy: for behold, your reward is great in heaven.’” Thus, it becomes clear that soteriology, eschatology, and liturgical practice are closely interconnected in Avvakum’s spiritual system.
Perhaps the desire for a full liturgical life in any circumstances (an intellectual and psychological need) also explains Avvakum’s famous statements about the possibility, with certain reservations, of accepting sacraments from newly ordained priests. After all, for Avvakum, as we noted, the liturgical rule is more important than the external conditions of its performance.
If necessary, one should only partially adapt to the circumstances: “If, due to necessity, you cannot obtain a priest, then confess your sin to your skilled brother, and God will forgive you, seeing your repentance, and then commune of the Holy Mysteries with the prayer rule. Keep the reserved Lamb with you. If on the road or at work, or in any circumstance outside the church, sigh before the Lord and, as said above, having confessed to a brother, commune of the holiness with a pure conscience: it will be good!”
At the same time, Avvakum strives to harmoniously combine necessary simplification with fidelity to the canons. “A good overseer baptized my daughter Xenia. She was born while still with Pashkov, but Pashkov did not give me peace or oil, so she remained unbaptized for a long time—later he baptized her. I myself read the prayer over my wife and baptized the children with the godfather—the overseer, and my eldest daughter was godmother, while I was the priest for them. In the same way, I baptized my son Afanasy and, serving the Liturgy on the Mezen, communed him. And I myself confessed and communed my children, except for my wife; there is a rule about that—it is permitted to do so.”
The forced simplification, under conditions of persecution, exile, and imprisonment, in certain aspects of performing divine services and sacraments in no way means that liturgical actions became less sacred for Avvakum.
Everything related to divine services is undoubtedly holy for him. Any violation of liturgical discipline by anyone, any church disorder, provokes an immediate and sharp reaction from Avvakum: “The archbishop assigned me a place in Tobolsk. There great troubles befell me at the church: in a year and a half, five sovereign’s decrees were issued against me, and one certain deacon from the archbishop’s court, Ivan Struna, even shook my soul. The archbishop left for Moscow, and without him, instructed by the devil, he attacked me: he wanted to unjustly torment the deacon Anthony of my church. Anthony fled from him and ran to me in the church. That same Ivan Struna, gathering people, came to me in the church one day—while I was singing vespers—and burst into the church, grabbing Anthony by the beard on the kliros. At that moment, I closed and locked the church doors and let no one in—only he, Struna, was spinning in the church like a demon. And I, leaving vespers, sat him with Anthony in the middle of the church on the floor and soundly whipped him with a strap for the church disturbance.”
It is important to note that Avvakum was distinguished by his faith in the power of prayer: “In ancient times, grace worked through an ass with Balaam, and with the martyr Julian—a lynx, and with Sisinnius—a deer: they spoke with a human voice. God, wherever He wills, overcomes the order of nature. Read the life of Theodore of Edessa, and there you will find: even a harlot raised the dead. It is written in the Nomocanon: the Holy Spirit does not ordain all through laying on of hands, but works through all except heretics. They also brought mad women to me: I, as usual, fasted myself and did not let them eat, celebrated molebens, anointed them with oil, and acted as I knew how; and the women became sane and healthy in Christ.”
For Avvakum, it seems entirely natural that God, who acted in the lives of biblical heroes and great saints, acts in exactly the same way in his own life. Avvakum feels no insurmountable distance between himself and the great spiritual ascetics of the past.
