Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Structural analysis of Sobranija : Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox Newell, Claire Marion 1971

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1971_A8 N49.pdf [ 11.14MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0101824.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101824-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101824-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101824-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101824-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101824-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101824-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

A STRUCTURAL AHALYSIS OF SOBRAi-lMA: DOUKHOBOR AND RUSSIAN ORTHODOX by CLAIRE MARION NEWELL B.A., University of Brit ish Columbia, 1C69 and TERRELL POPOFF B.A., University of Brit ish Columbia, 1970 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Anthropology and Sociology Vie accept tin's thesis as conforming to the required standard Claire Newell Terrel l Popoff THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1971 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment o f the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make i t f ree l y ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fu r ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th i s thes i s for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th i s thes i s f o r f i nanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten permission. Department of Ant.hronr.1ngv and Soc io logy The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date September 20, 1971 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements fo r an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make i t f ree l y ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th i s thes i s for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th i s thes i s f o r f i nanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten permission. Department of Anthropology and Sociology The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date 20 September 1971 i i ABSTRACT Ttie thesis investigates the Doukhobor meeting which has been treated in the l i terature as the religious-economic-social-political inst i tut ion-Previous writers have assumed that Doukhobors do not differentiate their ac t iv i t ies . A fa i lure to recognize that there are several d ist inct kinds of meetings can lead to a definit ion of the community meeting as a "multi-purpose" meeting9 a definit ion which, the thesis maintains, is not con-sistent with the Doukhobor def init ion. In the l i terature the Doukhobor meeting has been referred to as the "community meeting," "prayer service," "business meeting" or sobranie. In determining the characteristics and the precise nature of the meeting, ambiguities arise. In the thesis one approach used to explain the varia-tions in the descriptions of a sobranie is the reconstruction of a meeting as i t took place in the nineteenth century. Discrepancies between the accounts can, in part, be understood in terms of deviations from the his -"• y.) torical prototype. Some variations peculiar to three Doukhobor factions can be explained by historical developments within each of the separate groups. However, a comparison with the historical accounts does not com-pletely explain the differences that are apparent among meetings presently held. It is therefore necessary to consider other ways of explaining the variations among these meetings. This thesis argues that the "community meeting" does not encompass such a diverse range of act iv i t ies as is suggested in the l i terature. Further, i t is demonstrated that Doukhobors distinguish several types of meetings which are held on separate occasions and that unique terms are H i designated to each of these meetings. By constructing a folk taxonomy of gatherings i t is shown that Doukhobors distinguish several types of special purpose meetings. On the basis of th i s , i t is argued that there are two levels of contrast to the term sobranie and that Doukhobors differentiate the Sobranie or 'Community Meeting' 1 from the molenie or 'prayer meeting.' The various Doukhobor meetings are subsequently c l a s s i -f ied according to the participants' categorization of ac t i v i t i e s . This has important implications with regard to the manner in which meetings and act iv i t ies are c lass i f ied by the various Doukhobor factions. There is a presumed historical relationship between the Doukhobors and the Russian Orthodox Church, implying that there are, or were, connec-tions between the two. Given that Doukhobors dissented from the Russian Orthodox Church, differences are assumed by def in i t ion, while s imi lar i t ies may either persist or not. When a relationship can be shown to exist between some act iv i t ies and others, this not only demonstrates the connec-tion between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Doukhobors but also suggests hypotheses which explain the behavior of the latter in terms of the former. Because Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox members are both Russian speakers, a comparison of their taxonomies is made to ascertain whether or not they order their meetings and act iv i t ies in a similar manner and Vfhether they are making similar c lass i f icat ions with either the same or different terms. Br ief ly , the concern of the thesis l i e s with the act iv i t ies which lThe dist inction between sobranie and Sobranie is an analytical one and 1s discussed at length In the thesis. 1v occur at a Doukhobor Sunday meeting. The thesis also examines the terms used to describe the act iv i t ies and the meetings. Comparisons are made among the meetings held by the various Doukhobor factions and these in turn are compared with the Sunday meeting of the Russian Orthodox Church. V TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY PAGES T 1 L>1 G 0306 • O 0 * » a o s « o * a o « » o o a o a o o o a » i > o * i>J Sl*l^ ClCt oooo6aoooao*a»ooae*oeoao«ooooa Tab! e of Contents . . . . . . . . l_ 1 S C Q I Cl L> 1 (} S • a » o o o a a a a e a e a a e « a « » a o o « List of Diagrams and Figures . . . . . . Acknow! edrpents Hote to the Graduate Studies Corrsnittee i i i v v i i v l i i ix IiiTuODUCTIOr! A. Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. The Transliteration . . . 0 0 0 0 a 1 4 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A a iS SUrnP"b 1 01 i S oooeeooso«o»a*Ooa«oooo* B. Procedure CHAPTER II. HISTORY OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH . CHAPTER III. HISTORY OF THE DOUKHOCORS CHAPTER IV. C O N T E M P O R A R Y DOUKHOBOR MEETINGS A . Setting 1. Exterior Setting . . . . . . . . . . 2. Interior Setting B . Participants 0 • ! J V^ G SS ooaoaaeooeoooaaaoaoaaaoaoaeoo 0 S I C »aaeoaeooaasaD0oooeea«ooeao«o E. Sequence of Events F. Historical Prayer Meeting . . . . . . . . . • a a • 1 CHAPTER V b. C. F. . CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN ORTHODOX SERVICE 5) 0 C C 1 li 0 aoaeaavaaaaaoai 1. Exterior Setting . 2. Interior Setting . Participr.nts . . . . . . . . . L.' V* G S S i > o O D O O O « a o i > a o a o B M U S I C oeaeoaoaaaoaaaoo Sequence of Events . . . Chances in the Divine Liturgy . 13 21 37 47 48 49 52 5G G 3 70 82 oG 102 108 IOC l l u 125 CHAPTER VI. DISCUSSION A. Taxonomy of Doukhobor Gatherings 13( B. Taxonomy of Russian Orthodox Gatherings 143 C. Categorization of the Characteristics of Doukhobor Meetings 117 D. Categorization of the Characteristics of Divine Liturgy Spatial Usage and the Properties of Doukhobor Meetings . 150 162 F. 6!. I!. APPLHDIX Lcumenical CounciIs B . Excerpts from the l i terature containing the word sobranie C. Modus Operandi n\ r\ccnn\f ^ . ;L«V- *Js3; .i • I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .00.0... . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v i i LIST OF TABLES PAGE TABLE I. CHARACTERISTICS OF HOLE.iIE AND SOBRANIE 136 TABLE II. CHARACTERISTICS OF HERBISON'S VIEW OF SOBRANYA 139 TABLE III. CATEGORIZATION OF HERBISON'S CHARACTERISTICS ACCORDING TO MOLENIE AND SOBRANIE 140 TABLE IV. CLASSIFICATION OF CHARACTERISTICS WITHIN THE 'THREE TRADITIONAL DOUKHOBOR MEETINGS' 152 TABLE V. CATEGORIZATION OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF MOLENIE AND SOBRANIE 156 v i i i LIST OF DIAGRAMS DIAGRAM 1. DIAGRAM 2. DOUKHOBOR MEETIMPS HALLS 53 PLAN OF A RUSSIA;' ORTHODOX CHURCH BASED UPON HOLY TRINITY CHURCH 87 DIAGRAM 3. USE OF SPACE AT SUNDAY MEETINGS 164 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. FOLK TAXONOMY OF DOUKHOBOR GATHERINGS 133 FIGURE 2. TAXONOMY OF RUSSIAN ORTHODOX GATHERINGS 140 FIGURE 3. TRI DUXOBORCESKIX OBRADA— 'THREE TRADITIONAL bOUKKGDGR MEETINGS': •PRAYER MEETIMS,1 1 WEDDINGs' 'FUNERAL1 . . . . 149 ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We'wish to extend gratitude to a l l those Doukhobors who were most hospitable and spent many hours talking with the researchers. Special acknowledgment is given to Peter Legebokoff and William Sukhorev for their comments in the early stages of the investigation and to El i Popoff for his continued interest and assistance. A study of the Russian Orthodox Churches in Vancouver would not have been possible without the help of Bishop Antonuk and Father Vladimir. In particular, we wish to thank Father Vladimir for his patience and his incis ive explanations of the Russian Orthodox Church. Thanks are given to Professor A. Harshenin, of Slavonic Studies, University of Brit ish Columbia, who offered his help with the t rans l i t -eration. We are also indebted to Drs. Michael Ames, Werner Cohn, Harry Hawthorn and El 1 i kong'as fiaranda, of the Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of Brit ish Columbia, for their crit icisms and suggestions. Dr. Cohn deserves added recognition for his encouragement and discerning comments over the years. None of these people are., however, responsible for any errors or obscurities. NOTE TO THE GRADUATE STUDIES COMMITTEE ON THE JOINT AUTHORSHIP The purpose of this note is to explain the authorship of the various chapters of the thesis. Parts of the research were carried out indepen-dently by one of the two authors and in these cases that author assumes sole responsibi l ity for the material. An indication of the divis ion of labor is given here. The Assumptions (Chapter I, Section A), History of the Orthodox Church (Chapter II), Contemporary Doukhobor Meetings (Chapter IV), Taxonomy of Doukhobor Gatherings (Chapter VI, Section A), Categor-ization of Characteristics of the Divine Liturgy (Chapter VI, Section D), and Spatial Usage and the Properties of Doukhobor Meetings (Chapter VI, Section E) are the responsibi l ity of Claire Newell. The Procedure (Chapter Is Section B), History of the Doukhobors (Chapter III), Contem-porary Russian Orthodox Service (Chapter V), Taxonomy of Russian Orthodox Gatherings (Chapter VI 9 Section B) s Categorization of Characteristics of Doukhobor Meetings (Chapter VI, Section C), and Spatial Usage and the Properties of the Divine Liturgy (Chapter VI, Section F) are the respon-s i b i l i t y of Terrel l Popoff. Both authors acknowledge responsibi l ity for the concluding sections of the f inal chapter (Comparison and Summary). 1 PREFACE •A. Outline The introduction to the thesis is found in Chapter I. This chapter outlines the main premises on which the study is based and the theoretical frameworks used in discussing the material in the other chapters. The lat ter part of this chapter wil l discuss the methods of col lecting data and the procedure of the fieldwork. A history of the Russian Orthodox Church wil l be given in the second chapter. There are numerous volumes devoted exclusively to the history of Orthodoxy and Chapter II presents only a historical sketch which is intended to provide the context out of which'both Russian Orthodoxy and Doukhoborism emerged. It should be emphasized that while care has been taken in compiling the historical outl ine, not a l l dates and events have been fu l l y documented. As the interest of the thesis l i e s primarily with certain social occasions and behaviors, church doctrine and beliefs could only be treated superf ic ia l ly. The chapter dealing with Doukhobor history follows that of the Orthodox Church because Orthodoxy is h i s tor ica l ly prior to Doukhoborism. In Chapter III the Doukhobor history has been condensed and specif ic dates and events, as well as bel iefs , have been sketched to f ac i l i t a te compar-isons with the Russian Orthodox Church. If a s t r i c t temporal outline were to be followed, a description of the Russian Orthodox Sunday service would preceed that of Doukhobor meet-ings. However, as mentioned before, the thesis is concerned with Russian Orthodoxy only insofar as i t pertains to Doukhoborism. In order to give 2 the reader a frame of reference with which to follow the description of the Orthodox divine l i t u r gy , 1 i t was f e l t that the account of the Doukhobor meetings should preceed that of the Orthodox. The descriptions of the Doukhobor meetings which constitute Chapter IV are presented as " typical " meetings. They arc- considered to be typical because9 while they are the account of no one individual meetings they are a general account of any meeting which takes place. It is argued that the same pattern is repeated at the meetings. The chapter h?.s been sub-divided into several sections including: sett ing, participants 3 dress, music, sequence of events and historical prayer meeting. The account of the prayer meeting of the past is placed after the description of the contemporary meetings for., unlike the f i r s t section of the chapter, i t is a reconstruction based upon incomplete secondary accounts and therefore i t cannot be fu l l y detailed. These tv/o main sections are meant to be read in conjunction with one another as each provides a framework with which the other can be better understood. The comprehensive descriptions which comprise Chapter IV were in -cluded for two principal reasons. P.i the present time no complete des-criptions of an entire sobranie are available and, as has already been remarked, this lias led to inconsistencies between our own observations and the accounts in the l i terature. It was f e l t that the descriptions would also provide suff ic ient information to allow the reader to evaluate the subsequent analyses. ^Sty l i s t ica l ly i t is consistent to use lower case letters in writing divine l i turgy. It is recognized that the gloss for this service i s usually capital ized but the reason for tiie use of lower case letters wil l become apparent in the Discussion (Chapter VI). 3 The f i f t h chapter is a description of a contemporary Orthodox divine l i turgy service in Vancouver. The description considers setting, part ic-ipants, dress, music and sequence of events. Details which are recurrent and typical of a l l divine l i turgy services are outlined under these head-ings. It is intended that the description of a Doukhobor Sunday meeting wil l be kept in mind as this chapter is being read and that particular attention wi l l be given to s imi lar i t ies and differences between the two occasions. While i t is recognized that there were many changes in the divine l i turgy during the formative years of Orthodoxy, Orthodox doctrine main-tains that the service has remained unchanged for the last several cen-turies. In considering the divine l i turgy, the f inal section of Chapter V centers on the period beginning with the eighteenth century to parallel the time when Doukhobors became an identif iable group and began holding their own type of meetings. This section makes reference to the a l ter -ations since the eighteenth century and does not repeat the description in the f i r s t part of the chapter, which might be re-read in conjunction with the alterations found in this section. The f inal chapter draws largely upon the tv/o preceeding chapters, which were descriptive, and the f i r s t chapter, which was theoretical. In Chapter VI particular social occasions are examined and theoretical models are constructed and applied in an effort to explain the behavior on those occasions. 4 B. Transliteration In spell ing Russian words we have adhered to a transl i teration system which indicates the Russian spell ing and not the pronunciation. It is especially important to make this clear because there are decided variations in pronunciation between Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox speak-ers. Since the Roman alphabet has fewer letters than the Russian C y r i l l i c scr ipt , d i ac r i t i c marks , ') and two-letter combinations have been used to indicate certain C y r i l l i c le t ters . The only exceptions to this procedure are cases where a particular spel l ing has become conventional in English. For example, the spel l ing of the name of Peter Vasl l levich Verlgln follows a conventional English form rather than a transl i teration which would read Piter Vasil'evlfc Verigin. The following Is a key for the transl i teration used throughout the thesis. C y r i l l i c Trans l i t - C y r i l l i c Trans l i t - C y r i l l i c Trans l i t -eration eration eration a a K k X X 6 b Jl 1 u c B V M m H NT C r g H n 111 s R d O 0 m sc e e n P II e P r H y ac I c s h • 3 z T t 3 e H i y u K> ju a j f ja Russian words which have been transliterated into English are underlined and their glosses are indicated by single quotation marks. Foreign words, other than Russian words, are marked by double quotation marks and are underlined. At the end of the thesis, a glossary of the most frequently used Russian words is provided for the reader. 6 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Assumptions It is the objective of the thesis to be able to explain hov; certain events co l lect ive ly constitute particular social occasions such that pre-dictions about those social occasions can be made.1 A social occasion can be discussed in terms of any number of a great variety of perspectives. For example i t could be viewed in terms of soc ia l , rel ig ious, p o l i t i c a l , economic or legal factors, ad infinitum. Because i t is impossible to consider a l l perspectives at once, any investigation must necessarily concentrate upon certain factors. Insofar as the thesis focuses upon folk taxonomies, spatial configurations and the dist inct ive features of occasions, the thesis is selective in i t s approach. It must be recognized, however, that while the perspectives are selective, the data presented has not i n i t i a l l y been re-organized to substantiate particular hypotheses. Therefore lengthy descriptions of the occasions have been included, allowing the reader to follow the sequence of the events. The method of data col lection has also been given in order that the limitations of material can be revealed. This is intended to enable the reader to accept or challenge the authors' analyses on the basis of the material presented. In the thesis, the three procedures (the construction of folk taxonomies, spatial configurations and dist inct ive features) wil l be used to examine the same social occasion. If similar patterns emerge from each procedure, ty def init ion of a "social occasion" follows. 7 then i t wil l be suggested that they support one another and i t wil l be assumed that similar patterns can be taken as confirmation of one another. An occasion wil l be defined as the coming together of individuals at a specified time and place for a specified purpose or purposes. The beginning of the occasion is marked by the arrival of individuals at an appointed building and the termination of that occasion is indicated by the departure of the individuals from that building. In speaking about "socia l " occasions i t is assumed that more than one individual is invol-ved. A further assumption is made that the individuals, as members of the same culture, act in accordance with shared knowledge about those occasions. Since i t is taken as given that individuals come together at a particular time and place with some common understanding of the occa-sion, i t must also be taken as given that they meet for a purpose that i s , to some extent, shared. But i t l ies beyond the design of this thesis to consider why individuals participate in a given situation. The em-phasis is upon the act iv i t ies of individuals as participants in the social occasion rather than upon their motivations for participating. Language is communicative. Customary act iv i t ies and behaviors can also be considered means of communication. The thesis is predicated upon the premise that there is a logical connection between language and be-havior in that people's behavior in certain social occasions corresponds with their conceptual categorization of those occasions. This relat ion-ship can be demonstrated by considering the terms used to describe and categorize particular act iv i t ies and by then examining those same act iv-i t ies with respect to the physical setting in which they take place. For the purposes of the thesis i t has been assumed that physical space, in and of i t s e l f , has no meaning and that i t is only attributed meaning by 8 those who use i t . An attempt wil l be made to demonstrate a correspon-dence between the way act iv i t ies are categorized and the way space is ut i l i zed since i t is hypothesized that there is a correspondence between the categorization of act iv i t ies and the use of space. From the above discussion i t should not be inferred that the authors wil l undertake an analysis of everything that is said and done on a par-t icular occasion; rather, as previously mentioned, the thesis is concerned with the act iv i t ies that take place within the framework set by the social occasion and the manner in which the act iv i t ies are c lass i f ied by the participants involved. It is assumed that there is a fundamental difference between a participant's view of his act iv i t ies and an observer's view of those same ac t i v i t i e s . It will be suggested that in order to be able to explain act iv i t ies and events i t is necessary to take into consideration how they are defined by the participant. This is based on the premise that d i f fe r -ent cultures perceive their world di f ferent ly. This is not so much a search for some generalized unit of behavioral analysis as i t is an attempt to understand the organizing principles underlying behavior. It is assumed that each people has a unique system for perceiving and organizing material phenomena—things3 events, behavior, and emotions (Goodenough 1957). The object of the study is not these material phenomena themselves, but the way they are organized in the minds of men. Cultures then are not material phenomena,; they are cognitive organizations of material phenomena.2 In his classic work Language5 Thought and Reality, Benjamin Lee Whorf hypothesizes that the material world is dissected along l ines la id down ^Stephen Tyler, "Introduction," Cognitive Anthropology, edited by S. Tyler, iiew York, Molt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969, p. 3. 9 by one's native language. 3 Within this hypothesis is contained the idea that cultures, and therefore languages, differentiate those things which are important to them. Given different environmental and social conditions, there wil l be a resultant variation in the phenomena considered to be important. It is a logical extension of this hypothesis to advocate that there is a direct correspondence between the relat ive importance of ma-ter ia l phenomena and the degree to which they are distinguished by the language.^ Consequently, l inguist ic differentiations wil l vary from culture to culture and members of those cultures wil l perceive the world di f ferent ly. This can become an important issue in cross-cultural studies where the observer is faced with the problem of conveying the participant's terms and concepts from one language and culture to another. In undertaking the research, the participant's point of view was formulated by taking into consideration those Doukhobors who regularly attended the meetings. At Doukhobor meetings there is lay participation only and since a l l of the l a i ty are potential participants i t can be assumed that they have a common knowledge of the ac t iv i t ie s . In the case of the Russian Orthodox Church, where roles are inst i tut ional ly d i f f e r -entiated and specialized,5 the preceedinq assumption was modified for 3B. L. Whorf, Language, Thought and Reality, U.S.A., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1956, p. 213. ^Berl in, Breedlove and Raven apply this hypothesis to the naming of plant categories among the Tzeltal-speaking Mexicans. Their findinqs support the hypothesis that the more important ( i .e. useful) a plant is to the speakers, the more i t wil l be differentiated lex ica l ly . See their a r t i c le "Folk Taxonomies and Biological C lass i f icat ion" in S. Tyler ' s Cognitive Anthropology, pp.60-66. phrase was adapted from Bryan Wilson's a r t i c le "Analysis of Sect Development" in American Sociological Review, Vol. 24, February 1959, pp. 3-15. 10 practical purposes. Because of the formal training of a priest and be-cause the nature of his role is such that the act iv i t ies of a l l others are dependent upon i t , i t was assumed that the priest would have a know-ledge of a l l ac t i v i t i e s . It was from the pr iest ' s point of view that the participant's perspective was formulated in this case. This is not meant to suggest, however, that we are proposing that the other participants share with the priest an identical understanding of the ac t i v i t ie s . It is recognized that the congregation's point of view may be of interest in understanding the act iv i t ies of their meetings but i t was f e l t that this area of investigation.was well beyond the scope of the thesis. In conveying the participant's concepts cross-cultural ly, the ob-server can only formulate his interpretation and/or analysis of what he believes the participant means. It is therefore recognized that ethno-graphic descriptions are formulated part ia l ly by the participant and part ia l ly by the observer.G Implicit in the preceeding discussion is the assumption that the participant has some understanding of the act iv i t ies in which he is involved. The social scientist can then be seen as a r t i c -ulating the participant's constructs and extrapolating from them. Using "secondary constructs" i t is possible to explain material phenomena which are ultimately defined by the participant. It is further assumed that act iv i t ies are independent of the par-t icu lar individuals who participate in them. It is possible to focus upon the constants in a set of act iv i t ies and to be able to explain what wi l l 6 This is a point brought out by Alfred Schutz in The Problem of Social Reality where he uses the term 'secondary constructs^ (ColTected Papers Vol. I T h e Problem of Social Reality, edited by Maurice i'atanson, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1962.) Abraham Kaplan makes a similar dist inction when he refers to "act meaning and action meaning." (The  Conduct of Inquiry, San Francisco, Chandler Publishina Company, 1964j p. 34.) 11 occur, regardless of the particular individual who performs that act iv i ty . In relation to the thesis, there are two points which should be made clear. On the one hand, the rules governing act iv i t ies and events, l i ke the rules of grammar, are consistently applied although individuals may not be aware of them. On the other hand, the rules for predicting events and act iv i t ies wi l l be derived and constructed from the rules applied (either exp l i c i t l y or impl ic i t ly) by the participants. This is necessary because i t has been previously argued that different cultures categorize their world differently and that this must be taken into account. Orthodoxy was introduced into Russia in the tenth century and soon became the State rel ig ion. The thesis reviews the history of certain beliefs of the Orthodox Church and certain of i t s services. However the soc ia l , economic, and po l i t ica l implications of these factors are not considered in the thesis. This l imitation also applies to the consider-ation of the Doukhobors and their history. While i t is postulated? that there may be a historical relationship between the Orthodox Church and the emergence of Doukhobors in Russia, i t is not possible to assume that the presence of the same t ra i t is always caused by the historical connection. The presence of some tra i t s may be due to diffusion while others may be the result of independent invention. ?It cannot be stated unequivocally that the Doukhobors and the Russian Orthodox Church were h is tor ica l ly related. Among historians the point of contention appears to be the degree to which Orthodoxy was assim-i lated by the people and not whether Orthodoxy was, in fact, assimilated. Some writers propose that as a result of the reforms introduced in the seventeenth century by Patriarch i'iikon there were controversies among Orthodox Christians over how their Orthodoxy was to be practiced. It is argued that irreconcilable positions led to the Church's condemnation'of some groups as heretical. Other authors maintain that Orthodoxy was never completely assimilated by the masses and that the development of schismatic groups and the Doukhobors can be attributed to a nominal profession of Orthodoxy and the continuance of pre-Christian practices. 12 It is argued that the historical connection between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Doukhobors helps to reduce the likelihood of spurious connections. As Boas remarks3 "The historical method has reached a sounder basis by abandoning the misleading principle of assuming connec-tions wherever s imi lar i t ies of cultures were found." 8 In establishing whether or not t ra i t s are related, i t is important to note that a characteristic will be considered similar when i t can be demonstrated that i t is present in both Orthodoxy and Doukhoborism. How-ever this does not permit one to further conclude that t ra i t s evident in both groups are necessarily equivalent. On an empirical l eve l , a charac-te r i s t i c wi l l be defined by the observer as similar only i f the character-i s t i c is observed in both groups; i t wi l l be defined as equivalent i f and only i f the characteristic shares a definit ion which is common to both sets of participants. For example, i f a particular form of bowing is observed in the Sunday meetings of both the Russian Orthodox and the Doukhobors, then this action wi l l be considered similar. If the partic-ipants' definit ion of this act iv i ty is shared, then the act iv i ty wil l be considered eguivalent. If a historical connection is assumed, and i f i t can be shown that there are equivalent and/or similar tra i ts among the Russian Orthodox and the Doukhobors, then i t can be suggested that the presence of t ra i t s among the Doukhobors can be explained in relation to those tra i t s found among the Russian Orthodox. In this section of the chapter we have thus far considered the main assumptions upon which the thesis has been premised. These assumptions ^Franz Boas, Race, Language and Culture, Hew York3 The Macmillan Company, 1948, p. 280. 13 are used in attempting to explain and define particular social occasions. Furthermore,, the act iv i t ies of two related groups are compared with a view to further explaining the act iv i t ies found within one of those groups. D. Procedure The col lection of data was governed by the assumptions set out in the preceeding section. This section wil l discuss how the data was gathered. It has been estimated 2 that at the present time there are 20,000 Doukhobors in Canada and that there are approximately 3,000 Doukhobors on the West Coast. Of those Doukhobors l iv ing in Greater Vancouver, approx-imately sixty attend sobran i ja l° there. When this study was i n i t i a l l y begun in 1968 there were two separate sobranija regularly held in Greater Vancouver. Of the sixty Doukhobors attending, roughly one half part ic-ipate in the meetings at Lockdale Hal l . This is a community hall located in Burnaby which is rented on Sunday afternoons by the Independent Doukhobors. When the Independent Doukhobors of Greater Vancouver f i r s t decided to form an organization in 1948 they met in a hall in Hew West-minster. H In 1S62 they agreed to change the location of their Sunday ^George Woodcock and Ivan Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, Toronto, Oxford University Press, 19G8, pp. 1-17; Koozma J . Tarasoff, In Search  of Brotherhood, The History of the Doukhobors, Vancouver, Mimeographed, 19G3, Vol. 3, p. 871 (Hereinafter referred to as In Search of Brotherhood)-and Harry B. Hawthorn (ed.), Doukhobors of BritisF~ColumbiaT~Vancouver, J. M. Dent and Sons, 1955, p. 9. ^The plurals of Russian words are transliterated. For example, the ending te is given -for i neuter noun in the nominative singular case while the plural ending for the same is j a . Thus the plural form of sobranie is sobranija, and molenie is moTenija. ^See Koozma Tarasoff, "A Study of Russian Organizations in the Greater Vancouver Area," Unpublished Raster's Thesis 5 University of Brit ish Columbia, 1963, pp. 149-82. 14 meetings to the hall in Burnaby, where they now continue to meet. Most of the remaining Doukhobors can be identif ied as members of Union of Spiritual Communities of Christ or Sons of Freedom. These latter two groups held their meetings jo in t ly in the basement of the Russian People's Home in East Vancouver. In the case of the Doukhobors who meet at the Russian People's Home, informal gatherings have been held spor-adical ly since the 1940's. Tarasoff reports that no regular Sunday services were held then but that Doukhobors did come together as a group on special occasions such as Petrov den' (Peter's Day, June 29). During the winter months of 1968 and 1969 sobranija were held weekly at the Russian People's Home. At that time those attending said they had met there the previous winter and that, prior to th is , sobranija had been held in private homes. The winter of 1969 saw the discontinuance of sobranija at the Russian People's Home. It has since been learned that there were several factors contributing to this termination of gatherings. One of the reasons given involved a conf l ic t of opinions over the purpose of the gathering. There were those who f e l t that the exclusive purpose of these gatherings should be praying and singing psalms. But there were others who f e l t that the discussion of business matters was also appropriate. Another controversial topic centered around the problem of who should act as the starosta or 'e lder. ' This was an important question for them as the position involved, among other things, contacting people when special occasions arose (e.g. funerals or evening meetings) and col lecting suff ic ient funds to rent the ha l l . There seems to have been yet another major issue that was also discussed at this time. Among the Doukhobors attending, dissatisfaction was expressed over the place where they met. The recurrent complaints about the overtones of the Russian 15 People's Home were again reiterated.12 Some people f e l t that the hall had po l i t i ca l a f f i l i a t ions with which they did not want to be associated. They also f e l t that the Russians frequenting the hall behaved contrary to Doukhobor ideals by smoking and drinking. No concensus had been attained after repeated discussions and the gatherings gradually ceased. At the present time (1971) no sobranija are held at the Russian People's Home. Some of the Doukhobors who formerly met at the Russian People's Home now attend the sobranija at Lockdale Hall with the Independent Doukhobors. However, while these people have been encouraged to attend the gatherings at Lockdale, tensions have appeared because the Indepen-dents have asked them to make formal application to join the Society of Doukhobors of Canada. Some of those who have come from the Russian People's Home feel strongly that Doukhobors are, and must remain, "free" to carry out their way of l i f e without belonging to any organization. Discussions at Lockdale Hall often revert back to this issue and those Doukhobors attending have not yet reached an agreement of opinion. The data in the chapters concerning the Doukhobors was collected mainly from November 1968 to March 1969 during which time the researchers interviewed a l l those Doukhobors in regular attendance. Interviews were held in the respondents' home. A series of open-ended questions were asked, to which the informant responded verbally. Discussions in Russian and/or English took place between the respondent and one of the inter-viewers. The task of the other interviewer was usually one of taking notes or, occasionally, of taping the conversation. Each interview lasted approx-imately two to four hours. There were twenty-six individuals, twelve l J-The following issues also appear in Tarasoff 's study of Russian organizations in Vancouver. 16 males and fourteen females, who were interviewed. Ages ranged from thirty-three years to eighty-four years, with an average age of sixty. Of these twenty-six individuals, fourteen were Independent Doukhobors, eight were members of the Union of Spiritual Communities of Christ and six were Sons of Freedom at that time. In addition to the research carried out in Vancouver, at the end of August 1969 approximately two weeks were spent in Grand Forks, Brit ish Columbia, interviewing three Doukhobor h i s t o r i a n s ^ using the available documents in the Iskra l ibrary, talking with Doukhobors and observing a wedding and funeral, as well as prayer meetings and community meetings. Subsequent interviews were conducted in the Spring of 1970 (January to Apr i l ) to c lar i fy and further investigate the findings of the previous years. Throughout 1970 and 1971 the re-searchers periodically attended gatherings at Lochdale Hal l . The Russian language is s t i l l spoken at a l l Doukhobor gatherings. Russian is also the language of conversation at gatherings in the Russian Orthodox Churches. However, the Russian Orthodox services are conducted in Old Church Slavonic. By the time Christ ianity was introduced into Russia in the tenth century, the doctrines and practices of Orthodoxy had been translated into the Bulgarian-Macedonian dia lect, a dialect which was in te l l i g ib le to Slavic people.14 This language has come to be known as Old Church Slavonic or Church Slavonic. To the present day the l i turg ica l 13This term is used to describe three Doukhobor individuals who have collected material about the Doukhobor history and have published ar t i c les . They are respected by Doukhobors in general as being author-i t ie s on their history. Peter Legebokoff is the present editor of Iskra, E l i Popoff is the of f ice administrator of the Union of Spiritual Commun-i t ies of Christ and William Sukhorev is the author of Istori ia  dukhobortsieve. 14 See Chapter II for a more comprehensive discussion of this point. 17 language has remained the same. Out of this ecclesiast ical language, modern Russian developed.* 5 Roman Jakobson states that Russian had be-come the l i terary language by the eighteenth century and was used for non-religious purposes. The Russian Orthodox Churches in Vancouver s t i l l perform their services in Church Slavonic. Since Old Church Slavonic is quite dist inct from modern Russian, i t is s a i d l S that most of the words chanted in the services are not understood by the congregation. The following discussion is intended only to demonstrate that the dialects of Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox speakers are related and mutu-a l l y i n te l l i g i b l e . At the same time, however, i t wil l be emphasized that there are marked differences between the two. Within the larger Canadian society, Doukhobors can be identif ied as a Russian speaking ethnic group. They are further differentiated from other Russians by their fa ith and doctrine as well as by their dist inct ive way of speaking the Russian language. Their dialect is characterized by a mixing and blending of the different dialects of their national language. 1 7 In his "Analysis of the Phonology of the Dukhobor Dialect," Harshenin observes that the Doukhobors lack several phonemes that are present in standard Russian, but that they possess additional phonemes absent from Russian. The use of these phonemes help to differentiate the t i ro . 1 8 The Russian phoneme g_, for examples is frequently substituted by the phoneme h_ in Doukhobor Russian. i^ Roman Jakobson, "On Russian Fairy Tales," in Structural ism A Reader, edited by M. Lane, London, Jonathan Cape, 1970, p. 136. l^The priests of the Russian Orthodox Churches in Vancouver and members of the congregation expressed this opinion. 1 7 A . P. Harshenin, "An Analysis of the Phonology of the Dukhobor Dialect," Master's Thesis, University of Brit ish Columbia, 1960, p. 15. ^Personal communication, Professor A. Harshenin. 18 to i l l u s t ra te , the Russian word gospodi (meaning 'Lord') is pronounced hospodi in Doukhobor Russian. Harshenin found that the two dialects are also distinguished by variations in morphological s syntactical and lexical factors. For instance a lexical difference appears in the use of the word maSina. In standard Russian as used by Russian Orthodox speakers, the v/ord masina denotes a car whereas in Doukhobor Russian the term denotes a tra in. This brief discussion was intended to show that as minority groups in Canada both Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox speakers share a common d ia lect , although there are Characteristics unique to each group. Many of the older people who attend the Doukhobor meetings and the Russian Orthodox services do not speak English while middle-aged people tend to speak both English and Russian at their respective meetings. Since the researchers were not completely fluent in Russian, interviews were sometimes conducted in both languages while at other times the aid of a translator was necessary. In interviewing Doukhobors both English and Russian were used, the f a c i l i t y of the interviewee and the type of infor-mation being e l i c i ted also governed the use of one particular language. Similar remarks apply to the discussions that took place with members and clergy of the Russian Orthodox In these cases however, the help of a translator was not used even though interviews were likewise conducted in both Russian and English. There are 13,761 Russian Orthodox in Canada according to the Canadian census of 1961, of which 1,509 reside in Vancouver. 1 9 From September 1970 to March 1971 the researchers attended the divine l i turgy services at three Orthodox Churches in Vancouver. When the divine l i turgy 1 9Census of Canada, 1961, Ottawa, Queen's Printer, 1952. "Population: Religious Denominations," Bulletin 1.2-6. services began at the Russian Orthodox Church on Forty-Third Avenue, the average congregation consisted of four males and thirteen females. '' By the end of the service the number of those in attendance had risen to nineteen for the males and to th i r ty - f ive for the females. These figures include those participating in the choir, the size of which averaged nineteen—nine of those being male and ten being female. In contrast, compared with the average of two children who vers present at this< Church, there were seven who attended Sunday services at the Orthodox Church on Campbell Avenue. Here the number of males also varied from the beginning of the service to the end. T;.=e number of males increased from eight to thirteen while the number of females varied from sixteen to twenty-two. These numbers include the individuals who sang in the choir. The mean size of the choir was ten, consisting of an enual number c f males and females. The Russian Orthodox Church on Thirteenth Avenue iiad the smallest congregation. On the average there were six males and nine females who macie up the congregation. The size of the choir fluctuated from two individuals, one of who was often the pr iest , to six. Of six choir mem-bers, two were males and four were females, during tiie period of study there were never any children seen at this Church. Of those assisting the priest or the bishop at the divine l iturgy services, there were always altar boys. At the Church on Thirteenth Avenue there was one altar boy although there v.'ere instances when he was ^'fhese figures are based on the total number of males and females at the Sunday service, divided by the number of Sunday services observed during the research period. This procedure has been used in calculating attendance figures at Russian Orthodox and Doukhobor meetings. 20 not present and the priest conducted the service without his assistance. Trie number of a l tar boys accompanying the priest at Campbell Avenue ranged from two to four. At the Church on Forty-Third Avenue the number of help-ers for the bishop varied between three and f ive. Of these, one helper ^ was always a subdeacon. Subdeacons were never seen assisting the priests at the other two Churches. The researchers were unable to interview the members who attended the Churches regularly. When members of the congregation were approached with questions about Orthodoxy or about the Sunday services, they always referred the researchers to the priest. The usual response given to the researchers, as non-members, was that i t was not up to a layman to explain such matters. One was invariably told to direct queries to the priest "because he is the one who understands such matters." From October 1970 to flay 1971 interviews were held approximately once a week with the priest of Holy Tr in i ty Church on Campbell Avenue and the bishop of Holy Resurrection Church on Forty-Third Avenue. Time did not permit extensive interviewing with the priest at St. Ilicholas Church on Thirteenth Avenue. Occasionally the bishop spoke br ief ly with the researchers after the services but usually afternoon discussions dur-ing the week were arranged and took place in the parsonage. The priest at Holy Tr in i ty Church l ives several miles from the church building. When the interviewers made appointments with him, the arrangement always was to pick him up at his home and drive him to the church where the discus-sions took place. In both these interview situations, the discussions were loosely structured and sometimes followed the priests ' interests. Conversations usually lasted two hours. 