Church In Russia Research Articles

Studying the problems of church autocephaly in the socio-political context of the 19 th — early 20 th centuries in Russia

The article is devoted to the study of the problem of autocephaly of Orthodox Churches in Russia during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Interest in this aspect of aspect of Orthodox ecclesiology and canon law intensified not only because of the development of Orthodox theology in Russia, but also due to the fact that this problem acquired political significance. It was connected with some matters of domestic and foreign policy of the Russian Empire. The annexation of Georgian in the early nineteenth century and liquidation of the autocephaly of the Georgian Church by the decision of the secular authorities provided the enduring source of the anti-governmental mood among Georgian elite, traditionally closely connected with the local clergy. The foreign policy interests of the empire in the Near East and Asia Minor also contributed to the intensification of research in the field of ecclesiastic history and the modern structure of ancient patriarchates. The greatest factor that contributed to an increase in such research interests was the emergence of new autocephalous churches: the Greek and Bulgarian churches separated from the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Separation of the Bulgarian Church provoked an aggressive polemic in the Russian press. The problem of nationalism was highlighted, which is significant for the Orthodox tradition. As an attachment to the article, the authors include the text of a report on the possibility of the autocephaly of the Georgian Church composed by Vladimir Beneshevich in 1917. The report was made upon request of the Provisional Government and it is preserved in the collection of Beneshevich at the St. Petersburg Branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

RUSSIAN GREEK-CATHOLIC CHURCH: HISTORY, CANONICAL STATUS AND LEGAL REGULATION OF ACTIVITIES

The purpose of the study is to reveal the history of the Russian Greek Catholic Church and the development of state-confessional relations. The methodological basis of the research was provided, in particular, by the dialectical method of scientific knowledge. Dialectical logic ensures observance of the general principles of scientific knowledge. The method of comparison is used to establish similarities and differences between historical and legal phenomena and legislative processes in the environment of the Russian Greek Catholic Church, as well as in identifying common features of the problems studied. There is also a historical method applied. The scientific novelty of the study is to uncover the history of the development of the Russian Greek Catholic Church and the formation of state-confessional relations in the context of ecumenical dialogue between Catholics and Orthodox Christians. Conclusions. The Russian Greek Catholic Church originated and evolved through the care of such prominent hierarchs of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church as Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky and Patriarch Joseph Slipyj. The years of communist persecution did not become an obstacle to the preservation of the Russian Greek Catholic Church in Russia and in exile. And after the fall of the communist regime, the Russian Greek Catholic Church emerged from the underground. For Russia, its own uniates – a hint of the possibility of "alternative history" in which there is no rigid opposition to the West itself. The development of positive trends in the field of state-church relations in the last years will be the more successful, the sooner the Russian Federation (at federal and regional levels) will be able to abandon the inertia of the past decades, when state-church relations were seen as something third in the hierarchy of its interests.

Visi Eskatologis-Kreatif dan Eksemplaris-Terbuka sebagai Model Kehadiran Kristen dalam Konteks Indonesia

This paper intends to look for a vision of Christian presence that might be applied in the context of a pluralistic society, such as Indonesia. Therefore, I ventured into the tradition of the 20th century Russian Orthodox Church to look for that possibility. It was Nikolai Berdyaev, a Russian theologian who redefined the direction of church in Russia in his day. He expressed a philosophy of creative freedom in the eschatological perspective of the Orthodox Church. He stressed the importance of human participation in the divine work to resist objectification of the world. I will construct the vision of Christian Berdyaev’s presence, I will look at the thoughts of a theologian of a Calvinist Church in Indonesia, namely, namely Kadarmanto Hardjowasito. He expressed his Christian vision which emphasized exemplarity and openness to other individuals and communities as visions of Christian presence. Both thoughts can build a theological construction for visions of Christian presence in the Indonesian context

Rotunda church in Russia as typological phenomenon

The article describes results of a complex research, in the course of which the main stages of origination and formation of a rotunda church as a rare type in the history of the world’s and Russian architecture have been determined. The main groups of rotunda churches in the world architecture (7 types) and Russian architecture (9 types) have been identified together with criteria of their classification and typological characteristics, the chronology frames of formation of certain types. Space-planning and compositional decisions in designs of rotunda churches have been analyzed based on their types in the context of typology developed by the author. The types of rotunda churches and individual monuments of rotunda church architecture from the world architecture history, which served as a source of inspiration for architects in Russia, are considered. Features of Russian rotunda churches connected with the Orthodox traditions and national traditions of church architecture were identified. The examples of rotunda churches around the world, constructed within the multi-age period between the 6th century BC till the 19th century, and of Russian rotunda churches constructed within a short period from the end of the 17th century and till the middle of the 19th century, are made.