He believed that God would respond to his sincere prayers. At the same time, Avvakum is driven precisely by faith, not by conceit or an illusion of his own infallibility: “With tears and water I sprinkle and anoint with oil, having sung molebens in the name of Christ, and the power of God drives demons away from people… not according to my worthiness—no, not at all—but according to the faith of those who come.” Moreover, in response to prayer and constant observance of the rule, Avvakum expects help in everyday life and daily affairs. Avvakum considers it important to mention that he blesses his hens: “I sang a moleben, sanctified water, sprinkled and censed the hens; then I let them loose in the forest, made a trough for them to eat from, and sprinkled it with water…”
What is even more interesting is that Avvakum believes that, with the proper attitude toward prayer and divine services, God will act in the lives of other people as well. Furthermore, Avvakum believes that God expects spiritual discipline from others. “And I was commanded to tell Pashkov that he too should sing vespers and matins, then God would give fair weather, and the grain would grow, otherwise there were incessant rains; the barley was like hay in a small patch—just a day or two before Peter’s day—it grew quickly but had begun to rot from the rain. I told him about vespers and matins, and he began to do so; God gave fair weather, and the grain ripened at once. A miracle indeed! Sown late, yet it ripened early. But again, the poor man began to act cunningly in God’s affairs. The next year he sowed a lot, but an unusual rain poured down, water overflowed from the river and flooded the field, washing everything away, including our dwellings. Before that, water had never come there, and even the foreigners marveled. See: as soon as he mocked God’s work and went his own way, God turned to him with an unusual wrath!”
What, then, are the sources of Avvakum’s views on prayer and liturgical life?
First of all, attention should be paid to the childhood years of the future archpriest, when his personality was being formed. Undoubtedly, the example of his mother played a great role for Avvakum: “My mother was a faster and a woman of prayer, always teaching me the fear of God.” This is the only characteristic of his mother given by Avvakum, which makes it especially revealing. It was precisely his mother’s prayer life that, apparently, served as the pattern for his own spiritual practice and the basis for forming corresponding stereotypes of thinking and behavior.
It is important to note not only the activity and regularity of the young Avvakum’s prayer life but also its significance for the future spiritual leader. It is clear that from the beginning, prayer was perceived by him not as a burdensome religious duty but as an inner spiritual and psychological need. The fear of death is thus overcome; in other words, through prayer practice, a most important psychological need for security is satisfied.
According to Maslow’s well-known theory, “after physiological needs are satisfied, their place in the motivational life of the individual is taken by needs of another level, which in the most general terms can be united into the category of security.” In other words, only basic physiological needs, such as overwhelming hunger, can dominate over the need for security under certain circumstances. If the most essential physiological needs are met, the next dominant is precisely the need for security. In Avvakum’s case, prayer from childhood was firmly associated with security.
Alongside childhood experiences and emotions, education plays a significant role in shaping a person’s convictions—in Avvakum’s case, self-education. Avvakum’s extensive reading is well known.
It should be noted that in the spiritual literature circulating in Muscovite Russia before the schism, the theme of properly performed divine services and correct prayer life is frequently raised. A few examples will suffice. In the Book of Faith, the ideal fulfiller of the words of Scripture is called one who “lives his entire life in prayers and the service of God.” And one of the key spiritually edifying chapters—Chapter 16, “On Church Singing”—is entirely devoted to questions of prayer and liturgical piety.
However, despite the great importance of the influence that books had on Avvakum during the period of his personal, spiritual, and pastoral formation, this factor cannot be considered decisive.
It is obvious that not everyone whose formation was influenced by the same circle of literary works as Avvakum developed views on prayer and liturgical spiritual life similar to his.
Among the factors that continued to influence the consolidation and development of Avvakum’s system of views on the liturgical life of a Christian should be included his personal experience in mature years. The process of spiritual and psychological personality formation continues throughout life. Accordingly, significant changes in views may occur. On the other hand, there may instead be a process of strengthening already existing ideas if they find additional confirmation in life experience.
As is easy to notice, even toward the end of his life, Avvakum continues to experience moments of feeling a special closeness to God during the performance of liturgical services. This very sensation of God’s presence gave Avvakum confidence in the correctness of his worldview and system of values in general, as well as his views on prayer and liturgics in particular.
Avvakum’s liturgical life, as we have noted, was connected, among other things, with the sensation of divine presence. This sensation, in turn, contributed to confidence in the correctness of his position as a defender of the old faith (true Orthodoxy) and to self-affirmation as a spiritual leader. For Avvakum, liturgical life is not an abstract action but a deeply personal experience connected with many aspects of his inner life and practical activity.
Author: Ivanov Mikhail Vyacheslavovich, candidate at the Department of Russian History, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Master of Theology