21 CHAPTER II HISTORY OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH In the following chapter a history of the Orthodox Church is pre-sented. The chapter considers how the Church developed and how the Orthodox Church sees i t s e l f in relation to others. It is also intended to describe the context from which various dissenting groups, including the Doukhobors, emerged. The Orthodox Church traces much of i ts early history to the f i r s t Christian communities in Judaea in the f i r s t half of the second century B.C.I During the f i r s t three centuries the Roman Empire adopted a policy towards Christians which fluctuated between toleration and persecution, depending on the wil l of the emperors. The early Christians were at f i r s t seen by the Reman authorities as a branch of Judaeism and as such stood under i t s protection. When a distinction was later made, the charges against Christians were atheism and anarchism. 'Their rejection of the old gods seemed atheism; their refusal to join in Emperor-worship seemed treasonable."2 in the fourth century the Roman Empire lost some of i ts unity after a long period of c i v i l wars. In 313 A.D., Constantine and his co-emperor Licinius issued the Edict of Milan granting the f i r s t lSophie Koulomzin, The Orthodox Christian Church Through the Ages, U.S.A., Keystone Publishing Company, 1956, p. 37, (hereinafter referred to as The Orthodox Christian Church), and Williston Walker, A History of  the Christian Church, New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1959, p. 3. ^Walker, A History of the Christian Church, p. 43. 22 o f f i c i a l recognition of the Christian faith.3 This edict did not make Christ ianity the rel igion of the Empire but gave i t egual status with the other religions prevailing in the Roman world. Constantine later became the sole ruler of the Roman Empire. He favored Christianity and when he moved his capital from Rome to the Greek c i ty of Byzantium in 324, he changed i ts name to Constantinopolis.4 The following year Constantine called an ecumenical council in Nicaea on the advice of his ecclesiastical advisors. The council was called to sett le the prevailing Arian contro-versy. Constantine and his advisors saw the controversy as a threat to the unity of the Church and State. A priest Arius taught that Jesus Christ was not God in the same sense as God the Father.5 This contentious teach-ing spread throughout the Empire and caused a sp l i t within the Church. The Nicaean council condemned Arianism and gave a precise definit ion to the relationship of God the Father and the Son. This was the f i r s t of seven councils held to determine matters of Church doctrine and policy. The decrees of these ecumenical councils have become the canons which form the foundation of the Orthodox Church. However while the decisions thus formulated are considered to constitute the basis of the Orthodox fa i th , they are not of immediate relevance for our purposes and can therefore be found in Appendix A. From the Orthodox point of view, the Church adheres s t r i c t l y to the ^Timothy Hare, The Orthodox Church, Great Br i ta in, Penguin Books, 1963, p. 26. Also, Koulomzin, The~Q~rthodox Christian Church, p. 73. ^Walker, A History of the Christian Church, p. 105 and Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 277 ^Koulomzin, The Orthodox Christian Church, p. 79, and Alexander Schmemann, The Historical RoacT of Eastern Orthodoxy, New York, Holt, Rinehart a Winston, 1963, p. 77. 23 promulgations of the seven ecumenical councils thereby regarding i t s e l f as the guardian of the true fa i th la id down by the apostles and the early Christians. It is for this reason that they cal l themselves Orthodox Christians, the name being taken from the Greek words "ortho" meaning 'true or correct ' and "dojsa" meaning ' b e l i e f . ' 6 Orthodoxy claims that there is one true faith and therefore one true Church. However, as Heyendorff points out in his book The Orthodox Church, i t is a fal lacy to argue that there ever was an "undivided church" which lasted for nine centuries. Throughout the whole history of the Church there were numerous divis ive factors causing schisms within the Church. By moving the "New Rome" to Constantinople, Constantine geographically separated his new Christian capital from Rome which had enjoyed, until that time, the legitimacy of being the capital of Christ ianity. The following centuries can be seen as increasing the separation between Constantinople and Rome. Among the factors contributing to the estrangement of the contending capitals were theological differences re-garding the concept of "f i l ioQue" and the question of papal i n f a l l i b i l i t y . In the sixth century the western Churches inserted the word "fil.iague" (meaning 'and from the Son') into the iiicaean-Constantinopolitan Creed. The Orthodox maintained that the concept of "" was heretical be-cause they believed that the Holy Spir i t proceeds from the Father alone. 7 According to Orthodox interpretation, the word was not part of the or ig -^George H. Demetrakopoulos, Dictionary of Orthodox Theology: A_ Summary of the Belief, Practices and History of the Eastern Orthodox  Church, U.S.A., Philosophical Library Inc., 1064, p. 139 (Hereinafter referred to as Dictionary of Orthodox Theology), and John Meyendorff, The Orthodox Church, U.S.A., Random House, 19C2, p. v i i . 7Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 59. irial text and therefore the Creed in its altered form was not acceptable since the ecumenical councils spec i f ica l ly forbade any change to be intro-duced into the Creed. The western Churches regarded the Patriarch of Rome, the Pope, as i n f a l l i b l e , having absolute power over a l l the fa i th fu l . As long as the rule of the Roman Pope did not extend to the eastern Churches i t did not become a controversial issue. The Pope, however, believed his immediate power of jur isd ict ion to extend to the east as well as to the west.... The Greeks assigned to the Pope a primacy of honor, but not the universal supremacy which he regarded as his due.3 There were several other issues which developed over the centuries and which contributed to the eventual division between the eastern and western Churches. Among the eastern clergy there were two types of priests: the black clergy who took the vow of celibacy, and, the white or "secular" clergy who were permitted to marry prior to ordination. In contrast to th i s , the western Churches made celibacy mandatory for a l l clergy. In the ninth century another dispute arose over the Roman use of unleavened bread in the oucharist because the eastern Churches had always used leavened bread. Variations in language also contributed to the differentiat ion of the eastern and western Churches. In A History of the  Christian Church, Walker mentions that by about the year 450 very few c ler ics in western Europe could read and speak Greek. Conversely, he says that by GOO A.D. i t was rare for a Byzantine to speak Latin. Pre-sumably this limited communication and increased the distance between the two Churches. Although repeated attempts were made to restore relations between the eastern and western Churches, 1054 is given as the date of the last " Ib id., p. 57. 25 attempted reconci l iat ion. Consequently this date is considered as marking the schism between the Roman and Byzantine Churches. It should be re-emphasized that the two Churches grew up more or less independent of one another from the beginning of Christ ianity, even though communication continued until the twelfth century. The middle of the ninth century was an epoch of expansion of Christ-ianity emanating from Constantinople. Much of the Church's energy was directed toward the Slavic countries (Moravia, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Russia 9) lying to the north and north-west of the Byzantine Empire. The Orthodox Church subscribed to the old missionary principle of permitting each nation to conduct services in i ts own language.1° Concerning the conversion of the Slavs to Orthodoxy, perhaps the two people who had the most profound effect were the Greek brothers Cyril and Methodius from Thessalonica. In preparation for their missionary work in Moravia, the two monks began a translation of the Bible and the Orthodox l i turgies into their native Bulgarian-Macedonian dialect.11 For this Cyri l invented a Slavonic script based ultimately upon Greek letters. In this way the dialect of the Bulgarian-Macedonian Slavs came to be known later as Church Slavonic. Although the Greek missionaries went to Moravia at the request of the Moravian Duke, once there, they met with opposition from the German missionaries who followed the western style of worship. The Greek c ler ics eventually were expelled, resulting in a Roman victory. While the attempt to found a Slavic national Church had fa i led in Moravia, ^Ernst Benz, The Eastern Orthodox Church, Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company, 1963, p. 82. lOlbid., p. 112. HLOC. c i t . , and Walker, A History of the Christian Church, p. 195. 26 i t nevertheless had far-reaching effects. When Orthodoxy was later adop-ted by the other Slavic countries 3 i t was introduced in a ready-made form insofar as the texts were written in a dialect in te l l i g ib le to the people. The history of Orthodoxy in Kievian Russia begins in the late tenth century when Grand Duke Vladimir I married Anna, the s ister of the Byz-antine emperor.!2 on returning to Kiev, Vladimir brought with him Greek missionaries, books, vestments, icons, crosses, r e l i c s , and church uten-s i l s . In 932 A.D. a mass baptism was held in the river Dnieper for the people of Kiev.13 This marks the beginning of Orthodox Christ ianity as the State rel igion in Russia. For approximately two hundred and f i f t y years Kiev was considered to be the p o l i t i c a l , economic and ecclesiast ical center of Russia. The Mongol suzaranity over Russia lasted from the thirteenth to the f i f teenth centuries, during which time a policy of religious toleration permitted the Orthodox Church to continue functioning. Gradually Kiev lost i ts influence as the capital and in 1325 the see of the Metropolitan was o f f i c i a l l y transferred to Moscow.14 By the middle of the f i fteenth century the Russians had succeeded in driving out the Mongols and their new pol i t ica l independence roughly coincided with the ^Walker, A History of the Christian Church, p. 215. 13Koulomzin, The Orthodox Christian Church, p. 137, and D. Attwater, The Christian Churches of the East, London, Geoffrey Chapman, 1961, p. 45. l^Koulomzin, The Orthodox Christian Church, p. 155, and op_. c i t . , p. 215. 27 independence or autocephaly 1 5 of the Russian Orthodox Church (144816). Until this time the Patriarch of Constantinople had tradit ional ly appointed a Greek metropolitan to the Russian Church. Moscow came to be regarded as the new capital of Orthodoxy after Constantinople was conquered by the Turks in 1453.17 The importance of iioscow as the ecclesiastical center was further strengthened by the marriage of Ivan III ("Ivan the Great") to the niece of the Byzantine emperor in 1472.18 Through this marriage Ivan., the Grand Duke of Moscow, assumed the Byzantine t i t l e of Czar (a Slavic version of the word "Caesar")1S and as Czar headed both the Church and the State. In the course of the sixteenth century, the relationship between Church and State that resulted from this union was challenged. One party (the "possessors" under Joseph, Abbot of Volokolamsk Monastery 2 0) was committed to the idea of a close al l iance between Czar and Patriarch and therefore the acceptance of social and po l i t i ca l responsibi l i t ies by the Church. The opposing party (the "non-possessors" headed by Nil us Sorsky, l^Meyendorff states (in The Orthodox Church, p. 143) that the word autocephalous comes from the Greek "auto," ' s e l f and "kepha.le," 'head.' According to Demetrakopoulos (Dictionary of Orthodox Theology, p. 21), in Orthodox canon law an autocephalous church is one which elects i t s own head or primate and is not dependent upon any other patriarch. The boundaries of the various autocephalies often coincide with national boundaries, although this is not always the case. l G l Jalker, A Hi story of the Christian Church, p. 528. I7lbid., p. 523. l&leyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 107. ISWare, The Orthodox Church, p. 113. 20paul Miliukov, Religion and The Church in Russia, New York, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1043, p. 18. 28 founder of the Sorsk Hermitage) sought complete separation of State and Church matters. The latter party emphasized a l i f e of monastic poverty and piety and argued that clergy should be detached from worldly a f fa i r s . The quarrel was, for the most part, settled by the apparent victory of the "possessors" and from the sixteenth century onward the relationship between State and Church vascil lated between co-existence and domination. The actions of Patriarch Nikon in the mid seventeenth century and of Czar Peter the Great in the eighteenth century demonstrate the impli-cations of this union. As Patriarch, Nikon attempted to standardize church books and the form of worship, iiany regional variations had crept into the form of worship and Nikon demanded that the Russian practices conform to the l i turg ica l customs prevailing in the other patriarchates. In addition, with the introduction of the printing press and the mass reproduction of service books, i t was f e l t that a prototype was necessary. The books, and consequently the practices, were altered wherever they differed from the contemporary Greek style. The reforms most frequently mentioned in the l i terature concern the position of the fingers in making the sign of the cross, the number of halleluiahs sung and the direction of Church processions.21 While crossing themselves, the Russians held two fingers together, while the Greek custom was to hold three fingers to-gether, forming a single point?, whereas the Russians sang halleluiah twice, the Greeks repeated i t three times; Russian processions moved in a westward direction and, in processions, the Greeks moved the opposite way. However inconsequential these points may have appeared to some of the Russian people, when conformity with the Nikonian reforms was demanded, 21stepniak, The Russian Peasantry, Third Edition, London, Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1894, p. 3877 29 there were both clergy and l a i t y who refused to accept the new books and to adopt the new forms. Just as there are a number of explanations for the introduction of the reforms, there are many interpretations given for the strong resistance toward the modifications. The opponents argued that the Greek practices were of even more recent origin than the Russian forms and therefore had no more, or less, jus t i f i cat ion than their own with regard to the early Christian tradit ions. Further questions were raised about the implications of the changes upon the saints and the other " fa i th fu l " of the preceeding centuries who had adhered to the practices now being condemned as "unorthodox." Although iiikon was deposed by a synod of the other patr i -archs (in 166G A.D.), his reforms remained effective and in 16C7 a council pronounced an anathema against schismatics.22 Dissent characterized the seventeenth century in Russia. This led f i na l l y to a schism (raskol) within the Russian Orthodox Church. Of the dissenters (raskol 'n ik i ) , those advocating continuance of the former Russian Orthodox traditions severed connections with the Church and came to be known as the Old Believers or Old Ritual ists. Among the Old Be-l ievers , a dist inction is made between those who have retained the priest-hood (popovci) and those who have rejected the priesthood (bezpopovci).23 Throughout the seventeenth century schisms spread and the dissenters them-selves sp l i t into many factions. This has been viewed by some as a process in which the new factions can a l l be considered to be offshoots of the Orthodox Church. The 22i;eyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 110. 23Robert 0. Crummey, The Old Believers and The World of Ant ichr ist , U.S.A., University of Wisconsin Press, 1970, p. 23. 30 divisions are said to have resulted from disputes arising over the proper or right ( i .e. orthodox) form of worship. A more contentious position is taken by those who argue that training for the priesthood was generally characterized by a low standard of education such that the priests were only minimally qualif ied to perform the functions of their o f f i ce . Accor-ding to this reasoning, the people regarded the priests as tradesmen, performing the necessary services such as baptism, holy communion, marriage and burial which were required by State decree. This is aptly expressed by Stepniak: * The relations between the moujiks and their pops having l i t t l e , i f anything of the spiritual in them . . . i t remains an undeniable fact that as a rule the pops are looked upon by their parishioners not as guides or advisors, but as a class of tradesmen, who have wholesale and reta i l dealings in sacraments.24 The i l l i t e racy of the priesthood, in conjunction with the growing distance between the parish priests and the l a i t y , often contributed l i t t l e to the spir itual education of the people.25 while i t is impossible not to speak of a minimal absorption of at least certain aspects of Christ ianity, *iIoujiks means peasants. Pops means parish priests. This is a disrespectful term which seems to be applied most commonly to "white" priests (secular or married priests). Hingley points out that the proper term for priest is svjascennik. (R. Hingley, Russian Writers and  Society, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1907, p. 151.) Also see Schmemann, The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy. ^Stepniak, The Russian Peasantry, p. 373. 25in Chapter I of Religion and The Church in Russia, Miliukov centers on this point in discussing the assimilation of Orthodoxy in Russia from the time of conversion (989 A.D.) to the pre-Mongolian period. Stepniak, in The Russian Peasantry, argues the same point but with respect to the period of time from the conversion to Orthodoxy until the time of his writing (1894). Similarly, Dunn and Dunn speak about Orthodoxy in Russia from 1700 to the Bolshevik Revolution in their book The Peasants of Central Russia, (U.S.A., Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1967). 31 according to this argument i t is impossible to speak of the complete assimilation of i t . Evidence is given to support the claim that the con-victions of the masses remained a mixture of Orthodoxy and pre-Christian bel iefs. Because Dunn and Dunn concisely express several of these ideas they wil l be quoted at length. Due to organizational d i f f i cu l t i e s and shortage of personnels the Orthodox Church fa i led to maintain active control over many rural areas which were nominally Orthodox. Therefore, quite apart from the questions of the peasant festival cycle and sectarian influences peasant religious practice deviated from the o f f i c i a l church cere-monial . These deviations sometimes went so far that peasants who considered themselves Orthodox were regarded as schismatics by the Church hierarchy, and were treated accordingly. This is a part ic-ularly s ignif icant example of the way in which the cultural screen between the peasant and the urban resident operates. The operation of the screen in prerevolutionary Russia produced in effect two cultures in one country, both in point of rel igion and in other areas of l i f e . It is necessary to bear this in mind when considering any aspect of Russian history, and r.iost especially the role of the Orthodox Church in Russian l i fe.26 This position emphasizes that schisms occurred because many of the people had only superf ic ia l ly assimilated the teachings and practices of the Orthodox Church. Thus while acknowledging that the immediate issues con-cerned specif ic Orthodox teachings and practices, the divisions are said to express a disparity between the Orthodox doctrine and the continuance of previously existing bel iefs. It will be recalled that in accounting for the development of the numerous dissident groups the alternative interpretation suggests that cleavages arose exclusively out of theolog-ical disputes within the Church. The reforms introduced by Patriarch Nikon had continuing reper-cussions on the Russian Church and society in the following centuries. But another c r i s i s threatening union with the State was faced by the Church 26Dunn and DU?P~ The Peasant", of Central Russia, p. 30. 32 when Czar Peter the Great abolished the patriarchate.27 in 1721 he re-placed the patriarchate with a new form of organization called the Holy Synod. A new of f ice for a "lay procurator" was created and the remainder of the Synod was comprised of bishops and other clergy appointed by the Czar. As the Holy Synod was under the immediate control of the procurators and ultimately the Czar, the power of the Church was subject to the State. This synodical form of organization continued for approximately two hun-dred years u n t i l , in 1917, the patriarchate was re-established by an All-Russian Church Council and Tikon, Metropolitan of Moscow, was elected Patriarch.28 On January 20, 1918, the Council of Commissaries of the People approved the famous decree regarding the "separation of Church and State and the separation of the schools from the Church," which was promulgated on January 23.29 A series of measures were begun in 1918 to prevent the propagation of Orthodoxy within the U.S.S.R. A l l church buildings, lands and assets were nationalized and shortly thereafter theological academies, church schools and seminaries were transferred to the control of the Commissariat for People's Education.30 j . n order for a religious group to congregate i t became necessary to obtain o f f i c i a l recognition by the State. While this policy granted the right to meet for worship services, i t did not 27[ieyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 110; Schmemann, The Historical  Road of Eastern Orthodoxy, p. 331; and Walker, A History of the Christian  ChurcFT p. 530. 2 8Meyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 122; Walker, A History of the Christian Church, p."~5T2; Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 137; and Hicolas Zernov, Eastern Christendom, Hew York, G. P. Putman's Sons, 1961, p. 125. 2 2Meyendorff 5 The Orthodox Church, p. 125. 30fiiiiukov, Religion and The Church in Russia, p. 158, and Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 155. 33 allow formal religious instruction or proselytization. This brief discussion is not intended to be a resume of the o f f i c i a l State policy toward religious groups and the Orthodox Church in the U.S.S.R. from the October Revolution to the present day. It is intended only to indicate the general view toward which the Soviet government has tended, recognizing that religious groups in the Soviet Union have seen times of both restraint and lax i ty. The re-establishment of the patriarchate in 1917 saw the beginning of further divisions within the Orthodox Church, divisions which have played a fundamental role in the recent history of Russian Orthodoxy. Before Patriarch Tikon died in 1925 he appointed three possible "locum-tenentes" or guardians of the patriarchal throne 3* (the Metropolitans C y r i l , Agathangelos, and Peter), anticipating that further councils probably could not be held regularly. Because of the incarceration of these three appointees. Metropolitan Sergius became "deputy locumtenens." 3 2 In 1927 Sergius o f f i c i a l l y requested that the Soviet government legal ize the Patriarchal Synod over which he presided, a request which was granted the same year. "The latter demand appeared to many to be going too far in the way of accommodation, for government ' legal izat ion ' necessarily implied an unspecified amount of government c o n t r o l . " 3 3 Within the Orthodox Church many of the clergy protested this move, regarding i t as an unacceptable compromise with the government. Sergius was f i na l l y elected Patriarch in 1943 by a small group of 3 1Meyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 134. Also Ware, The Orthodox  Church, p. 161. 32[1eyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 135. 3 3 L O C . c i t . 34 bishops34 but he died the following year. In 1945 Metropolitan Alexis, a supporter of Sergius, was subsequently elected Patriarch. Not a l l of the Orthodox clergy agreed with the position taken by Sergius and Alexis concerning the relationship of the Russian Orthodox Church and the State. Among them were a number of clergymen who, in exi le after the Russian Revolution, formed The Synod of the Russian Church in Lxile.35 Sergius and Alexis, however, have several times put out condemnations of the Karlovtsy administration, and the Moscow Patriarchate con-tinues to the present day to regard i t as entirely i l lega l and un-canonical. The Synod, for i t s part, does not recognize as valid the elections of Sergius and Alexis to the Patriarchate; and i t has ig -nored the condemnations published by Moscow, looking upon them as po l i t i ca l documents devoid of any spiritual authority.36 There is yet another group of priests, presently referred to as The Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America,37 who or ig inal ly came as missionaries to Alaska in 1794. When Alaska was purchased by the United States in 1868, the Russian Orthodox missionaries f e l t the need to extend their Church to other parts of North America.38 At that time San Francisco was the center for Russian settlers and in 1870 i t 34There'were nineteen bishops at this council. See Mare, The  Orthodox Church, p. 167. 35A,1SO known as The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, Russian Church Outside Russia, The Synodicals, The Karlovtzy Synod or Anastasians. See Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 181; Tarasoff, "A Study of Russian Organ-izations in the Greater Vancouver Area," p. 18. 3 eWare, The Orthodox Church., p. 133. 37A1SO known as The North American Jurisdict ion or The Metropolia. See Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 182. 3*Vieyendorff, The Orthodox Church, p. 185. 35 was made the see of the Russian Orthodox Diocese in the United States . 3 9 The seat of the Metropolitan was later (1905) transferred to Hew York. By 1924 the Russian Orthodox Church of America had severed contact with the Moscow Patriarch and considered i t se l f to be an autonomous body. Although the history of this jur isd ict ion is complicated, the controversy centers mainly upon the recognition of this jur isdict ion by the Moscow Patriarchate. The Patriarchate was not prepared to grant complete autonomy to the North American jur isd ict ion and demanded the right to appoint bishops there. The late Patriarch Alexis is said to have granted an autocephalous status to the North American Russian Orthodox Church in 1970 just prior to his death.40 i t is important to remark that the new off ice of Patriarchate of New York has not yet been f i l l e d . In spite of th i s , The Metropolia considers i t s e l f to be an independent body with i ts own Patriarch. From the Moscovite position, both The Russian Church in Exile and The Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America are schismatic. How they view the relationship of the Church and the State in the Soviet Union and how they view themselves connected to the iioscow Patriarchate would therefore appear to be central characteristics differentiating these two jur isdict ions. In Vancouver, Churches belonging to The Russian Church in Exile and The Russian Orthodox Church of America jurisdict ions are represented. Holy Tr in i ty Church (on Campbell Avenue) and St. Nicholas Church (on Thirteenth Avenue) are a f f i l i a ted with the former jur isd ict ion while Holy Resurrection Church (on Forty-Third Avenue) belongs to the 3 %oulomzin, The Orthodox Christian Church, p. 230; Tarasoff, "A Study of Russian Organizations in the Greater Vancouver Area," p. 16. 40Bishop Antonuk, personal communication. 36 l a t ter j u r i s d i c t i o n . ^ There is a small group of Russian Orthodox Churches known as The Russian Exarchate in Western Europe^ w ho, as Russian emigres, recognize the Patriarch in Moscow. Because there are no Churches with this a f f i l -iation in North America, no further reference wil l be made to them. ^*For a discussion of the history and development of these Churches in Vancouver see: Tarasoff, "A Study of Russian Organizations in Greater Vancouver Area," Chapters 9, 10 and 11. AO Also known as the Paris Jur isd ict ion. See Ware, The Orthodox  Church, p. 182. 37 CHAPTER III HISTORY OF THE DOUKHOBORS Chapter II outlined the development of the Orthodox Church, the influence of Orthodoxy in Russia and i t s subsequent introduction to North America. To understand the Doukhobors i t is necessary to again consider the period in history that begins roughly with the seventeenth century. The history of the Doukhobors, then, is the subject of Chapter III beginning with the seventeenth century and the Nikonian reforms. Brief consideration wi l l be given to some of the events mentioned in Doukhobor l i terature, with the greater emphasis being given to events which occurred in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. On the basis of historical evidence many attempts have been made to trace the orig in of the Doukhobors in Russia. 1 For present purposes i t is suff ic ient to begin a discussion of the development of the Doukho-bors at the time when they came to be identif ied as a specif ic group of dissidents. In 1785 the Orthodox bishop of Ekaterinoslav, in the Ukraine region, used the term duxo borec 2 (meaning 'those who fight against the reader is referred to Chapter II on the historical background of the Russian Orthodox Church. 2 E1i Popoff, Historical Exposition of Doukhobor Bel iefs, Manuscript for the National Museum of Canada, August 1964, p. 1, (Hereinafter referred to as Historical Exposition); Charles Frantz, "The Doukhobor Pol i t ica l System, Social Structure and Social Organization in a Sectarian Society," Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1958, p. 32, (Here-inafter referred to as "The Doukhobor Po l i t ica l System"); Tarasoff, In Search of Brotherhood, p. 5; and Vladimir Tchertkoff (editor), Christian Martyrdom in Russia, London, The Free Age Press, 1900, p. 3. 38 Holy Sp i r i t ' ) to describe one group of heretics who repudiated a l l Or-thodox formalit ies. The meaning of the word lost i ts pejorative over-tones when i t was reinterpreted by i ts members to mean those who wrestle with the chaotic world in an attempt to gain the peace of the sp i r i t . Similarly i t was taken to mean those who struggle against the injustice and evi l in the world with spir itual instead of violent means.3 The name 'church' was rejected as was any particular man-made structure because i t was contended that the sp i r i t dwells in man and the real church is within the body. There are two points to be made in connection with the term church. The Doukhobors did not see themselves as being formally constituted in a manner similar to the Russian Orthodox Church and hence they rejected label l ing themselves as a church ( i .e. subject to inst itutional ized church d isc ip l ine) . They referred to the place where their meetings were held as obScij dorn^  or molitvenyj dom, glossed respectively as 'community house* and 'prayer house.' Such a place was never referred to as xram or cerkov', terms which are glossed in English as 'church.' Each individual was regarded as equal to a l l others and Doukhobors advocated a brotherhood of a l l mankind, recognizing God as the only 3This interpretation emphasizing the non-violent aspect of Doukho-borism was insisted upon by Legebokoff in an interview. The point is also made in many of the accounts including: J . P. Zubek and P. A. Sol berg, Doukhobors at War, Toronto, Ryerson Press, 1952, p. 7, 177; Popoff, Historical Exposition, p. 1. ^This is the term given in Tarasoff 's In Search of Brotherhood (Vol. 3, p. 917), but molitvenyj dom is moreHEhe commonTy used form today. 39 supreme authority.5 Doukhobors were of the conviction that a l l believers possess the sp i r i t of God. They said that a l l were equal to interpret the "Christ within" and that the individual himself was the only true priest. Perhaps i t was from this precept of equality that Doukhobors renounced the authority of the clergy and government.6 They also opposed the formalities and the ' r i t u a l ' (r itual) of the Orthodox form of worship including the Bible as the ultimate source of inspiration, Orthodox l i t -urgy, icons, crosses, fasts, sacraments, baptism, communion, and conf i r -mation—all of which they saw as unnecessary external it ies. Emphasizing the unity of the individual and God through the Holy Sp i r i t , the Doukho-bors interpreted baptism, marriage and communion as manifestations of the sp i r i t but not as overt acts. From the Doukhobor perspective bap-tism, for example, took place when a person repented and believed in God. Consequently they regarded baptism with water "as useless, saying that water only washes of f the uncleanness of the external body."? Because these views were seen by the Orthodox Church and the State not only as heretical but also as anarchical, Doukhobors were continually persecuted. At f i r s t Doukhobors were concentrated in the three provinces of Ekaterinoslav, Tambov, and Kharhov.B in 1792 the governor of 5 T n i s i s a fundamental tenet professed by a l l Doukhobors. It can be seen, for example, in the "Declaration of the Union of Spiritual Communities of Christ in Canada," proclaimed in Verigin Saskatchewan, 1934. 6 Frantz, "The Doukhobor Po l i t ica l System," p. 16; Tchertkoff (ed.), Christian Martyrdom in Russia, p. 5-6; Zubek and Sol berg, Doukhobors at War, p. 7. 7Tchertkoff (ed.), Christian Martyrdom in Russia, p. 10. See also Tarasoff, In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 1, p. 11; Zubek and Sol berg, DoukhoBors at War, p. 16$. 8 Tarasoff , In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 1, p. 33. 40 Ekaterinoslav advocated that the Doukhobors be shown no mercy, for their bel iefs were seen by the o f f i c i a l s as a potential threat to the Russian Orthodox people with whom they came in contact. Those practicing the Doukhobor teachings were condemned to be burnt; the sentence was later remitted and they were exiled to "various regions on the periphery of the Russian Empire." 9 During the reign of Czar Alexander I (1801-1825) a policy of toleration towards the Doukhobors was adopted. In 1802 they were relocated in Taurida along the Molocnaja River, which in English is generally described as the Milky Waters.10 Here the Doukhobors were permitted to organize their l ives as they chose. The State interfered l i t t l e with them, particularly regarding the matter of compulsory mi l -itary service. Alexander's reign was followed by the reign of Nicholas I (1825-1855) a period during which Doukhobors were again persecuted. In 1839 the Czar delivered an ultimatum that those not renouncing the Doukhobor teachings and returning to the Russian Orthodox Church would be exiled to the Caucasus. Thus in 1841 Nicholas I expelled the reca l -c itrant Doukhobors from the Milky Waters region and forced them to re-locate near T i f l i s in the Caucasus Mountains. Later, in 1887, an edict was issued enforcing universal mil itary service. This caused the Doukho-bors to take an overt stand to uphold their bel iefs . At this time in Doukhobor history the hereditary spir itual leader-ship was held by Peter Vasi l ievich Verigin (or Peter the Lordly) who set out to l i ve an exemplary l i f e by abstaining from eating meat, smoking and drinking l iquor. Not only were these proscriptions instituted among 9Woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, p. 31. lO lb id . , p. 36. 41 his followers, but communal l iv ing and passive resistance were also made mandatory. In response to the edict of 1887, Peter the Lordly chose June 29, 1895 (Petrov den') as the day a l l Doukhobors would burn their weapons as a public demonstration of their refusal to serve in the army. Prior to the burning of arms, June 29th was said to be the day commem-orating the birth of the saints Peter and Paul. In addition, the 29th of June had been recognized as an important day by the Doukhobors for on the 29th of June, 1859, their leader Peter Vasi l ievich Verigin was born.11 This public demonstration of Doukhobor opposition to conscrip-tion led the State authorities to further persecute them. These actions eventuated in the migration of approximately 7,500 Doukhobors to Canada in 1899, although 12,000 chose to stay behind.I 2 Arrangements, negotiated prior to their arr ival in Canada, appeared to the Doukhobors to protect their af fa irs from government interference. Education, under the authority of provincial governments, was not yet compulsory in outlying areas. Nor was there a national rel ig ion to which Canadian c it izens or immigrants were forced to conform. From 1899 to 1904 Doukhobors arrived in Canada and were given land in the Prair ie **Popoff, Historical Exposition, p. 18; Tarasoff, In Search of  Brotherhood, p. 126; and Woodcock and Avakumovic, The DouFhobors, p. 76. 12These are the figures quoted to Tarasoff 's In Search of Brother- hood , Vol. 1, p. 196; also in Hawthorn (ed.), The DoukTiobors o f Br it ish  Columbia, p. 7; Woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, p. 149; and Zubek and Sol berg, Doukhobors at War, p. 32. It wi l l be noted that at the turn of the century more Doukhobors remained in Russia than immi-grated to Canada. During the 1880's the Doukhobors were sp l i t into two factions, the Large Party (although numerically the smaller party) under Peter Vasi l ievich Verigin, and the Small Party under Gubanov. This schism has been attributed mainly to a controversy over the legitimacy of Peter Vasi l ievich Verigin's claim for leadership, following the death of Luker'ia Kalmykova. See Woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, pp. 70-85. 42 regions. Under the provisions of the recently ammended Hamlet Clause (original ly instituted in 1870 for the Mennonites) they were allowed to sett le together and to cult ivate the land jo int ly . Further, by an Order in Council of 1898 they, along with other pac i f i s t i c groups, were exempt from mil itary service.13 Approximately 1907, the relat ively homogeneous group of "Canadian Doukhobors" sp l i t into three major factions. While sharp lines were drawn between the groups over the question of pledging allegiance, less c lear ly defined boundaries emerged as early as 1900 when, according to several sources, approximately 2,000 Doukhobors had l e f t the community organization to farm independently. 1^ The factional divisions were part ia l ly attributable to irreconcilable opinions on the question of the hereditary spir itual leadership. In 1905 government pressure demanded that oaths of allegiance be taken in compliance with the Homestead Act. The signing of the Act involved two things contrary to Doukhobor pr in-c ip les—private ownership of land and swearing allegiance to the Queen. To register land as individuals was a violation of the Doukhobor tenet of communal l iv ing and to swear allegiance to a monarch meant the recog-nition of a sovereign other than God. Mo consensus and no o f f i c i a l pol-icy were reached. In the end i t became a personal decision for each Doukhobor. As a result , the Doukhobors sp l i t into three main groups. 13woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, p. 134. ^Woodcock and Avakumovic (The Doukhobors, p. 159) c i te this figure from Bonch-Bruevich. Hawthorn (The Doukhobors of Br it ish  Columbia, p. 32) quotes from the same author also. 43 F i r s t , those who signed the Homestead Act (about 1,0001 5) came to be cal led Independents since by owning land individually they exp l i c i t l y disregarded the Community organization. Secondly, those who refused to take the oath of allegiance (roughly 6,400) were no longer e l i g ib le for Crown land and their property reverted to the government. Subsequently this latter group formed a legal ly recognized company known as the Christ-ian Community of Universal Brotherhood Limited (C.C.U.B.) and bought land en masse, enabling them to continue l iv ing and working together as a corporate group. And th i rd ly, the t i t l e Sons of Freedom came to be associated with those Doukhobors who have been zealous opponents of ass imilat ion* 6 throughout the entire time Doukhobors have been in Canada, demonstrating their dissatisfactions with the Canadian government and the modern North American way of l i f e . Few in numbers during a l l of Doukho-bor history, they were estimated to number about one hundred at the turn of the century. The Independent Doukhobors (now under the charter name of the Society of Doukhobors in Canada) remained in Saskatchewan after pledging allegiance. They were more or less ostracized by the other Doukhobors * 5These figures are estimations given by E l i Popoff, personal communication. Similar figures are given in Hawthorn's book The Doukho- bors of Br it ish Columbia, p. 8. Woodcock and Avakumovic estimate that ten per cent of the Doukhobor population was Independent by 1906 (The Doukhobors p. 198). The authors recognize that this last figure seems to contradict that given previously where i t was said that by 1900 there were approximately 2,000 Independents (both estimates given by Woodcock and Avakumovic). However Woodcock and Avakumovic suggest that the decline in the number of Independents stemmed from pressures for conformity by Peter the Lordly after his arr ival in Canada (1905). 1 6 The resistance of the Sons of Freedom to the assimilative process i s a point which is discussed at length in the Hawthorn Report on the Doukhobors (1952). The point is also made by Woodcock and Avakumovic. 44 who, part icularly in the early years, are said to have been discouraged by their leader from associating with them. 1 7 Most of the Independents recognized Peter Vasi l ievich Verigin as their spir i tual leader but denied the authority of his successors. Under Peter the Lordly the Christian Community of Universal Brother-hood was incorporated in 1917.^ The Union of Spiritual Communities of Christ (U.S.C.C.), envisioned by Peter Petrovich Verigin as the successor of the C.C.U.B., was not incorporated until 1939, one year after his death. 1 9 Members of both the Christian Community of Universal Brother-hood and the Sons of Freedom began migrating to Brit ish Columbia to acquire land in 1908. Although both these groups acknowledge the leader-ship of the late Peter Petrovich Verigin, the U.S.C.C. members now re-spect the spir itual guidance of John J . Verigin whereas many of the Sons of Freedom follow Stephan S. Sorokin. It is interesting to note that John J . Verigin is regarded as the spir itual leader by some members of the U.S.C.C. because of his lineage although his o f f i c i a l position re-mains only that of honorary chairman of the organization.20 The succession of hereditary leaders frequently has been a con-troversial issue among Doukhobors, the most recent example of which 1 7 Tarasof f , In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 2, p. 496; Woodcock and Avakumovic, The~Doukhobors, p. 240. °Hawthorn, The Doukhobors of Br it ish Columbia, p. 10; Tarasoff, In Search Of Brotherhood, Vol. 2, p. 410; and Zubek and Sol berg, Doukhobors at War, p. 100. 1 9 In conversation, members of the Union of Spiritual Communities of Christ are usually referred to as "Orthodox" Doukhobors. Members of the Society of Doukhobors of Canada are generally referred to as "Independents." 20john J . Verigin was chosen for this position in July, 1961. See Tarasoff, In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 3, p. 717, and Hawthorn, The Doukhobors of BritisTTColumbia, p. 255. concerns Stephan Sorokin. He is regarded as a spir i tual leader by many of the Sons of Freedom although there are other Doukhobors who question his claim. It is not only Sorokin's legitimacy that has been questioned; throughout the entire history of the Doukhobors disputes have arisen over the question of hereditary leaders. Several wr i t e r s 2 1 have sugges-ted that these confl icts are the result of "structural ambivalence" inherent in Doukhobor bel iefs and organization. Because every indiv id-ual is free to interpret the " sp i r i t within" himself, he i s considered to be equal to a l l other individuals. Consequently every person has the potential for becoming a leader in spite of the fact that the descen-dents (putative or genealogical) of a particular family usually become the leaders. It is said that because of "structural ambivalence" there 1s the poss ib i l i ty of conf l ic t between the unlimited freedom of Individuals and the restraints placed upon those individuals by rout in i -zation.22 i t becomes apparent then that i f some kind of balance between the authority of the individual and the authority of the co l lec t i v i ty is not met, factionalism wi l l result. For almost as long as Doukhobors have been in existence they have been wrestling with the implications of leadership, organization and routinization on their bel ief in freedom and individual ity. 2lHarry B. Hawthorn, Charles Frantz, Koozma J . Tarasoff. 