THE STATE AND THE CHURCH IN RUSSIA IN THE EARLY NEW AGE: CUSTOM AND LAW

Purpose: The article is devoted to the analysis of the peculiarities of the system of relations that were formed between the Orthodox Church and the authority of the Russian state in the early modern period.
 Methodology: The authors, based on the most recent research approaches of the characteristics of early modern states, use a number of examples to show the significant role of the church and its hierarchy which had both an effect on the secular authority actions, limited its power and represented the political role of the Russian state and society.
 Result: The authors point out to the informality, unfounded in any formal legislative acts. This informality allowed the church to respond flexibly to the demands of the moment, but at the same time weakened its position. The authors also point out that that being the only independent Orthodox Church; the Russian church imposed certain limitations on its actions as an independent force of the supreme power, which later served as one of the factors that caused the subordination of the church to the state and its transformation into integral element of the machinery of government.
 Applications: This research can be used for universities, teachers, and students.
 Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of the State and the Church in Russia in the Early New Age: Custom and Law is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.

Anton Vladimirovich Kartashev as a publicist and social activist of the early XX century: analytical review of articles in the “Russian Word” (1911-1913)

This article is a sequence of publications on the role of Anton Vladimirovich Kartashev in religious movement for the Russian church reform of the XX century. The subject of this research is his journalistic activity during the 1911-1913. After participating in the Petersburg religious-philosophical gatherings, Kartashev joined the intelligentsia movement for the church reform; tried his hand at journalism; and picked the topic “Russian Church and Modernity” to write about for the liberal “Russian Word”. Observing Kartashev’s publicistic writing the author underlines his role as a social activist in the movement for church reform. For studying the systemic approach of A. Karthashev towards the problem of church reform in Russia, the author applies the historical method allowing to correlatie the evens of the history of Russian Church, crisis stage of religious movement and response in Kartashev’s publicistic writings. The period from 1911 to 1913 is one of the insufficiently studied periods in social activity of the future Minister of Religious Confessions of the Provisional Government and the last last Ober-Procurator of the Most Holy Governing Synod of the Orthodox Church in Russia (1917). The content of his works during this period were not viewed in the context of the upcoming church reform. However, it demonstrated Kartashev’s ideas on what impeded the Russian Church in becoming the center of historical-cultural and economic modernization of Russia.

Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church

The convocation of the Local Council in 1917, the first Council in over two centuries, had a great significance for the internal life of the Orthodox Church of Russia. But in a period when the World War was still ongoing and there were pressing issues to resolve in the sphere of cooperation of Russian Orthodoxy with other orthodox and non-orthodox churches, the Local Council could not but touch upon the international and inter-church issues. For the first time in the history of Russian Church the official ecclesiastical forum was attended by official elected delegates who served abroad and who could bring the opinion of the foreign part of the Russian Church to its «maternal» part and to provide the mutually beneficial exchange of practices and opinions. Moreover, in a situation when the church was liberated from the tutelage of the state, it became possible to engage with foreign religious organizations not through social organizations or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but directly. This opened a way for creating the Church’s own structures which would be responsible for contacts with other confessions, including Old-Catholics and Anglicans, with whom there had already been lengthy unofficial dialogue. The efforts of some historians and publicists shaping contemporary discourse in Russia depict the restoration of the Patriarchate in the Russian Church as the only important act of the Council are challenged by the material presented in this article, which shows how the Council constructed the future position of Russian Orthodoxy in dialogue with the non-Orthodox churches, in its presence abroad and its missions in non-Christian countries. The word of the Council in this sphere was completely new and never before told. The Council was ahead of its time in the issues of international connections (like in many other spheres of its work). Many issues at the Council were expressed for the first time or in a completely new way. How to manage the missions abroad (in Japan, China, Korea, Urmia, and Palestine)? The Council, occupied with the internal problems in the situation of the beginning of persecution against it, could not abandon these missions. How was it possible to unite Russian emigrants abroad? The idea of Paris as a centre of their unification was expressed for the first time at the Council. The scholars who touched upon these issues before analyzed them through the concept of ecumenism (following the participation of the Russian Church in the ecumenical movement). But it seems more appropriate to research them in the context of the time of the Council itself, since it was a time that preceded the emergence of the Ecumenical Movement proper. The author of the article draws a conclusion that during the year of the Council (August 1917 – September 1918) the issues of international and inter-church relationships transformed in its agenda from being of secondary to primary importance. This conclusion allows us to challenge the dismissive perspective that the Moscow Council 1917-1918 was ineffective. Although it did not have time to complete its agenda, the Council was ahead of its time and contributed much for the future mission of the Russian Church in the modern world.

