Religious and Philosophical Prerequisites of the Eurasianism: Personal Religiosity and Theoretical Foundations

Abstract

The article analyzes the Eurasianist religious doctrine, the religious views of the leaders of the 1920s Eurasian movement and their relationship with the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church in exile and at home. Until now, this issue has not been featured in special papers or monographs. The attention of researchers has been attracted to the political, ideological and other aspects of the Eurasian doctrine. Two of the founders of the Eurasian movement, Georges Florovsky and prince Alexander von Lieven, entered the Church. Florovsky tried to take the lead and turn the movement to purely religious and philosophical development. This shows that, in addition to political, anti-colonial, economic and geopolitical components, the basis of Eurasianism contains a strong religious and philosophical element, which is often underestimated. The Eurasians unconditionally supported the Russian Orthodox Church and Patriarch Tikhon and condemned the Karlovci schism that led to the emergence of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. They opposed Catholicism and attempts at proselytism on the part of Catholics who provided assistance to Russian emigrants, pursuing their selfish motives — for example, they offered to teach children, forcing them to change religion. Eurasians published a collection named Rossiya I Latinstvo (Russia and the Roman Catholic Faith), condemning the church union, ecumenism and Catholic theology. After participating in the Eurasian edition of Russia and the Roman Catholic Faith, Florovsky left the movement. To fill the vacant place of a theologian and philosopher, Eurasianists involved Lev Karsavin (Levas Karsavinas), who made his debut in the Evraziyskii Vremennik (Eurasian Chronicle) with the anti-Catholic article titled Lessons of the Renounced Faith (1925). Karsavin enriched the Eurasianism with many religious and philosophical ideas, but they came into conflict with the concepts of Nikolai Trubetzkoy. Disputes on “the potential Orthodoxy” and “the symphonic personality” (Karsavin) or “the choral personality” (Trubetzkoy) were a constant background of Eurasianist discussions and correspondence. The Eurasians opposed the theological opinions of the archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, who was suspected of Catholic sympathies, and labeled his sophiology as a theological formalization of Freudianism. In relation to the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, Catholicism and Western confessions in general, as well as to the archpriest Bulgakov’s theological opinions, the Eurasians were of the same mind. The article highlights the differences between the views of the leading Eurasianists on the religion and the Church, outlining the reasons for their confrontation with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia and the loyalty to the Russian Orthodox Church persecuted by its homeland.