2 2According to Weber, charismatic authority rests upon the values of the extraordinary and is opposed to traditional domination which Weber says is based upon the sanctity of everyday routines. This conf l ic t is always resolved with the charismatic authority becoming organized and permanent, f ina l l y succumbing to routinization. (H. H. Gerth and C. W. Mi l ls (eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, New York, Oxford University Press, 1958, pp. 52-54, 297TT This i s a point Frantz also develops in his thesis "The Doukhobor Po l i t i ca l System." 46 Presently in Canada members of these three factions of Doukhobors are to be found. It is important to keep in mind that the membership in these categories fluctuates. "There is no hard and fast dividing l ine of bel ief or of behavior between them the Sons of Freedom;and the others, and even membership and support are dr i f t ing categories."23 This is noticeable at meetings in Vancouver. For example i t can, and does, happen that a member of the Sons of Freedom wi l l attend a meeting of the Independents or vice versa. Although such a person participates f u l l y , following the particular style of the group he is v i s i t ing , his past act iv i t ies and allegiances are remembered and are used to explain any inappropriate behavior. Thus in attending a meeting of Independents, i f an individual from the Sons of Freedom were to kneel to the f loor in accordance with his style of worship, the others present would not follow his example; among themselves, they would probably explain this behavior by the fact that he is a zealous Son of Freedom. Not only do individuals attend the act iv i t ies of different factions, but they sometimes also change the group with which they choose to be ident i f ied. A Son of Freedom can, for instance, become a member of either the U.S.C.C. or the Independents. Membership in the lat ter two groups is more stable in that membership turnover may be somewhat deterred by formal appl i -cation to these organizations while such a formality does not seem to be characteristic of allegiance with the Sons of Freedom. At the present time (1971) only the Independent Doukhobors hold sobranija regularly in Vancouver. At these sobranija individuals from a l l three Doukhobor fac-tions participate and sometimes the boundaries between the groups are d i f f i c u l t to detect. 23rlawthorn (ed.), Doukhobors of Br it ish Columbia, p. 10. 47 CHAPTER IV CONTEMPORARY DOUKHOBOR MEETINGS Having br ief ly considered the history of the Doukhobors, attention wi l l now be focused upon contemporary Doukhobor meetings which are held . on Sundays. This chapter describes the Sunday meetings which take place in Vancouver and Grand Forks, Br it ish Columbia. A. Setting It is understood by Doukhobors that a sobranie 1 begins at eleven o' Clock every Sunday morning in Grand Forks and at one o' clock in Vancouver.2 Doukhobors acknowledge no holy days and maintain that they hold a sobranie on Sunday s t r i c t l y for the sake of convenience. Sobranija are also held on special occasions. On June 29 (or the closest Sunday to that date) the Doukhobors commemorate Petrov den' (or Peter's Day) by holding a meeting out of doors. The U.S.C.C. Doukhobors gather for a sobranie on August 1 as well. Annually they recognize this as Declaration Day; in August 1934 a declaration of beliefs was formulated and i t was this document that in 1938 became the basis of the U.S.C.C. Sobranija are held year round in Grand Forks. This is also the case among the iThe term sobranie here refers to a 'gathering' or 'meeting' in a general sense. This is the term used by Doukhobors in Vancouver in reference to Sunday meetings. In addition to the word sobranie, Grand Forks Doukhobors use another term. Molenie or 'prayer meeting' i s a more specif ic term used only in reference to their morning meeting. This is an important dist inction and should be kept in mind as the following descriptions are read. 2The Independent Doukhobors in Vancouver are the exception in that they hold their sobranija on the last Sunday of every month. 48 Vancouver Independents but when the other group in Vancouver held the i r own meetings, they did not meet during the summer months. The specif ic details regarding the hour, day and season peculiar to the various sobranija are taken for granted. That i s , there is no announcement of the next meeting, and because of the nature and form of the meeting, there are few preparatory requirements. For example, no individual de-l ivers a sermon which could necessitate weekly preparation; because there is no choir there obviously are no rehearsals during the week. Shortly before the beginning of the sobranie a loaf of bread is brought to the hall and is placed on a table with salt and water. These items are the pre-arrangements necessary for the staging of a sobranie. 1. Exterior Setting One of the original principles Doukhobors upheld was the rejection of any externalit ies of worship. Because the Holy Sp i r i t dwells within man, they saw no need to attach great importance to the place where they met for prayers. Having no special buildings, rooms or paraphernalia they formerly met outside or in someone's home. Today they maintain that private houses are too small to accommodate their needs. Grand Forks is a town with a population of approximately 5,000, sixty percent of which are of Doukhobor origin.3 The Doukhobors l iv ing there have always had their own meeting hall and a new hall was bu i l t there in 1958. In Vancouver, where the Doukhobor population attending sobranija 3Tarasoff, In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 3, p. 875. 49 i s smaller, community halls are rented by each of the two groups.^ The Grand Forks dom (a word meaning 'house') is situated in the middle of a large f i e l d on the outskirts of town. It is a two-storied wooden struc-ture, facing east-west, with large continuous windows along the north and south sides. There are no sign boards outside to indicate the iden-t i ty of the building. Both of the halls used in Vancouver are situated on side streets and while signs on the exterior identify the buildings as community ha l l s , there is nothing to indicate that this is where Doukhobors meet. As in Grand Forks, the buildings l i e in an east-west direction, with the entrance at the west end. The locations of the buildings are such that their setting removes them from obvious extraneous noises including sounds from cars passing by, children playing or industrial plants. 2. Interior Setting One enters the dom in Grand Forks through a set of doors on the west end of the building and then proceeds up four or f ive stairs to three sets of closed doors. Beyond these doors l ies the main room (approximately f i f t y feet by ninety feet) which is bounded at the far end by a bu i l t - in stage. One immediately senses a feeling of spacious-ness created by the twenty foot ce i l ing and the uninterrupted plate glass windows. Because the windows constitute the greater portion of ^As the terms for the various groups are cumbersome, the following notational system wi l l sometimes be used: (G) denotes Doukhobors in Grand Forks (G); (L) denotes the Independent Doukhobors who meet at Lockdale Hall (L) in Burnaby; (R) denotes Sorts of Freedom and Union of Spiritual Communities of Christ Doukhobors who hold their meetings together at the Russian People's Home (R) in Vancouver. 50 the side walls, they expose the surrounding countryside. The f loor is highly polished natural wood with no f loor covering. The walls are of the same natural wood. There are no curtains or furnishings, nor is there any type of ornamentation (such as pictures,icons, candles, flowers etc.) in the ha l l . The wooden benches piled along the walls, beneath the windows, are a l l that disrupt the emptiness of the room. Because the hall is used on many other occasions, the lower f loor or basement has kitchen f a c i l i t i e s and a dining area to accommodate three hundred people. When the dining area is not in use, the collapsable tables and chairs are stored in the west corner, leaving a large empty area to be used as the occasion demands. In contrast to the complete absence of ornamentation in the upstairs ha l l , there are several small portraits of Doukhobor leaders and prominent Russian writers (e.g. Leo Tolstoy) on the basement walls. The two halls in Vancouver are roughly the same size (thirty feet by sixty feet) and are of the same general layout, with two sets of doors, a stage at the east end, and movable chairs. In the three hal l s , the area between the two sets of doors is not used for socia l iz ing; rather, upon entering one immediately proceeds through both sets of doors. In Vancouver there is not the same sense of spaciousness because the rented halls have fewer and smaller windows. In addition, the darker surface of the walls seems to close in the area. Just as there are no Doukhobor accessories displayed outside, there are no Doukhobor ornaments or f i x -tures inside. This is not to say that there are no pictures etc. on the walls—only that they do not belong to the Doukhobors. There are certain arrangements which are carried out just prior to the beginning of a sobranie. A ' table ' (stol) is placed at the east 51 end of the room, about eight feet from the stage and an equal distance from the north and south walls. The table is small and can be of any shape. In one case i t is round (G), in another square (L), and in the last , rectangular (R). The table can either ba covered with a table-cloth or not. Thus at one hall (R) the table is not covered; at the other two halls the table is covered but in one instance (G) there is a plain white cloth and, in the other (L), there is a cloth with a white background and a multi-colored design. Upon the table 'bread' (xleb), ' s a l t 1 (sol ' ) and 'water' (voda) are placed. In a l l three cases water from a tap is poured into a pitcher and placed on the table along with an empty glass and a sa l tce l lar . A loaf of bread is sometimes put on a plate but in any case i t is put near the other objects on the table. These objects are grouped together although their arrangement would appear to be arbitrary.- In Vancouver, the bread is usually brought by the informal chairman-who also takes i t upon himself to set out these objects and the table. In Grand Forks, this duty f a l l s upon the care-taker of the dom. Mere, one of the women brings a loaf of homemade bread. It is a round loaf about eight inches high, and, though i t is baked in the traditional way, there is no special preparation to set this particular loaf apart from others. The bread used at a Vancouver sobranie is usually purchased at the local store just before the meeting and is placed on the table in i t s commercial wrapping. As the bread is brought to the hall for the occasion, i t is taken home afterwards by the donor whereas the other objects are stored at the hall and are reused at the next meeting. The display of bread, sa l t and water is an old 52 Slavic custom indicative of hospital ity.^ When asked, Doukhobors say that while bread, sa lt and water may have individual meaning, in this context they are taken together to represent hospital ity, the basic necessities of l i f e and " to i l and peaceful l i f e . " The table is used to orient oneself in the building for as one enters the room, the males wi l l group on the l e f t half of the hall and the females on the right half. (See Diagram 1.) Using the table as a point of reference, Doukhobors say that males are on the right hand side and females on the l e f t hand side. While from the entrance men are seen to be on the l e f t and women on the right, Doukhobors see the reverse as being true since men are said to be on the right hand side of God and women on the l e f t . 6 This paral lels their respective positions when one stands behind the table and faces west. The above is applicable to a l l three sobranija but in Vancouver chairs are set up before the beginning of the meeting. Again in re la -tion to the table, several rows of chairs are set a few feet from the table toward the west end. The rows of chairs are grouped so that those on the men's side and those on the women's side face each other. (See Diagram 1.) B. Participants It was mentioned previously that the ages of those attending sobranija range between thirty-three and eighty-five years, the average age being sixty to sixty f ive years. At such a meeting there is usually ^Both Doukhobors and Russians say that this has been the custom for generations. See also Dunn and Dunn, The Peasants of Central Russia, p. 97. 6 This interpretation was given by a l l informants. DIAGRAM. 1 DOUKHOBOR MEETING HALLS s in ac-table empty chairs position for f i r s t boy and qreotino East ,X i l Y. x xx x y y TV MEETING HALL IN VANCOUVER L E G E N D ; x denotes males congregating before sobranija X denotes males during sobranija y denotes females congregating before sobranija - • Y ctefletes-^emates daring sobranija 54 an equal number of males and females. The absence of young people, or those between the ages of ten and thirty years, is readily apparent. Occasionally young children of both sexes accompany their parents. Duri the meeting children wi l l remain with the parent of the same sex. At a sobranie not only do most of the participants know each other on a f i r s t name basis, but because of the famil iar i ty within the ethnic group, one can also trace an individual 's parents, grandparents, close relat ives, vi l lage Of or ig in, allegiances and act iv i t ies by the family name. Before the meeting begins people chat quietly, often making i n -quiries about other Doukhobors or talking about the differences between the various factions. In a group where members know each Other, the non member or the stranger is conspicious upon entrance, especially i f he does not give the proper Doukhobor greeting. If one f a i l s to extend the appropriate greeting or i f the proper greeting is given and one s t i l l remains unrecognized, those Doukhobors already present wi l l ask one's family name. If the name is of Doukhobor origin one is then asked his patronymic name.? From this information the Doukhobors wi l l infer that one has come because of his background; in the case of a non-Doukhobor the reason for one's presence is asked. During the informal conversation prior to the meeting individuals frequently glance around to check for the presence or absence of those who regularly attend. When those who are expected to be there have ?Among Russian speakers, one's patronymic name is differentiated from one's family name. The patronymic is thename derived from the father's f i r s t name with the addition of the appropriate suffix. This name preceeds one's family name or surname, thus for example, in the name Peter Petrovich Verigin, Petrovich ('son of Peter') is the pat-ronymic and Verigin is the family name. 55 arrived, or when i t is f e l t enough people are present, someone suggests that the meeting begin. The suggestion i s usually made by an elder, always a male, who.simply says "Let's start brothers and s i s ters . " The 'elder ' or starosta 8 is expected to be the in i t i a tor probably because he is assumed to have the greatest knowledge of the traditions. The elder informally assumes this role as a function of the particular social con-text and not solely because of personal attributes. Thus he may be an in i t i a to r at some sobranija and not at others.^ Speci f ica l ly , as elder, he is concerned with choosing the appropriate time to begin. He is usually the f i r s t to give a prayer and he knows,.as does everyone else, those who usually 'read' prayers.1° He picks up cues as to when a given sequence of events has terminated and a new one should commence. In some subtle manner (such as raising his eyebrows or glancing in a certain direction) he intimates that i t is appropriate for the next act iv i t ies to begin. Considering a l l of the sobranija the researchers attended, there °The starosta ( l i t e ra l l y , 'e lder ' ) in nineteenth century Russia was the head of the mir or peasant commune. (Dunn and Dunn, The  Peasants of Central Russia, p. 9.) The elder was chosen by the members of the commune to act as their spokesman and to manage the transactions of the mir. (Also see Tarasoff, In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 1, p. 54.) b rake ' s a r t i c le was helpful in describing this role. See his discussion of "assistants" in Subanun ceremonies, expecially p. 480. ("A Structural Description of Subanun 'Religious' Behavior," in Cognitive Anthropology, Tyler, (ed.), 1969, pp. 470-487.) l^The meanings given for the Russian verb c i t a t ' are 'to read' and 'to rec i te . ' When Russian or Doukhobor Russian speakers translate this verb into English they tend to use one form—'to read.' Thus the Doukhobors wi l l say in English that they "read their prayers." The English speaker should remember, however, that Doukhoborism is an oral tradition and that prayers are 'read' ( i .e. recited) from memory. 56 were few incidents that could perhaps be cal led inappropriate behavior. At one meeting in Vancouver, people were standing s i lent ly except for the person who was recit ing his prayer. An elderly woman in her late eighties interrupted the proceedings by interjecting a few irrelevant comments ( i .e. irrelevant to the proceedings). This was the only time the elder was observed to make an overt gesture; he simple called her name--"Tanya." She immediately recoiled and stood in silence for the remainder of the meeting. It should be noted that in some ways this is an atypical example for everyone present considers the old woman to be "a l i t t l e senile" and excuses her on this account. Nevertheless the example was included as an i l lus t rat ion of how the elder is expected to handle violations of understood rules of conduct. But i t is not always the elder who is expected to deal with improper situations. In the case of a person who may attempt to converse in a hushed voice with his neighbour, those around him wil l indicate that he is not conforming to the decorum by turning to look at him br ie f ly . C. Dress At the sobranija of a l l three groups, men's at t i re is not str ik ingly dist inct ive and i t would not readily identify them as 'Doukho-bor.' Men wear either suits or sports jackets and pants. Shirts range from dress shirts to sports shirts and ties are worn by some but not by others. Consistency seems to l i e in the fact that some type of jacket is worn. While men may wear overcoats and hats to the hall these are removed after entering. In contrast to the men, the women at Grand Forks meetings have a d ist inct ively Doukhobor way of dressing. No woman wi l l enter the dom 57 without her head covered. A large shawl is worn over the head and shoul-ders, extending to the small of the back. It is made either of cotton or lace, in the former case the fabric is plain though small groups of flowers frequently are hand embroidered on i t and in the latter case a f lora l design in lace is evident. A three inch fringe borders the shawl in the back. The shawl f i t s t ightly around the face in front of the ears, exposing l i t t l e or no hair and is held under the throat by a broach. Women wear a two piece ou t f i t , a matching blouse and sk ir t . Skirts are f u l l , plain and mid-calf in length. Blouses with three-quarter length sleeves button down the front and tuck under the waistband of the sk i r t . The blouses and skirts are of matching fabric and while some have small patterns, they are predominantly of plain material. A woman's shawl is generally of the same colour as her out f i t . The prevalent colours are pastel shades of green, blue, yellow and pink. Doukhobors wear no jewellery. Bracelets, necklaces or broaches are not worn as accessories and seldom are watches or rings seen. Rings are not exchanged at a Doukhobor wedding for i t is believed that this is a "sign of materialism"; furthermore i t is believed to be superfluous to the state of being married. When a person feels a need for an out-ward sign of marriage for the sake of the larger Canadian society, a woman wi l l wear a plain thin wedding band. It is uncommon to see facial make-up, even l i p s t i ck , and at a sobranie in Grand Forks, one never sees a woman carrying a purse. While this traditional dress is maintained in Grand Forks, var i -ations are seen in the dress of women attending Vancouver sobranija. Although some Doukhobor women do wear the traditional dress in 58 Vancouver, this is certainly the exception. It seems characteristic of the older women (s ixty-f ive years and over) to wear a shawl, kerchief or hat. Typical ly, more women have their heads covered at one sobranie (R) than at the other (L). At both these meetings, covering the head is not as s t r i c t l y practiced as i t 1s in Grand Forks. Generally, the Doukhobor women wear clothing that can be included under the vague term of "average Canadian" dress. Dark or pastel coats are worn to the halls and are kept on throughout the meetings. Again, jewellery is not d is -played although possibly i t maybe worn beneath the coat. Wedding rings and purses are apparent yet nevertheless they cannot be said to be common. D. Music Much of Doukhoborism is revealed through i t s particular style of singing. Doukhobors always sing without accompanying instruments, which they condemn. As their entire tradition is o ra l , words and musical arrangements have served as one of the principal means by which their history, prescriptions and proscriptions, and concepts of l i f e have been: passed from generation to generation. Doukhobors believe that through committing the words to memory, they wi l l become a part of the person and be his guide for l i f e . "Record i t in your hearts; deliver i t by mouth" Doukhobors say. A chi ld is not only taught the words to the many songs but he i s also taught his own "part." Over time an individual becomes so famil -iar with the words and style as to be able to participate at any Doukho-bor gathering. Male and female voices sing in unison, though an octave; apart. There are two parts for both men and women and approximately one..... 59 half of the congregation wi l l sing the principal melody. The others, perhaps the more musically g i f ted, wi l l sing the embellishing harmonies.11 There is rib provision made in this communally-oriented group for such a gifted person to display his talents individual ly; there is no place for solos or duets. Within the group then, everyone knows the words and harmonies and the group together forms the choir which requires no for-mal direction. Kenneth Peacock has collected and recorded many types of Doukhobor songs and he describes their music in the following way: "A l l Doukhobor group singing has this strong central column of sound from which the cantilevered harmonies are projected."12 To the unaccus-tomed l i stener the music may sound monotonous and extremely slow and solemn. When one becomes familiar with the style of singing the solernn-ness takes on the meaning of the words and one comes to appreciate the intr icacies of the harmony. Doukhobors divide their songs into three main categories: 'psalms' (psalmy), 'hymns' ( s t i x i ) , and ' folk songs' (narodnaja pesnja). Folk songs, however, are not important to this discussion since they are never sung at a Sunday meeting. Psalms are the oldest musical form of the Doukhobor tradit ion. They are memorized teachings of the spir itual leaders and selected lessons from the Bible. The psalms were la id down primarily by two early leaders: I larion Pobirokhin (1775-1785) and Saveli i Kapustin (1790-1818). Later additional contributions were made llRenneth Peacock, "The Music of the Doukhobors," in his Twenty  Ethnic Songs from Western Canada, Ottawa, National Museum of Canada, 1966, p. 39. 1 2 Loc . c i t . 60 by Peter V. Verigin and Peter P. V e r i g i n . 1 3 Although the word "psalm" is used i t does not always refer to specif ic Bibl ical passages. Ideas from the Old and New Testaments have been used as the basis of some Doukhobor psalms. These psalms are teachings common to a l l Doukhobors rather than spontaneous invocations of individuals. They are memorized and every individual supposedly knows exactly the same psalms as every other Doukhobor. Because of the standardized nature, there is no oppor-tunity in a psalm for individual variation. Doukhobors say that the dist inct ive manner of singing psalms arose out of the religious persecutions they suffered in Russ ia .^ To avoid detection of their ac t i v i t i e s , the words of the psalms were made unrec-ognizable by extending some syllables for several minutes, creating a dirge- l ike effect. To i l l u s t ra te , when the word slava (meaning 'praise ' ) is contained in a psalm the syl lable sla_ is held over a series of varying notes for about two or three minutes. This being the case, f ive words of a psalm may take up to ten minutes to be sung.15* Psalms most commonly deal with the Doukhobor concept of l i f e and worship. Among other things they give the Doukhobor view of heaven and h e l l , church r i t u a l , passivism, humility, brotherhood and understanding. Every psalm ends with the phrase 'glory to our God' (Bogu nasemu slava). 1 3 Popoff, Historical Exposition, pp. 10-13, and Peter Legebokoff, personal communication. ^The respondents interviewed related the emergence of this style of psalm singing to the time of Doukhobor persecutions by the Russian Orthodox Church and State. This explanation is also given by Hugh Herbison in his chapter on "Religion" in Hawthorn's Doukhobors of Br i t i sh  Columbia, p. 176, and by Woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, p. 22. 150p_. c i t . , p. 35. 61 Many of the psalms are in the form of questions and answers. For example, the psalm "What manner of person art thou" (also referred to as "The question and answer psalm") is said to have been composed around 1775-1785 by I larion Pobirokhin who insisted that the written word was l i f e -less as, he said, was evident in the Russian Orthodox Church. 1 6 Because this i s a lengthy psalm, Doukhobors have broken i t into several parts and these are sung separately. Selected questions and answers from this psalm have been included here to indicate some of the ideas and precepts contained within psalms. What is the kingdom? The kingdom is neither food nor drink; i t is righteousness on earth and joy in the Holy Sp i r i t . What is the root of a l l evi l? Love of money and idol worship. How do you pray to God without priests? With true reverence, humility and love. What kind of works do you refrain from doing? We refrain from anger and violence; from the judgment of others and taking of oaths, and from taking part in the terr ib le acts of war. We do not keep company with those who indulge in foolish giddiness, dance and other forms of devi l - inspired worldly pleasures. 1 7 While these memorized teachings are sung, they are also said (I.e. spoken) at a particular time in the sobranie. In this case they are referred to as 'prayers* (molitvy). When psalms are sung at a sobranie a l l those present stand shoulder to shoulder. Men and women stand with 1 6 Popoff, Historical Exposition, p. 7. 1 7 I b i d . , pp. 32-39; and Doukhobors: Their Faith, Saskatchewan, Published by the Doukhobor Society of Canada, 1961, pp. 9-24. 62 elbows s l ight ly bent and hands clasped in front below the waist. A l l heads are s l ight ly bowed during psalm singing. The pitch and tempo are set by one person, usually a woman, who is known to be a good singer. The person who in i t iates the singing has a similar position to that described for the elder. That i s , whether one is informally expected to begin the psalms depends not only upon who else is present but also upon how famil iar one is with the impl ic i t ly agreed upon psalm. In addition to psalms, Doukhobors sing hymns which Peacock has categorized into several types. One group can be c lass i f ied as early historical hymns. These were sung in Russia before the turn of the twentieth century. They are transitional in that they have elements which identify them as both psalms and hymns. They are not completely metered as are later hymns nor are they exclusively of the form of the older psalms. 1 8 Hymns are further differentiated from psalms as the lat ter are in the form of one complete text which flows continuously from beginning to end. Hymns, on the other hand, are made up of a num-ber of verses or stanzas and there are noticeable breaks between these since the individual who starts the hymn also starts the f i r s t few bars of each verse. As a result of the ambiguous status of early hymns they are called psalms by the Independent Doukhobors (L) while most of the remaining Doukhobors (R and G) regard them as hymns.^ The early hymns have themes similar to those presented in the discussion of psalms. In contrast to these early hymns, later hymns make reference to specif ic 1 8Peacock, "The Music of the Doukhobors," pp. 35-38. 1^ 1n interviews, the older Doukhobors from Lockdale Hall stated that they sing "old hymns" instead of "psalms." They say this is so because many of the "younger people" no longer "know how to sing psalms." 63 events in Doukhobor history such as persecution, imprisonment, martyrdom, the burning of their arms, treks, and " . . . they often ref lect the longing and dispair of a people undergoing persecution and e x i l e . " 2 0 In com-parison with psalms, hymns are of a faster tempo and a l l words and phrases are known and understood by the singers. Br ief ly, psalms and hymns can be considered an oral record of and a commentary upon Doukhobor l i f e . E. Sequsnce of Events At eleven o' clock on Sunday morning, a sobranie begins in the Grand Forks dom. It lasts for about three-quarters of an hour. In Vancouver the starting time is supposedly one o' clock Sunday afternoon and once a sobranie begins i t lasts for about three and one half hours. People start arriving approximately five minutes before the meeting is said to begin. As individuals enter the building they give a formal greeting for this occasion. The f i r s t to arrive at the dom enter and simply bow their heads. When others arr ive, usually in couples or small groups, they enter through the door on the appropriate side. The men are on the l e f t side of the hall and women on the right but, as was noted e a r l i e r , 2 1 males are said to be on the right side and females on the l e f t side in relation to the table. People enter with their hands in front, clasped below the waist, and walk half way into the room. Here they pause, bow from the waist down saying, slavim Bogu-Bog proslav'sja or 'we praise God and God is worthy of praise, ' to which those already 20This quote is taken from Peacock's a r t i c le "The Music of the Doukhobors," p. 35. See his chapter for a fu l le r discussion of the Various kinds of hymns. 2 1 See Chapter IV, Section A 2, Interior Setting. 64 present reply velikoe imja Gospod'noe povse zemle or 'the Lord's name is known throughout the who!e earth. ' The procedure is the same in Van-couver sobranija, although people walk only a few paces into the room and say slava Gospody or 'praise our Lord.' In this case those present reply SIavim blagodarim. Xristos voskres or 'We gratefully praise him too. Christ is r i s e n . , 2 2 In both Grand Forks and in Vancouver, people congregate in the west half of the building (at the opposite end from the table) and talk informally while waiting for the others to arrive. On their appropriate sides, men and women chat quietly to one another. People rarely cross the hall to talk to someone of the opposite sex. When i t is f e l t that a l l who are expected to attend have arrived, or when i t is f e l t that "enough" people are there, the elder wi l l say "Brothers and sisters l e t ' s start. " This informal period can vary in length from approximately ten minutes to one hour during which time people anticipate the arr ival of some thirty of forty others. It is interesting to observe that while the starting time for the sobranie fluctuates in Vancouver, the commence-ment of the sobranie in Grand Forks is punctually adhered to. After the suggestion to begin has been made, people gradually move toward the opposite end of the hall and group together more or less in rows of f ive or six people, with the table between the sexes. (Refer to Diagram 1.) As people approach the table they assume a stance that is maintained throughout the sobranie; men stand with hands clasped below the waist while women's hands are clasped and placed at the waist. The head is s l ight ly bowed, the eyes open. While people 2 2For an explanation of the reasons for these different greetings see Chapter IV, Section F. 65 may glance around, they look at no one in particular. Should an indiv-idual arrive while any part of the sobranie is in progress, he wi l l enter quietly, walk to the center of the room pause, and bow, waiting for the others to acknowledge his presence with a nod of the head before he takes his place. Prayers are recited f i r s t by the males and then by the females. Respect for age may be evidenced by the places where people stand and the order in which they give their prayers. When people are gathered at the table to give prayers they stand in rows, males and females facing each other so that the elders stand closest to the east end and closest to the table. Perhaps the Doukhobor view of age and maleness is demon-strated in the sequence of prayers—the elder, elderly men, younger men, elderly women, younger women. Each individual recites a different prayer. Tradit ional ly, everyone present was obliged to say a different prayer but now the number of prayers spoken varies from week to week, depending on the number of people who choose to say a prayer. At the conclusion of each prayer everyone bows together. Different types of bows occur and consequently i t should be noted that the bow at the end of a prayer is called obs'cee poklonenie 2 3 or 'communal bow1 by the Doukhobors. It is distinguished from the bow that is given upon entering the hall which is simply referred to as poklonenie or 'bow. ' 2 4 The f inal prayer recited is always Otce nat or 'Our Father' ( i .e . The ^Doukhobors translate the noun poklonenie as 'bow.' However in standard Russian this term means 'worship.' The word poklonenie i s derived from poklon, which means 'bow' to both speakers. But, poklon is rarely used by the Doukhobors for the above mentioned bows. 24Doukhobors explain bowing as the acknowledgment of the presence of the sp i r i t within the other person. 66 Lord's Prayer). The prayers take between ten and f i f teen minutes to be recited. After th is , three psalms are sung, the f i r s t being 'Our Father.' People group closer and closer together as the singing proceeds. This is a subtle movement of people slowly, continuously, but perhaps unknow-ingly, clustering together. Although most people participate, as a rule more women sing than men. As is the case during the recit ing of prayers, those who do not wish to participate 1n the psalm singing stand furthest from the table. On the second verse of the second psalm the man nearest the east end (usually the elder) clasps the right hand of the man beside him and they bow deeply to each other three times, kiss three times— on the right cheek, l e f t cheek and then on the l i p s . They turn and a l l the men as a group bow to the women. Only as many individuals as choose participate in this act iv ity—general ly i t involves about ten men. When the men have completed the rounds of bowing and kissing, the women commence the same. The singing of psalms continues uninterrupted throughout this sequence. This act of bowing and kissing is also called poklonenie. The length of time involved for the singing of psalms, the bowing and kissing varies with the number of participants but on the average i t lasts f i f teen to twenty minutes. The conclusion of a Grand Forks meeting is marked by a l l individuals simultaneously kneeling and touching their foreheads to the ground three times. On each respective bow they repeat in unison: Vefc'naja pamit' vsem' pokoj nam borcam  za is t ' inu or 'Everlasting memory for a l l those strugglers of truth! ' zivem pozalej Gospodi dobroqo zdorov'ja. Prosti nam Gospodi i_ ukrepi v putjax tvojix or 'Grant 0 Lord good health to those l i v ing . Forgive us 0 Lord and strengthen us in your pathways'; Otcu i synu i svjatomu  duxu or 'Of the Father and Son and Holy Sp i r i t . ' This is known as the 67 zemlepoklonenie or 'bow to the earth. ' After the last bow people r ise and nothing more is said. They slowly disperse, though some congregate to chat informally. The conversation is carried on in the west half of the ha l l , away from the table, just as i t was prior to the beginning of the meeting. Most conversation takes place between members of the same sex. If males and females do speak to one another they usually stand near the center of the hall at the west end. Generally most people have l e f t the dom within ten minutes and presumably they have returned home. Both of the last two types of bows mentioned are omitted from sobranija in Vancouver.2!* When the three psalms have been sung, people proceed to the chairs west of the table (See Diagram 1) where they soon begin to talk among themselves. In Vancouver then, the movement away from the table and the breaking of the silence mark a change in the tone of the meeting. Once the people walk away from the table and move toward the chairs, the atmosphere becomes more relaxed as people begin to con-verse, re-arrange chairs and the usual sounds of people shuff l ing, coughing and getting themselves settled continue for about f ive minutes. During this time there is a conscious manipulation of people as someone inevitably says "move up to the front and closer together." Of the two and one half hours that follow, approximately half of the time is spent singing while the remainder is taken up by group d is -cussion. Again, not necessarily everyone participates and those people who s i t in the back rows often carry on conversations with one another. During this part of the sobranie individuals do get up to go to the 2^For an explanation of this omission see Chapter IV, Section F. 68 washroom or to leave the ha l l . Upon occasion, i f the necessity arises, an individual wi l l cross the hall to speak br ief ly with a member of the opposite sex. As people often look over to the other side of the room, a husband and wife may subtly indicate to each other when to leave, for example. In this event the people then leave as unobtrusively as poss- . ib le . In a Vancouver sobranie when someone arrives while the others are seated, he stops several yards to the west of the chairs, pauses, and then says 'Praise our Lord.' If those present are not in the process of singing they give the customary reply. If they are, however, they simply nod in recognition. The choice of a psalm sung while the people stand around the table seems to depend mainly upon the preference of the individual who starts the singing. Once people are seated, the selection of hymns is often preceeded by unstructured conversation until a consensus is reached as to what particular hymn wi l l be sung at a given time. It also happens that an individual wi l l start singing a hymn without prior discussion. Should the others have forgotten this hymn and not join i n , the singing stops and a discussion follows as to whether or not to con-tinue. This has happened occasionally during hymn singing but never has i t been observed during psalm singing. The discussions at the two sobranija take different forms. The sobranie which is held by the Independents (L) assumes a different character attributable, to at least some extent, to the formal structure of the Society of Doukhobors of Canada. The Society has an elected chairman who presides over discussions which deal with organizational matters. A new chairman is elected annually and this position does not necessarily f a l l upon the elder. At one meeting the discussion concerned 69 the proposal to build a home for elderly Doukhobors; at another, the topics centered around Doukhobor Youth Groups and an athlet ic association; a familiar theme is Doukhobor factionalism. Individuals begin speaking by addressing the others as "Brothers and s isters" and indicate the end of their discourse by thanking the others for l istening. Discussion of such matters continues principal ly among the males for roughly ten minutes or, until the women interrupt with another hymn. The subjects are not considered resolved until everyone more or less agrees on a course of action. Therefore discussions continue from one sobranie to another. The hymns which punctuate the discussion usually number nine or ten but one or several can be sung consecutively. In sum, the portion of the sobranie when people are seated can be described as discussion frequently interspersed with hymns. The other sobranija (R) can be described as the reverse: hymn singing interspersed with discussion. This can be readily seen by the topics that are raised. Often discussions revolve around whether or not i t is appropriate to talk about "business" at a sobranie. When dis-cussion begins, the comment usually made is "I come to sobranie to sing and this i sn ' t a sobranie." At this sobranie the only recurrent topic pertains to the differences between the various Doukhobor groups. There i s no chairman among the group, ref lect ing the unstructured nature of this sobranie in contrast with the other. It is because discussion is not generally held to be proper, by those attending, that hymn singing predominates this meeting. In comparison with the entire Grand Forks sobranija and the part of the Vancouver sobranija when people stand around the table, the seated portion of the meeting appears to be characterized by more f lex-70 i b i l i t y . There is no set number of hymns to be sung nor is there a definite order to the proceedings. People seem to be able to choose the extent they wish to participate and there are less restrictions on appropriate behavior. The lack of restrictions is seen in the examples of a person leaving the room or of a thirsty individual going over to the table and pouring himself a glass of water, occurrences which are never seen while people are grouped around the table. . A f t e r about two or three hours of sobranie people often begin leaving. When either the numbers are greatly reduced or when they feel they have discussed and sung enough, someone begins the hymn 'The closing of the sobranie.' After th i s , people col lect the bread, sa l t and water and put away the table and the chairs. This usually takes about thirty minutes because of the conversation that occurs while these things are being dene. People then leave the hall to return home. F. Historical Prayer Meeting In attempting to account for soma of the variations which are apparent in the meetings as described in the previous part of this chapter, a description of a late nineteenth century Sunday meeting is given in this section. The reconstruction of the meeting deals mainly with the sequence of events on this occasion, to the exclusion of other ethnographic details such as dress and music. The account which is presented in this section of the chapter has been reconstructed primar-i l y on the basis of Christian Martyrdom in Russia edited by Vladimir Tchertkoff, the text of which is a translation of a manuscript published in Russian Antiquity, (1C05). Another first-hand description was re-corded by Stephen Orellet in his "V i s i t to the Doukhobors near 71 Ekaterinoslav in 1819." Several secondary descriptions were also used in researching the prayer meetings of the nineteenth century. It is said that the Doukhobors broke away from the Russian Orthodox Church in the seventeenth century because of the emphasis placed upon what they considered to be ceremonial external it ies. The Doukhobor faith at this time expressed i t s e l f in a negative attitude to outside authority. They believed external sacraments were offensive to God, and that priests and r i tual acted as a barrier to actual communion between God and man. By removing the Orthodox barriers, the Doukhobors believed men and women could attain harmony with God. This harmony involved freedom from a l l obligations to the Church and State.27 Viewing a l l obligations to the Church as inexcusable abuses, the Doukhobors then in i t iated what they believed to be the "correct" form of worshipping God. From the time of their early history Doukhobors held a gathering known as 'God's prayers' or 'God's prayer meeting.' These phrases are glosses for the Doukhobor word boqomolenie. The word Bog ('God') was often dropped so that the gathering was simply cal led a molenie /" In Alymer Maude's A Peculiar People an account is found (New York, Funk and Wagnalls, c. 1904, pp. 142-43). In Slava Bohu, J . F. C. Wright recreates the 1877-78 mode of "religious observance" (New York, Ferris and Rinehart, c. 1940, pp. 38-39). Additional references to "prayer services" are found in Tarasoff's In Search of Brotherhood (Vol. 1, p. 92). In The Doukhobors, Woodcock and Avakumovic describe a similar gathering which took place during the time of Luker'ia Kalmykova (the late nineteenth century), p. 103. It is possible that the variations in these accounts may be attributable to differences in time, location or interpretation. Wright, Slava Bohu, p. 13. 