Thomas Bremer. Cross and Kremlin: A Brief History of the Orthodox Church in Russia

Church and empire. Naristi history of the Russian Orthodox. ThomasBremer - Kiev: Duh-i-Litera, 2018. - 264 p. ISBN 978-966-378-525-7; 150.00 UAH.

Changes in the organisation of parish administration in the Russian Orthodox Church in Soviet and post-Soviet Russia

The article reveals the changes that took place in the parish administration of the Russian Orthodox Church after the revolutionary events of 1917. It is shown how during the last hundred years within the framework of changes in the state religious policy, the opportunities for the clergy to participate in the management of parishes have changed. State legislative acts regulating the religious sphere and documents adopted by local and bishops' Councils are analysed. The article assesses the attempts to use the experience of Congregationalism in the management of the Orthodox Church in Russia, including at the present historical stage.

The Activities of Nikolai Ivanovich von Bock at the Russian Imperial Diplomatic Mission to the Holy See, 1912—1917

The diplomatic activities of Nikolai Ivanovich von Bock at the Russian Mission to the Holy See in 1912—1917 are assessed in the general context of the Russian-Vatican relations. The relationship between the Vatican and the Russian Empire was never an easy one. On the one hand, the Tsarist regime and the Holy See shared a commitment to traditional values and an aversion to radicalism in any forms. On the other hand, their political dialogue was complicated by the traditional rivalry between the Orthodox and Catholic Church and the fact that the majority of Catholics in Russia was represented by the Poles, among whom nationalist feelings and a desire to secede from the Empire were widespread. There were also other points of mutual dissatisfaction, for instance, the position of the Catholic Church in Russia. In the period when Nikolai von Bock served in the Mission — and with his active contribution — Russia and the Vatican not only broke the stalemate in bilateral relations, but managed to improve them significantly. The new character of these relations, marked by a removal of limitations to the Catholic Church’s activities in Russia, to a large extent corresponded with von Bock’s convictions and his desire to continue the political line of Foreign Minister Sergei D. Sazonov, aimed at reaching compromises and agreements with the Holy See. The article relies, among other sources, on Nikolai von Bock’s memoirs and his correspondence with the Russian Foreign Ministry.

The “Belarusian” past, present and future in the representations of the Catholic Metropolitan Stanisław Bohusz Siestrzeńcewicz

A large number of Roman Catholic population, mainly ethnic Lithuanians and Belarusians, joined the Russian Empire during the division of the lands of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1771-1795. The first section of 1772 included mainly the Eastern Belarusian territories and the new Roman Catholic subjects of the Empire were mostly ethnic Belarusians. This fact influenced the choice by the Russian Imperial administration of «Bishop of Catholic churches in Russia». They appointed Stanisław Bohusz Siestrzeńcewicz. In accordance with the volition of Empress Catherine II, the “Bishop of Belarus” was placed in Mogilev. He was entrusted with the gradual transfer of control of the Russian Roman Catholics in within the Empire. Siestrzeńcewicz was a “Litvin” by origin, raised in a mixed Protestant and Catholic family. Over time, Siestrzeńcewicz became close to understanding the national otherness not only of his East Slavic flock, but, apparently, his own. His otherness was vitally connected with the use of the names “Belarus”, “Belarusian”. The relocation of Siestrzeńcewicz in the early nineteenth century from Mogilev to Saint Petersburg gave him the opportunity to significantly expand his ties and influence in the state. This contributed to his further scientific and literary researches. Even in Mogilev, he created a number of works, which described the Western part of the East Slavic lands, considers the problem of unity of the origin of the East Slavic peoples. By the end of his life, Siestrzeńcewicz sees the past, present and future of all the Eastern Slavs in close connection with the fate of Russia, “the State that occupies the ninth part of the inhabited globe...”

