Khlyst

[Daniel Rancour-Laferriere]

Dear colleagues,

My thanks to all of you who have responded with generous suggestions  
concerning the origin of "Khlyst."  Many of the the references you  
mentioned were of course familiar - hence the problem, for they  
contradicted one another in various ways.

The issue comes up in the context of current research on the sign of  
the cross in the history of Christianity.  For the time being I have  
placed the Khlysty alongside medieval flagellant brotherhoods in  
Western Europe as follows:

> There were self-flagellants who practiced their masochism in  
> private, and others who flagellated themselves in groups.  In either  
> case the imitation of Christ is clear.  Among the indications that  
> the public self-flagellants were imitating Christ was an oath many  
> of them swore to scourge themselves in public procession for exactly  
> thirty-three and one half days – this number replicating the  
> supposed number, in years, which Christ lived on earth.[1]   
> Cruciform imagery also characterized the self-flagellant movements.   
> Cohn writes that the self-flagellants called themselves – among  
> other things – “Cross-bearers” or “Brethren of the Cross.”  They  
> wore uniforms with a red cross front and back, and caps or hoods  
> marked with crosses.  In one ritual they would throw themselves face  
> down and lie motionless with arms outstretched in the form of a  
> crucifix (a similar practice can also be found at other times and in  
> other places in the Christian world).[2]  Some of the self- 
> flagellants also allegedly claimed that
>
>
>
> . . . Christ himself had shown them his bleeding wounds and bidden  
> them go out and beat themselves.  Some even said openly that no  
> shedding of blood could be compared with theirs save that at the  
> Crucifixion, that their blood blended with that of Christ, that both  
> had the same redemptive power.[3]
>
>
>
> Strictly speaking, any assertion made about the redemptive  
> significance of self-flagellation would have to be heretical in a  
> Roman Catholic context, and it is not surprising that the organized  
> self-flagellant groups were formally condemned and prohibited by  
> Pope Clement VI in 1349, and that some particularly grandiose self- 
> flagellants were later persecuted by the Inquisition.[4]  Similarly  
> heretical claims in an Eastern Orthodox context were also made, for  
> example by various Russian sectarians such as the Khlysts (from  
> khlyst, meaning whip or switch) starting in the second half of the  
> seventeenth century, some of whom actually claimed to be Christ.[5]   
> The Khlysts too were formally condemned, for example at a 1733 trial  
> in Moscow which resulted in the beheading of Khlyst leaders.[6]
>
>
> [1]   Cohn 1970, 130, 133, 136; Lambert 2002, 242.
>
> [2]   Cohn 1970, 133; cf. Gougaud 1927, 13; Bailly 1964, 397; Bynum  
> 2007, 35; Etkind 1998, 44.
>
> [3]   Cohn 1970, 137.
>
> [4]   Bailly 1964, 398-400.
>
> [5]   Etkind 1998, 49-53.
>
> [6]   Bulgakov 1993 (1913), vol. II, 1668.
>


With regards to the list,

Daniel Rancour-Laferriere
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------