72 ('prayers'or 'prayer meet ing ' ) . " Doukhobors say they confine the word molenie exclusively to their own prayer meetings; they never use the word molenie when referring to prayer meetings or gatherings of non-Doukhobors. Since Doukhobors recognized no holy days, a l l days were regarded as equal and a molenie could be held at dawn on any day. However in most cases, for the sake of convenience, these gatherings took place on ordinary Church or national holy-days. Because the Doukhobors did not attach any significance to particular l o ca l i t i e s , these prayer meetings were held outside or in anyone's house. Upon entering the house, i t was customary to walk a few paces into the room and exchange greetings. The tradition was to bow from the waist down (objcee poklonenie) saying: Slavim Bogu-Bog proslav'sja ('We praise God and God is worthy of his praise') to which those already present replied Velikoe imja Gospod'noe povse zemle ('The Lord's name is great through-out the whole e a r t h ' ) . 2 9 When the exchange of these salutations had ^°Bonch-Bruevich in Zhivotnaya Kniga Dukhoborstev (St. Petersberg, n.p., 1909) makes reference to a bogomolenie, p. 24. The use of the word bogomolenie was confirmed in personal interviews with a number of elderly Vancouver Doukhobors including: Mr. Sam Chernoff, Mr. William Makayoff, Mr. Nikitn Popoff and Mrs. Verigin, wife of the late Michael the Archangel Verigin. Further validation was obtained in Grand Forks, Brit ish Columbia from Peter Legebokoff, E l i Popoff and William Sukhorev. There i s , however, no mention of a molenie or bogomolenie in the English l i terature on Doukhobors. But in these accounts there are references made to, and descriptions of, "religious services" and sobranija. This is an important point and wi l l be discussed in great detail in Chapter VI. 2 9A1though these greetings have not been documented, Nikila Popoff remembers attending molenija in Russia when this tradit ion was practiced. E l i Popoff corroborates this from material he has gathered. Further-more this greeting is s t i l l carried on at the molenija in Grand Forks at the present time, and possibly other Doukhobor settlements. 73 been.completed, a man would stand in l ine on the right hand side of the rccm while a v/oman would stand in l ine on the l e f t side. A plain table with a,white, cloth upon which, was placed bread, salt and water separated the men's side from the women's. Thus the men would be standing, on the l e f t side of the rccm as one entered, the women standing on the right side of the room. The f i r s t man in l ine would start recit ing a prayer followed by each one, in turn, saying a different prayer, '.'hen a l l the men had finished rec i t ing, the women then began saying their prayers. Attention should be drawn to the fact that generally between f i f t y and cne hundred people attended a molenie, a l l of whom were obliged to recite a different prayer. HiVan a l l the prayers had been said, someone would begin singing a psalm. On the second verse of the secend psalm the f i r s t l ine would clasp the right hand of the second man and they would bow very low to each other three times, then kiss three times, before bowing to the women (poklonenie). "' By turns, a l l other males repeated this procedure until every male carried out the bowing and kissing with every other male, "hen the men had completed the rounds of bowing and kissing, the women then commenced the same. The singing of psalms Ly a l l those present continued throughout this sequence. At the end of the meeting, a prayer was said after which everyone returned home. This was the form of worship in Russia and i t remained essential ly unchanged during the Doukhobors' f i r s t years in Canada (approximately The sequence of the bowing is not made expl ic i t in any of the early accounts mentioned in footnote 25 of this chanter. However the sequence in Grand Forks today is two deep bows, followed by a kiss and another deep bow. Then the participants face the opposite sex and bow once more. It is possible that the present practice carried out in Grand Forks is either the original procedure or a variation of that tradit ion. 74 three to f ive years). When the Doukhobors arrived in Canada in 1899, their leader Peter V. Verigin remained imprisoned in Siberia. During his incarceration, Verigin sent letters containing advice as to how his followers should meet the challenges of l i f e in a new country. In his l e t ter s , Verigin passed on to the Doukhobors in Canada the principle of passive resistance and other moral rules of conduct which they accepted on his authority. From interviews with elderly Doukhobors, i t became apparent that when Peter's letters were received they were read after the conclusion of the molenija. If questions arose over the application and implementation of his instructions, a sxodka ('regional meeting*) was held. The word sxodka was used by the Doukhobors to mean a meeting held exclusively for discussion, among those within walking distance of each other. In contrast to th i s , a s"ezd or 'convention' was held for similar meetings and included followers from a l l areas. It is important to note that at this time no discussion was carried on during the molenie; rather a separate meeting spec i f ica l ly for the purpose of discussion was held either following a molenie or at some other convenient time. It should be emphasized here that the reading of the letters after the molenie was the i n i t i a l aberration from the original procedure. When Peter the Lordly arrived in Canada in 1902, i t was a logical extension to replace the reading of his letters at the close of the molenie by his personal d i scourse. 3 1 His speeches dealt primarily with spir itual matters. Gradually other individuals were permitted to speak of spit i tual matters only. Doukhobors say that over a long period of time topics began to d r i f t away from what could be cal led spir i tual 3 1From interviews with elderly Doukhobors. See also Woodcock and Avakumovic's The Doukhobors, pp. 238-39. 75 concerns and f ina l l y turned to business matters. It is necessary to recognize that in Russia Doukhobors sang hymns, a fact that has been documented by Bonch-Bruevich. The dist inction be-tween psalms and hymns made in the preceeding chapter was intended to make i t clear that although both psalms and hymns were a part of Doukho-bor tradition in Russia, only the former were an integral part of the molenie. During the interval between 1899 and 1907 (?), Peter the Lordly composed a few hymns and, as E l i Popoff s ta tes , 3 2 some hymns were taken from other Christian groups (including Baptist and Russian Evangelical Christian). However, the incorporation of these new hymns was dependent upon the approval of Verigin. In the past, informal gatherings were occasions at which hymns were sung. For example, i f people did not re-turn home immediately after the molenie they would congregate to sing. As one respondent said, "after the bogomolenie some stayed to play games but others gathered in the afternoon to sing hymns." As a result of the increase in the number of hymns, as well as the increasing persistence of informal discussions, i n i t i a l modifications can be seen. Because the changes were gradual i t is not possible to give their precise dates but those interviewed maintain that several changes took place between 1902 and 1907, corroborating the account of Re ib i n . 3 3 When Peter V. Verigin returned from a v i s i t to Russia in 1905, he held a s"ezd ('convention') at which he informed his followers that they should relinquish some of their old forms of worship. Taking advantage of his 3 2 See E l i Popoff, The Soul Expressive Heritage of the Doukhobor- Russian Group Singing, Unpublished Manuscript, 1968. 3 3Simeon F. Reibin, Trud mirnaia zhizn, i s t o r i i a dukhoborstev  bez maski, San Francisco, Delo, 1952, p. 115. 76 l i terary l icence, Tarasoff suggests what might have been Peter's view of these practices. "Now that we are in Canada" he said, "there is no need to be afraid of Orthodoxy; we can now eliminate those things, which under the Tsarist regime, were employed to muddle and confuse the opposition. Let 's go back to fundamentals."3^ Peter the Lordly declared that some of the psalms, being composed so long ago, had lost their relevance and should be either changed or given up. The Doukhobors complied with this and other alterations. He suggested that the greeting of SI avim Bogu-Bog proslav'sja be replaced by the shorter salutation of Slava Gospody. Further, he abolished the poklonenie (the Doukhobor practice of kissing, bowing and handshaking during the molenie). In 1936 (?) Peter the Lordly's successor Peter Petrovich Verigin reintroduced into the molenie both the poklonenie and the old form of the greeting. 3^ It was also during this time of Peter Petrovich's leadership that a more intense effort was made to compose and col lect hymns and, as a result of his intervention, the singing of hymns became more prominent than the singing of psalms. 3 6 Although Peter P. Verigin reinstituted these tradit ions, they have not been accepted by a l l Doukhobors. The poklonenie and the long form of the greeting have not been reincorporated by Independent Doukhobors who recognize only the authority of Peter V. Verigin. Having described a molenie in Russia, and having discussed a l ter -3 *Tarasoff, In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 2, p. 396. 3 5 Tarasof f , In Search of Brotherhood, Vol. 2, p. 396. Personal interview with William Sukhorev, also to be found in his Istori ia  dukhobortsev. 3 6 Popoff , The Soul Expressive Heritage of the Doukhobor-Russian  Group Singing, p. 6. Also, Woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, p. 349, and Peacock, "The Music of the Doukhobors," p. 38. 77 ations that took place in Canada, i t may be useful to br ief ly summarize the prayer meeting or molenie as i t occurred during the time of Peter Petrovich Verigin. Early in the morning people gathered, bowed and said either Slavim Bogu-Bog proslav'sja or Slava Gospody depending on their allegiance to one or the other of the hereditary leaders . 3 7 When those already present had given their reply, the men stood on the right hand side of the table with i ts bread, salt and water, the women on the l e f t side. Prayers were recited and psalms sung. The bowing, kissing and hand-shaking (poklonenie) were carried out at this point by those who accepted the authority of Peter Petrovich Verigin while i t was omitted by those who did not. After the f inal prayer had been said, the molenie as such terminated. It was in Canada that immediately following the molenie, or shortly thereafter, people would gather to hear spir itual discussions and to sing hymns. 3 7 The researchers concluded from the evidence gathered that the use of one phrase or the other stems from allegiance to a particular leader. This i s not necessarily meant to imply that people make this dist inct ion exp l i c i t l y . 78 CHAPTER V CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN ORTHODOX SERVICE Having presented the descriptive material on the Doukhobor meetings, we wi l l now turn the attention to the Sunday meetings which are held in the Russian Orthodox Churches in Vancouver. For comparative purposes this chapter has been arranged to parallel the organization of Chapter IV. It is intended that in reading the description of a Russian Orthodox service attention wil l be given to s imi lar i t ies and diss imi lar i t ies which appear between this meeting and the Doukhobors' meetings. One could, for i n -stance, compare the preparatory arrangements or the number of people in -volved in the staging of one meeting in comparison with that of the other. A. Setting The Orthodox service held every Sunday morning is the social occasion which constitutes the subject matter of this chapter. The ser-vice is referred to as the divine l i turgy (bozestvennaja l i turg i ja ) or mass1 (obednja).According to Orthodox doctrine, the divine l i turgy is one of seven sacraments,2 the other six being: confession, baptism, conf ir -mation, marriage, ordination and extreme unction. Each one of these 1 'Mass' is a rough gloss for the Russian term obednja which is derived from the word 'dinner' (obed), hence the divine l i turgy or mass implies the sharing of the eucharistic meal. 2Sacraments are defined o f f i c i a l l y as " . . . a holy act through which the grace of the Holy Spir i t is given." (Archimandrite Anthony, A Brief  Catechism of the Orthodox Catholic Eastern Church, "Russian Day" Committee, 1952, p. 44, hereinafter referred to as A Brief Catechism.) 79 sacraments is celebrated in the church. In the case of extreme unction, except when exceptional circumstances may sometimes be prohibit ive, i t is considered preferable that even this sacrament be administered in the church. As the concern of the thesis l ies only with the divine l i turgy, i t is suff ic ient to mention br ief ly that on each of these occasions, different parts of the church are used. As i t wi l l become apparent later, the sanctuary is used by the priest on Sunday morning and "It is here, s t r i c t l y speaking, that Divine Services are conducted . . . . "3 In contrast, for example, confession is held on the l e f t side (from the congregations's point of view) of the nave, and the entire wedding service or 'crowning1  (venEanie) is conducted in the central part of the nave. On the evening prior to the divine l i turgy, vespers (ve£ernja) are held at six o' clock. Those anticipating receiving communion the following morning are obliged to "take confession," and they are expected not to "break the fast" before the service. Tradit ional ly confession was taken the evening before the divine l i turgy. However now i t is not unusual for members to take confession on the morning of the eucharistic service, although this is not favored by the clergy.^ In contrast, at least once a year a clergyman takes confession when in the presence of other priests even though he takes communion weekly. The confessional services observed were of very short duration (approximately two or three minutes). At this time "the sinner contritely confesses his sins before 3Rev. Leonid Soroka and S. W. Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, The  Eastern Orthodox Religion, Minnesota, The Olympic Press, 1954, p. 37, (hereinafter referred to as Faith of Our Fathers). ^Father Vladimir, personal communication. 80 a priest and God forgives him." 5 The divine l i turgy is held at least once a week, though during fes-t ival times a modification of the Sunday service is held during the week. For example during Holy Week in Great Lent, prior to Easter, the l iturgy is celebrated three times a week and vesper services are held once a day. The Russian word for Sunday (Voskresen'e) means 'day of resurrection' and i t is on this day that a eucharistic service is held in remembrance of the Last Supper before Christ 's resurrection. The service always takes place between daybreak and noon. 6 A priest can celebrate only one divine l i turgy a day and only one divine l i turgy can be celebrated on a communion table on any one day. In Vancouver, while the services are not announced from week to week, they always begin punctually at ten-thirty in the morning at two of the churches (HT and SN) and at eleven at the other (HR).7 The services continue for two to two and one half hours. Prior to the staging of this occasion there are certain preparations that must be made. A 'choir practice' (spevka) is held during the week. The altar breads are baked, the church is cleaned and vacuumed and wax is removed from the brass candle holders. On some occasions the icon which is placed in the center of the nave is changed in accordance with the ecclesiast ical calendar and the current festival that is being celebrated. ^Archimandrite Anthony, A Brief Catechism, p. 149. 6The exception is Easter, when midnight mass is held. ?These abbreviations refer to: (HT) Holy Tr in i ty Church (SN) Saint Nicholas Church (HR) Holy Resurrection Church Two i n i t i a l s have been used to denote Orthodox Churches in order that they may readily be distinguished from the various Doukhobor halls which were denoted by a single i n i t i a l . 81 The cloths which completely cover the tables in the church are likewise changed periodical ly to correspond to the Church seasons ( i .e. during Great Lent a l l cloths are changed to black and before the midnight Easter service they are again changed, this time to white). On Sunday morning wine is brought, along with a pitcher of warm water. Approximately one hour before the service begins, the church warden arr ives, the candles are l i t and put in the brass candle holders. A divine l iturgy can take place even when no adult member of the congregation has taken confession, in this case the priest and children participate in the communion. Up to seven years of age, children take communion without confession but after this age they must assume respon-s i b i l i t y for their actions and must confess their sins. Of a l l those present at a divine l i turgy, i t is more common for children under the age of seven to take communion than for adults. For example, in a seven month period 8 adults have been observed taking communion approximately four times (out of th i r t y ) , and two of these occasions were important fest ivals ( i .e. Easter and Christmas). Orthodox members are supposed to take communion at least once a year, and they most commonly take communion at Easter. Another usual time is one's namesday ( i .e. the day commem-orating the saint after whom one is named). However, young children take communion every time they attend which, as previously mentioned, is not the case for adults. Not only must the above preparations be made, but also a priest and congregation (among whom there must be those who know the l iturgy and can respond to the pr iest ' s petitions at the appropriate times) must be 8September 1970 to March 1971. 82 present. Because the word l i turgy means 'public worship,'9 no divine l i turgy can be held by a priest alone. For a divine l iturgy service, there always must be a congregation present. A divine l i turgy is always cele-brated in an Orthodox church in the manner described below. However, there may be instances when there is no church building available and since a divine l i turgy cannot be cancelled, temporary arrangements must be made.1^ Services can be held in other locations (e.g. f i e l d , house, or garage) when certain provisions have been made. There must be at least an antimins 1 1 bread and wine and icons of Christ and Mary before a divine l i turgy can be celebrated. 1. Exterior Setting Of these Orthodo* churches in Vancouver, Holy Resurrection is the largest, both in terms of the size of the building i t se l f and in terms of the size of the congregation. Of the churches, i t is the most recently constructed (in the late 1950's). The church is located in a residential area, (Forty-Third Avenue and Main Street) on a comer l o t , with an adjacent hall on the same property. The church building is surrounded by a lawn and garden, which extends around the ha l l , on a l l but one side. There is a paved parking area, accessible from Forty-Third Avenue. The blacktop parking area separates the church buildings from the parsonage, %rom the Greek word " leitourgie" meaning public service, service of the gods, or public worship. Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1933. Pub].c worship is also a-meaning given by informants. ^Father Vladimir and Bishop Antonuk, personal communication. " The word antimins has been incorporated into the Russian language but i t is a loan word from the Greek language. This also applies to many other terms used by the Russian Orthodox Church. 83 a modest two-storey stucco house on the adjoining lo t . Here, the resident pr iest, presently a bishop, l ives alone in a minimally furnished house. Relative to the other two churches, Holy Resurrection has the most elaborate decorations and l i turg ica l paraphernalia. It also has the largest area inside the church building. In addition, i t is the only church with an adjoining building used for church concerts and meals. Holy Tr in i ty on Campbell Avenue, is bounded by a wire fence that is kept locked when the church is not in use. This particular church has been mentioned second of the three for , compared to the others, i t ranks in an intermediary position with respect to s ize, number of members, and (in very general terms) interior decorations and ornamentation. On the property there is one building. Access to the basement, used for church gatherings and feasts, is gained only by an outside door on the side. The priest who of f ic iates at Holy Tr in i ty l ives at least one mile away from the church, in a house which he shares with his (biological) s ister. St. Nicholas Church, on the corner of east Thirteenth Avenue near Kingsway, is bui l t on a single lot among surrounding homes, most o f which are of older vintage. Approaching the church, one walks up a h i l l , beside an al ley and passes in front of a small, one room manse, located behind the church, where the monk l i ves . This is a very modest church, being one storey, without a basement or ha l l . Because i t has no basement, when one enters the church one finds that a heater occupies a prominent place in the center part of the church. Al l these Orthodox churches, in Vancouver, are located on side-streets and are readily identif iable by the dist inct ive style of architecture. Saint Nicholas is the exception architectural ly because 84 i t s exterior construction is not of the typical Byzantine form; i t is a brown stucco, rectangular building with a gabled roof. Of the three churches, Holy Resurrection is identif ied by a large sign near the east end of the property stating, in English, the name of the Church, the jur i sd ic t ion, the of f ic ia t ing bishop and the hours of services. Perhaps i t is interesting to note that this particular Church belongs to the North American Jurisdict ion which acknowledges the use of some English in the services. Of the other two Churches which belong to the ju r i s -diction of the Russian Orthodox Church in Exi le, one (HT) has no sign outside, while the other'(SN) has a small notice, tacked to the door stating, in Russian, the hours of the services. Orthodox churches are usually bui lt in the Byzantine sty le, charact-erized by one or more "onion-shaped" domes or cupolas. The number of cupolas varies from one to t h i r t e e n . 1 2 There may be more than thirteen, yet there are always an odd number of domes. Significance is attached to the number of cupolas on a church. One dome, for example, s ignif ies that Christ is the head of the Church and three domes represent the Holy T r i n i t y . 1 3 Holy Resurrection and Holy Tr in i ty each have three domes, while there is no dome at St. Nicholas. On top of each cupola is a cross of the Orthodox form. There are 1 20rthodox Cathoiic Christian Education Lessons, Unit 3—The Divine  Liturgy, published by Metropolitan Council, Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church, 1965, p. 18, (hereinafter referred to as Orthodox  Education Lessons). 1 3Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 36. Explanations of other numbers of domes are as follows: f ive cupolas represent Christ and the four evangelists, seven cupolas represent the seven g i fts of the Holy Sp i r i t , nine cupolas represent the nine ranks of angels, and thirteen cupolas represent Christ and the twelve disc iples. 85 several historical explanations for the Orthodox style of the cross. This cross, which emerged around the tenth century, has a lower, diagonally placed, foot bar and a top horizontal cross bar.* 4 In an interview, the bishop gave the following interpretation of the bars on the cross: when facing the cross, the foot bar is t i l t ed with the l e f t side slanting up and the right side slanting down, because Christ was upon the cross and the sides were reversed for Him. Thus the cross has continued to be interpreted from Christ ' s point of view. It is t i l t e d up that way [where the l e f t side is raised from the onlooker's perspec-t i ve , but where the right side is considered to be elevated] for the thief who asked to be remembered in the kingdom—for those who follow Christ wil l go to heaven. The opposite side slants down for those who wil l not reach paradise.1£> The shorter, upper bar stands for "the tablet" nailed above Christ ' s head when he was cruci f ied. The exterior shape of the Orthodox church can be one of several forms. One church (HT) is bui lt in the shape of a cross, meant to refer to the crucif ied Christ as redeemer. The other two churches (HR and SH) are rectangular, and this is said to be indicative of the ark which carries the Christian to find salvation. There are two other forms upon which Orthodox churches can be constructed: c ircular churches denote the in f in i ty of the Church and the unity of earth and heaven; star-shaped buildings with eight angles symbolize the role of the Church as a guiding 1 4 I b i d . , p. 34. 15 Explanations in the l i terature on Orthodoxy give this and similar interpretations. (See Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 34, also Archimandrite Anthony, A Brief Catechism, p. 95."] 86 l i g h t . 1 6 After walking up a few sta i rs , one enters the churches through a set of double doors. When inside the lobby, a person then faces another set of closed doors. He opens these and immediately proceeds into the nave. 2. Interior Setting The interior of the church is divided into three parts: (1) 'vestibule' or narthex (pritvor); (2) central 'nave' or the church proper (sepedinaja cerkov'), and (3) 'sanctuary' (a ltar*). A plan of an Orthodox church is presented in Diagram 2. VESTIBULE The vestibule is said to correspond to the courtyard where, in the past, the catechumens17 (oglasenie) remained during the service. This portion of the church is now much reduced in size. 1** At two of the Churches (HT and SN) the vestibule is an area approximately six feet by six feet, containing a large wardrobe with the c ler ica l vestments for the various ecclesiast ical seasons. Often small notices of future church events are tacked to the doors separating the vestibule from the nave. Now this area acts only as a passage-way for the members of the Church. NAVE Beyond these inner doors l i e s the nave where the worshippers 1 6Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 35. 1 7 The unbaptized or those preparing for baptism into the Orthodox Church. •^Orthodox Education Lessons, p. 18. G7 DIAGRAM 2 PLAM OF A RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH BASED UPON HOLY TRINITY CHURCH* -See legend on foilowing page. LEGEND FOR DIAGRAM 2 PARTS OF THE CHURCH: ICONS ON ICONOSTAS: A. iconostas (or altar screen) B. vestibule C. nave D. sanctuary E. kl iros F. sacristy G. solea H. amvon I. domes J . stairs to balcony K. royal doors L. north door M. south door a. Gabriel b. Patron Saint of Church c. Mary and Christ Child d. Jesus Christ e. John the Baptist f . Archangel Michael ICONS ON BANNERS: g. banner of Mary and Christ Child h. banner of Jesus Christ FURNISHINGS: 1. table (at which the church warden stands) 2. brass candleholders 3. coff in 4. cruc i f ix 5. throne 6. table of oblation 7. plants 8. chairs 9. icons (not specified) 10. carpet ICONS ON ANALOI: i . icon on central analoj of fest ival celebrated j . icon of Mary with Christ Child k. icon of Jesus Christ 89 gather. Upon entering the nave the western observer may notice the absence of pews and the lack of regular rows of chairs to seat the congregation. The dim l ighting and the heavy smell of incense surround the person upon entering. The windows are not a predominant part of the walls, nor are they a primary source of l ight. The chandelier and can-dles are sources of a r t i f i c i a l l ight though the tone of the room remains subdued. DOME The central cupola outside has i ts counterpart inside as a large dome. The eye is drawn upwards by a chandelier suspended from the middle of the dome and as one looks up, frescoes are seen. At Holy Tr in i ty Church, the dome is octagonal, and on every other side is a painting of one of the four evangelists (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). At Holy Resurrection church, a painting depicting the resurrection of Christ is on the east side of the dome. On either side of this are i n paintings of two angels, seraphim and cherubim. At the third Church (SH) there are no domes and no frescoes on the ce i l ing . ANALOJ In the center of the church, below the chandelier, is an analoj or 'Tectum.' The analoj is completely covered with a cloth and has a sloped top on which rests an icon. There are several other lecturns around the nave, each with a different icon. Some also serve as stands ^The paintings on the dome of an Orthodox church are prescribed but not demanded. That i s , i t is not necessary to have paintings on the dome of the church; however, given that the dome wil l be painted, then the subject matter for these paintings is prescribed. (See Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 43.) 90 for the Gospel. The icon on the central analoj is changed according to the day of the Church year and the cloth similarly varies with the Church season. In front of the altar screen, there are two additional analoi or Tectums. Upon the lecturn on the north side of the church rests an icon of "Mary, Mother of God, with the Christ Chi ld. " An icon of Christ i s placed on the other analoj. ICONS Icons depicting the l i f e of Christ and the saints are considered to be holy pictures. They are to be venerated but not worshipped.^ Accordingly, when an individual l ights a candle or prays before an icon he does this in remembrance of the saint represented and not in order to worship the icon i t s e l f . There are several explanations concerning the function of icons. They are said to add richness and beauty to the church and to help make perceptible to the believer those things which are unseen.21 Just as there are rules governing the painting of church frescoes, there are special rules of iconography. The subject matter, symbolism, style of figures and background, colors and materials used, as well as the procedure to be followed by the monks in the actual painting had been established by the f i f t h century of Orthodoxy. Icons range in size from very small (two inches square) to very large (seven feet high and three feet wide). In two of the Churches in Vancouver (HT and HR) there are f ive large free-standing icons, in 2 0 T h i s was defined by the second ecumenical council of Nicaea in 737 A.D. See Appendix A. 21 t A F o r a comprehensive discussion of icons see: Benz, The Eastern  Orthodox Church, Chapter 1. See also Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 42. 91 elaborate wooden frames. At the other Church (SN) there is only one such icon. Some of these large icons are placed in the church in such a way as to section off portions of the nave. A similar feeling is created in a l l of the churches by the profusion of smaller icons placed about the church by members of the congregation. These smaller icons form a continuous collage just above eye-level along the north and south walls. There is one large icon on the east wall. This must always be an icon of Christ. At the other end of the church, on the west wall, there are no icons and the priest explains this by saying that people should never have their backs toward icons.22 Despite th i s , there are a few icons on the back wall which, according to the pr iest, "confuse some of the old people." The feeling of spaciousness is reduced by the many icons and furnishings that protrude into the nave. In the east end of the church a screen extending from f loor to cei l ing sections off the nave and blocks the remaining portion of the church from view. The vertical distance within the nave is set by a narrow red carpet (three feet wide) which begins at the inner doors and abruptly stops at the east end of the nave in front of the a ltar screen. As the predominant colors of icons are gold and blue they contrast with the dark tone of the wooden walls, thus making the icons seem to advance into the room. The icons seem to project into the room perhaps because most of them are not contained by frames and are not covered by glass. BANNERS Metallic or brocade cloth forms the background of banners. To the center of the background is sewn an icon, usually outlined in gold braid. 22Father Vladimir, personal communication. 92 This purple or white rectangle is fringed at the bottom, and is attached to a seven-foot pole. There are two or three banners in each church, two always being found just in front of the steps below the icon screen. The banner with an icon of Mary rests on the north side, while on the south side is found a banner with an icon of Christ. Throughout most of the year banners rest against the walls. They are used to head processions as, for example, the procession around the church at the beginning of the Easter mass. CANDLEHOLDERS In front of most of the large icons, and near the Tectums with icons, are found brass candleholders. Many candles are placed in each of the candleholders as members of the congregation burn candles in remembrance of a particular person or saint. Thus, as the services proceed, more and more candles are l i t as people continue to arrive u n t i l , near the end of the service, candles have been placed in most of the holders. In addition to the candles burning before icons, there are small gold lamps suspended on a gold chain from the top of a l l free-standing icons, in front of the cruc i f ix and in front of the icon of the Last Supper on the icon screen. These are s t i l l referred to as the ' l i t t l e icon lamps' (lampadka) even though a short candle is placed in the glass container where formerly pure o i l was burned. CRUCIFIX It has been mentioned that there i s , in the church, a large wooden cross (approximately seven feet high) with the figure of Christ attached to i t . This is always located on the north side, not far from the steps at the east end. Beside or in front of the cruc i f ix is found a 93 small table which often blocks the lower part of the cruc i f ix from view. The table is completely covered with a cloth and on i t , a t iered, brass candleholder rests. Members of the congregation place candles here in remembrance of deceased relatives and friends. COFFIN Near the cruc i f ix , there may be a " co f f in , " or there may simply be a wooden rectangular box representing a cof f in. The top is covered by a cloth which matches the coverings on the lecturns. The coff in l ies parallel to the north wall and is situated mid-way along that wall. It remains in this position a l l year, except at Easter when i t is moved to the center of the nave. On the wal l , behind or beside this cof f in , is a large icon of Christ in the tomb. 2 3 PLANTS In a l l three churches, i t is common to see flowers or plants placed on the f loor , particularly on special festival days. Surrounding the icon on the central analoj, flowers are usually placed. At one Church (HR) there are palm trees beside the two lecturns in front of the elevated area at the east end of the church. At another Church (SN) plast ic flowers are placed around the altar screen and around many of the icons in the nave. BALCONY On entering, the balcony is not readily v is ib le to the person as one's attention is directed toward the altar screen. The balcony is 2 3 There is a coff in at Holy Resurrection and a wooden box as described above at Holy Tr in i ty . Saint Nicholas is the exception, where there is no coff in nor a representation of one. 94 located at the west end of the nave and a staircase in the north-west corner is used by the choir members to gain access to i t . This is the case at Holy Resurrection and Holy Tr in i ty but is not true of St. Nicholas where there is no balcony. During the time when the researchers attended divine l i turgy services, members of the congregation who were not part of the choir were never seen in the balcony. TABLE In the south-west corner of the nave at Holy Tr in i ty and St. Nicholas there is a ' table ' (stol) where altar breads and candles of various sizes can be purchased. At Holy Resurrection there is a snail room with a table on the south side of the vestibule; i t is used for similar purposes. SOLEA Separating the nave from the sanctuary is an altar screen or iconostas (meaning, a place on which icons stand). The iconostas usually extends to the cei l ing of the church. Of the Churches in Vancouver, only Holy Tr in i ty has an iconostas which does not extend the fu l l height of the building. In this Church the cei l ing is approximately th i r ty feet high, and the screen reaches about one half that distance. An iconostas has three doors—the north door, the south door, and the 'royal doors' (carskie dveri) or 'royal gates' which are in the middle. A l l of these doors open toward the sanctuary. The area on the nave side of the north and south doors is called the solea, while that in front of the royal doors is known as the amvon. The solea is elevated a step or two and the top step forms a narrow platform (approximately three or four feet wide) across the entire width of the church. To the south of the solea is a 95 square structure (kl iros) enclosed on three sides with walls over six feet high. At Holy Tr in i ty the kl iros is sometimes used by a chanter who remains unseen from the nave. At St. Nicholas, where there is no balcony, the choir stands in this kliros during services. At Holy Tr in i ty , perhaps because of the architecture of the building, the kl iros is s i t -uated on the south side but is not adjacent to the solea. (See Diagram 2.) At Holy Resurrection there is another kl iros on the north side but this is not the case in either of the other two Churches. A l l that is v i s ib le to the viewer is one large icon. 2** The amvon is usually a semicircular projection of the solea into the nave and is located d irect ly in front of the royal doors (HT). However, the amvon is considered to be part of the solea even when i t is not a physically distinguishable feature, but in such a case (as at HR and SN), i t continues to be referred to as the amvon. ICONOSTAS As already mentioned, the iconostas forms a high wal l , covered with icons arranged in a prescribed order. The screen is divided into halves by the royal doors. Because the royal doors are not the fu l l height of the iconostas, there is an open space above them, bounded on either side by the rest of the iconostas. At certain times during the services a curtain is drawn from behind the screen, f i l l i n g in this area. On the royal doors are four icons depicting the four evangelists. These surround a central icon portraying the annunciation of the Virgin. At the top of each royal door, there is a small icon (three inches by four 2 «Th i s applies to Holy Resurrection and Holy Tr in i ty . At St. Nicholas a great variety of icons (rather than one large icon) covers this wall. 96 inches). At the upper corner of the royal door on the south side there is an icon of Christ and in the same position on the other door there is an icon of Mary. When the royal doors are closed, an Orthodox cross rests at the point where they meet. The iconostas is divided into sections, each panel containing a ful l - length single figure. Dealing with the south side f i r s t , the icon closest to the royal doors portrays a figure of Christ. Next, John the Baptist or an honored saint, usually St. Nicholas, is represented and on the adjacent panel, which serves as the south door, is an icon of the Archangel Michael. With respect to the north side of the iconostas, the icon closest to the royal doors is a figure of "Mary, Mother of God." Next to Mary the saint or event for which the church was named is depicted. As in the case of the south side, the adjacent panel with an icon of the Archangel Gabriel serves as the north door. These six icons always depict the same f igures. 2 ^ The iconostas can consist of more than these six panels, as in the case of Holy Resurrection church where there are additional icons--St. Lawrence (south side) and Archdeacon Stephan (north side). The subject matter of additional icons along this row varies with the individual preferences of a given church. This set of icons is co l lect ively referred to as the "deis is" t ie r and sometimes a series of smaller icons with Bibl ical scenes is placed below i t ^^This is corroborated by Benz, The Eastern Orthodox Church, p. 9, and Demetrakopoulos, Dictionary of Orthodox Theology, p. 108. 2 6Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 41. 97 These are the principal icons Above them hang three or four rows of smaller icons—their number depending on the size of the church—in which the whole story of redemption and the hierarchy of of the celest ia l church are represented. Above the "deis is" t ie r is the second or festival t i e r including icons that i l lus t ra te the twelve great feast days of the Orthodox Church. An icon of the Last Supper is always above the royal doors and i t forms 28 the central panel of this t i e r . The third t ier depicts the twelve d isc ip les; the fourth t i e r is al lotted to the Old Testament prophets; and the f i f t h t ie r is devoted to the cruci f ix ion. The arrangement varies when not a l l f ive t iers are present (Holy Tr in i ty has three t i e r s , Holy Resurrection has two t i e r s , and St. Nicholas has one t ier ) but the f i f t h t i e r ( i .e. crucif ixion t ier ) always completes the iconostas. On the south side of the iconostas, between the last t ie r and the ce i l ing (HR and SN), a replica of the Gospel is found. A replica of the tablet on which the Ten Commandments were given is found on the north side above the last t i e r . SANCTUARY The area bounded by the iconostas and the east wall of the building is called the 'sanctuary' or ' a l tar ' ( a l t a r ' ) . 2 9 The word 'a l tar ' is used by the Orthodox to refer to the entire elevated area behind the iconostas. It is not applied to any table within the sanctuary i t se l f . The sanctuary in Orthodox churches i s , in pr incip le, located at the geographic east of the building, (HR and HT). However, since the con-2 7 Benz, The Eastern Orthodox Church, p. 9. 280p_. c i t . , p. 40. '•From the Hebrew word meaning "a place of sacr i f i ce . " 98 struction of any building is in part determined by the position of the property, an Orthodox church which is bui l t with i t s entrance facing south and i ts sanctuary in the north (this is true of St. Nicholas) is s t i l l considered to be facing east. That i s , the position of the sanctuary conceptually determines the direction of the church and the placement of a l l properties within i t . 3 ^ For the Orthodox person i t is 31 the sanctuary which orients his directions and actions. Among the reasons offered for the sanctuary being located in the east are the following: (1) the East is where the f i r s t Christian Church originated, (2) the sun rises in the east, and (3) Christ, as the source of l i ght , was born in the East and his l ight shines through the darkness of the wor ld . 3 2 Great significance i s attached to the sanctuary and only men are allowed to go through the north and south doors into the sanctuary. The priest and his helpers alone are in the sanctuary during the divine l i turgy. At other times a male is permitted behind the iconostas should his presence be necessitated by the circumstances. According to the clergymen in Vancouver, even in this situation a male should vest before entering. Only the clergy are permitted to pass through the royal doors and even they must do so at specified times during the divine l i turgy. ^Father Vladimir and Bishop Antonuk, personal communication. 3 1 Loc . c i t . 3 2Soroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 35, and Orthodox  Education Lessons, p. 4. Women are not permitted behind the iconostas. 99 THRONE When the royal doors are open a large fresco of Christ is seen on the east wall and a large table (four feet long, three feet wide, and three feet high) is v i s ib le in the center of the sanctuary. This table is called the presto!, or in English, the 'throne' or 'communion table. ' It is equally spaced between the north and south walls, and also is equidistant from the east wall and the iconostas. The throne has several meanings attributed to i t , contingent upon the actions of the priest during the service. Over the throne there are three coverings. One of these, the sracica, is consecrated by the bishop and is never removed from the throne. The other two coverings ( ind i t i ja and pokryvalo) 33"The priest and the bishop both said that in the Bible women were forbidden to enter the sanctuary. Demetrakopoulos gives the following explanation: "The reasons for these restrict ions are found in Holy Scriptures and Sacred Tradit ion, according to which only consecrated males served God at the altars and only males are tonsured and ordained." (See Dictionary of Orthodox Theology, p. 7.) The interdiction seems to have something to do with the menstrual cycle but when interviewed neither the priest nor the bishop could (or would) elaborate either of these explanations. In exceptional circumstances elderly women, past menstruation, are permitted to enter the sanctuary. ^During the "great entrance" in the divine l i turgy, the throne is considered to be the grave where Christ was buried; during the f i r s t part of the Creed i t is regarded as the table on which the Last Supper was celebrated; and at a later point in the Creed i t becomes the place of sacr i f ice where the wine and bread are transubstantiated. (See Nikolai Gogol, Meditations on the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Catholic  and Apostolic Church, New York, American Review of Eastern Orthodoxy, Reprinted 1964, pp. 29-53, hereinafter referred to as Meditations on the Divine Liturgy.) 