The Moscow Council of 1917–1918

Following a period of decline beginning in the early eighteenth century, the Orthodox Church in Russia held a general council in Moscow from August 1917 to September 1918. More than 500 clergy and laity met, prayed and discussed numerous issues relating to the church’s life and witness. The Moscow Council was prompted by various trends of renewal which were growing ever stronger among the clergy and laity. Political circumstances at the time also made the Council possible: a preparatory preconciliar process was initiated in 1905, in parallel with the first revolution against Emperor Nicholas II, and the Council itself was convened in 1917, in parallel with the establishment of a Provisional Government. However, it was precisely such political events which led to the premature interruption of the Council. The main items on the Council’s agenda were linked to the reformation of church structures and the implementation of conciliar provisions at every level of church life: parish, deanery, diocese and autocephalous church. Special attention was given to the renewal of the pastoral ministries of priests and bishops, and to that of committed laity. In a way, the Moscow Council was a kind of ‘first encounter’ of Orthodoxy with contemporary societies, secularised or on the road to secularisation. Its legacy is therefore of great interest to all Christianity today. This article aims to analyse the Council and the main decisions made, in the light of ecclesiology, and to provide a primary bibliography at the end of the text.

The Provisional Government’s Bill regarding the “Legalization” of Russia’s Third Orthodox Church—Old Orthodox Belokrinitskaya Hierarchy

The legislative acts of the Provisional Government regulating the functioning of religious organizations has not been sufficiently studied. The bills, which were created in the various ministries of the Provisional Government and failed to become law, are virtually unexplored. On the wave of political events in Russia in February and March 1917, the nondenominational Provisional Government came to power. There arose the need for a comprehensive reform of public administration in Russia and, in particular, church-state relations. In the bowels of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Provisional Government, there was created a structure that developed the draft laws on the status of various denominations: 1) the group on general religious issues; 2) the commission for the revision of the statutory provisions about the Roman Catholic Church in Russia; and 3) the group on issues relating to the Old Believers. This publication focuses on the activities of this final group. The main outcome of this group, working in close alliance with representatives of the Old Believers, was the creation of the draft law on the “legalization” of the third Orthodox Church in Russia (after the Russian and Georgian Orthodox Churches), that is, the Old Orthodox Belokrinitskaya Hierarchy, which, in 1988, became known as the Russian Orthodox Old Belief Church. The resulting bill, dated 18 October 1917, was submitted to the Provisional Government for approval. However, it was not approved because of the overthrow of the Provisional Government on 25 October of that same year. The present article introduces this 1917 bill to “legalize” the Russian Old Orthodox Belokrinitskaya Hierarchy into scholarly awareness.

An Aging Church in an Aging Society: Averting a Possible Grim Future for the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Russia

"Being an international and highly diverse community of believers, the world-wide Seventh-day Adventists Church has always struggled with maintaining its identity in a fast-changing world. This is natural, and much credit is to be given to several generations of church leaders for success in this regard. Nevertheless, after the seeds of Adventism have been liberally sown all over the world and as the seeds have grown, it is time to let those plants share more responsibility for their own future. Paternalism and top-down strategizing is no longer adequate to facilitate the spiritual rejuvenation of local forms of Adventism. To experience the refreshing power of the Spirit is clearly the work of God. It is time to ask him to give us courage to re-think our Adventist message and identity both universally and locally. Otherwise, as it has been demonstrated in this article, the Adventist Church will keep producing one-sided results that simply do not have a future. This is at least true for Russia. If an inspiring image of a “young Jesus” emerges in the heads and hearts of people who claim to believe in him and who want to follow him, most likely the result will be an emerging Adventism, renewed in the image and likeness of a “young Jesus.”"

