asts who originated the movement—the Denissoffs and Koveline, with many others—have generally been men of action and practical sense, evincing great administrative ability. They have, by their energy and skilful management, given a material unity and solidity to the Raskol which it could never have attained if it had continued to be, as at the first, simply a religious manifestation.
For one of the two great branches of the Raskol, for Popovtsism, the difficulties in the way of a religious organization arose chiefly from circumstance, and not from principle, and they were consequently far less formidable than the obstacles encountered by the other branch, Bezpopovtsism. The former has recently arrived at a solution of the problem which proves apparently satisfactory, and is accepted by the great majority of its adherents, though not by all; before treating of this event, however, it will be interesting to review the vicissitudes through which it passed.
The recognition of the necessity of a priesthood for the existence of a Church maintained, among the Popovtsi, the ancient dogmas of Orthodoxy, and preserved the unity of the faith. Indulgence in freedom of interpretation was more circumscribed, and division into sects, by differences of individual opinion, was less frequent than among the Bezpopovtsi. Almost the only element of controversy was the conditions requisite for the admission of popes. As their clergy was recruited among refugees from the established Church, they were contemptuously styled "Beglopopovtsi,"[1] or "Community of runaway priests." These popes, before reception, were subjected to humiliating ordeals of abjuration, purification, and penitence; they were rebaptized; some-
- ↑ From beglii, runaway, and pope, priest.