100 are changed to coincide with the colors of the ecclesiastical seasons. 3^ "The holy table after consecration cannot be used for any other purpose than the s a c r i f i c e . " 3 6 Upon the throne a prescribed set of objects are found in specified positions. The antimins (also known as the corporal) i s a rectangular piece of s i lk cloth on which is stamped a picture representing the entombment of Christ. At the four corners are small pictures of the four evangelists. Also on the antimins is an inscription by the Archbishop of the diocese consecrating the antimins and the church in which i t is found. Without this cloth no Orthodox church can exist. Minute portions 37 of re l i c s annointed with holy o i l are sewn on the side which is turned to the East.38 The word antimins is derived from Greek and Latin words and means ' in place of a table. ' The Orthodox consider the antimins to be absolutely necessary for the divine l i turgy to be performed and should an occasion arise where there is no throne, the antimins serves as the throne. The antimins is covered with an outer red cloth called the i l i t o n . Together these are placed under the Gospel. The Gospel is r ich ly bound in red velvet with s i lver or gold g i l t and l ie s on the central part of the throne. It is ornamented with medallions of Christ and the evangelists. Beside the Gospel l ies a gold blessing cross. Another cross stands upright at the back of the throne and in front of "^Father Vladimir, personal communication. 3 6Demetrakopoulos, Dictionary of Orthodox Theology, p. 8. ^Demetrakopoulos defines " re l i c s " as: "remains of holy persons, either parts of their bodies or possessions such as clothes or vestments " , Ibid., p. 153. 3 8 H . C. Romanoff, Sketches of the Greco-Russian Church, England, Rivingtons, 1869, p. 85. 101 this there,is a seven branched candelabrum. In front of this candle-holder is the tabernacle (daroxranitel'nica or 'communion container '), a container in which the consecrated bread and wine are reserved for administration to the sick. TABLE OF OBLATION In the north-east corner of the sanctuary is another table called the 'table of sacr i f i ce ' (zertvenik). In English this is usually referred to as the 'table of oblat ion ' . This table is completely covered by a cloth and upon i t are placed two icons and the utensils necessary for the preparation of the bread and wine for the divine l i turgy. The two icons which are always found on the table of oblation are the cru-c i f ix ion and Christ praying in the Garden of Gethsemane. The utensils include: the paten, a small disc on a stand, usually made of s i lver or gold, on which the various pieces of bread are put during the divine l i turgy; the asterisk, consisting of two arched gold bands, is placed on top of the paten to support the vei ls or coverings and to keep these from touching the pieces of bread; the chal ice, made of gold or s i l ver , is the vessel into which the wine and water are poured; a v e i l , which is placed on top of the chalice and another to be placed on top of the paten; a larger third vei l which is placed over the other two ve i l s ; a golden (or s i lver) spoon with a long handle used to administer communion; the spear, a small, double-edged knife used by the priest for the cutting of the a ltar breads; a small sponge used to wipe the paten after the pieces of bread have been put into the chal ice; the 'a ltar breads' (or prosfora) which are brought to the table of oblation during the 102 divine l i t u r g y . 3 9 The prosfora are leavened a l tar breads**0 made accor-ding to a prescribed procedure. Each small round bread is stamped with one of two special seals. Stamped on some of the prosfora is a square seal consisting of a cross and the letters IC_ XX NI KA signifying "Jesus Christ conquers." A l l of the other prosfora are stamped with a picture of Mary and the Christ chi ld with the letters MP BY, signifying "Mother of God." Prosfora are used only in the divine l i turgy. SACRISTY The south side of the sanctuary is called the 'sacristy* (r iznica). Although i t may be a separate room,**1 in the Orthodox churches in Vancouver i t is not a partitioned area but a conceptually defined part of the sanctuary. Here the sacred vessels,** 2 the censer, and vestments of the season worn by the pr iest , subdeacon, and a l tar boys are kept. B. Participants Bishops, priests and deacons are referred to as the major orders and are assisted by the non-ordained minor orders including subdeacons, chanters and altar boys. While the major and minor orders are ranked relat ive to one another there is a hierarchical structure within each of these. The head of an autocephalous Church is a Patriarch. The 3 9 F o r a more detailed explanation of these utensils see: Demetrakopoulos, Soroka, Romanoff, and Orthodox Education Lessons. 4 0Demetrakopoulos, Dictionary of Orthodox Theology, p. 150. ***Ibid., p. 157; also Orthodox Education Lessons, p. 20. ^ fcSoroka and Carlson, Faith of Our Fathers, p. 156. 103 heads of a l l other Churches are called Archbishop or Metropol itan. 4 3 These are followed in turn by the of f i ce of bishop, pr iest , and deacon. 4 4 Each of the above off ices is attributed an increasing amount of importance and respect. At two of the Orthodox Churches in Vancouver there are priests o f f i c ia t ing while at the third (HR) there is a bishop. A bishop can celebrate a l l church services and perform a l l sacraments. A priest can celebrate a l l church services and perform a l l sacraments, with the exception of ordination. Furthermore, a priest is not permitted to bless the antimins or holy o i l . Neither a priest nor a bishop is permitted to marry once he is ordained though i t is possible for a priest to marry before ordination. 4 ^ However, should a priest marry, he cannot raise his position in the Church, for a l l bishops must be monks. The bishop in Vancouver was married before his ordination into the priesthood and i t was not until the death of his wife that he was ordained as bishop. During the course of the research i t was concluded that there are three principal characteristics which distinguish a bishop from a priest at the divine l i turgy. The bishop is assisted by at least two sub-deacons and at least two altar boys. At two of the Churches (HT and SN) the researchers have never seen subdeacons assisting the priest. At 4 3 " 0 r i g i n a l l y a Metropolitan was the bishop of the capital of a province, while Archbishop was a t i t l e of honor given to other bishops ' of special eminence, whose sees were not provincial capitals. The Russians s t i l l use the t i t l e s in this way " (Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 299.) 44 A similar hierarchy exists in the monastic orders but a different set of off ices applies. These are Archimandrite, Higumenos, Hieromonk, Hieredeacon. (See Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 300.) 4^0rthodox Education Lessons, pp. 28-30. 104 the lat ter two Churches, there is usually one altar boy although there may be more. Characteristic of the of f ice of bishop are the particular vestments worn. At each ordination, as one moves up in the Church hierarchy, some new ar t i c le of the canonicals is added. Thus a bishop wears different vestments than a priest. The bishop also has additional ornaments. Each ar t i c le of clothing worn by the clergy for the divine l i turgy has a special meaning and must be put on in a prescribed manner. 4 6 For the purposes at hand, i t is suff ic ient to remark that the clergy are ident-i f i ed by their vestments which readily distinguish them from each other and from the congregation. The differences between the various c ler ica l orders do have an effect on the sequence of events during a service. The o f f i c ia t ing of a bishop greatly magnifies the complexity of the service. The researchers have chosen to discuss the divine l i turgy only when a priest o f f ic iates because bishops are much fewer in number47 and consequently i t is the exception for a bishop to conduct the service. A different format of the divine l i turgy is apparent when a bishop conducts the service. For example, when a bishop of f ic iates the divine l i turgy, the royal doors are only closed once, but they are closed at several points when a priest holds the same service. The deacon is the f i r s t of three ordained orders of the priesthood, 4 6 F o r a description of the vestments and of the symbolic s i g n i f i -cance of each a r t i c le the reader is referred, for example, to Orthodox  Education Lessons, and Romanoff, Sketches of the Greco-Russian Church. mentioned previously, the bishop in Vancouver is one of eleven in North America. 105 and the deacon's primary function is assisting the priest during services. For example, he chants the l i tan ies . The deacon cannot celebrate any service alone and he can only assist an o f f i c ia t ing priest or bishop. There are no deacons in Vancouver, but there are subdeacons. This is a non-ordained position and of higher rank than that of a ltar boy. The subdeacon who holds the l itany books for the bishop and removes his stole at prescribed times during the divine l i turgy. On the other hand, the a l tar boy's duties are confined largely to holding candles and moving to appropriate positions at required times during the service. The 'reader' or chanter (ponomar') assists the priest at the divine l iturgy by chanting the "hours" ( i .e. prayers and psalms of the day) at the beginning of the service and by chanting the Epistle lesson. The chanter is not ordained; he is merely blessed. A man is appointed 'church warden' (cerkovnaja starosta), or AO 'e lder ' (starosta) because he has "worked hard" for the church. ° The church warden looks after the church building and during the divine l i turgy sees to the proper functioning of certain of the act iv i t ies in the nave. He stands at the table (in the south-west corner of the nave) where candles of various sizes may be purchased. It is through the starosta that a person requests that the priest say a prayer for a particular individual (s). When such a request is made, the starosta sends the name of the individual, along with an a ltar bread, to the priest in the sanctuary. After the prayer has been said and a part ic le removed from the prosfora, the remaining loaf, then called antidor, is returned to the starosta. He wraps each antidor in a plain white paper serviette 4 8 Father Vladimir and Bishop Antonuk, personal communication. 106 and leaves i t on the table to be picked up by members of the congregation as they leave. The starosta has been observed to reprimand individuals for breeches of the rules of behavior. For instance, when a young boy entered the nave with his hat on, the starosta pulled him by the arm, took off his hat, and scolded him. It is also the church warden's duty to ring the bell at appointed times during the divine l iturgy and to take the col lect ion. Those people attending the Russian Orthodox divine l i turgy on Sundays in Vancouver can roughly be divided into two main age groups. The predominant age group at any given Church on any given Sunday is estimated to f a l l between forty and eighty years, with the age of the majority of people tending toward the upper extreme of this range. At Holy Tr in i ty there are, on the average, ten children between eight and eighteen years of age. Occasionally young children under the age of seven are brought for infant communion; however, there are rarely more than f ive such infants on any particular Sunday. Children who attend are expected to follow the actions of their parents. If very young children become restless and noisy during the service their parents are expected to quieten them immediately. When a g ir l about two years old started crying during the divine l i turgy, the bishop waited until she was quiet before resuming the sermon. Older children frequently leave the church and go outside for a few minutes. At Holy Resurrection and St. Nicholas i t is exceptional to see children of any age at a divine l i turgy. The absence of younger people between the ages of twenty and forty is apparent in a l l three instances. The children who attend Holy Tr in i ty are of both sexes though the absolute number of g i r l s tends to be greater. At a l l the Churches 107 the number of females exceeds the number of males. This is particularly true of the most elderly, among whom there is a group of women who are both the most elderly and the most regular attenders. At the services participants enter, buy candles, pray before various icons, and then stand in the west half of the nave. These: act iv i t ies are carried out at different points in time by different individuals; some people are moving about while others stand quietly. It is exceptional to see people engaging in conversation at this time, but sometimes after the divine l i turgy people chat informally as they leave the nave. People appear to recognize regular attenders or friends and to acknowledge their presence by a gesture such as a nod of the head. The non-member or stranger is not approached,but after several weeks, though he s t i l l may not be known by name, others may acknowledge his presence. Non-members and strangers generally are conspicuous by their lack of participation in the proceedings. Their presence becomes obvious i f , for example, they do not cross themselves at the appropriate times, or do not burn candles before the icons. The divine l i turgy begins at ten o' clock in the morning at Holy Tr in i ty and St. Nicholas Churches, and at ten-thirty at Holy Resurrection. The priest begins preparing for the service at this time. For the people, the service starts punctually one half hour after the priest has begun the f i r s t part of the divine l i turgy. The service usually lasts two to two and one half hours and a l l of the participants stand throughout the whole service. There are several chairs provided and these are used intermittently by the elderly, most frequently during the sermon at the end of the service. The only times when i t is considered not permissible 108 to be seated are when the royal doors are open, the Lord's Prayer and the Creed are being sung, or when the priest faces the congregation. It should be pointed out that while there is the provision for s i t t i ng , most people stand during the service. C. Dress Reference has already been made to the fact that the priest and his helpers are readily identif ied by their special apparel. As for the male members of the congregation, i t is usual to see them wearing suits. With the suits most men wear dress shirts and t ies . If a man wears an overcoat or a hat to church, he wil l remove these upon entering. Generally women wear coats to the church and do not remove them during the service. The coats are of diverse styles and patterns and i t is not uncommon to see coats with fur trim or fur coats at any of the three Orthodox churches. The older women (roughly s ixty-f ive years and over) seem to wear hats with greater frequency than the younger women. Jewellery is commonly displayed on fingers, wrists, ears and clothing. In addition, diamond wedding rings are worn on the right hand. Most women carry a handbag which they place on the f loor beside them and because i t remains there throughout the service, a woman's hands are l e f t free. D. Music Instruments are never used in the Russian Orthodox Church. They are excluded on dogmatic grounds. In The Eastern Orthodox Church, Ernst Benz explains that the Orthodox believe man should not use " l i f e le s s metal" instruments; man himself should be the l iv ing instrument to praise 109 God. 5 0 Benz also says that because "pagan" forms of worship employed musical instruments this contributed to the rejection of instruments in the Orthodox Church. In order to distinguish themselves, the early Christians are said to have restricted the use of instruments to act iv-i t i e s outside of the Church. "The very absence of instrumental music led to an unusual prol iferation of choral song and hymnody in the churches." The entire divine l i tu rgy s except for the sermon, is sung by the pr iest , the reader and the choir. The music of the l i turgy has developed over the centuries and is of such complex arrangement that i t requires a trained choir and conductor. Many parts of the divine l i turgy vary according to the ecclesiastical calendar, and therefore weekly 'choir practices' (spevka) are held in preparation for the Sunday service. Members of the congregation do not participate in the singing at the divine l i turgy. It is said that the congregation are not able to take part because of the complexity of the music. 5 2 There are several l i turg ies that are used in the Orthodox service. The divine l i turgy used throughout most of the year is that of St. John Chrysostom (c. 344-407 A.D.). St. John did not compose the l i turgy in i t s entirety; rather, he established the practice of having certain actions, prayers and practices already in use at that time, follow each other in a certain o r d e r . 5 3 This order of the l i turgy came to be assoc-iated with his name. Another form of the divine l i turgy has come to be 5 0 Benz, The Eastern Orthodox Church, p. 146. 51Loc_. c i t . 5 2 Th i s is the explanation given by both Father Vladimir and Bishop Antonuk. 5 3Koulomzin, The Orthodox Christian Church, p. 99. 110 associated with St. Basil (who l ived in the middle of the fourth century). The l i turgy of St. Basil is used on ten occasions during the year, mainly during Great Lent ( i .e. Easter Lent). Within the framework of these l i turg ies , the exact words said, the sequence of their occurrence as well as the actions accompanying them are prescribed and rigorously followed at every divine l i turgy. Even the parts which vary from week to week follow a set pattern. Thus the individual prokeimenon54 (psalms), troparion and kontakion (hymns), other types of hymns, and antiphons are designated according to the fest ival day. The different types of l i turg ica l music found in the Orthodox Church are very complex and would demand a discussion which l ies beyond the scope and purpose of the chapter. E. Sequence of Events at the Divine Liturgy The divine l i turgy is divided into three main parts: the 55 ^ proskomedia or 'preparation'; the 1 i tur i ja oglasenie or ' l i turgy of the catechumens'; and, the 1 i tur i ja vernjaja or ' l i turgy of the f a i t h f u l . ' Each of these parts is in turn divided into a number of l i tanies or petit ions.^ 6 5 4 See footnote 11 of this chapter. 5 5 L o c . c i t . 6 6 There are many books which contain verbatim the text of the divine l i turgy. The present chapter is not concerned so much with the words said as with the relationship of the actions of both the priest and people, within the framework set by the divine l i turgy. The reader is referred to Reverend Basil Shereghy, The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Minnesota, The Liturgical Press, copyright 1961 by The Order of St. Benedict; Gogol, Meditations on the Divine Liturgy; The Divine Liturgy  according to St. John Chrysostom, New York, Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America, 1967. I l l The priest is the only participant in the preparation which begins about one half hour prior to the arrival of most of the congregation and prior to the beginning of the l i turgy of the catechumens. The proskomedia is the preparation of the bread and wine for the sacr i f ice and subsequent communion in the divine l i turgy. If a deacon is present then he assists the pr iest throughout the entire divine l i turgy. In Vancouver there are no deacons and consequently the priest takes both roles. When the priest enters the nave3 the l ights in the nave and sanctuary are off and remain off until the beginning of the l i turgy of the catechumens. A l l the doors of the iconostas are closed and the curtain behind the royal doors is drawn. While the priest is preparing for the service in the sanctuary i t is not possible to see him. Those present know that the preparation is in progress because the reader is chanting the "hours" ( i .e. prayers and psalms of the day) from the balcony. Periodically the pr iest ' s voice is audible as he responds to the reader's chanting but the most of the time i t is not possible either to see or to hear him. Upon entering the nave, the priest stands in front of the closed royal doors, bows three times and prays, then he goes before the icon of Christ on the iconostas and kisses i t . He proceeds to the other side of the iconostas and goes before the icon of Theotokos or ('Mother of God'), kisses i t while praying s i lent ly , as he did before Christ ' s image. After praying in front of these icons the priest enters the sanctuary by way of the south door. In the sanctuary the priest stands on the west 57See footnote 11 of this chapter. 112 side of the throne and bows three times toward the east. Afterwards he kisses the Gospel, the throne and the blessing cross, asking God to cleanse him. Prayers are recited at the throne and the priest proceeds to the south side of the sanctuary where he vests. The priest says the required prayer while putting on each ar t i c le of clothing. At the completion of his vesting the priest moves to the north side of the sanctuary to the table of oblation where the l i turgy of preparation begins. Standing before the table of oblation, the priest again bows three times. He then takes one of the a l tar breads or prosfora with the seal of Christ, and pierces i t , after which he makes an incision with the spear along the right side. The priest then makes an incision along the l e f t side of the prosfora. After making incisions along the right and l e f t sides, and cutting cross-wise through the bread, a large square is removed from the center. A l l these actions are carried out according to a prescribed manner and s i lent prayers are said after each gesture. This square of the prosfora now represents the "Lamb" 5 8 and is placed in the middle of the paten and is pierced once more, this time on the right side under the letter IC_. Next the wine and warm water are blessed as they are poured into the chalice. After completing this act the priest removes a large triangle from the second prosfora again according to a set procedure. This part icle is removed in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary and is placed at the right side of the Lamb (at the pr iest ' s l e f t ) . From the third bread the priest removes nine particles in memory of the saints. At the Lamb's l e f t (the pr iest ' s right) the CO "The priest cuts the Holy Bread crosswise, taking care not to cut through the seal, and says: sacrif iced is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, for the l i f e of the world, and i t s salvation." (The Divine Liturgy according to St. John Chrysostom, p. 14.) 113 priest places three rows of three part ic les, in honor of the prophets, apostles, saints and hierarchs, martyrs, "holy and venerable fathers and mothers," "holy wonderworkers and unmercenaries," "ancestors of God," the saint of the church, the saint of the day, and the saint whose l iturgy is being celebrated, each of who is remembered by name. From the fourth prosfora portions are removed in remembrance of the Orthodox rulers and clergy and other Orthodox Christians ("the l i v ing fa i th fu l " ) who have asked to be mentioned by name. The portions from this a l tar bread are placed on the paten, at the foot of the Lamb below the letters NJ_ KA. At the end of the row for "the l i v ing " the priest adds another particle for himself. Particles are removed from the f i f t h prosfora in memory of the departed founders of the Church and a l l other "departed f a i th fu l . " These are placed on the paten below the particles for "the l i v ing . " The Lamb, together with the other particles placed on the paten, represents the universal Church. 5 9 The particles thus removed have been blessed by the priest though the remaining prosfora is unconsecrated. The latter is now called the antidor. The antidor will be eaten at the end of the service by "the f a i th fu l , " even i f they have not taken holy communion. When a l l the particles have been placed on the paten, the priest censes the asterisk and ve i l s , placing them over the chalice and paten. Next the priest is required to bow and cense the offerings (bread and wine) and the sanctuary. He censes the table of oblation, the throne and f ina l l y the sacristy. The procedure for censing is as follows: f i r s t the south side of the iconostas, then the north side; the priest 5 9Shereghy, The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, p. 9. 114 then censes the nave starting at the south-east corner working his way, icon by icon, around the perimeter of the church until he reaches the north-east corner; he goes through the royal doors to the sanctuary where he concludes with a censing of the throne. The priest censes the throne by swinging the censer in the form of a cross: f i r s t to the east, to the north and f ina l l y to the south. The priest kisses the Holy Gospel and the throne. The congregation knows that the priest is concluding the preparation when he appears from the sanctuary and begins censing the iconostas and nave. At Holy Tr in i ty and St. Nicholas, people begin arriving shortly after ten o' clock, and at Holy Resurrection they begin arriving at ten-th i r ty . At a l l three Churches people are arriving while the preparation is in progress. Before entering the nave (at the threshold of the vestibule and nave) an individual wi l l pause, bow s l ight ly and cross himself. This action of bowing and crossing is called obscij poklon ('group or communal bow'). The sign of the cross is made with the right hand. The thumb, index f inger, and forefinger which are held together are said to be symbolic of the Holy Tr in i ty ; the other two fingers which rest on the palm of the hand, are said to represent Jesus Christ as fin being truly God and man. The individual makes the sign of the cross by tapping his forehead, chest, right and l e f t shoulder. Ideally, an individual is supposed to face east, then south, and f i na l l y north, each time crossing himself; but i t is most common for people to enter and cross themselves only once, while facing the east. After crossing one's se l f , a person wil l go to the starosta or ^Orthodox Education Lessons, p. 23. 115 churchwarden and purchase candles which he wi l l l ight before various icons. Although people may come to the church together, they obtain their candles separately, and only one person wi l l go before the icons to l ight his candles. The other (s) wi l l wait at the west end of tha church until the individual has finished venerating the icons. There are no prescribed rules governing which icons an individual must ven-erate; however consistency seems to l i e in the fact that most people go to the icon on the central analoj f i r s t . At an icon, the individual bows his head and crosses himself ( ideally three times) and kisses the icon; he then l ights the candle and places i t in the candleholder. Before joining the rest of the congregation, or before proceeding to another icon, the person wi l l pause in front of the icon and cross himself again. Immediately after venerating the icon (s) an individual takes his appropriate place in the church—females on the north side and males on the south side. This sex separation is not s t r i c t l y adhered to but i t is apparent nonetheless. 6 1 The elderly women who attend regularly stand together in a group, closest to the north-east end of the church, while those people who appear to be casual or irregular attenders 6 2 seem to congregate near the west end of the church, along the back wall. The younger members (twenty to forty years) seem to constitute the predominant part of this group. 6 1 I n an interview, the priest stated that the separation of sexes v/as s t r i c t l y observed in Russia but that today he notices this is not so r ig id ly maintained. He goes on to explain that while the sexes "should" be separated (as specified in the Old Testament) i t is not of paramount importance—"It's not so important anymore," he says. 6 2 These are terms applied by the researchers to those people who were not recurrent attenders, who stood near the back of the nave, and who were never observed to cross themselves, bow or kneel during the service. 116 People continue to arrive throughout the entire divine l i turgy, and usually follow the same practice of bowing and crossing, buying candles and venerating the icons. There are times when people wil l enter and remain at the back of the church until "important" proceedings in the service are completed. It has been observed that people wil l not move about when the Creed is being sung by the choir, Otce Nas ( i .e. the Lord's Prayer) is being sung, or any time when the royal doors are open and the priest can be seen. The movement of people continues during the divine l i turgy as people often remain at the church for only a portion of the service. When a person leaves the church he pauses at the threshold of the nave and vestibule, faces east and crosses himself. By the time the priest has begun censing the nave, most of the congregation has arrived and as the priest moves about the nave censing the icons, those near him bow their heads. The large chandelier in the nave is suddenly switched on, the bells to l l and the choir sings. By these events the congregation knows that the l i turgy of the catechumens has begun. The sanctuary l ights are also turned on although the royal doors remain closed. The priest has returned to the sanctuary where he remains unseen though his voice i s audible as he chants twelve inter-cessions (THE GREAT LITANY). To these, the choir responds at each separate petition with Gospodi pomiluj or 'Lord have mercy.' The people cross themselves at the end of each petit ion. At the conclusion of this chain of prayers and responses, the choir begins to sing the f i r s t antiphon. The antiphons are selected songs from the Book of Psalms and they vary according to the Church feast-day. During the singing of the antiphon the priest prays s i lent ly in the sanctuary and at the end of the antiphon the people cross themselves. This same sequence of 117 actions occurs through the next antiphon and series of intercessions (THE LITTLE LITANY). At the singing of the third antiphon the curtain is drawn aside and the royal doors are opened. Now, for the f i r s t time during the service, the congregation sees the throne. Standing on the west side of the throne, the priest takes the Gospel and proceeds f i r s t in a southerly direction around the east side of the throne and then out the north door of the iconostas, (THE LITTLE ENTRANCE). Usually preceeding the priest as he comes through the north door are two a l tar boys holding candles. The priest stands on the amvon in front of the royal doors with the two altar boys on either side of him. The priest faces the people and blesses them by making a sign of the cross with the Gospel. He does this by elevating the Gospel and t i l t i n g i t to the south and to the north, and then lowering i t . In response, the people bow. The priest returns to the sanctuary through the royal doors, while the a l tar boys, who were standing on the north and south sides, pass each other in front of the royal doors, returning to the sanctuary by the south and north doors respectively. The Gospel i s placed on the throne and throughout this procession the choir sings hymns in honour of the feast of the day. The priest stands in front of the throne with his back to the congregation and s i lent ly recites a prayer. While the priest is recit ing the prayer he i s interrupted by a male choir member who wi l l read the Epistle of the day. The Epistle reader comes from the balcony, across the nave, to the south door of the iconostas. He kisses the icon on the door before entering, and stands on the south side of the throne. The priest blesses the reader by placing his r ight hand on the Epist le, after which he makes the sign of the cross before the face of the reader. 118 They chant a short prayer together, and afterwards the reader exits through the south door. As the reader leaves he holds the Epistle with both hands in front of his face and walks to the central analoj where he stands facing the east. When the priest has completed the prayer he stands on the south east side of the throne, facing the congregation. It is only at this point that the reader begins to chant the prelude to the Epist le. He f i r s t sings verses from the Psalms or the prophets that have some relation to the saint or feast of the day. After the prelude, the reader chants the Epistle which usually consists of selec-tions from the letters of the apostles. At the end of the Epistle reading the reader returns to the balcony and the choir. The priest censes the throne and, standing on the amvon, censes the people, moving the censer f i r s t to the south side and then to the north side. After censing, the priest removes his biretta and stands on the amvon holding the Gospel. At this point some members of the congreg-ation kneel and cross themselves while most others simply cross themselves. As the priest begins chanting the appointed Gospel lesson, the bell is rung and members of the congregation join those already kneeling. At the end of the Gospel reading those individuals who are kneeling, stand, and the members of the congregation bow their heads and cross themselves while the priest blesses them with the Gospel according to the form previously mentioned. The priest then walks through the royal doors, kisses the Gospel and returns i t to the throne. The royal doors are now closed. From inside the sanctuary the priest chants a series of inter-c e s s i o n s ^ LITANY OF FERVENT SUPPLICATION), to which the choir replies 'Lord have mercy,' the congregation crossing themselves after each petit ion. Behind the iconostas the priest unfolds the antimins in a prescribed manner. When the antimins is fu l l y unfolded and the chain of fi' intercessions completed, the priest exclaims, "Al l catechumens depart." This marks the end of the l iturgy of the catechumens and the beginning of the l i turgy of the fa i th fu l . The following hour is spent preparing the bread and wine for the sacr i f ice and i ts subsequent transubstantiation. After the antimins has been unfolded, the royal doors are opened as the choir sings a hymn and the priest censes the sanctuary, the iconostas, and the people. When he censes the sanctuary he moves from the throne, to the table of oblation, and f ina l l y to the sacristy. When censing the iconostas and the people, the priest goes to the south side f i r s t and then to the north side. When the priest finishes censing, he enters the sanctuary through the north door and he recites the Cherubic Hymn three times, making a deep bow after each recitat ion. He proceeds to the table of oblation where he censes the offerings (bread and wine). The priest removes the large v e i l , folds i t and places i t on his l e f t arm. He takes the paten in his l e f t hand and the chalice in his right. After praying s i l en t l y , the pr iest , preceeded by the two altar boys, carries the chalice and paten through the north door to the amvon (THE GREAT ENTRANCE). The priest stands in front of the royal doors facing the people who kneel or cross themselves. The royal doors and curtain are closed after the 6 3 I n the early centuries, the unbaptised or catechumens were required to leave the church. This discipl inary procedure concerning the catechumens was discontinued long ago but this arrangement of the l iturgy was retained. Today everyone can remain throughout the divine l i turgy, whether baptized or not. (Shereghy, The Liturgy of St. John  Chrysostom, p. 29.) 120 priest enters the sanctuary. He places the chalice and paten on the unfolded antimins which is lying on the throne. After removing the vei ls from the paten and chal ice, and after censing the offer ing, the priest chants a series of twelve petitions (THE LITANY OF THE OFFERTORY) to which the choir responds while the people cross themselves. If there is more than one clergyman participating in the service, the celebrants exchange the kiss of peace at this point in the service. The senior priest stands in front of the throne and the others stand on the south side of the throne, according to their rank. The senior priest takes the hand of the priest closest to him and they kiss each other on the right shoulder, the l e f t shoulder and then the priest kisses the right hand of his senior. As the kiss of peace is exchanged the senior priest says 'Christ is in our midst' (Xristos posredi nas) to which the answer 'He is and shall be' (Est' i budet) is given. This series of actions i s carried out by each of the other celebrants in turn. As the choir sings the Nicaean Creed the curtain is drawn aside permitting an individual to part ia l ly see the priest. During the singing of the Creed the priest removes the veil from the offerings and waves i t gently above them, invoking the Holy Spir i t to transubstantiate the bread and the wine. This action is accompanied by the repeated to l l ing of the church be l l . As the worshipper can part ia l ly see over the royal doors he is able to see the priest elevating the veil and then the g i fts (the bread and wine transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ). At this time the person in the congregation prostrates him-se l f , or at least crosses himself. After the priest r i ses, for he too prostrates himself, he prays s i lent ly and censes the g i f ts . When the priest censes the g i fts he makes the sign of the cross over them--swinging 121 the censer east, north and then south. After completing this act the priest gives a verbal blessing to the people who now stand and bow. From the sanctuary the priest again chants a series of petitions (THE LITANY BEFORE THE LORD'S PRAYER) and the congregation cross them-selves every time the choir replies 'Lord have mercy.' At the end of the twelve intercessions the people and priest cross and prostrate themselves (zemlepoklon or 'bow to the earth ' ) , as the choir sings Otce nas ( i .e. the Lord's Prayer). Near the end of the singing of the Lord's Prayer the priest, s t i l l kneeling, washes his hands. After washing, the priest and people stand and the priest comes forward, onto the amvon, and exclaims a petition to which the choir and congregation respond, the former verbally and the latter by the action of crossing themselves and bowing. The priest returns to the sanctuary and says a prayer. The curtain behind the royal doors is now drawn thus making i t impossible for the congregation to view the sanctuary. As the choir sings a hymn, the priest behind the iconostas prays s i lent ly and makes "Christ 's body and blood" ready for communion. In the nave, the church warden walks among the members of the congregation taking a col lection of money. He returns direct ly to the table in the south-east corner of the nave when he is f inished. In the sanctuary, the priest, in preparing for communion, divides the Lamb into four parts and places these on the paten in the form of a cross. The f i r s t portion marked IC_ is dropped into the chalice over which the priest makes the sign of the cross. A second portion (stamped XC) the priest takes between the f i r s t two fingers of his right hand. He says a prayer. The particle is eaten by the priest who afterwards drinks from the chalice three times. The priest divides the remaining two 122 portions of the Lamb (marked NT and KA) and puts them into the chalice for the communicants present. He then covers the chalice with a veil and recites a prayer. The royal doors are opened and the pr iest , with the chal ice, walks through them onto the amvon where he administers communion to children (under seven years) and adults v/ho have taken confession. Those about to cake communion proceed to the south side of the amvon. Here the priest, standing on the amvon, instructs the communicants to take "the sacred body and the precious blood." These are taken, by the pr iest, from the chalice with the spoon and are placed in the mouth of the individual. After the person has partaken of the g i f t s , a subdeacon or altar boy cleans the l ips of each communicant with a red cloth. Each person then walks to a small table which has been temporarily moved to the north side, near the amvon. Here the person drinks water from a s i lver cup after which he takes a small piece of antidor. The water and bread are taken "to clean the mouth."64 when a l l have communed, the priest blesses the people with the chalice containing the remaining particles and then he returns to the sanctuary through the royal doors, placing the chalice on the throne. At the throne the priest wipes into the chalice the particles remaining on the paten and then he verbally blesses the people who cross themselves. After blessing the congregation, the priest covers the chalice with one veil and censes i t three times. The pr iest, with the chalice in his right hand, faces the people who then bow. Subsequently, the priest carries the chalice around the throne to the table of oblation. Here the priest again censes the chalice, three ^Explanation given by Father Vladimir. times. He returns to the throne and folds the antimins. The priest 9 while holding the Gospel, makes the sign of the cross over the folded antimins. This is done by raising the Gospel and t i l t i n g i t f i r s t to the north s then to the south, and f i n a l l y resting the book on the throne. The priest walks through the royal doors and stands facing east, in front of the amvon, and recites a prayer (PRAYER BEFORE THE AMVON). At the conclusion of this prayer the people cross themselves and the priest enters the sanctuary through the royal doors, goes to the table of oblation and prays silently. From here the priest moves to the royal doors and verbally blesses the people who cross themselves. After the blessing he moves out onto the amvon and delivers the sermon.65 The sermon generally consists of an explanation of the pre-viously read Gospel lesson. The sermon differs from the rest of the divine liturgy in that i t is spoken in Russian while the divine liturgy i s chanted in Church Slavonic. At the end of the sermon (which lasts approximately fifteen minutes) the priest blesses the people and they either bow or cross themselves. Before departing from the church the congregation gathers at the foot of the amvon. As the people move to the front they pause, then kiss the icon of Christ on the analoj near the amvon. If the priest has an announcement to make, he wil l speak as the people move forward. At such a time he may announce that there wi l l be a gathering in the hall after the service, the date of a wedding service or the time of a special event that wi l l take place during the week. When the priest has finished speaking, the people approach him and kiss the gold cross G^At St. Nicholas Church the sermon is delivered earlier in the service, directly following the reading of the Gospel. 124 which he is holding. After th i s , they walk over to the small table which is again moved to the north side. They take a piece of antidor. It is usual for the altar boys to receive the antidor f i r s t , followed by the elderly women, the remainder of the congregation, and f ina l l y the choir. This marks the end of the divine l i turgy. The formal service being completed, the members of the congregation informally talk among themselves while s t i l l at the front of the nave. Shortly thereafter, they leave. By this time the church warden, and occasionally a person from the congregation, have begun to extinguish the candles and to col lect them from the holders. The priest closes the royal doors and draws the curtain. Before the priest leaves, he is required to eat and drink the remaining g i f t s . Almost every Sunday after the divine l iturgy there is a gathering in the church hall or basement. 6 6 Gatherings can be held for such occasions as: pominki or 'remembrance service' for a deceased relative or member of the congregation; a particular church festival (at times such as Christmas, Lent, Easter); or when the priest has something to discuss with the members (beseda). On these occasions i t is the practice to serve Russian food. The women of the church prepare some of the food while the divine l iturgy is in progress and therefore a few of them leave the service periodical ly. When the divine l iturgy has concluded the people gradually move to the ha l l . The priest is often the last person to arrive at the hall because he must consume the remaining g i f ts and then remove his vest-ments. The people gather in the hall but they do not begin eating until 6 6 S t . Nicholas is the exception. As mentioned this church has neither a hall nor a basement. 125 after the priest has arrived. The priest leads the people in singing Otce nas and a few short prayers. 6 7 Everyone present stands at this time. Afterv/ards the people are seated and they then begin eating. While eating they talk informally among themselves. If there are matters to be discussed, i t is the priest who conducts the proceedings. Some people leave before the others, but most remain until the priest in i t iates a closing prayer. Gatherings such as these last approximately one or two hours. F. Changes in the Divine Liturgy The divine l iturgy has evolved throughout approximately 2,000 years and there are many changes which have taken place during this time. Some of the developments have taken place in the last several centuries, corresponding to the time when Doukhobors began emerging, and these changes are of greater interest to the thesis. From the information reviewed, i t is evident that the development of the divine l i turgy service is complex but despite this i t was often d i f f i c u l t to establish even relative dates when alterations became apparent. Possibly this is because the changes were gradual and occurred in different regions at different times or perhaps this may have something to do with the fact that the Orthodox maintain that the divine l i turgy service has remained essentially unchanged throughout i ts existence. The Orthodox Church views the Last Supper celebrated; by Jesus Christ before his crucif ixion as the f i r s t divine l i turgy. However, for centuries the proceedings of the l i turgy were not precisely formulated. 