Political Ideas and Political Struggle of the Pre-Revolutionary Russian Clergy (The Case of the Ryazan Diocese)

Abstract

This article, written using the materials of Ryazan diocesan press, studies the history of the formation of political ideas and the political struggle of pre-revolutionary Russian clergy. In the process of forming separate spiritual estate and system of the rationalized Latin-speaking spiritual education within the Russian Empire, the clergy becomes one of the forces modernizing the country, while perceiving itself as the enlightener and the civilizer of people. The state saw the clergy as petty officials, but the clergy were not willing to accept this role. During the creation of elementary school in the system of the Ministry of State Property, the clergy strengthened their social position and acquired many years of teaching experience. The liberal nobility feared that the clergy would take the lead in rural life by alienating the landlords. Zemstvos begin to fight to push the clergy away from the peasants, squeezing the clergy out of schools. At the same time, churches start opening schools en masse. The clergy enters a political struggle with the liberal gentry. Church periodicals began to appear, shaping the political stance of the clergy. The clergy sees itself as a separate politicum, which can be higher than zemstvos as all-empowerment bodies. Diocesan congresses, as well as district and parochial assemblies start appearing as a means of unification and consolidation of the clergy.The necessity of intra-church democracy, while ignoring the canonical role of the bishop and mass media's leading role, becomes a dominant idea in the clergy's life until the Revolution of 1917. These democratic representations in the Ryazan diocesan press were not called “sobornost” anymore but were political in nature. For utilitarian purposes, the state power supported such aspirations of the clergy during the 1912 election campaign to the State Duma. The clergy had the opportunity to realize their political views during the February Revolution of 1917 and fully supported it. Diocesan bishops were expelled, each parish was considered as a separate “local church”. The clergy sought to remain unelected and beyond the control of the parishioners, although they themselves insisted on electing diocesan bishops. However, parishioners turned their backs on their pastors. Some clergy were expelled from parishes, others limited the level of fees for services. Representatives of the laity and lower clergy drove the clergy out of elected parish and diocesan authorities. As the revolution developed and the country descended into chaos, the clergy, who had taken part in these processes, did not accept their share of responsibility for what was happening; on the contrary — they blamed the “ignorant” people for the church trials.