Restytucja patriarchatu na Soborze Lokalnym Rosyjskiego Kościoła Prawosławnego (1917-1918)

The beginning of the 20th century was a crucial period for the life the Orthodox Church in Russia. The main event, which changed the internal and external situation, was the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1917/1918. The most important decision of the council was the restoration of the patriarchate, which was destroyed by a resolution of tsar Peter the First in 18th century. The discussion concerning this process initiated numerous interesting opinions and dialectic directions. In this article positive arguments for restoration of patriarchate have been presented on the basis of publications by S.N. Bulgakow, N.I. Troicki and A.W. Wasiljew, which supplemented the work of the council. Their relation to the marks of the Church such as unity, apostolicity, and conciliarity (sobornost’) is of particular importance.

Book Review: Tradition and Reform: Thomas Bremer, Cross and Kremlin: A Brief History of the Orthodox Church in Russia

Book Review: Tradition and Reform: Thomas Bremer, <i>Cross and Kremlin: A Brief History of the Orthodox Church in Russia</i>

THE CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSION OF THE FOREIGN POLICY OF RUSSIA AT THE TURN OF 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES

The author of this article aims to examine the role and place of the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia's transition from the regional state of the Middle Ages to an absolutist state of Modern history. Transformations in states' domestic and foreign policies that took place in Modern history cannot be reduced to a simple set of changes in various spheres of life of states, nations and peoples. By studying the transition from one type of statehood to another one we are dealing with a fundamental transformation of the entire state organism, the state as a cultural phenomenon, with a change in the very notion of what a state is and what its goals, objectives and functions are. The process of transformations in statehood affected all countries of the world including our Motherland. In Russia these changes had their own cultural and historical specificity which was largely formed by religiosity of our people and was rooted in the Orthodox faith. Therefore, the author considered it necessary to raise the question of how the cultural, historical and religious identity of the Russian people could influence the course of reforms in the sphere of the Russian state system in Modern history. The author focuses on the foreign policy of the Russian state built on cultural and religious values in I7th-I8th centuries. This foreign policy is seen as an alternative paradigm of the modern Russia's foreign policy. The author believes that the modern Russian state does not shape its foreign policy on the basis of core values of the Russian world view arising from the religious consciousness of our people. This fact deprives Russia’s foreign policy of unity with cultural and historical tradition of our state and in many respects weakens it. The article provides a possible answer to the question why a tendency to the framing of a foreign policy on the basis of values and religious outlook inherent in the Russian people did not prevail in the foreign policy of the Russian state.

Public Projects of Roman Catholic Church in Russia

The article analyses some features of non-liturgical activity of Catholic Church, which are related to the arrangement and the occupation of catholic orders, to the arrangement of laity's association, to publishing and educational activities.

Pentecostals and Charismatic Protestants in the Republic of Komi and Nenets Tundra

Between 2010 and 2012, an extended team of scholars studied contemporary Protestant groups in Russia. The project was labelled Center for the Study of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements in Russia1 (CSPCMR) and was led by Aleksandr Panchenko from the European University in Saint Petersburg and Patrick Plattet from the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Besides Russia and the USA, scholars from Ireland, the United Kingdom, France, and Estonia were involved in this collaborative research effort. The host institution of the project was the European University in St. Petersburg. The aim of the project was to analyse the Protestant-charismatic (P/c) Christianity in various regions of post-Soviet Russia. The project proceeded from the notions concerned with global effects of the rapid extension of P/c Christianity in the contemporary world. In the anthropology of Pentecostalism, problems of continuity and change, globalisation and indigenisation, preservation of prePentecostal ontologies, creating the new morality and approaches to economy and politics have been discussed (Coleman 2000; Robbins 2004a, 2004b). The Estonian team’s specific task was to analyse contemporary Protestant missions and churches in the north-eastern corner of European Russia, in the Republic of Komi and the European Nenets tundra. The first Pentecostal churches were established in Russia in the 1920s. Beginning in the 1930s, Pentecostals were persecuted and during the anti-religious campaign of the 1950s and 1960s they became a special target for Soviet repressions. Pentecostals were accused of fanaticism (a stereotype mainly based on the practice of ‘speaking in tongues’) and even ritual murder. As a result, most Pentecostal churches in Russia continued to exist without official registration (Lunkin 2004; Nikolskaya 2009; Panchenko 2013). Beginning in the late 1980s, numerous foreign Pentecostal missions started to proselytise in the

Cross and Kremlin: A Brief History of the Orthodox Church in Russia by Thomas Bremer (review)

Cross and Kremlin: A Brief History of the Orthodox Church in Russia by Thomas Bremer (review)