67The priest says that Otce nas ( i .e. the Lord's Prayer) is always sung at a l l church gatherings. 126 The prayers, hymns, readings and movements of the celebrants were variable. By the fourth century St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom had standardized two forms of the divine l i turgy, but even these continued to be modified over the centur ies . 6 8 Several of the changes were a direct result of prevailing con-troversies. To c i te a few examples, the Nicaean-Constantinopolitan Creed was written and incorporated into the l i turgy in the fourth century to define the Church's position on the relationship of God the Father and the Son. Throughout the service the doxology to the Tr in i ty is frequently repeated. One of the reasons for i t s repetition in the l iturgy is that during i ts formative period various heresies concerning the Tr in i ty were f lourishing, and i t was necessary to counteract them by mentioning the dist inct names of the three divine Persons as often as poss ib le . 6 9 For similar reasons the second antiphon was incorporated into the service. This is a psalm which is a statement against the Nestorian heresy? 0 that was prevalent during the sixth century.? 1 There were other reforms but not a l l of these were direct responses to controversies. During the f i r s t f ive centuries, catechumens were not permitted to attend the entire divine l i turgy. They were not allowed to participate in the l iturgy of the fa ithful during which holy communion was administered. Gradually the policy of forcing catechumens to leave was altered, and while they s t i l l could not participate in holy communion, 6 8 See Chapter V, Section D, "Music." 69 Shereghy, The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, p. 54:. ?°See Appendix A. 710p_. c i t . , p. 18. 127 they were permitted to remain in the church during that part of the service. The vestiges of this practice remain in the divine l i turgy of today for at the end of the l i turgy of the catechumens the priest says: A l l catechumens, depart. Depart, catechumens. A l l that are catechumens, depart. Let no catechumens remain. Let us, the f a i th fu l , again and again in peace pray unto the Lord.72 Formerly the sermon followed the reading of the Gospel but i t was moved to the last part of the divine l i t u r g y . 7 3 One explanation account-ing for the change suggests that i t disrupted the continuity of the se rv i ce . 7 4 Other explanations say that the time of the sermon was altered because many of the people did not arrive until the service was well in progress and would therefore not have been present for this instruction i f i t occurred early in the service. 7 ^ It is d i f f i c u l t to establish when this sh i f t was made for , in The Orthodox Christian Church  Through The Ages, Sophie Koulomzin says that i t had changed by the fourth century while the priests in Vancouver suggest i t is a more recent innovation. In Meditations on the Divine Liturgy Gogol, who i s writing about nineteenth century Russia, remarks that " in former times" the sermon followed the Gospel reading. While this modification has been adopted in many Churches there are s t i l l those who follow the old form. St. Nicholas Church in Vancouver is a case in point. In his book, Gogol supplements most of the text of the service 7 2 The Divine Liturgy according to St. John Chrysostom, p. 45. 73 See footnote 65 of this chapter where i t was stated that this order is s t i l l maintained today. 7 4 Gogol , Meditations on the Divine Liturgy, p. 26. 7^Bishop Antonuk and Father Vladimir, personal communication. 128 with an explanation of the actions and the words said. From his account we see that there have been few changes in the divine l iturgy between the time of his writing and the present day. One of the most noticeable differences l ies in the degree of verbal participation by the congregation. Whereas the Cherubic Hymn, Beatitudes, Lord's Prayer and petitions are sung by the choir today, they were sung by the people in Gogol's time. This is evident in his account of the divine l i turgy where the text is divided into parts specified for the pr iest , choir and people. In the Churches in Vancouver the congregations now participate only by si lent prayers and by bowing and crossing themselves. They have no spoken parts. It may be of interest to note that the priest in Vancouver mentioned that in some Churches (e.g. in Ottawa) the people have retained some of these verbal responses to the present day. Gogol mentions that prior to his writing a l l of the people present would join the clergy in exchanging the "kiss of peace." "In former times a l l present in the church kissed one another, men other men, women other women, saying: Christ is between us, and others replying: He is and wil l b e . " 7 6 It was learned that "a long time ago," when a l l of the people received communion weekly, they would ask forgiveness of each o ther . 7 7 An individual would say 'Christ is between us' to which another (a member of the same sex) would respond 'He is and wi l l be.' Today the only time when the people participate in a similar kind of a c t i v i t y 7 8 7 6 Gogol , Meditations on the Divine Liturgy, p. 36. 7 7 Bishop Antonuk and Father Vladimir, personal communication. 7 8 The bishop and the priest in Vancouver draw this relationship between the two ac t i v i t i e s . 129 is during the Easter service. At this divine l i turgy they kiss one another and say Xristos voskres ( 'Christ is r isen' ) to which Voistinnyj  Xristos ( 'Veri ly Christ is r i sen ' ) is replied. These same words are repeated many times throughout the Easter service by both priest and congregation. In br ief ly pointing out some of the modifications that have occurred in the divine l i turgy, attention was drawn to the fact that numerous modifications occurred in the formative centuries of Orthodoxy. The l i terature indicates that by the eighteenth century the divine l i turgy had assumed a stable form. From Gogol's account of the l iturgy as i t was practiced in Russia in the mid nineteenth century, i t becomes apparent that apart from the changes mentioned above the same worship service is practiced today. The Orthodox people and clergy themselves emphasize the s tab i l i ty of their divine l i turgy and the unaltered continuance of the 'correct form' of worship. 130 CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION A. Taxonomy of Doukhobor Gatherings One of the objectives of the thesis is to describe and cate-gorize particular social occasions in an effort to explain the behavior that occurs on those social occasions. In cross-cultural studies, and in the study of the Doukhobors, the researcher is faced with the d i f f i cu l t y of conveying terms and concepts from one language and culture to another. It is a contention of the thesis that the fa i lure of other writers to fu l l y explicate what the Doukhobor Russian terms denoted has led to confusion with English glosses and concepts. It is therefore necessary to take the language of the speakers into consideration, using native concepts as a basis for constructing models to explain behavior. In the past the Doukhobor community meeting has been defined by observers as a general purpose meeting at which a wide range of act iv i t ies takes place. This definit ion may stem from the supposition that Doukhobors do not categorize and compartmentalize their act iv i t ies so that rel ig ious, economic, educational and po l i t i ca l act iv i t ies can potentially occur at a sobranie. However, the authors argue that i t cannot be assumed a pr ior i that Doukhobors make no distinctions between kinds of ac t iv i t ie s . Chapter IV consisted of descriptions of contemporary sobranija as they are carried out in both Grand Forks and Vancouver. It wi l l be recalled that while Doukhobors refer to these meetings by the term sobranija, the meeting in Grand Forks is also referred to by the term 131 molenie. Molenie was used in speaking of the meeting which was held by Doukhobors in Russia. It is necessary to now consider the usage of these two terms. When we find that different words are being used by the speakers, the problem becomes one of identifying what dist inct ions, i f any, are being made when one term is applied rather than another. From the descriptions in Chapter IV i t becomes apparent that there are several characteristics common to the molenie and sobranie. These characteristics are: particular greetings; reciting of prayers; singing of psalms; bowing and kissing; the presence of bread, salt and water; and the separation of males and females. Furthermore, there are unique characteristics which are exclusive to the term sobranie. A particular greeting, s i t t ing throughout, singing of hymns and verbal discussions are features unique to the term sobranie. From this i t becomes apparent that sobranie is used in referring to a set of characteristics which is shared with molenie and that the term sobranie is also used to refer to a set of characteristics which is not shared with molenie. In considering these terms as they are defined by the Doukhobors, i t wil l be noted that molenie is glossed as 'prayer meeting' while sobranie is glossed either as 'meeting' or 'gathering.' Considering these factors concomitantly we conclude that Doukhobors use the term sobranie on two levels. On the one hand sobranie is used by the Doukho-bors in referring to any congregation of people or any gathering. On the other hand sobranie is used in a more specif ic sense to denote a particular greeting, and times of s i t t ing , hymn singing and discussion. Henceforth when the word Sobranie is written with a capital "S" i t wi l l be used exclusively to designate the above mentioned meeting which in -cludes hymn singing and discussions. The small "s" sobranie denotes any 132 type of gathering in a more general sense thus subsuming the upper case Sobranie. 1 The dist inction between the two forms of the word sobranie is made here to f ac i l i t a te the observer formulating the categories of the actor. When the word Sobranie is used to refer to the 'Community Meeting,' such a meeting includes only Doukhobors. In contrast, when sobranie is used in the other sense to denote a gathering, i t can refer to gatherings involving Doukhobors or non-Doukhobors. Where the term sobranie is used with reference to non-Doukhobor gatherings, i t can be used to refer to such occasions as a Parent-Teachers' Association meeting or a c i ty council meeting.2 Perhaps a few i l lustrat ions wil l c l a r i f y the usages as they pertain to Doukhobors. It is possible to use sobranie in the general sense to mean a gathering which is a convention; and i t is possible to use the term s"ezd ('regional meeting' or 'convention') in a more specif ic sense. Clearly a l l 'conventions' (s"ezdy) are 'gatherings' (sobranija) but not a l l 'gatherings' are 'conventions.' In a similar manner molenie ('prayer meeting'), Sobranie ('Community Meeting'), svad'ba ('wedding'), poxorony ( ' funeral ' ) , pominki ('remembrance serv ice ' ) , sxodka ( ' local meeting'), spevka ('choir pract ice ' ) , beseda ('a meeting for discussion') are special purpose meetings—all of which can be referred to as Concerning the use of the term sobranie, the dist inction between actor and observer categories and the use of the word nacerima made by Werner Cohn was found to be useful in this discussion. For a fu l l discussion, see Cohn's a r t i c le " 'Rel ig ion ' in Non-Western Cultures?" American Anthropologist, Vol. 69, No. 1, February 1967, pp. 73-76. 2 I t is possible that Doukhobors make some dist inction between terms for their own meetings and those for non-Doukhobor meetings. However the manner in which the differentiat ion may be accomplished, has not been investigated in this thesis. 133 sobranija or 'gatherings.' This dist inction becomes a l l the more apparent when diagramatically set out as in Figure 1. FIGURE 1 FOLK TAXONOMY OF DOUKHOBOR GATHERINGS* sobranija ! — j — i — i — r * ~ i — i — i — i \ cu •r— ta -a a; > J C>: J -•1— ±£ M - C 2 •r— c : %- c ; o e: • I — -a > G> 0) — o OJ • i - -o <ti r: o to ty s- I"" x> o s- •r— X <y i—— o i> J Q . £ </> o > X G r— C o E o O 3 o. o. c o • r - O *This taxonomy of gatherings is intended to be i l lu s t ra t ive and is not meant to be exhaustive. There may be other special purpose meetings which could also be included. Figure 1 indicates that the word sobranie is used in two senses. On one leve l , sobranie denotes any gathering while on the other level Sobranie means a particular type of meeting just as s for example, molenie denotes a particular type of meeting. The folk taxonomy shows that Sobranie and molenie are only two of many specif ic types of sobranie but the reader is reminded that these two meetings are the primary concern of the following discussion. The contemporary molenie in Vancouver and Grand Forks and the 134 Sobranie in Vancouver are very predictable in that they are held regularly. Other meetings are less predictable in that they occur only when the occasion arises. In the a r t i c le "A Fresh Approach to the Problem of Magic and Religion," iiischa Tit iev c lass i f ies ceremonies as either calendric or c r i t i c a l . He proposes that calendric ceremonies are scheduled, re-current and predictable in that they occur in fixed forms and at set times even though the participants may vary. Calendric ceremonies are social or communal in nature and therefore invariably tend to disappear when a society loses i t s distinctiveness or radical ly alters i ts old way of l i f e . T i t iev speaks of c r i s i s ceremonies designed to meet immediate needs and consequently these ceremonies cannot be announced, scheduled, or prepared for too far in advance. When a personal or private need arises such as i l lness , death or marriage, ceremonies are called to meet the needs of the concerned individuals or groups. It is useful to consider T i t i ev ' s c lass i f icat ion in relation to the various kinds of Doukhobor meetings. Inasmuch as molenija occur regularly, on a particular day and in a particular manner, they can be called ca l -endric meetings, Molenija formerly were the only meetings of this type. As pointed out s in Vancouver and Grand Forks, molenija are s t i l l regularly scheduled occurrences. In contrast, Sobranija gradually evolved in Canada and occurred with increasing frequency.^ In the past then, Sobranija were unscheduled or c r i t i c a l meetings and even now remain un-scheduled among those Doukhobors l iv ing in Grand Forks, while they have i i i scha T i t i ev , "A Fresh Approach to the Problem of Manic and Religion," in Reader in Oomparative Religion, edited by E." A. Lessa and E. 1. Vogt, Second Edition, U.S.A., Harper and Row, 1955, p. 317. ^Ses Chapter IV, Section F 135 become calendric meetings in Vancouver. The other Doukhobor meetings such as weddings and funerals can be classified as critical meetings, arising to serve the needs of a particular occasion. In the previous discussion the focus was upon the terms used to refer to meetings. In relation to the first part of this chapter, two meanings of the word sobranie have been distinguished and these have been separated from the meaning of the word molenie. Attention will be re-directed to the descriptions and to the components that constitute present day molenija and Sobranija. From these descriptions we find that there are particular greetings that are given at the beginning of the molenija. There are two greetings either of which can be said, depending upon the particular Doukhobor faction with which the individual iden-tifies and the allegiance of those who are holding the meeting. The males and females stand on opposite sides of the hall in a "V" formation with bread, salt and water between them (See Diagram 1). Those present recite prayers,, sing psalms, and bow and kiss. The order of these proceedings is not variable. People stand throughout the entire meeting and tiiere is little movement by individuals except for those activities carried out in common with the others present.5 At Sobranija there is only one greeting that is given. The males and females are separated by the bread, salt and water. People sit during the singing of hymns and the discussions that ensue. There is, however, flexibility in this pattern of hymn singing and discussion as the fre-quency of hymns and the amount of discussion are variable. Throughout 5These last two characteristics are principally the result of observations made by the researchers. This is not meant to imply that the participants do not recognize the characteristics, but only that they are not necessarily mentioned by the participants. the Sobranija some people freely come and go. The above mentioned characteristics of molenija and Sobranija are presented in Table I. TABLE I CHARACTERISTICS OF MOLENIE AND SOBRANIE sobranie 'gathering' molenie 'prayer meeting' Sobranie 'Community Meeting' • »••< 1. 2. 3. bread, sa l t , water separation of sexes greeting either slava Gospody or si avim Bogu-Bog  proslav'sja prayers psalms bov/ing and kissing standing in "V" 9. 10. 11. order invariable restricted movement 1. bread, sa l t , water 2. separation of sexes 3. greeting always slava Gospody A. — * G . 7. 3. 10. 11. s i t t ing discussion hymns order variable less restricted movement *The broken l ine beside a number indicates the absence of that characterist ic. 137 With the aid of Table I, i t is possible to consider how previous authors have used the term sobranie. Examples from the l i terature wi l l not be quoted at length in this chapter but brief summarizations of the types of references wil l be made here. A review of the relevant texts is presented in Appendix B and the reader is referred to these detailed excerpts. Charles Frantz speaks of the "sobranie or vi l lage and community meeting" at which there is "the customary bowing and kissing." 1" He describes these 'community meetings" as structured very informally and he maintains that a wide range of act iv i t ies occur, nevertheless Frantz argues that the sobranie is the central po l i t ica l assembly of the Doukhobors. Koozma Tarasoff often refers to "sobranyas [ s i c j " as "religious and business meetings" but in other instances he refers to "traditional prayer services or religious sobranyas [ s i c ] ." By examining the references of these two authors i t can be concluded that the term sobranie has not bean consistently applied. Perhaps i t is necessary to examine in detail a specif ic passage which exemplifies such usages. One of the most important institutions in Doukhobor l i f e is the community meeting, the sobranya. Here is the Church, the school, the fraternal society, and the government .... i t is assumed that as the same God is in every heart, the desired unaminity depends upon each person's giving up his own individuality so that the God within him may"merge with the God in others, and in this corporate union is found the consensus of the meeting . . . . The effectiveness of the sobranya l ies not in a building, which is unnecessary: not in r i t u a l , which is minimal: not in the preaching, which is incidental * not in personal communions and prayer, for which there is no provision- and not in the heightened sensit iv i ty of mind and heart reaching for truth, because this is not character i s t ic . 7 ^Charles Frantz, "The Doukhobor Pol i t ica l System," p. 73. 7Hugh Herbison, "Religion," in The Doukhobors of Brit ish Columbia, edited by Harry B. Hawthorn, Vancouver, J . M. Dent and Sons, 1955, p. 168. 138 It is important to understand 'how the word "sobranya [sic] " is used in this text. The author states in the f i r s t sentence that he is using the word l ;sobranya [s ic] " to describe the :|community meeting.11 Clearly, his use of sobranie is l imited, by def in i t ion, to Sobranie as a particular meeting. While the author states th is , i t is evident that he is sometimes impl ic i t ly using the term in a more general sense to refer to several different types of meetings. Consequently, although the author states that he is referring to a single type of meeting (Sobranie) fact he has confounded two levels cf contrast. If one assumes, as Kerbison does, that a Sobranie is a 'Community Meeting' then i t should be possible to find those characteristics which were l i s ted under the head ing Sobranija in Table I. Herbison considers " r i t u a l , " "preaching" ( i .e. discussion) 8 and Sprayer" to be part of the Sobranie. By grouping these characteristics under his term "sobranya fsic] " i t is possible to conceptualize what the author is referring to (Table II). sThere is actually no "preaching" among Doukhobors in the usual sense of that term. Presumably the author is referring to personal dis-courses by members of the group ( i .e. discussion). TABLE II CHARACTERISTICS OF IlERBISON'S VIEW OF SOBRANYA 'sobranya or community meeting" 1. r i tual 2. preaching (discussion) 3. prayer By incorporating these same characteristics with the framework of Table I, i t is now possible to visualize where misconceptions can arise (Table III). 140 TABLE III CATEGORIZATION OF HERBISOli'S CHARACTERISTICS ACCORDING TO MOLENIE AND SOBRANIE sourame 'qatherinn' molenie 'prayer meeting' Sobranie 'Community Meeting' 1. r itual 2. — 3. prayers 1. 2. 3. ritual preaching (discussion) In Table III, r itual has been included under both molenie and Sobranie as the author does not specify what he considers to be r i tua l . If r i tua l is broadly defined as patterned behavior then, because there are predictable elements in both moleiiie and Sobranie, r itual can jus t i f i ab ly be placed in both categories. For a l l intents and purposes, the term r itual could jus t i f i ab ly be eliminated from both categories. From Tables I and III i t is seen that "preachinn ; i (discussion) can only be attributed to Sobranie. In the same way, "prayer" can only be included under the term molenie. By virtue of the fact that "preaching1' (discussion) is exclusive to Sobranie and 'prayer" is exclusive to molenie, i t is obvious that two separate meetings have been treated as one and that both have been referred to by the general 141 meaning of the word sobranie. As previously suggested;, molenie and Sobranie are mutually exclusive meetings and unless they are so treated confusion wi l l result. Misconceptions result when the researcher, as an observer, f a i l s to conceptualize distinctions the participants themselves recognize. The recent book by Woodcock and Avakumovic (1968) provides a good i l l u s -tration of the consequences of fa i l ing to make this d ist inct ion. They state: The sobranie appears to have served three purposes, as i t does among the Doukhobors to this day. F i r s t i t was a religious meetino, beginning with the chanting of hymns and psalms around the table carrying the symbolic bread and sa lt . Then, when a level of common feeling had teen established by this kind of spiritual participation, the meeting would turn to discuss the every day business of the community This brings us to the f inal function of the sobranie. It gave the leader the means of ascertaining the feeling of the group on particular issues before he reached his own decis ion. J In this description a reference is made to ''psalms,: and these were found to be characteristic of a molenie. Other references are made to "hymns" and 'business discussions," found only to be characteristic of a Sobranie. Thus elements of both the molenie and Sobranie are seen by the authors as components c f a single entity. Because other authors have not used the term sobranie in their writings, i t is not possible to establish unequivocally what type of meeting or meetings are being described. Zubek and Solberg relate the events of a 'religious service" in their book Doukhobors At War. They speak of separation of the sexes in a "V" formation, prayers, psalms, hymns, and bowing and kissing. In Doukhobors As They Are, Stoochnoff gives an account of a Doukhobor meeting in which he refers to the sep-%'oodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, pp. 4 3 - 4 4 . 142 aration of the sexes, bowings psalms, prayers and messages ( i .e. discuss-ions). These i l lustrat ions indicate the writers' lack of spec i f ic i ty with respect to the type of meeting being discussed and i t would appear that no dist inction has been made between the molenie and the Sobranie. It is not possible to present a detailed cr i t ic ism for the cases where the word sobranie has not been used in the l i terature but nonetheless i t is obvious that often some confusion is apparent in the use of English g losses. 1 0 It can be concluded that in the Russian language, as used by Doukhobors, the term used to refer to a 'gathering' and a 'Community Nesting' can be the same. In one sense of the word, Sobranie is viewed as a particular type of meeting; but in the other sense, sobranie is viewed as any gathering of people. It is these separate connotations, the particular and the general, that are not easily conveyed from one language to another. Tiie previous discussion has demonstrated that in the past Doukho-bors viewed the molenie and Sobranie as separate meetings and tiiat these meetings are s t i l l differentiated in Grand Forks, Brit ish Columbia.11 Although some of the Doukhobors interviewed in Vancouver exp l i c i t l y differentiated between molenie and Sobranie, i t is apparent that this dist inction is becoming increasingly vague to them. Everyone made some dist inction between 'formality and informality"; "standing and s i t t i ng " ; "psalms and hymns"; 'absence of discussion and discussion. , : While the l L The reader is again referred to Appendix ii for these and additional excerpts. ^See Chapter IV., Section F. 143 terms molenie and Sobranie were not always used, a dist inction between types of act iv i t ies was made nevertheless. It should be emphasized that although this dist inction is apparent to the participants, the tendency is for them to consider the Vancouver Sobranie in terms of ''formality and informality" and not in terms of the words molenie and Sobranie. To the extent that the Vancouver Sobranie is perceived in this way, i t is suggested that molenie and Sobranie are being conceptualized as a single meeting and that the term Sobranie is gradually being attributed another meaning by Vancouver Doukhobors. As the dist inction between moienie and Sobranie becomes less precisely defined, i t can be suggested that in Vancouver these meetings may eventually be referred to simply by the term Sobranie, a term which is consistent with that used in the l i terature to date, nevertheless i t is important to remark that this does not necessarily imply that an extensive range of act iv i t ies is possible, a view which is not consistent with that presented in the l i terature. Again, i t must be recognized that at the present time, within the Vancouver Sobranie, there s t i l l exist two separate parts which correspond to molenie and Sobranie. B. Taxonomy of Russian Orthodox Gatherings Having presented a taxonomy of Doukhobor gatherings, attention wil l now be directed to the construction of such a taxonomy for the Russian Orthodox speakers. Because of the presumed historical connection between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Doukhobors, consideration wi l l be given to the Russian Orthodox c lass i f icatory scheme of gatherings. A comparison of the resulting taxonomies wil l be made to see whether gatherings are ordered in a similar manner and to see i f , on an analytical 144 leve l , similar c lass i f icat ions are being made with either the same or different terms. At the most general l eve l , Russian Orthodox speakers use the word sobranie to mean any gathering. Further, gatherings are differentiated into two main categories-- 'rel igious meetings' (religioznie sobranija) and 'secular meetings' (svetskie sobranija). As the interest of this discussion centers upon the divine l i turgy and 'religious meetings,' those meetings which are categorized as secular wil l not be discussed. 'Religious meetings' are dichotomized into 'God's services' or 'divine services' (bogosluzenie) and 'church meetings' (cerkovnie sobranija). •f 'God's services' are l i turgies or public worship services conducted by the priest. The priest must be vested at a l l of these services. In contrast to th is , 'church meetings' are parish meetings at which'the priest may or may not be present. If the priest attends, he is not vested. Each of these categories of 'rel igious meetings' are subdivided into numerous types of meetings. 'God's services' (bogosluzenie) are divided into: 1. 'divine l i turgy ' (bozestvannaj a l i turg i ja ) 'vespers' (vecernja) 3. 'matins' (utrenja) 4. 'wedding' (vencanie) r 0 . 'baptism' (krescenie) 6. 'churching' (vocerkovlenie) 7. 'funeral service' (panixida) O • 'thanksgiving service' (moleb en) 9. others* 2 There are also several types of 'church meetings' (cerkovnie sobranija) among which are the following: 1. 'remembrance service' (pominki) 2 . 'choir practice' (spevka) 3. 'dinner following a service 1 (trapeza) 4. 'a meeting at which the priest gives a talk ' (beseda) 5. others The Russian Orthodox categorization of gatherings is shown in Figure 2. !^It is recognized that both l i s t s of meetings are not exhaustive. However i t should be noted that the meetings which are l i s ted here are those most commonly held. FIGURE 2 TAXONOMY OF RUSSIA ORTHODOX GATHERINGS* sobranija I svetski  sobranija ; i . re l ig icznie  sobranija I bonosluzenie 1 cerkovnoe sobranija o t+ CO ~i 73 •o < < c < O 0 ) o -s o . ,j " 5 o< CO — j . ra o< rti ro cr X - 5 o< o> ~i iT> ?~ rj C j . =j tC5 O - O =s i. 01 - J . Vc 1 o I cr o ro in < I 1 1 » o cr <•+ ro -i o </> a> 3 ro :j < - 5 a. ro o» N 01 — i . •Source; Russian Orthodox Driest in Vancouver. 147 The taxonomies of gatherings for Russian Orthodox speakers and for Doukhobors (Figures 1 and 2) show that, at the most general l eve l , both groups use the word sobranija to denote gatherings. At the most specif ic level of the taxonomies, Russian Orthodox speakers and Doukhobors dis-tinguish particular meetings but there are only two terms which are common to both. Spevka is the word both groups use to denote a 'choir practice' and the word pominki s imilarly denotes a 'remembrance service' which is held six weeks after the burial of the deceased followed by a meal provided by the next-of-kin. It is evident that for Russian Orthodox speakers there are two intermediary levels that do not appear in the Doukhobor c lass i f i cat ion. The dichotomies of 'rel igious meeting-secular meeting' and 'God's services-church meetings' are aspects which are absent in the Doukhobor scheme. From this i t can be concluded that Doukhobors do not dis -criminate religious and non-religious meetings at this leve l . Because Russian Orthodox speakers distinguish 'secular meetings' from 'religious meetings,' the taxonomy of gatherings, would suggest that Russian Orthodox speakers distinguish secular act iv i t ies from religious ac t i v i t ie s . The Doukhobor taxonomy of gatherings, in which there is no polarization of 'secular meetings' and 'religious meetings,' would therefore suggest that doukhobors do not distinguish secular and religious act iv i t ies in this way. At this point one may ask upon what c r i t e r i a , i f any, Doukhobors c lass i fy their act iv i t ies within the various meetings. C. Categorization of the Characteristics of Doukhobor Meetings The primary concern of this section l ies with the categorization of the characteristics which constitute the molenie and Sobranie. Consideration wi l l f i r s t be given to the molenie and the manner in which i t s attributes are ordered by the Doukhobors. The molenie is regarded as one of three Doukhobor obrada ( tr i duxoborceskix obrada), the other two being svad'ba ('wedding') and poxorony ( ' funeral ' ) . The phrase t r i  duxoborceskix obrada can be glossed as 'three Doukhobor tradit ions. 1 As the term ' tradit ions ' refers speci f ica l ly to particular meetings s the phrase wi l l be glossed here as 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings.' The word obrad is defined by Doukhobors as 'custom' or ' t r a d i t i o n ' 1 3 and the 'prayer meeting.,' 'wedding' and ' funeral ' were, and s t i l l are, con-sidered to be the 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings.' Hone of the other meetings previously mentioned are grouped with these meetings and called t r i duxoborceskix obrada. The grouping of the various meetings is indicated by Figure 3. Mot only do Doukhobors categorize 'prayer meeting,' 'wedding' and ' funeral ' as t r i duxoborceskix. obrr.da, but they distinguish specif ic characteristics within the meetings as obrady--'customs' or ' t radit ions. ' It is apparent that there is more than one usage of the term obrad and thus i t becomes necessary to indicate this difference. When the word obrad is used to refer to an entire meeting (e.g. molenie, svad'ba, poxorony) obrad wil l be written with a capital "0". When the term is used with reference to particular act iv i t ies within a meeting, i t wil l be written with a small "o." The participants identify some character-* 30ther definitions of obrad that were given in the interviews include; the way something is done; the way i t was in the past; that's our style. The dictionary definit ion of obrad is , : r i te " but Doukhobors do not use this gloss in describing their ac t iv i t ies . 149 i s t ies within the molenie by the term obrad. The appropriate greeting, the separation of males and females and the presence of bread, sa l t and vater are referred to as 'customs' or ' t radit ions. ' o U J DC. o ca o zn I D O O — 1 _ J o 1 — 1 — * — Q < c — Ol 1— CD L . J S : -U J O cv: o a : L U i — § Srs c ! i — i r n 1— o L U U J X V . < t / J tu 111 >-» o c-; a'. o c t a — o X Q i—« c 1 — •r-'j) I — Sobranie  pominki  sxodka  spevka  s'!ezd — beseda others I T J •a ta s-o >< O'l CJ »<J o X i o X 3 molenie svad'ba ooxorony TO <e • o ex +•> o cu cz . c o +•> • r --S-> f : iC • r -N •r— -a r— (U res «/> to • i — c." O «o to o •l— "O a> to •f— 150 In examining the characteristics of these three meetings, i t is necessary to understand how the characteristics are seen by the Doukho-bors and how they are differentiated from the elements in the meetings which are not referred to as obrady. We find that certain act iv i t ies within the molenie are identif ied by the participants as l i t u r g i j a . In the molenie the recit ing of prayers, singing of psalms and bowing and kissing are called l i t u r g i j a . 'Acts of worship' is a rough gloss for the term which uoukhobors define as "recit ing prayers," "singing psalms," "bowing and kissing," "those things which are not obrad," "the prayer worship." It is said that l i tu rg i j a denotes 'actions directed toward God.' Thus i t can be concluded that in the molenie some act iv i t ies are categorized as the 'customary' or ' t rad i t iona l ' act iv i t ies (obrady) as distinguished from those act iv i t ies which are considered to be 'actions directed toward God' (1 i turgija). Within the other meetings identif ied as the 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings,' corresponding demarcations of characteristics are found. The f i r s t part of the 'wedding' and the ' funeral ' are composed of characteristics similar to those of the molenie. At both 'weddings' and ' funerals, ' prayers are recited, psalms are sung and bowing and kissing are carried out. These act iv i t ies are likewise called l i t u r g i j a . The greeting, separation of the sexes, and the bread, salt and water which are part of these occasions, are similarly known as obrady. In addition, the hymns which are sung as another part of 'weddings' and 'funerals ' are called obrady. There are characteristics which are part of these two meetings but which are said to f a l l into neither of the groupings 1 i turgija nor obrady. The Doukhobors consider, for instance, separation of the relatives from the remaining people or the communal 151 dinner at a 'wedding' and ' funeral ' as characteristics which are simply , ;part of" the 'wedding' and ' funeral . ' They do not c lass i fy these act iv i t ies by any special terms. In i t ia l l y i t was found that the 'prayer meeting," 'wedding' and ' funeral ' were the 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings.' It was then established that Doukhobors do distinguish particular characteristics as l i tu rg i j a or obrady. The same characteristics which were 'actions directed toward God' and termed l i tu rg i j a were found to be common to a l l three meetings. Similarly, the characteristics of the 'prayer meeting' which were called obrady or 'custom' were apparent in the 'wedding' and ' funeral . ' These c lass i f icat ions are summarized in Table IV. TABLE IV CLASSIFICATION OF CHARACTERISTICS WITHIN THE 'THREE TRADITIONAL DOUKHOBOR MEETINGS' sobranija 'gatherings 1 8. t r i duxobcrceskix Obrada 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings' molenie 'nraver meeting' bread, salt, water (obrad)* separation of sexes (obrad) greeting (obrad) prayers ( l i turgi ja) psalms ( l i turgi ja) bowing and kissing ( l i turgi ja) •Doukhobors define obrad as 'custom' or ' t radit ion ' and l i t u ro i j a as 'acts of worship' svad'ba 'wedding' bread, sa l t , water (obrad) separation of sexes (obrad) greeting (obrad) prayers (1iturpija) psalms (1ituroija) bowing and kissing (1iturpija) hymns (obrad) communal dinner (**) etc. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. noxorony ' funeral ' bread, sa l t , water (obrad) separation of sexes (obrad) greeting (obrad) prayers ( l i turg i ja) psalms ( l i turg i ja ) bowing and kissing (1iturgija) hymns (obrad) communal dinner (**) etc. ••see text for explanation of c lass i f i cat ion 153 The previous section of this chapter indicated that, in reference to themselves, Doukhobors do not make the Orthodox dist inction between 'rel igious meetings' and 'secular meetings.' But, as the above discussion indicates, they do differentiate three particular meetings from a l l others and tliey do distinguish between particular characteristics within these three meetings. The same characteristics of the 'prayer meeting,' 'wedding' and ' funeral ' are c lass i f ied as either 'actions d i -rected toward God' ( l i turg i ja) or 'customary' (obrady) and the Doukho-bors speak of part of the 'wedding' and ' funeral ' as "a l i t t l e molenie." 1^ However, there are many more characteristics which make up the 'wedding' and the ' funeral ' and which are exclusive to each. The researchers have interpreted their explanations to mean that a l l characteristics of the molenie are present in the 'wedding' and ' funeral ' but that these characteristics are not always ident ical . A greeting is given at the 'prayer meeting,' 'wedding' and ' funeral ' but the greetings are different on these occasions; prayers are recited and sung; bowing and kissing are carried out among members of the same sex at the 'prayer meeting' but at the ' funeral , ' the deceased is kissed, and at the 'wedding,' the bride and groom kiss the next-of-kin. Doukhobors classify the same characteristics of the 'prayer meeting,' 'wedding.' and ' funeral ' with the same terms, l i tu rg i j a and obrady. The characteristics of the molenie would therefore seem to be the common denominator which can be used in accounting for why Doukhobors group the 'prayer meeting,' 'wedding,' and ' funeral ' together as the 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings.' Although these findings are the result of a preliminary investigation of 1^ 'From interviews with UoukSioL'or informants. 154 the 'wedding' and ' funeral ' in comparison with the 'prayer meeting,' the relationship between these three meetings appears to be an important one. It is recognized that further investigations along these lines are necessary before conclusive results can be made on this particular point. Because Doukhobors categorize the three meetings together as t r i  duxoborceskix Obrada and because the three meetings have common act iv i t ies which Doukhobors cal l l i t u r g i j a , i t can be concluded that the 'prayer meeting,' ' funeral ' and 'wedding' are set apart from other types of meetings, nevertheless i t is not possible to infer that 'actions directed toward God' (1iturgija) are equated with "rel igious" and that 'customary' act iv i t ies (obrady) are equated with "secular" by the Doukhobors. Doukhoborism is a wholistic concept; i t is a way of l i f e which does not separate the "rel igious" from the " secu la r . " 1 5 Therefore, i t is also not possible to infer that Doukhobors separate the t r i duxoborceskix Obrada as religious meetings and that these are opposed with other, or secular, meetings. To repeat the point, this c lass i f icat ion of 'prayer meeting,' ' funeral , ' and 'wedding' can only bo taken to suggest that Doukhobors separate three meetings from a l l other meetings and that within these meetings, act iv i t ies are c lass i f ied as 'acts of worship.' While the 'wedding' and ' funeral ' have been considered in this context, subsequent discussions wil l revert to the Sunday molenie and Sobranie. Doukhobors say that the Sobranie or 'Community Meeting' can i t s e l f be called a traditional meeting (Qtrad). However the Sobranie is not regarded as one of the 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings.' Within the Sobranie there are no characteristics which the Doukhobors view as 15iJoukhobors do not apply to themselves a term which could be glossed as ' re ! ig ion. ' 155 1iturgi ja. Al l of the components, with the exception of discussion, are said to be obrady or 'customary' ac t i v i t ie s . In other words, the greeting, separation of the sexes, bread, sa l t , water and hymns are the 'customary' or ' t rad i t iona l 1 attributes of the Sobranie. The discussions that take place within a Sobranie are categorized by a different term. Porjadok is the word Doukhobors apply to the periods of discussion in the Sobranie. There are several definitions of porjadok which Doukhobors give in explaining the term. This word is glossed as 'habit. ' It i s also considered to mean "form" or 'personal way of doing things." Because the term is applied to act iv i t ies that "can change at any time," Doukhobors contrast porjadok with obrad and confine the latter word to act iv i t ies which cannot change because " i t is the Doukhobor way" (see Table V). Thus we see that the Sobranie and the molenie are differentiated beyond the attributes as they are l i s ted in Table I. It has now been demonstrated that Doukhobors group the components of the Sobranie into obrady and and porjadoky while those of the molenie are divided into l i tu rg i j a and obrady. 156 TABLE V CATEGORIZATION OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF MOLENIE AND SOBRANIE sobranija 'gatherings' t r i duxoborceskix Obrada one of 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings' molenie 'prayer meeting' 1. bread s s a l t s water (obrad)* 2. separation of sexes (obrad) 3. greeting (obrad) 4. prayers (1iturgija) 5. psalms (1iturgija) G. bowing and kissing (1iturgija) 7. 8. —• *Douk'iobors define obrad as 'custom' or ' t rad i t i on ' : 1iturgija as 'acts of worship'; porjadok as 'habit. ' Obrad 'a traditional meeting' Sobranie 'Community Meeting' 1. bread, sa l t , water (obrad) 2. separation of sexes (obrad) 3. greeting (obrad) 5. — C. — 7. discussion (porjadok) 0. hymns (obrad) In speaking of characteristics or attr ibutes s both actions of the participants (e.g. bowing and kissing) and physical properties (e.g. bread, sa l t , water) have been taken into account. By concentrating on the type 157 of ac t iv i t ies ( i .e. what people do) within the two meetings, i t becomes possible to reduce the characteristics further. Al l of the actions in the molenie are c lass i f ied as l i tu rg i j a or 'acts of worship.' There are two types of actions in the Sobranie—obrady or ' t rad i t iona l ' actions and porjadoky or 'habitual ' actions. While these two types of actions con-stitute Sobranija, there can be variations in the nature of 'Community Meetings.' For example, the Sobranija held on Sundays at the Russian People's Home was previously described as primarily hymn singing with some discussion. Consequently most of the actions ( i .e. hymn singing) are obrady or ' t rad i t iona l ' actions. Because the Sobranija at Lockdale Hall were described as discussions with some hymn singing, the reverse applies. That i s , most of the actions ( i .e. discussions) at the Lockdale Sobranija are c lass i f ied as porjadoky or 'habitual ' actions. In sum, moienija are characterized by 'acts of worship' (1iturgija) while Sobranija are characterized by ' t rad i t iona l ' and 'habitual ' actions (obrady and porjadoky). It must be recalled that at the Vancouver Sobranie no expl ic i t dist inction is made between the terms molenie and Sobranie although i t was established that Doukhobors recognize attributes def init ive of the molenje (1iturgija and obrady) and of the Sobranie (obrady and porjadoky). It has already been remarked that psalms are considered to be l i tu rg i j a but hymns are regarded as obrady. While hymns have been categorized as obrady they have not, in the past, been part of the molenie. In Vancouver, some hymns are now sung during the f i r s t part of the meeting 153 or molenie, usually to the exclusion of psalms. 1 G This can be taken as indicating that there are modifications in the constituents of the molenie. This, combined with the fact that the dist inction between molenie and Sobranie is becoming less exp l i c i t , leads the researchers to suggest that the Vancouver Sobranie is assuming a different form from that of the traditional prayer meeting.* 7 Whereas the entire Sunday meeting in Vancouver is considered to be an Obrad ( 'traditional meeting 1), i t is not regarded as one of the t r i duxoborceskix Obrada ('three traditional Doukhobor meetings'). On the basis of the preceeding discussion i t is reasonable to hypothesize that the Vancouver Sobranie wil l come to be regarded by Doukhobors in Vancouver as one of the 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings.' D. Categorization of the Characteristics of Divine Liturgy It is interesting to consider whether or not Russian Orthodox speakers categorize attributes of a Sunday divine l i turgy service. The term l i tu rg i j a can be applied by the Orthodox to a l l the meetings which fa l l under the category of 'God's services' (see Figure 2). In this sense l i tu rg i j a denotes 'public worship services. ' Additionally, the 'divine l i turgy ' service (bozestvennaja l i turg i ja ) may be simply referred to as the ' l i turgy ' (1iturgija). Yet, further distinctions within the divine l i turgy i t se l f are not made with this term. It is explained that because the entire service is 'public worship' (1iturgija) a l l the characteristics which together constitute that service are 'public worship' l^Refer to the section on music in Chapter IV where psalms and hymns are discussed. 1 7 F o r a more complete discussion of this lack of c l a r i t y between molenie and Sobranie see Chapter VI, Section A. 159 and individual attributes are not spec i f ica l ly referred to as 1iturgi ja. This explanation is interesting insofar as i t contrasts with the Doukho-bor usage of l iturgija.which is applied to individual characteristics within some meetings. The term obrady is glossed by Orthodox speakers as 'customs' or 'old tradit ions. ' They say that obrady refers to "our r u l e s / and "how traditions are performed." In i l lus trat ing the use of the term, the priest remarked that the singing of antiphons or the l ighting of candles before the icons and the accompanying crossing of oneself are examples of when the term obrad might be used. Another word is often introduced in describing actions such as these. Obycaj is glossed as 'custom' or ' t rad i t ion. ' When people cross themselves at the beginning and the end of the divine l iturgy or when the petition 'Lord have mercy' is repeated, these are said to be 'customs' or ' t radi t ions. ' From these and other examples i t can be suggested that the two terms obrad and obycaj are often used interchangeably. There are two words, and Russian Orthodox speakers say that there is a difference between thems but they were unable to categorize characteristics according to the c r i te r i a which they had set. However, i t does appear that sometimes (though not usually) 'customs' (obycai) are c lass i f ied into one of two types. 'Church customs' (cerkcvnie obycai) nr~ distinguished from 'native customs' (narodie obycai). The former phrase is used in speaking of rules such as the ones specifying that only the priest may touch the throne and that everyone must be standing when the royal doors are open. The latter phrase applies, for example, to the bringing of bread and eggs to the Easter divine l i turgy. From this the researchers surmise that the phrase 'church customs' denotes features which are considered to be Church law 160 whereas 'native customs' are features which are executed according to local traditions. The findings show that in discussing characteristics of the divine l i turgy service there is a lack of c l a r i t y among Orthodox speakers in the uses of the terms obrad ('custom' or 'old t rad i t ion ' ) , obycaj ('custom' or ' t r ad i t i on ' ) , cerkovnie obycai ('church customs') and narodie obycai ('native customs'). These findings are cf importance in a comparative study for they would seem to indicate that for the Russian Orthodox speakers this categorization of act iv i t ies is not commonly used. It lias been found that particular components of the divine l iturgy are not categorized by the concepts 1 i turg i ja, obrad, and obycaj. There is considerable difference in the use of these terms between Orthodox and Doukhobors, who apply two of the terms to specif ic features within their meetings. Another difference l ies in the fact that while the Russian Orthodox refer to obrad as well as to obycaj, Doukhobors do not use the latter term in the context of their Sunday meetings. Doukhobors view the actions of a molenie as 'acts of worship' while Russian Orthodox speakers view the divine l iturgy as 'public worship.' It is interesting to note that neither of the groups use the term ' r i t u a l ' in speaking of their meetings, 1'hile neither of the groups apply the term r itual ( ' r i tua l ' ) to their own ac t i v i t i e s , they do use this word in referring to the act iv i t ies of "others." Thus Russian Orthodox speakers mention tiiat they do not have ' r i t u a l ' but that other faiths do. Likewise, Doukhobors say that ' r i tua l s ' are not a part of their meetings but that the Russian Orthodox services are ' r i tua l s . ' This can be taken as evidence that a differentiation is made between one's own act iv i t ies and the act iv i t ies of "others"' and that the term 1G1 ritual is applied to the lat ter . Ritual can have the connotation of a meaningless or empty act and this may serve as a reasonable explanation of why the term is confined to the act iv i t ies of o ther s . 1 8 If one of the connotations of r itual implies a meaningless act and, i f the term is not applied to one's own ac t i v i t i e s ; then i t would be consistent to conclude that one's own act iv i t ies are seen as meaningful. It was pointed out that of the four terms r i t u a l , r i t e , ceremony and custom, custom alone does not convey the idea of a meaningless act. Even though Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox speakers are referring to different tilings, they gloss the word obrad as 'custom,' ' t rad i t ion ' or 'way of doing things.' It was noted that the translation " r i t e " is given in the dictionary for the term obrad. On the basis of the data col lected, i t was found that " r i t e " is never used as an English gloss for the word obrad as used in the context of Sunday meetings. It can be suggested that the term r i t e is not used by the speakers because, l ike r i t u a l , i t can have disparaging overtones and therefore the speakers choose to define obrad in terms of 'custom' and ' t rad i t ion ' ( i .e. not-meaningless acts). It can be concluded that Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox speakers wil l apply the gloss ' r i t u a l ' to the act iv i t ies of "others'' but not to their own act iv i t ie s . It can also be concluded that in referring to their own Sunday meetings, neither group ^The authors constructed a matrix of a l l possible definitions of the concepts r i t u a l , r i t e , ceremony and custom in order to be able to delineate the shared and unique meanings among the words. It was found that one meaning of r i t u a l , r i t e , and ceremony connotes 'meaningless or empty" acts. However custom is set apart from the other three terms because i t is not appropriated this meaning, indicating that the word custom is not used when referring to meaningless or external actions. This and related problems are discussed at length in an unpublished paper by C. ilevel 1 t i t l ed "Aspects of the terms r i t u a l , r i t e , ceremony, custom: an application to the Russian Orthodox Church." of speakers wi l l use the gloss ' r i t e . ' L:. Spatial Usage and the Properties of Doukhobor Meetings The previous discussions have demonstrated that Doukhobors make a dist inction between the molenie and Sobranie and that i t is possible to see this dist inction by considering the actions within these meetings. Tiie sections concerned with the use of space are intended to determine whether there is a correspondence between the patterns of observable behavior and the l inguis t ic groupings of actions within the meetings. Chapter IV described the proceedings at a molenie and Sobranie. There, i t was stated that as one enters, the males are always on the l e f t side of the hall and females are on the right side. It was also noted that from the time people enter the hall until the time they leave, men and women remain on their respective sides of the ha l l . Doukhobors say that i t is their custom that the men and women do not stand together. From the Doukhobor point of view the sides are reversed, for the position-ing is interpreted from behind the table in the east end. Thus as one stands behind the table with the broad, salt and water and looks toward the entrance in the west end of the h a l l , males are on the right side and females on the l e f t . l y Doukhobors speak of this separation in terms of l e f t and right and they say that men are on the right hand of God. The descriptions of the meetings indicated that there is a set order governing not only the placement of men and women at the molenie, but also governing the order in which men and women participate. The men say their prayers f i r s t : the men bow and kiss before the women.20 I;i l^'This point was discussed in Chapter IV, Section A 2. 2°See Chapter IV, Section t. 163 the molenie, a correspondence can be drawn between right and male, and between male and primacy of performance. Consequently there must also be a correspondence between l e f t , female and secondary performance. In Grand Forks and Vancouver the man and women stand in a "V" formation throughout the entire- mcjlonj^e, with the table between them. In Vancouver when the molenie concludes, the men and women move to the chairs which are west of the table, roughly in the middle of the ha l l . During the Sobranie they remain seated on their respective sides. In a l l cases, the actions which are part of the molenie have been described as 1 i turg i ja ('acts of worship'), /".s already mentioned, the actions which comprise the Sobranie in Vancouver are c lass i f ied as obrad ('custom') and porjadok ( 'habit ' ) . (Refer again to Table V.) Considering the above points in relation to one another, two deductions can be made; (1) l i tu rg i j a or 'acts of worship' occur in the east end of the hall while peopla are standing around the table, and (2) obrad and porjadok or 'customary acts' and 'habitual acts ' take place while people are seated to the west of the table (see Diagram 3). Because i t is assumed that space is attributed meaning by the individuals who use that space, and because i t was found that there are dist inct l inguist ic and spatial patterns in the Doukhobor Sunday meetings, i t can be concluded that there is a correspondence between the l inguist ic and spatial configurations. F. Spatial Usage and the Properties of the Divine Liturgy It was intended that the Orthodox use of terms would be related to the Orthodox use of space. Previously, i t was indicated that Russian Orthodox speakers do not differentiate the attributes of the divine DIAGRAM 3 USAGE OF SPACE AT SUNDAY MEETINGS East Location of l i tu rg i j a or 'acts of worship' in a molenie Location of obrad or 'customary acts' and porjadok or 'habitual acts' in a Sobranie Left R'i ght MEETING HALL IN VANCOUVER East Left Right Iconostas Area in which divine l iturgy is celebrated Right Left RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH IN VANCOUVER ICC l i turgy according to the terms l i t u r g i j a , obrad, obycaj. Obviously then, i t is not possible to demonstrate a correspondence between these terms and the use of space. But i t does appear that some of the characteristics of the divine l iturgy are defined spat ia l ly. I n i t i a l l y i t was stated that the Orthodox church building is oriented by the throne and that the throne, in turn, is defined with respect to the east. Furthermore i t was noted that the east end was separated from the rest of the church by the iconostas. Only males are permitted in the sanctuary behind the iconostas and even '-hen in this area they should be vested. At the divine l i turgy, the priest and his assistants are the only persons who pass through the side doors of the iconostas into the sanctuary. 2* Because the divine l iturgy is celebrated by the priest in the sanctuary, the Orthodox maintain that this is the most important part no of the church. West of the iconostas is the nave where the congregation remains during the entire service. In the description of the Russian Orthodox divine l iturgy service there are many east-west and north-south dist inctions. It has just been stated that the east end is considered the most important part of the church. The west, being direct ly opposite and farthest from the east, can be inferred to be of lesser importance. As the meaning of the east-west axis is clearly defined, i t wil l not be considered as problematic here. Therefore the Orthodox conception of north and south wil l be considered. For the observer, i t is apparent that more males congregate on the 2*See Chapter V, Section A 2. ^ F o r a discussion on the importance of the sanctuary see Chapter V, Section A 2. 1G5 south side of the nave and that conversely, more females congregate on the north side. When the priest was asked why the males stand on the ' r ight" side, he replied that men are on the right hand of God. Con-sequently, the north side of the nave is relegated to the women. Females "should not" stand on the south side of the nave, the priest said, but now this proscription is not r ig id ly maintained. He explains that this is 'not so important any more." There is another rule concerning women which is adhered to without exception. Women are prohibited from entering the sanctuary.23 while they may venerate the icons on the iconostas, they cannot go through the doors (either north or south) into the sanctuary. When the priest enters the church before beginning the divine l i turgy, he. prays before the royal doors, goes to the icon of Christ on the south side of the iconostas, and then proceeds to the icon of Mary on the north s i d e . 2 4 During the divine l iturgy the priest holds the censer in his right hand and moves around the perimeter of the nave, starting at the south-east corner and moving to the north-east corner. When he censes the sanctuary or anything in the sanctuary, he swings the censer to the east (the direction he is facing), north and then south. When the priest stands on the amvon and blesses the people with the Gospel, he stands facing them and t i l t s the Gospel f i r s t to the south and then to the north. Just prior to the PRAYER BEFORE THE AHVQi! the pr iest , standing at the throne, makes the sign of the cross over the antimins, moving the Gospel to the north before he moves i t to the south. Al l of 2 3 The explanation given in Chapter V Section A 2 suggested that the interdiction may be attributed to the menstrual cycle. t , 'See Chanter V, Section E for a more complete description of the details of the act iv i t ies referred to in the present paragraph. 167 these actions are oriented with respect to the throne and hence, the east. They are also directed with respect to the north-south axis. The table of oblation is situated on the north side of the sanc-tuary. But in discussion this table, the priest speaks of i t as being on the right side in reference to the fresco of Christ on the east wall behind tiie throne. Consequently, the priest says that the table of oblation is on the right side of the throne. Thus we see a contradiction between the interpretations given and the actions (or the placement of objects) within the sanctuary and the nave. With reference to the priest ' s actions in the nave (kissing the icons before entering the sanctuary, censing, blessing with the Gospel), the priest invariably moves to the south f i r s t . However, when the priest stands in the sanctuary, he always follows the pattern: east, north then south when blessing with the Gospel and censing. Furthermore, when an individual crosses himself his actions are prescribed so that he touches his right shoulder before the left.25 It is suggested that, for the observer, these actions can be ordered by taking into consideration the Orthodox conception of the cross. It has previously been explained that when one stands in front of an Orthodox cross, the lower bar slants upwards to the l e f t side.26 i t has also been pointed out that one must visualize the cross from Christ 's 4 : 5 I t is recognized that the individual touches his forehead, chest, right and l e f t sides but the interest here l ies in the privacy of the right over l e f t . This is an important issue as the order of crossing oneself was one of the factors which led to the sp l i t with the "oman Catholic Church (the latter cross themselves in the following manner: forehead, chest, l e f t and right shoulder). 2 6 See Chapter V, Section A 1 for a discussion of the Orthodox cross. I C S perspective so that i t i s , in fact, the right side -which slants upwards.The interpretations given explain that the rinlit side is elevated to represent the pardoning of the repentant sinner, his ascension into heaven while the l e f t side is lowered to ref lect the fate of the non-repentant sinner who was condemned. A pattern of the rules governing the order of the actions emerges when accounted for by a r i ght - le f t dist inction instead of a north-south dist inct ion. In the sanctuary, the table of oblation is then on the right of the throne (perceived in relation to the Orthodox cross). Although the priest censes the south before the north when he is in the nave, he censes the north before the south when he is in the sanctuary. Therefore, in both cases he is censing the right side f i r s t . Looking at the actions (or the placement of objects) and the interpretations given to them by the Orthodox, we find a dist inction between actions executed in the nave and those executed in the sanctuary. Thus we see that on the nave side of the iconostas, the south side is considered to be the right side and axiomatically, the north side is the l e f t side. On the sanctuary side of the iconostas, the south side is regarded as the l e f t side, and the north side as the right. From this i t can be said that the r i ght - le f t distinction is reversed depending upon where one is standing in the church (nave or sanctuary). Therefore the perspective one wi l l adopt in perceiving that space (in the nave or sanctuary) is reversed. It should be emphasized that only the clergy (bishops, pr iest, deacons) use the area bounded by the iconostas and the east wall and so the reversal of sides in the sanctuary directs them, and not the 1G9 27 congregation 3 in orienting their actions. nevertheless, i t can be pointed out that the male members of the congregation stand on the right ( i .e. south) side of the nave and females on the l e f t ( i .e. north) side. With this information, i t is possible to construct a model of the way the space in the Orthodox church is defined and used, and a model of the qual it ies attributed to that space. We find that, on the one hand, right is equated with: (1) Christ, (2) male, (3) heaven, and (4) the faithful (Orthodox) and the repentent. On the other hand, l e f t is equated with: (1) Theotokos Clary), (2) female (menstruation), (3) not heaven,^ and (4) sinners and the non-repentent. The attributes equated with the right side seem to emphasize positive asnects: (1) (Son of) God, (2) right hand of God, (3) "saved," and (4) correct bel ief in God. The attributes equated with the l e f t side would appear to emphasize the opposite (not-positive) aspects; (1) Mother of God, (2) l e f t hand of God, (3) not saved and therefore condemned, and (4) not correct bel ief in God. 2" : Al l the attributes of "right" can be summed up by the term "orthodox" where "orthodox" is defined as correct or right in opinion (from the Greek words : !q rrtiio" and 'cfoxos" meaning right in opinion). Conversely, the attributes of " l e f t " can axiomatically be defined as *-7while i t is projected that members of the congregation wil l be interviewed at a future date in order to ascertain their perception of this d i s t inct ion, only the clergy have been dealt with at this point. It is therefore not possible to state whether or not this dist inction applies to the members of the congregation as well. Of' The Orthodox do not speak of " h e l l , " they speak of an eternal separation from God. ^-This argument was more fu l ly developed in an unpublished paper entit led "Spatial ••leaning in the Russian Orthodox Church," written by T. Popoff. 170 net-orthodox.3'- This would seem to indicate that r i ght - le f t is a binary opposition that operates within the divine l i turgy. This opposition appears to explain the direction of actions and the placement of objects in the Orthodox church. The opposition is a factor governing the pro-cedure of the actions involved in crossing oneself, in blessing the people and in censing. Presumably this opposition also operates in the location of icons and the location of the table of oblation. Hithin the nave, the r i ght - le f t dist inction separates the males from the females. In the sanctuary, the north side is seen to be the right side and the south, the l e f t , but in the nave the sides are considered to be reversed. Thus i t can be concluded that the sanctuary is sectioned off not only physically, by the iconostas, but also conceptually, by the reversal of the right and l e f t sides (refer back to Diagram 3). While the Russian Orthodox and the Doukhobor conceptions of space cannot be direct ly compared in relation to their l inguis t ic categorizations of the attributes of their meetings, there are some s imi lar i t ies that can be drawn. It has been shown that the east is where the Doukhobors hold their molenie and where the Russian Orthodox priest and his assistants Of! In this model Mary is relegated to the "not orthodox" side of the church. It is recognized that Mary is treated with great respect in Orthodox doctrine, but in this case she may be considered in opposition to Jesus Christ. Because of Mary's placement in the church, and because of the. high esteem with which she is held in the Orthodox Church, i t may be postulated that " l e f t " is not direct ly opposed to "right" but that " l e f t " is a residual category for those things which are not c lass i f ied as "r ight." Thus while Mary is located on the l e f t side, she may riot be considered "not orthodox" for i t is possible that a different principle is operating, cross-cutting these categories. (The authors wish to .acknowledge the comments of E l l i Kongas Maranda on this point.) 171 celebrate the divine l i t u r g y . 3 1 The vest end, on the other hand, is never used for either of these purposes. It is interesting to note that invariably Doukhobor males are perceived to be on the right side and females on the l e f t side. The same dichotomy is apparent for Russian Orthodox males and females. In summary, parallels can be drawn between the east-west, r i gh t - l e f t , and male-female distinctions made by both Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox speakers. G. Comparison of Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox Sunday Meetings From a brief comparison of the descriptions of Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox Sunday meetings, there are several differences which become immediately apparent. In the Orthodox Church there are a number of functionally differentiated roles. Broadly defined, there are the following categories of people at the divine liturgy: clergy, assistants, choir, congregation. At Doukhobor Sunday meetings there are no specialized roles that people assume, with the exception of the informal elder who in it iates some of the ac t i v i t ie s . There is no Doukhobor choir at these meetings and most c f the people join in the singing. Another difference is the str iking contrast in the amount of paraphernalia and the preparations that accompany these two meetings. Relative to the molenie and the Sobranie, the divine l iturgy is very complex. Without exception, the divine l i turgy is held at the same time every Sunday—this sacrament cannot be cancelled. There seems to be some degree of variation with regard to Doukhobor Sunday meetings. The commencement of the molenija and Sobranija fluctuates among the Doukhobors in various locations, as 3 1 F o r the discussion on Doukhobor use of space see Chapter VI, Section E. 172 does the frequency with which meetings are held. At this level of com-parison these would seem to be the major differences between the meetings of the two groups. There are a number of s imi lar i t ies that arise from the description of these meetinos. It was suggested ear l ier that historical connections between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Doukhobors might be used to explain certain aspects of contemporary Doukhobor meetings. Al l Doukhobors participate in the molenie at the east end of the ha l l . The divine l iturgy is celebrated by the priest in the sanctuary at the east end of the church. The people at the meetings in both groups are segregated according to sex. In both cases the males are said to be on the right side because men are on the right hand of God. Because this is an instance where both groups interpret the behavior in the same way, i t can be said that their behavior is equivalent. At the divine l iturgy and at the molenie, people stand throughout the entire service and sing unaccompanied by musical instruments. The sneakers attribute the same explanation to the proscription on musical instruments and consequently this can also be considered equivalent. Several different kinds of bows are executed by Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox members. As was explained, both groups of speakers use comparable terms to distinguish between various types of bows. The 'Dov' that is made on entering a Doukhobor meeting is called poklonenie while the 'communal or group bow' (obscee poklonenie) is made at the end of every psalm and prayer. The 'bow to the earth' (zemlepoklonenie) is the third type of Doukhobor bow. At the close of the moienie, Doukhobors o p An explanation of this assumption is found in Chapter I. 173 together 'bow to the earth' in remembrance of the l i v ing , the dead and the Tr in i ty . There is another type of 'bow' which is also called noklonenie. In this case poklonenie refers to the bowing, kissing and .handshaking.33 With the exception of the 'bow to the earth, ' which is directed toward the l i v ing , the dead, and the Tr in i ty , a l l Doukhobor bows are said to acknowledge the sp i r i t within the other person. There are two different bows made by the people attending the divine l iturgy. Upon entering the church, and generally at the end of every pet it ion, one crosses himself, simultaneously bowing. This is known as the obscij poklon 3^ or 'group or communal bow.' The zemlepoklon or 'bow to the earth' is made at "important tines' during the service. Sometimes when one venerates the icon on the central analoj, this bow is made. It is usual to see some Russian Orthodox individuals 'bow to the earth" during the Lord's Prayer and tiie transubstantiation of the bread and wine. Both of these bows are Interpreted as showing praise and humility toward God. From this i t is seen that Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox members make similar types of bows and that they ca l l them by similar terms but that these bows are given different meanings. There is one bow that has not been mentioned and which might be considered equivalent to the ,-oukhobor bowing, kissing and handshaking (poklonenie). During concelebration at a divine l i turgy, Orthodox priests exchange the kiss of peace while they bow and shake 3 3 The latter two bows are not carried out in Vancouver. These two types of bows were re-introduced into the meeting by Peter Petrovich Verigin whom the U.S.C.C. Doukhobors and the Sons of Freedom acknowledge. Therefore at a molenie of Independent Doukhobors one would not expect to f ind these two types of bows. See Chapter IV, Section F. 34T lie connection between the words poklon and poklonenie were mentioned in Chapter IV under the heading "Sequence of Events." 174 hands. This is interpreted as an acknowledgment of the sp i r i t within the other person. Thus we see that the kiss of peace can be equated with the Doukhobor poklonenie. Prior to the beginning of a molenie or Sobranie, one walks approx-imately mid-way into the hall before bowing and giving the greeting. Upon entering the Russian Orthodox church, i t is usual for one to walk to the middle of the nave to the central analoj where he bows and venerates an icon. Although dissimilar act iv i t ies take place after one enters and bows at the two types of meetings, some s imi lar ity can be seen in the positioning of these actions. In the descriptive chapters, reference was made to the Doukhobor and Russian Orthodox use of the term starosta. Doukhobors gloss starosta as 'e lder ' and this person is considered to be an informal in i t i a tor of the proceedings at the molenie. Russian Orthodox speakers gloss the same term as 'church warden' and the church warden looks after some of the proceedings in the nave--specif ical ly, he looks after the candles, a ltar breads and offering. Although the same term is used by the two groups, the functions of these men are very different. From these comparisons we see that there are several actions which are similar in the Russian Orthodox and Doukhobor meetings; there are also a few actions which are equivalent. While this can serve as one possible explanation for their occurrence among the Doukhobors, the authors recognize that the relat ion-ships cannot be considered conclusive. !!. Summary The over-all purpose of the thesis has been to explain and define the behavior of Doukhobors cn particular social occasions. The attempt 175 to examine the same occasions with several procedures was based on the assumption that correspondences among the findings could be taken as supportive of one another. Discrepancies among the Doukhobor gatherings may be due to historical changes. By taking the changes into account in constructing a folk taxonomy of gatherings, i t becomes clear that the participants make distinctions among types of meetings. Concentrating upon two of the meetings3 particular characteristics were isolated and were found to be l ingu i s t i ca l ly differentiated by the Doukhobors. Furthermore, i t was demonstrated that there is a correspondence between l ingu i s t i ca l ly differentiated characteristics and the meaning that those characteristics attribute to the physical space. The meetings, taxonomies, grouping of characteristics and spatial configuration of two h is tor ica l ly related groups were compared in an effort to establish the areas of congruity between them. This summary is intended to highlight the findings of the previous sections and to use these findings to extrapolate beyond the points discussed. Contrary to the l i terature which states that the "community meeting" is a "multi-purpose" inst i tut ion, this thesis concludes that special purpose meetings are differentiated by Doukhobors, that a limited range of act iv i t ies takes place within the Sobranie or 'Community Meeting,' and that these act iv i t ies are distinguished from those which occur within the molenie or 'prayer meeting.' A folk taxonomy of terms for gatherings was constructed and was, to some extent, based on the development of the Sobranie in Canada. It was then demonstrated that present day meetings car, be understood with reference to this taxonomy. It was found that the molenie or 'prayer meeting' is l ingu i s t i ca l ly and conceptually d ist inct from the Sobranie or 'Community Meeting' and that both of these specif ic 176 types of meetings are subsumed by the general use of the term sobranie, meaning any gathering. The Doukhobor taxonomy of terms does not differentiate between 'religious meetings' and 'secular meetings.' However at a more specif ic l eve l , Doukhobors identify particular attributes of Sunday meetings as 'acts of worship,' 'custom' or 'habit. ' This is especially interesting when compared with the Russian Orthodox taxonomy of gatherings which i n i t i a l l y dichotomizes 'relinious meetings' and 'secular meetings' but which does not l ingu i s t ica l ly differentiate particular characteristics of the divine l iturgy as 'acts of worship,' 'custom' or 'habit. ' By relating the morphology of the molenie and Sobranie to the terms that are used in ordering the component attributes, i t was deduced that 'acts of worship' are confined solely to the molenie. By a similar deduction, i t was found that the components of the Sobranie are seen as either 'custom' or 'habit. ' These findings contradict the view of meetings presented in the previous l i terature where i t is suggested that there is great latitude in the types of act iv i t ies which can potentially occur at the 'Community Meeting.' When the Russian Orthodox and Doukhobor Sunday meetings are compared with respect to the participants' categorizations of the attributes within those meetings, there is a disparity in their c lass i f icat ions by the terms l i t u r g i j a , obrad, porjadok, and obycaj. It can be suggested that Doukho-bors c lass i fy their act iv i t ies more clearly than the Russian Orthodox and that this may be attributable to historical circumstances. There was a period in Doukhobor history when their act iv i t ies were considered by the Church and State in Russia to be heretical and when Doukhobors were persecuted. It seems reasonable to hypothesize that the so-called heretical 177 act iv i t ies (and perhaps other act iv i t ies as well) were clearly defined in order that they would persist. It is possible to go beyond these findings to suggest that the Doukhobors' greater l inguist ic differentiation of act iv i t ies is attributable to an attempt to define their own act iv i t ies as sectarian and to differentiate their act iv i t ies from those of the Orthodox Church. The previous sections demonstrated that both Doukhobors and Russian Orthodox speakers orient their act iv i t ies with respect to the east end of the building. It was seen that the molenie (consisting of 'acts c f worship') is held around the table in the east end of the hall and that the divine l iturgy is celebrated by the priest in the east end of the church. East is used by Doukhobors as the reference point in perceiving the men's and women's sides of the ha l l . They say that, as one stands behind the table and faces west, the men are on the north side of the hall but they are considered to be on the right. Behind the iconostas, the priest defines the sides of the sanctuary in a similar manner so that the north side is considered to be the right side. For Doukhobors this male-female, r i ght - le f t separation holds throughout the entire building but for Russian Orthodox speakers, the r i ght - le f t dist inction is reversed behind the iconostas at the east end of the church. Doukhobor males are on the geographical north side of the building (conceptually said to be the right) and conversely the females are on the south side ( i .e. the l e f t side). In the Russian Orthodox church, the males are on the south side of the nave ( i .e. right) while the females are on the.north side ( i .e. l e f t ) . Behind the iconostas, the north side of the sanctuary is considered to be the right while the south side is said to be the l e f t . Taking a l l of these r i gh t - l e f t , north-178 south 5 east-west distinctions into accounts i t can be hypothesized that Doukhobors are adopting a perspective which coincides with that of the Russian Orthodox priest. This hypothesis is further reinforced with the recognition that during concelebration the priests exchange the kiss of peace—an action that was found to be equivalent with one of the Doukhobor bows. Calendric meetings are viewed as communal or societal in nature and, at least according to T i t iev , they tend to disappear when the society changes i ts traditions or loses i ts old ways. The conclusion has already been drawn that, in the past, the molenie was a calendric or scheduled meeting and that the Sobranie was an unscheduled or c r i t i c a l meeting. It was also stated that in Grand Forks these definitions of the molenie and Sobranie s t i l l apply. However, i t was concluded that while the act iv i t ies characteristic of the molenie are s t i l l apparent in Vancouver, the dis-t inction between molenie and Sobranie is becoming increasingly vague. People are less apt to use the word molenie in labell ing their act iv i t ies at Sunday meetings in Vancouver and this can be seen as a modification of previous practices. There is another alteration that is seen in the Vancouver Sobranie. Because many of the people no longer know the words, psalms are less frequently sung, a development which is most noticeable in Vancouver. Psalms which were formerly sung during the molenie are gradually being replaced by hymns. The introduction of hymns into the molenie is s ignif icant for this can be taken as an indicator of the changing nature of the molenie and the ambiguous boundaries that are developing between the attributes of the 'prayer meeting' and the 'Community Meeting.' From the evidence discussed here, i t is possible to project that a new type of meeting is emerging in Vancouver and that 179 some attributes of meetings are assuming a new meaning. Tin's new type of meeting has been alluded to in the thesis as the Vancouver Sobranie and i t can be hypothesized that this meeting wil l come to replace the molenie as the calendric meeting of Doukhobors in Vancouver. 180 APPENDIX A ECU iiZrilCAL COUNCILS1 1. The f i r s t council c f Nicaea, 325 A.D. The f i r s t council condemned the Arian teaching and defined the i n -carnate Son of God as ! consul.stantialwith the Father. It also proclaimed tiie f i r s t part of the Creed and established tiie day on which Laster is to be celebrated. 2. The f i r s t council of Constantinople, 301 A.D. This council defined the teaching of the Church on the Holy Tr in i ty , particularly on the iioly Sp i r i t . Later, this council vas credited vitii having adopted tiie present creed known as the iiicaean-Constant1 nopolitan Creed. 3. Tiie council of Ephesus, 431 A.D. Nestorianism, which declared that Christ had two separate natures, was condemned by the third council. The council specified the Church's teachings on the Holy Virgin and declared that the divinity c f God and the humar.ity of Christ were united in one person and that consequently ;-iary, Mother of Jesus, is the Aether of God (Theotokos). •'•The following sources were used in compiling this summary of the seven ecumem"cal counci 1 s; Koulorrtzin, Tiie Orthodox Christian Church, p. 04, .'ieyendorff, The Orthodox Church, pp. 32-30r. Schnemann, The  Historical Ftoad of Eastern Orthodoxy, pp. 86-135: and Walker, A History of the Christian Church, pp. 107-145. 4„ The council of Chalcedon, 4UI A.D. 'flie council of Glialcedon condemned the "-lonophysites ("mojo," 'one'; physics 5 I ! 'nature') who taught that Christ was only Hod and not pan. The council a f f imed that the Son of God must be confessed in two natures "unconfusely, imutable, ind iv i s ib ly, inseparably united . . . in one Person or hypostasis." G. The second council of Constantinople, 3G3 A.D. It further condemned the iiestorian heresy and sought to explain, in iisore precise terms than the council of Chalcedon, how the two natures of Christ unite to form a single person. G. The third council of Constantinople, GCC A.D. This council condemned another branch of the Monophysites, the iio no thelites (''thelesis / ' ' w i l l ' ) . The liono thelites taught that the wil l of Christ has two natures. That i s , there is only only one w i l l , the divine w i l l . The council maintained that the humanity in Christ is not an abstract entity but is manifested by, and subject to, the divine w i l l . 7. The second council of Kicaea, 787 A.D. It defined the Orthodox doctrine concerning the images (icons) which represent Christ or the saints. The word of Rod was truly incarnate and became true man. i!e and the saints may therefore be pictori a l l y represented. While sacred images ought to De venerated, the one '.'horn they represent is the true object of the veneration, however, i t is not lawful to pay to them the highest form of worship ("l.atrei.a i ;),which is due to God alone. (The dist inction between 'veneration' j "prcskynesis" and 'true worship' " l a t re ia " has been an important one for the Orthodox.) The veneration 1£2 of images v;as opposed by several Byzantine emperors, resulting in the iconoclastic controversy c f the eighth century. APPENDIX D EXCERPTS FROM THE LITERATURE CONTAINING THE WORD SOBRANIE This appendix contains passages from various works pertaininn to Doukhobors. The writers are quoted direct ly. Brief prefatory comments are made before the text is cited and, in a few instances, the explanatory notes of the present authors have been marked by an asterisk. The following is an account written by Stephen Orellet in 1010 describing his v i s i t tc a Uoukhobor settlement near Ekaterinoslav. From the events that he describes i t can be inferred that he is describing a molenie. The account riven by Maude (1004) ouotes at lenoth from Orel let. . . . The Duhobortsi col lected, ct about ten o' clock, on a spacious spot cf ground out-of-doors. They a l l stood, forming a large c i r c l e ; a l l the men on the l e f t hand of the old man, tiie women on his right,; tiie children of both sexes formed the opposite side of the c i r c l e ; they were a l l cleanly dressed; an old woman was next to the old man; she began by sinning what they called a psalmr, the other women joined in i t ; then the pan next to the old man, taking him by tiie hand, stepped in front of him, each bowed down very low to one another three times, and then twice to the woman, who returned tiie salute; that man resuming his place, the one next to hini performed the same ceremony to tiie old man, and to the '-omen; then, by turns, a l l the others, even the boys, came and kissed three tines tiie one in the c i r c le above him, instead of bowing, When the men and boys had accomplished this , tiie women did tiie same to each other; then tiie g i r l s ; the sinning continuing the whole time. It took them nearly an hour to perform this round of bowing and kissing; then the women in a fluent manner, uttered what they called a prayer and their worship con-cluded 1 ^Stephen Orel let , "V i s i t to the Doukhobors near Ekaterinoslav in 1G1£," in Memoirs of the l i f e and gospel labours of Stephen Orel let, edited by Benjamin Seebohm, Philadelphia, Lonastreth, 1064, Vol. 1, pp. 455-57. J i 17* Wright l ived among the Saskatchewan Doukhobors (roughly between 1 9 3 2 and 1D3D) and based his novel on personal experiences, corroborated by the Doukhobors themselves. Wright re-created the 1 C 7 7 - 7 0 mode of "religious observance. u Although he does not use a Russian term, i t can Le inferred that he is describing a molenie. As the sun rose higher over the meadow, the confusion of arrival gradually subsided and the elders prepared for the ordered routine of religious observance. To the rioht of the ceremonial table, with i ts white clot!;, some of the older men in somber blue beshmets formed to recite a psalm, while several grandmothers took their places to the l e f t . Groups of men and women who were conversing here and there came to join the ceremony, and soon a large human v spread out in the meadow ....They spoke f i r s t a short psalm, "praise be Almighty God, : ; their voices droning along the meadow When the last notes had floated away in the flower-scented breeze, Vas i l i Verigin, father of Peter Vas i l iv ich, spoke a psalm as the assemblage stood with bowed heads: "So says the Lord: 'The heavens are Uy throne; the earth is My footstool. Wherever I may rest is My home, for is not a l l this the work of 'Ay hands? Who wil l ; :y eye rest on with pleasure: the gentle the s i lent and those that fear Ay word.' The Lord is ever near those of contrite heart; He wi l l save those of humble sp i r i t , lie who obeys the wi l l of God, him God wil l also hear. Higher, super-human qualities do not exist in churches, and things of lower plane receive l i f e only from human hands. Physical baptism is not true prayer before God. Oft repeated motions of r itual gladden the heart of the dev i l , but we pray to the only ^od4 maker of heaven and earth. God is the s p i r i t , God is the word, God is the man. Well i t is to bow down before the true God and the true Sp i r i t . Slava Dohu! Let us a l l bow to Almighty God."* As one they knelt to the ground, touching their foreheads to the grass. Then came the "Godly ceremony c f kissing in brotherly and s i s ter ly love." beginning with the most devout men and women who formed the closed end of the v-shaped assembly ! v the ceremonial table, one by *In the above account the author seems to be describing a molenie. However, there would appear to be contradictory evidence concerning "the psalm" spoken by V a s i l i Verigin. The words in single quotes appear to be the psalm while the words following,, in double quotes, appear to be an interpretation of the psalm by the speaker. If this is what ' 'right in -tended, then we would argue that he has confused the two different types of meetings. Perhaps this could have resulted from the fact that by the time Wright was reconstructing the "religious observance" (molenie) i t may have already assumed the new form in which the leader spoke after the close of the 'prayer meeting.' lGli one they stepped from their places to face their neighbor, bowed three times, then joining hands, kissed three t i res . The ceremony continued throughout three hours, but i t was not possible for everyone to kiss everyone else in that length of time. Thouoh there were some who had not taken part, the sun was high, and the assemblage showed signs of restlessness. Even the elders were retting hungry, so tiie religious service was I rought to a close with the sinninc^of another psalm. Al l went to their wagons to make the meal Zy the events that Zubek and Sol berg include under the term "religious services," i t is presumed that the account is a resume of a molenie in 1949. Tiie new colonists meet for religious services every Sunday morning at ten o' clock. These services are conducted much as they ware in tiie old days before tiie ortltodox group began to disintegrate. Men and boys form a l ine on one side of a small table. Women and g i r l s arrange themselves in a second l ine facing tiie men. Tiie table is tiie apex of a "V : : formation. On i t rest a loaf of bread, a jug of water and a shaker of sa l t—the symbols of Doukhobor faith—and often a vase of vivid flowers. Dread represents tiie staff of l i f e for the material body and symbolizes purity; sa l t , the seasoning and preser-vative which Christ commended when he said, "Ye are the salt of the earth." All three combine to represent the love of Pod, tiie t r i n i t y . The service consists of prayers, psalms and hymns unaccompanied by musical instrument. It always closes with the recitation of The Lord's Prayer. Then each man and boy salute each other male by bowing twice, kissina on the mouth and bowl no again. Each woman and g i r l carries out the sare ritual within tiie ferale croup. Bowing and handshaking follow between sexes but tiie formal kiss is omitted. Tiiese salutations end the ceremony which is followed by tiie communal breakfast.3 "-Wright, Slava Boiiu, pp. 30-39. 3Zubek and Sol berg, uoukhobors at War, p. 210. In Scoociinoff's descr ipt ion 3 * attention should be drawn to where the author says "after the prayers and psalms" speeches begin. While no expl ic i t dist inction is made between "prayers and psalms" and :messages, the phrasing of the account could lead one to infer that the author may be separating the two types of events. Since there is no term given to the meeting or meetings, the reader is l e f t in doubt as to what the author intended. Underlying the whole Doukhobor l i f e and economy is the religious basis upon which i t is bu i l t , the main focal center of religious fellowship in the meeting. As they gather into the hall for the meeting, the men and women separate to s i t on opposite sides of the hall facing each other. As others enter, bows are exchanged to acknowledge the Spir i t of God within. Then commences the singing of the Lord's Prayer in a reverent position and the meeting enters into an hour and a half of religious psalms and prayers sung entirely by the congregation without instru-mental music . . . . Following the psalms and prayers, messages are given by various members and vis itors present» who take their place behind a small table with the simple elements of bread, salt and water--signifying Jesus, the bread and water of l i f e . . . and us s the salt of the earth . . . in some of the meetings a large choir of Doukhobor youth may participate after the prayers . . . . f wStoochnoff is an "orthodox Doukhobor." ^Joiin Philip Stoochnoff, Doukhobors As They Are, Toronto, Ryerson Press, 1961s p. 24. 1G7 lierbiscn worked witii the Research Committee which studied the Doukhobors from 1350-51. As part of his stated purpose, he was attempting to report Doukhobor "values and bel iefs" from their point of view. Herb1son, l ike other authors, maintains that Doukhobors do not "depart-mentalize" their act iv i t ies and his account of the "community meeting" includes a wide range of ac t iv i t ie s . Because Woodcock and Avakmovic regard Harbison's account as 1-an excellent essay on Doukhobor re l ig ion, " they c i te him in their book The Doukhobors. One of the most important institutions in Doukhobor l i f e is the community meeting, the sobranya. Here is the church, the school, the fraternal society, and the government. The character of the sobranya is completely al ien to po l i t i ca l system, man-made lega l i t ie s , and democratic procedure. The underlying principle is that Ood is present and available and i t is His w i l l , not rules nor order and majorities of men, which is expected to influence decision. Moreover, i t is assumed that as the same Ood is in every heart, the desired unanimity depends upon each person's giving up his own individual ity so that the Ood within him may marge with the Ood in others, and in this corporate union is found the consensus of the meeting. In Sons of Freedom meetings tiiere may be talk, there may be speeches, there may be anything unpredictable as well; but in the end, i f there are decisions, they are not important—what remains impressed upon the people is a unanimity of mood, a shared attitude which provides the sense of belonging, which unites the people as strongly as any voting aye or nay. Its vagus indef inabi l i ty is of no concern. The effective-ness of the sobranya l ies not in a building, which is unnecessary; not in r i t u a l , which is minimal; not in the preaching, which is incidental; not in personal communion and prayer, for which tiiere is no provision; and not in the heightened sensit iv i ty of mind and heart reaching for truth, because this is not characterist ic. The sobranya is a settling-down into the past, an immersion of se l f into the group. The sinning at a sobranya is monotonous, persistent, inescapable" i t is vocal manic which takes the place of other forms and deter-minants of unity. Doukhoborism is remarkable in that i ts symbols are neither numerous nor sanctif ied. They are simply bread, salt and water, placed at every meeting on a plain table covered with a white c loth—a big golden loaf of homemade bread, a simple shaker or carton or dish of sa l t , and a jug of water accompanied usually by a drinking cup or glass. The non-Doukhobor observer who has a respect for sacred symbols 1r»r wil l be shocked by an incident which is l i ke ly to take place during any sobranya. A thirsty chi ld may no to the table and have an older person pour a drinfe of water from the jug. If a few drops remain unwanted, they are l ike ly to be thrown out on the rough floor.5 Several quotations wil l be presented from Frantz's thesis because he is using the term "sobranie1 1 to describe many kinds of meetings. Such a usage may stem from one of his premises in which he suggests that Doukhobors do not separate their act iv i t ies from one another. In the vil lage and community meetings, the presence of the leader brought much greater deferential behavior than was shown to other administrative o f f i c i a l s . Speeches by the leaders generally were absorbed in the midst of quiet awe. Deferential gestures, such as the customary bowing and kissing, were displayed The community meeting, or sobranie, has been the singularly outstanding inst itution through which widespread po l i t i ca l participation has occurred. It wil l be recalled that Doukhobors tradit ional ly have rejected the state, the church, the priesthood, and a l l sacraments because these interfered with the attainment of Godly perfection. Their conceptions of the sacred l i f e have not distinguished between the religious and the c i v i l ; the realm of the sacred embraced both. Hence, they believed no dist inct social structures were necessary for p o l i t i c a l , economic, rel ig ious, or other a f fa i r s . On the contrary, God is inherent in a l l of nature, and a l l men possess immanent and permanent Holiness. Individuals are miided by the "inper l ight, ' 1 and the affairs of daily l i f e are religious by de f in i t i on . 0 The author had frequent opportunities to observe and participate in these sobranii during his f i e ld work. The dynamics of the meeting varied considerably from those of most American groups. One observer (Mavor 1923:10) of a Doukhobor meeting during their early years in Canada made the following report: "'Each man who spoke shouted in a loud voice, and the a f fa i r bore the complexion of a contest in lung power." The sobranie considered the interests of a l l the Doukhobor vil lages throughout the whole day, than "suddenly the clamour ceased without apparent formal reason. One side had shouted the other down, and the defeated side became s i lent. That was a l l A decision had been reached."' The meetings have been characterized by free and • fyterbison, "Religion, 1 The Doukhobors of Brit ish Columbia, p. ItC and pp. 174-75. G Frantz, "The Doukhobor Pol i t ica l System,u p. 73, and pp. 76-77. 139 uninhibited discussion. The face to face interaction frequently has been very intense. Cursing and fighting have not been rare occurrences. The meetings tradit ional ly have been structured very informally, and the topics discussed have ranged widely during the course of the meeting as the interests of the group have been reviewed and elaborated. There usually have been no "sermons, i : as each individual has been free to speak on a subject i f he f e l t "divinely inspired." Meetings usually have been held outdoors, weather permittinr, and they often have lasted for hours, and even days. Both men and women have par-ticipated without discrimination. s!o formal votes have occurred in the community meetings. Rather, decisions have been made upon the basis of consensus, and sometimes unanimity. Trie sobranie sometimes lias gone on the road, too. Since 1902 Doukhobors -especially Sons of Freedom--have made pilgrimages of one kind or another. These have been designed to bring chances in Canadian governmental pol ic ies, or to gain new members by pointing out the retrogression of the accommodating Independent and Orthodox Doukhobors. In sum, the sobranie has been the central po l i t i ca l (equated with religious) assembly although i t has shared authority and responsibil ity with the hereditary charismatic leader. It has been based more on emotion than on rat ional i ty. It has functioned to purify the community and presumably to reaffirm the sol idar i ty of the group . . . . It has allowed for the partial resolution of personal differences and internal factional s t r i f e . Through the sobranie, the community has attempted to face the outside world as a harmonious group. The frequency with which i t has been held and the Intensity of expression and pa r t i c i -pation within i t unquestionably attest to this view. Ibid., pp. 77-70, 00-31. 190 From the quotations presented, i t is apparent that Tarasoff- usually distinguishes "prayer services' (or "religious services") from 'business meetings" but in some cases his usage of the terms is vague. However, in several instances he denies the dist inction he had previously made. ilote that in one of the passages cited here the author makes note of the fact that "men are on the l e f t and women on the r ight", an interpretation which contradicts the Doukhobor view of where they stand. They** were concerned basically with three things: 1. The problem of youth ("something should be taught to them about the Doukhobor movement"); 2. The concern over the fact that a number of Doukhobors were actively participating in the Russian People's Home ("which is a Bolshevik organization where people drink l iquor " ) ; 3. The need to have an independent Doukhobor organization in order to hold their own sobranyas (religious and business meetings), to give some order to the annual Petrov Lien, and so forth. The meeting discussed these concerns and as a result i ts members decided toAform an organization. Speaking of the same group Tarasoff goes on to say: At their Easter Service, 200 Doukhobors came . . . . Following the formal service, choral presentations and open forum speeches were the order of the day. The young people were never real ly brought into the act iv i t ies of the Society--only a few ever attended. "Religious services were always, in Russian, so were the business meetings nonetheless, the Fraternal Society has brought together a number of individuals who might not otherwise have joined any Doukhobor organ-ization. Especially, this is true with those members who are disi l lusioned with the traditional prayer services or religious n  sobranyes and nevertheless desire to maintain their ethnic ident i ty . 0 Tarasoff is a Doukhobor himself. "*"They" refers to the Doukhobors of Hew Westminster now known as the Society of Doukhobors of Canada. °Tarasoff, "A Study of Russian Organizations in the Greater Vancouver Area," pp. 150, 153, 157, 162. 1 9 1 Since its official inception, tiie Society* has held sobranyes twice a month ... and has provided leadership for the Petrov Dien event. At one of the sobranyes last year ( 1 9 5 2 ) , one of the people present stated that it is the Doukhobor's role today to ... join in the protest for world peace and disarmament .... ... the Doukhobors have been traditionally opposed to the formal structure of churches, priests and their ritualistic paraphernalia .... Some members use the word ''Church" interchangeably with the word sobranye—but this has been periodically challenged by other members. Likewise challenged is the contention that many of the 'old psalms have no meaning whatsoever and should be discarded1. Tiie prayer part of the sobranyes and most of the business part have been in the Russian language. Sunday afternoon, May 2 7 , 1 9 0 2 , 2 : 1 5 p.m. to 5 : 2 0 p.m. I came in a bit late (from another meeting just concluded in the kitchen) at a time when the group was singing some Doukhobor hymns in Russian .... Chairs were set up in the centre facing the front of the stage. In between was the table with tiie traditional bread, salt and water. Men on tiie left and women on the right: and some people standing in the centre amidst the chairs. It was obvious that iiikita Popoff was at the head of the meet Inc.--i.e. of the sinning part. After the Otche pThe Lord's Prayer'Q , several psalms and hymns were sung. The people then sat down. SPEECH DY KEii iCOHi'Ii! (in English) Ken noted surprise that a "prayer service" was held before this meeting. Ken, it appears, wants the religious and business meetings entirely separated. KJT. But this is really contrary to tiie Doukho-bor tradition where soLranye meetings were practically always a combination of tiie two; i.e. Doukhobors don't really separate tiie "sacred" from the "secular"; life is a union, not a segmentary thing. *i.e. I he Society of Doukhobors of Canada, in Vancouver B.C. 9Ibid., pp. 1 7 4 , 1 7 9 , 1 0 1 , 1 0 2 , 2 4 1 , 0 4 3 . 132 Harry Cheveldave: . . . I look around us and note t!ie lack of young people at this sobranye. I'm the last of the Doukhobor generation — unless we do something about i t . Let's do something positive to build up a "proper rel ig ion" John Chutskoff: "Spiritual J3kuhovnoe"J sobranyes are necessary for us. |_To the youth.3 lie tr ied in the past to organize the youth. He tr ied teaching them psalms—no, i t didn't work..." Ken Konkin: He have one aim: "spir itual sobranye winch we do not have today." Adjournment at 5:20 p.m. Everyone stood un and sang "Hi Okonchali Sobranye" (We've Concluded Our Assembly--customary ending). Meeting.announcement published in Iskra (Grand Forks, B.C.) Mo. CS1, May 18, 10G2, p. 30, in Russian: Notice to a l l Doukhobors in Vancouver and Distr ict On Sunday May 27, 1202, at 2 p.m. in Lochdale Hall (Hastings and Sperling, Burnaby), there wi l l take place a spir itual meeting, after which a business one of the Society of Doukhobors for the discussion of the following important ques t ions . . , l j Although there are two manuscripts on the Doukhobors by Tarasoff, they have been treated separately because one deals primarily with the history of the Doukhobors (In Search of Brotherhood: The History of the Doukhobors) while the other is spec i f ica l ly a consideration cf contemporary Russian organizations in Vancouver ('A Study of Russian Organizations in the Greater Vancouver Area"). The comments made with respect to Tarasoff's thesis apply to the following excerpts. Even during Kanustin's time, we are told by Novitsky, the "secret sobranyes (gatherings)" were held along with regular communal prayer service, 'but there significance is not known. It is only known that during the time of Kanustin's nephew these secret sobranyes f lead toj scandalous org ies . . . * ! l ° I b i d . , pp. 24D-51, 242. ^Tarasoff , In Search cf Brotherhood: Vol. 1, 0. G2. 193 . . . i f we look at the following account by the Doukhobors„ describing the period up to 133G: Sirotskoy Dom is located in the vi l lage cf Horeloe. It consists of two buildings~~a cne-story brick structure covered with t i l e , and a small two-story wooden building. The f i r s t structure was used for sobranyes and prayer services,---where two rooms were present for this purpose—while the second one was used as a public forum with the administrators of the Home Verigin's second important letter had the status of a psalm and was read often at sobranye prayer meetings with tiie customary close: "Doi.u nashemu slava' (Glory to God). The " lat ter " was written in tiie style of the "Ten Commandments'"'' and was directed towards the building of the "Christian Community of Universal Brotherhood," a t i t l e which Verigin coined to supercede the word "Doukhobor"... iiext day* Verigin and his escorts l e f t by train for York ton, then by sleigh and horses forty miles north to Poterpevsha -the vi l lage of his aged mother...It was a solemn and .joyous occasion as the people awaited their leader. With fur caps o f f , the whole crowd began to sing a psalm of welcome: "Cur Dear Guest". In response Verigin took of f in's cap and waited until the psalm and lengthy sobranye came to a close. Then in a customary manner he bowed low and followed this by words of greetings... **The conditions were ripe for Verigin and his communal experiment. Al l the features of Russian communal l i f e , except l iv ing in v i l lages, were introduced. Tiiere was the same groups of sobranyes, winch met weekly.; these same sobranyes chose their elder, who transacted business on their behalf. The sobranyes assigned the duties of each individual for the coming year and dealt with a l l matters affecting the domestic and industrial l i f e of i ts members. Verigin was quick to in i t ia te reform. In 1902 he abolished the practice of •''kissing" and "handshaking" which had crept into their sobranyes as foreign end superfluous ceremony.12 *The author is speaking of the period around 1S02. The date is also around 1002. 1 2 I b i d . , Vol. 1, pp. 92,238, and Vol. 2, pp. 205-86, 300, 3S Around 1912 there were ! :ten o f f i c i a l discipl inary measures" that became effect ive, the last of these i s ; 10. A l l children, without exception, must come every day to the sobranye to sing prayers and hymns and to read psalms. William A. Soukoreff recal ls his youthful days- when he and other vi l lagers had to ^et up at 4 o'clock in the morning and walk barefooted to a designated Community l;ome_for a prayer service... ...during the middle of April L l ' O l s U , Verigin returned to the Kootenays. A sobranye was called for in Loogovoe [pass Creek^U* and everyone was instructed to walk there barefooted... It was only in 1232, though, that a youth organization was f i r s t formed by the Community Doukhobors.Evening sobranyes were held regularly at f i r s t , with the program being mainly that of singing, some drama, presentation of talks, and an attempt at learning Russian and reading books. *A11 who could find standing room squeezed into the Community Home, while the rest, shawled women and bareheaded men stood in the t rad i -tional "V : i in the courtyard by the iam factory. Inside, on the platform, stood a plain-clothed tabie with i t s loaf of bread, salt in a salt- shaker and a pitcher of water. When the last psalm ended Peter ascended the platfrom, Bonderoff, the secretary of the "Darned Doukhobors", came right behind The usual greetings were exchanged as heads bowed in acknowledgement, for there was no room to bow a l l the way. "Brothers and s i s ters" , began Verigin, sonorously? "on tin's beautiful day we are gathered here in the Spir i t of Chr i s t . . . " According to Michael the Archangel Verigin, Peter P. Verigin advocated several changes to the new community: schools were to be accepted by a l l , but based on Christian principles:; the kissing ritual of the Community Doukhobors which Peter P. Verigin had introduced into the sobranye meeting was to be abolished, for only one bow was necessary.. .I3 "Tarasoff is speaking of the practices in the 1330's. 1 3 I b i d . , Vol. 2, pp. 402, 406, 550, 5G6, 705. Concerning tiie 50th Jubilee: The big event arrived July 31-August 1 as 5,000 vis i tors came... People took their seats on benches facing an open stage against the background of a community meeting ha l l , the former community barn if. the 1930's. They waited for the big moment, but f i r s t the prelim-inaries—the opening prayer service; the community dinner, picnic style for most, seven banquet tables for the guests (all vegetarian meals); words of greetings at the banquet tab le; . . . "Should Folk Singing De Permitted in the Doukhobor Community lionse?"' This discussion was curtailed prematurely when one elderly v i s i tor got up and said: ''This topic is not appropriate in this building.' Immediately came other comments? "The hews wil l get into the newspapers and we wil l be the laughing stock from our neighbours." "Is this a Community 'tome or is i t a Prayer Home?" "Folk singing, yes, but not during the time for praying"; "there should be folk songs in order to have a more complete re l i g ion" ; "any other day but Sunday";... The fact i s , however, that Blaine Lake and d i s t r i c t have already changed s ignif icantly since the f i r s t Doukhobor set foot here in tiie summer of 1890. Alexei Popoff, Doukhobor elder, v iv id ly describes this change in 1951; "As i t is known to a l l there were no churches and no community homes amongst the Doukhobors". Rather Sunday sobranyes as well as business meetings were held in the homes, although not at the same time 4. Tiie Doukhobor ideal rejects churches, worships no ikons or idols , supports no baptism, or confession, nor the "divine" position of ministry. Tradit ional ly Doukhobors have held 'meetings, or sobranyes at which they prayed and discussed their various everyday problems (both local and international). The building where this is held is not considered "sacred", nor is i t a " church " . . . . 1 4 "'Ibid., Vol. 3, nn. 751, 854, 900, 917. 195 In addition to citing. Harbison's description of "Doukhobor re l ig ion. Woodcock and Avakumovic make several other references to "sobraniia." It is also interesting to note that the authors say women are on the right and men are on the l e f t , a perspective which is not adopted by the Doukhobors. . . . in Luker' ia 's reign . . . . Her arrival in a vi l lage would mean a gala day of rejoicing; beginning with the welcome of the v i l lagers, ranged in a great V on the vi l lage green, the white-shawled women on the right and the men on the l e f t of the table symbolically la id with i ts great peasant loaf of rye bread and its dish of sa l t ; continuing in psalm singing and feasting; and ending in a kind of durbar at which Luker ' ia, always approachable, would l i s ten to the complaints and requests c f her followers. Today . . . . Almost every sobranie held in Canada s t i l l opens with the hymn to their memory," 'Sleep on, you brave fighting eagles,' which lias inspired many a latter-day Doukhobor to choose a path of rebellion and imprisonment.... **Within the vi l lage the sobranie served as a means for reaching Community decisions. Attended by a l l the inhabitants,, i t was usually a combination of religious gathering and business meeting. The week was punctuated by routine events—the sobranie every Sunday and on Saturday the v i s i t to the bathhouse Among them*** the ceremonial l i f e of sobrani1a and psalm-singing was richer than elsewhere, and they developed the strongest resistance to any concession to the materialism of non-Doukhobor l i fe .15 v " t h e i r memory" refers to the martyrs who died in Russia. The authors are speaking of the period up to 1907. "Them" refers to the Sons of Freedom. ^Woodcock and Avakumovic, The Doukhobors, pp. 71, 103, 199, 200, 31C. APPENDIX C MODUS OPERANDI When tiie researchers began tin's investigation in 1968, Doukhobors in Vancouver were the focus of the study. Perhaps because one of the researchers is of Doukhobor heritage and has a Doukhobor surname, access to the community was not problematic. Strangers and young people are conspicuous when they attend Doukhobor meetings and this certainly applied to the presence of the researchers at the meetings. After inouiries had been made about cur surnames, we inferred that the Ocukhobors assumed the one researcher came to learn of his heritage and that the other came as a potential spouse. Despite retpeated statements to the effect that we were colleagues, and riot betrothed to each other, they continued to look upon the relationship as one of introducing the "English'- ( i .e. non-Doukhobor) person to the Doukhobor way of l i f e . Tiie fact that there were Doth male and female researchers was regarded as an asset, given the physical separation of males and females at the meetings. Tins enabled the researchers to observe and discuss the proceedings from both perspectives. Although a l l Doukhobors in regular attendance at the Vancouver Sobranija were wil l ing to talk at length with the researchers, they often referred us to the more elderly Doukhobors. The elderly Doukhobors were said to te the people who better understood their customs. There seemed to be some select iv i ty in the individuals we were referred to, for there appeared to be a bias toward members of the same faction. While we were aware of tins problem, i t was interesting to consider this in relation to the boundaries between the various groups which are often ambiguous and/or not articulated. It should be pointed out again that there were few young people or children who attended meetings and consequently these categories of respondents are net represented in the study. A similar non-attendance of young people at Russian Orthodox Church services drew attention to the presence cf the researchers. Members of the congregation and the clergy were delighted to see a "young couple" regularly attend services throughout this year. The researchers were given the irepression that they were seen as potential Church members. When members of the congregation were asked questions about the service, they invariably referred us to the priest since he was considered to be "the expert." Apart from brief comments after the service, members of the la i ty would net engage in discussions with the researchers about Orthodoxy or the services. The study concentrated upon the Doukhobors in the f i r s t years of the investigation and upon the Russian Orthodox in the last year of data col lect ing. Cur close proximity to the communities enabled us to maintain contacts and to make repeated v i s i t s to the same informants ever the years. This was especially advantageous in the later stages of the investigation, when i t was possible to check the on-going analysis with the respondents, ''hen the taxonomy of Doukhobor gatherings had been constructed;, i t was shown and explained to various Doukhobors who were asked to make comments. The Russian Orthodox taxonomy of gatherings was constructed by the researchers in conjunction with the priest. In both cases the most usual questions asked at this stage of inquiry were "Is " x " a kind of gathering?" and "What kind of a gathering is "x"? ; : IDS In addition to procedural matters, there are several d i f f i cu l t i e s that can arise in jo int research. A basic dilemma revolves around the separation of the individual author's ideas and contributions. As tiie theoretical problems are discussed and worked upon together, i t becomes increasingly d i f f i c u l t to assess the individual contributions of the authors since ideas are continually being refined. The ramifications of this are also seen in tiie manner in which the individuals, as joint authors, are treated by others. It would seem to us that, as joint authors, we have become equated with each ether, by the university community, and that we are seen by then as inte l lectual ly inseparable, l.'hile this problem persists a related but seemingly contradictory problem arises. l.'e are speaking here of tiie question of equal recognition of authorship. In tin's particular study tiiere would appear to be added intricacies since one author is male and lias a Doukhobor name while the other is female and non-Doukhobor. We have noted from conversations and correspondence that inquiries are generally directed toward tiie former author and not to tiie la t ter . Dot withstanding the d i f f i cu l t i e s mentioned above, the benefits of a jo int undertaking are to be found in the continual development and exenanoe of ideas, the different orientations tiie individuals have to offer and therefore the greater scope of investigation which is possible. 200 GLOSSARY* a l tar ' 'sanctuary.' Area east of the iconostas in an Orthodox church. amvon The area in front of the royal doors in an Orthodox church. analoj ' lecturn. ' Lecturn upon which an icon or icons are placed. antidor Altar bread which has been blessed by the priest. It is usually given to the congregation at the end of the divine l iturgy service. antimins A s i lk c loth, consecrated by a bishop, which remains on the throne. beseda A meeting at which an Orthodox priest gives a talk. beseda A Doukhobor meeting at which some issue is being discussed. Cog 'God.' bogomelenie 'God's prayer meeting.' Refers to a Doukhobor prayer meeting. Also molenie. bogosluzenie 'God's services' or 'divine services. ' Used by the Russian Orthodox to refer to particular meetings. bozestvennaja l i t u rn i j a 'divine l i turgy. ' The Orthodox Sunday Church service. See l i t u r g i j a . carskie dveri 'royal doors.' The doors in the middle of the iconostas. cerkov' 'church.' dom 'house.' Refers to the building in which Doukhobors hold their meetings. Also molitvenyj dom, obscij dom. Gospodi pomiluj 'Lord have mercy.' An intercession sung by the choir at the divine l i turgy. kl iros A square structure in the Russian Orthodox church, enclosed on three sides. Used either by tiie chanter or choir. krescenie 'baptism.' One of the seven sacraments in the Orthodox CUurcii.. *The meaninos given in this glossary are defined primarily with reference to the Doukhobors and tiie Russian Orthodox Church. 201 l i t u rg i j a ' l i tu rgy . 1 Terr, used by Russian Orthodox speakers in reference to the divine l i turgy. See bczestvennaja l i t u r g i j a . 1iturgija 'acts of worship' or 'actions directed toward Sod.' Term used by the Doukhobors to refer to certain actions in the molenie, poxorony, and svad'ba. l i tu rg i j a oglascenie ' l i turgy of the catechumens.' One of the three principal divisions of the divine l i turgy. l i t u r g i j a vernjaja ' l i turgy of the f a i t h f u l . 1 A division of tiie divine l i turoy. moleben 'thanksgiving service. ' This is a private church service usually held for an individual. molenie, molenija 'prayer meeting,' 'prayer meetings.' A shortened form of bogomolenie or 'Hod's prayer meeting.' Used to refer to a Doukhobor prayer meeting. molitvenyj dom 'prayer bouse.1 Refers to the building in which Doukhobors hold their meetings. Also dom, obscij dor. obednja 'mass.' Refers to the divine l i turgy. Derived from the word obed, meaning 'dinner,' hence tiie word implies the sharing of the eucsiarist meal. obrad 'custom' or ' t rad i t ion. ' Used to refer to particular actions and objects in Doukhobor meetings. Also used by Orthodox speakers but not in reference to particular actions and objects. Obrad 'traditional meeting.' An analytic dist inction is made between Obrad and obrad. Obrad refers to an entire meeting which Doukhobors consider to be a 'traditional meeting.' obscij dom 'community house.' Building in which Doukhobors hold their meetings. Also dom, molitvenyj dom. obscij poklon 'communal or group bow.' Refers to tiie Orthodox person bowing and crossing himself. The phrase is sometimes used by Doukhobors in reference to a group bow. See poklonenie and obscae  poklonenie. obscee poklonenie 'communal or group bow.' The usual phrase employed by Doukhobors in reference to a group bow. obycaj 'custom' or ' t rad i t ion . ' I'sad by the Orthodox in reference to actions within the divine l i turgy. Dot used by Doukhobors in the context of Sunday meetings. oglascenie 'catechumens.' Unbaptized or those preparing for baptism into the Orthodox Church. 202 Otcfe nas 'Our Father.' Cur Father or the Lord's Prayer. panixic'a An Orthodox church service for the dead. Potrov den' 'Peter's day.' On the 29 June, Doukhobors commemorate the burning of their arms in Russia. Also refers to St. Peter's day (29 June) in the Orthodox Church. poklon 'bov?.' There are various kinds of bows distinguished by the Jrthoclox and Doukhobors. This term is not frequently used by Doukhobors. See poklonenie, obscij poklon, zemlepcklon, zemlepoklonenie. poklonenie 'bov;.' The word is used by Doukhobors to mean either a bov; or the act of bowinr; and kissing. In standard Russian the word means 'worship.' pominki 'remembrance service. ' Refers to both Russian Orthodox and Doukhobors gathering in remembrance of the deceased. These gatherings are held six weeks and a year after the person has died. porjadok 'habit. ' Also defined by Doukhobors as form or personal way of doing things. poxorony ' funeral . ' The term used by Doukhobors in reference to the singing of psalms over the deceased, the burial and the communal dinner 'ield after the buria l . presto! 'throne.' The communion table in the Orthodox church. pritvor 'vest ibule. 1 ;*arthex or vestibule in an Orthodox church. proskomadia 'preparation.' The f i r s t main division of the divine l iturgy. prosfora 'a l tar bread.' Leavened altar Dreads used in the divine l i turgy. psalom 'psalm. 1 riznica ' sacr i s ty. ' The south-east area behind the iconostas. seredinaja cerkov' 'nave.' The center of the Orthodox church. sobranie, sobranija 'gathering,' 'gatherings.' Written with a small i T T , " sobranie refers to any gathering and conseouently the term subsumes a l l tyoes of particular meetings. Sobranie, Sobranija 'Community Meeting,' 'Community Meetings.1 Capital "S" Sobranie denotes a particular Doukhobor meeting at which hymn singing and discussions take place. It is subsumed by the more general term sobranie ('gathering'). spevka 'choir pract ice. ' 203 starosta 'e lder. ' The term is used by Doukhobors to refer to their i n fo rma1 cha i rma n. starosta 'church warden.1 Used by Russian Orthodox speakers to refer to the man who has several duties including looking after the church buildinq. st ix 'verse' or 'hymn.' stol ' tab le. ' The table upon which Doukhobors place bread, salt and water. Also used to refer to any table in the nave of the Orthodox church. svad'ba 'wedding.» A Doukhobor wedding. sxodka ' local meeting.' For tiie Dcuknobors the term refers to a meeting within walking distance. s' ;ezd 'convention' or 'regional meeting.' Implies travel l ing to the meeting by vehicle. trapeza A. meal at which a clergyman is present. Among Vancouver Russian Orthodox people i t refers to a meal held in tiie hall after the divine l i turgy. t r i duxoborceskix nbrada 'three Doukhobor tradit ions ' or 'three traditional Doukhobor meetings'--moienie, ooxoronys svad'ba. utrenja 'matins.' An early morning Orthodox service. xram 'church.' Usually denotes a large church or cathedral. vecemja 'vespers.' An evening Ortiiodox service. vencanie 'crowning.' Tiie wedding service or crowning in the Russian Ortiiodox Church. vocerkovlenie 'churching.' A mother brings her infant to a church service forty days after tiie birth of the ch i ld . Voskresen'e 'Sunday.' The day of resurrection. zemlepoklon 'bow to the earth. ' The term refers to a Russian Ortiiodox person bowing to the floor and crossing himself. zemlepoklonenie 'bow to the earth. ' The Doukhobors refer to the action of bowing to the f loor by this term. See poklonenie. zertvenik 'table of oblation' or 'table of sacr i f i ce . ' The table of oblation is behind the iconostas in the north-east corner of the sanctuary in the Russian Orthodox church. 204 BIBLIOGRAPHY A. GEHEKAL REFERENCES Becker3 Howard. 'Current sacred-secular theory and i ts development." Modern Sociological Theory. Edited by Howard Becker and Alwin Baskoff. Hew York, Molt, Rinehart and Winston, 1957. Boas, Franz. Race, Language and Culture. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1948. Canada, Dominion Bureau of Stat is t ics. 1901 Census of Canada (Ottawa 1DC2). 'Population: Religious Denominations,''' bul letin 1. 2-C., Werner. " 'Rel ig ion ' in i-ion-Western Cultures?" American  Anthropologist, Vol. 59, Do. 1. February 1007, pp. 73-76. . "What is Religion? An Analysis for Cross-Cultural Comparisons." Journal of Christian Education, Vol. 7, No. 2 and 3. November 1904, pp. 116-30. Dunn, S. P. and Ethel Dunn. The Peasants of Central Russia. U.S.A., Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1907. Fortes, M. "Religious premisses and logical technique in divinatory r i t u a l . " Royal Society of London Philosophical Transactions, Series B, Vol. 251, Issue No. 772. 19GC,'pp. 402-15. Geertz, C l i f fo rd . "Ethos, World-View and the Analysis of Sacred Symbols-" The Antioch Review, Vol. XVII, No. 4. December 1957, pp. 421-37. Perth, H. ii. and C. Wright H i l l s , eds. and trans. From Pax Weber: Essays in Sociology. Dew York, Oxford University Press, 195S. Kaplan, Abraham. The Conduct of Inquiry. San Francisco, Chandler Publishing Company, 1954. Lane, Michael, ed. Structural ism: A Reader. London, Jonathan Cane, 1970. Leach, E. R. "Ritualization in Man." Royal Society of London Philosoph- ical Transactions, Series B, Vol. 251 s Issue No. 772. 195G, pp. 403-C6. Levi-Strauss, Claude. The Raw and The Cooked. Translated by John and Doreen Weightman. Mew York, Harper and Row, 1970. 205 01ivar 3 Douglas. 'An Ethnographer's Method for Formulating Descriptions of Social Structure." Amc r i ca n A n t h ro po1o n i s t , Vol. 60. 1956, pp. 801-£6. Propp s Vladimir, Morphology of the Folktale. Second edition. Trans-lated by Laurence Scott. Austin, University of Texas Press, 1308. Proshansky, Harold M . , et al_, , eds. En vi ronmental Psychology: I an and  his Physical Setting. U.S.A., Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1370. Schutz, Al free!. Col 1 ected Papers Vol. U Tiie Problem of Social Reality. Edited by Maurice Natanson. Tiie Hague, Martinus Mijhcff, 1002. T i t iev , Mischa. "A Fresh Approach to the Problem of Magic and Religion. 1 1 in Reader in Comparative Religion. Second Edition. Edited by E. A. Lessa and E. Z. Vogt. U.S.A., Harper and Row, 1S05, pp. 316-12. Tyler, Stephen, ed. Cognitive Anti\ropo1ogy. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1909. Whorf, b. L. Language, Thought and Reality. U.S.A., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1056. Wilson, Bryan. "An Analysis of Sect Development." American Sociological  Review, Vol. 24. February 1959, pp. 3-15. 20C 0. RUSSIA! ORTHODOX REFERENCES Anthony, Archimandrite, ed. A Brief Catechism of the Orthodox Catholic  Eastern Church. Pennsylvania, published by ''Russian Day" Committee of Luzerne and Lackawanna Counties, 1002. Benz, Ernst. The Eastern Ortiiodox Church. Translated ty Richard and Clara Winston. Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company, 1063. Crummay, Robert 0. The Old Believers and The World of Antichrist. U.S.A., University of Wisconsin Press, 1970. Oemetrakopoulos, George i-i. Dictionary of Orthodox Theology: A Summary of the Bel iefs, Practices and History of the Eastern Orthodox Church. U.S.A., Philosophical Library Inc., 1004". Tiie Divine Liturgy According to St. John Chrysostom. ;lev.' York, Russian Ortiiodox Greek Catholic Church of America, 1057. Gogol, Nikolai. Meditations on tiie Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Ortiiodox  Catholic and Apostolic Church, New York, American Review of Eastern Orthodoxy, Reprinted 1364, {Written c. 1845-51] . iiingley, R. Russian Writers and Society. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1907. ixoulomzin, Sophie. Tiie Orthodox Christian Church Through Tiie Ages. U.S.A., Keystone -Publishing Company, 1956. McGowan, Jean Carro l l . ConceleDration. iiew York, Herder and Herder, 1904. Heyendorff, John. The Ortiiodox Church. Translated by John Ciiapin. U.S.A., Random House, 19c2. Hiliukov, Paul. Religion and The Church in Russia. Translated by U. Unhet and E. Davis, iiew York, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1943. Orthodox Catholic Christian Education Lessons, Unit 3--The Divine Liturgy. Published by Metropolitan Council, Religious Education Department, Russian Ortiiodox Greek Catholic Church of North America, Revised IOCS. Romanoff, H. C. Sketches of tiie Greco-Russian Church. England, Rivingtons, 1869. Schmemann, Alexander. The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy. Translated by L. W. Kesich. Flew York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 19G3. Shereghy, Reverend Basi l . The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. Minnesota, The Liturgical Press, Copyright 10X1 by The Order of St. benedict. Soroka, Reverend Leonid, and Stan Carlson. Faith of Our Fathers: The Eastern Orthodox Religion. Minnesota, The Olympic Press, 1054. Stanley, Arthur Penrhyn. Lectures on The History of The Eastern Church. London, John Murray, 1383. Stepniakrjs. M. KravchinskyJ . The Russian Peasantry. Third Edition. London, Swan Sonnenschein Z. Co., 1894. Tarasoff, Koozma John. "A Study of Russian Organizations in the Greater Vancouver Area." Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Brit ish Columbia, 19C3. Walker, Wil l iston.. A History of the Christian Church. Nov: York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1959. Ware, Timothy. The Orthodox Church. Great Br i ta in, Penguin books, 1953. Zernov, Hi col as. Eastern Christendom, riew York, G. P. Putman's Sons, 19'bl. 200 C. DOUKHOBOR REFERENCES A l len, Vii H i am. "V i s i t to the Doukhobors in 1819." L i fe of Hi H i am  Al1 en, with selections from his correspondence, Vol. 2. London, Gi lp in, 1G4C 47, pp. C1-D3. Bellows, John. Letters and Memoir. Edited b* his wife. London, Kegan Paul, 1904. Donclv Druevich, Vladimir D . Zhi.vatnaya Kniga Dukhoborstev. St. Peters-berg, n.p. 9 190?. Bradley, Arthur Granvil le. "The Doukhobors." in his Canada in the  Twentieth Century. London, Constable, 1905. Dawson, C. A. "Doukhobors." in his Group Settlement -Ethnic Communities in Western Canada, Vol. 3. Toronto, Macmillan Co., 193G, pp. 1-51. "Doukhobors; Their Faith." Published by the Doukhobor Society of Canada, 1901. Elkington, Joseph. Doukhobors, Their History in Russia, Their Emigration  to Canada. Philadelphia, Ferris and Leach, 1003. Fitzqibbon, Mary Agnes T s a l l y Bernard J . Canadian Doukhobor Settlements--A Series of Letters. Toronto, Wi11iam Brings, 1809. Frantz, Charles. "The Doukhobor Pol i t ica l System, Social Structure and Social Organization in a Sectarian Society." Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1050. Orel let, Stephen. "V is i t to the Doukhobors near Ekaterinoslav in 1813." Memoirs of the 1ife and gospel labors of Stephen Grel1et, Vol. 1. Edited by benjamin Seebohm. Philadelohia, Longstreth, 18G4, pp. 455-57. Harshenin, A. P. "An Analysis of the Phonology of the Oukhobor Dialect." Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Brit ish Columbia, 1960. Hawthorn, llzrry C , ed. Doukhobors of Brit ish Columbia. Vancouver, J . M. Dent and Sons, 1955. . , ed. Report of Doukhobor Research Committee. Vancouver, University of Brit ish Columbia, 1352. Haxthausen, August Freiherr von. Russian Empire, Its People, Institutes  and Resources. Translated by Robert Farie. London, Chapman, 1856. Kenworthy, John C. 'Religion and Revolution." in Hey; Order, Vol. 5. London, M.S., December 1800, pp. 1C3-37. Maude, Aylmer. A Peculiar People: The Doukhobors. Hew York, Funk and Wagnalls, c. 1004. Peacock, Kenneth. "The Music of the Doukhobors." in his Twenty Ethnic  Sonos from Western Canada. Ottawa, National Museum of Canada, 1906, pp. 35-44. Popoff, El i A. Historical Exposition of Doukhobor bel iefs. Manuscript for National Museum of Canada, August 19G4. . The Soul Expressive Heritage of the Doukhobor-Russian Group  Singing. Unpublished Manuscript, 19G8. . "What is true Doukhoborism?" in Iskra. Grand Forks, Brit ish Columbia, June 1951. Reibin, Simeon F. Trud i mi maia zhizn: i s to r i i a dukhobortsev bez maski. San Francisco, halo, 1952. Stoochnoff, John Phi l ip. Doukhobors As They Are. Toronto, Ryerson Press, 1951. Tarasoff, Koozma John. In Search of Brotherhood: A iii story of the  Doukhobors, 3 Vols. Vancouver, Mimeographed work, 1963. Tchertfcoffj Vladimir, ed. Christian Martyrdom in Russia. London, Tiie Free Age Press, 1900. Woodcock, George, and Ivan Avakumovic. The Doukhobors. Toronto, Oxford University Press, 19GC. Wright, J . F. C. Slava Bohu. New York, Ferris Printing Company, 1940. Zubek 9 John P., and P. A. Sol berg. Doukhobors At War. Toronto, Ryerson Press, 1552. 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items