/
Search results


Пылаев М. А., Морозова Е. С. Философская теология Ф. Шлейермахера // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. 2015. Вып. 1 (57). С. 56-68. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201557.56-68
The authors examine two stages in the philosophical-theological thought of Schleiermacher. The first is the product of his Sentences about Religion (1799); the second is based on his Introduction to Dogmatics (1822). They are placed in the context of the evolution of European philosophical and theological thought of the Modern Epoch and of the twentieth century. The authors first delineate the sources of Schleiermacher’s thought and proceed to analyze its influence on successive theological thought. In his first period, Schleiermacher understands religion as the feeling and taste for the infi nite . The authors of this article immediately exclude all subjective and psychological, as well as pantheistic and determinative interpretations of this experience of the inexpressible. In their opinion, Schleiermacher like Karl Barth, wished to keep religion and revelation in its own, unique domain. Schleiermacher’s Sentences about Religion contains all the fundamental elements, both implicit and explicit, which constitute a philosophical discourse about the sacred. In his second period, Schleiermacher uses a more exact concept than of feeling which he calls direct self-realization . The authors analyze Schleiermacher’s understanding of the structure and evolution of man’s self-realization. The highest degree of self-realization is piety or religiosity. Religious realization itself becomes the material for the formation of dogma. The authors analyze how concretely Schleiermacher wishes to say Lutheran dogma is formed. They conclude that Schleiermacher is successful in expressing the Christian kerygma, conserving its irreducibility. While assimilating current philosophical trends, Schleiermacher is careful to conserve the essence of Christian dogma.
Schleiermacher, philosophical theology, feeling of dependence, sacred, piety, self-realization, dogmatics

1. Bart K. Cerkovnaja dogmatika (Church Dogmatics), Moscow, 2007, vol. 1.
2. Tillih P. Sistematicheskoe bogoslovie (Systematic Theology), Saint-Petersburg, 1998, vol. 1.
3. Barth K. Die protestantische Theologie im 19. Jahrhundert, Zürich, 1994.
4. Moretto G. Das Heilige im Denken, Münster, 2005.
5. Pannenberg W. Problemgeschichte der neueren evangelischen Theologie in Deutschland, Göttingen, 1997.
Pylaev Maksim
Morozova Ekaterina
Пылаев М. А. Философия и теология в «неоортодоксии» Карла Барта // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. 2016. Вып. 6 (68). С. 26-40. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201668.26-40
In the proposed article the author explores the concept of God’s Word in theocentric theology of K. Barth and theology of early K. Barth in times of the second edition of 'Romans’, in terms of their philosophy founding. The author compares the block of philosophical and theological topics such as the theory of temporality, dialectic concept of the beginning (Ursprung) and other types in philosophical discourses used by K. Barth (platonism, neo-Kantianism, existentialism, scholasticism, phenomenological philosophy and others) with theology of K. Barth. The article gives a brief reconstruction of the theology of God’s Word by K. Barth in its two complementary projections as presented in the ‘Sketch of Christian Doctrine’ and ‘Dogma of the Church’. During the presentation the reader is well acquainted with the third projection of the concept of God’s Word by K. Barth at the time of the genesis of the book ‘Fides quaerens intellectum’. The article tests the hypothesis that the second edition of the ‘Romans’, ‘Fides quaerens intellectum’ and ‘Sketch of the Christian Dogma’ with ‘Church Dogma’ explicate the form of Christian theology, which, absorbing primarily the important philosophic achievements of 19–20th centuries, yet tries to stay free of them. Using various forms of philosophical discourses Karl Barth implements his own task of building a Christian theology beyond metaphysics, history and human existence.
K. Barth, God’s Word, revelation, theology, dialectics, time, phenomenology, existentialism, scholasticism, phenomenology, philosophy

1. Assman Ia. Egipet: teologiia i blagochestie drevnei tsivilizatsii. Moscow, 1999.
2. Bart K. Poslanie k Rimlianam. Moscow, 2005.
3. Bart K. Tserkovnaia dogmatika. Moscow, 2011. T. 1, 2.
4. Bol'nov O. Filosofiia ekzistentsializma. Moscow, 1999.
5. Frank S. L. Sochineniia. Moscow, 1990.
6. Khaidegger M. Vremia i bytie. Moscow, 1993.
7. Iaspers K. Filosofiia. Moscow, 2012. T. 2.
8. Adriaanse H. J. Zu den Sachen selbst. Gravenhage, 1974.
9. Balthasar H. U. Karl Barth. Darstellung und Deutung seiner Theologie. Einsiedeln, 1976.
10. Barth K. Die christliche Dogmatik im Entwurf. Zurich, 1982. Bd. 1.
11. Barth K. Die kirchlische Dogmatik. Munchen, 1932. Bd. 1.
12. Barth K. Die protestantische Theologie im 19. Jahrhundert. Zurich, 1994.
13. Barth K. Fides quaerens intellectum. Zurich, 1931.
14. Beintker M. Die Dialektik in der «dialektischen Theologie» Karl Barths. Munchen, 1987.
15. Casper B., Hemmerle K., Hunermann P. Besinnung auf das Heilige. W., 1966.
16. Heidegger M. Sein und Zeit. Tubingen, 2006.
17. Jungel E. Barth-Studien. Zurich, 1982.
18. Kung H. Rechtfertigung. Die Lehre Karl Barths und eine katholische Besinnung. Einsiedeln, 1957.
19. Lohmann J. F. Karl Barth und der Neukantianismus. B., 1995.
20. Pannenberg W. Problemgeschichte der neuren evangelischen Theologie in Deutschland. Gottingen, 1997.
Pylaev Maksim
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: St. Tikhon Orthodox University, Russian State for the Humanities;
Email: email: maximpylajew@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.
Пылаев М. А. Пролегомены ко всякому будущему религиоведению, могущему возникнуть в качестве христианского религиоведения // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. 2018. Вып. 80. С. 119-126. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201880.119-126
This article discusses the possibility of building confession-oriented religious studies. It employs the material of studies by T. Samarina, particularly her article “Designer Project of Phenomenological Understanding of Religion: F. Max Mueller’s Comparativism”. I put forward a number of critical comments as to the scientifi c methodology of T. Samarina’s article. Particularly, I draw attention to the fact that the substitution of discourses is taking place. T. Samarina desires to present the religious and philosophical mentality of M. Mueller as his science of religion. Besides, the criteria of phenomenology of religion are not necessary nor suffi cient for the defi nition of its specifi city. Finaly, T. Samarina radically rethinks both Russian and foreign tradition of interpretation of phenomenology of religion. This article proposes for consideration the author’s own understanding of the conceptual nature of phenomenology of religion. In the fi rst hand, this science is related to the discussion about the sacred. The uniting of the non-unifyable takes place within its framework, i.e. philisophy, theology, and religious studies, ideal religion, empirical religion and confessional faith. Phenomenology of religion, in all probability, was called to overcome the drawbacks of only philosophical, only theological, or only religious-science study of religion. The result of the genesis of phenomenology of religion was separation from religious studies. I believe that the dissociation of philosophy of religion, including phenomenology of religion, and religious studies is unavoidable.
phenomenology of religion, religious studies, M. Mueller, confession-oriented religious studies, theology
  1. Gantke W. (1998) Der umstrittene Begriff des Heiligen. Eine problemorientierte religionswissenschaftliche Untersuchung. Marburg.
  2. Hegel G. (1975) Filosofiia religii [Philosophy of Religion]. Moscow (Russian translation).
  3. Kehnscherper J. (1998). Theologisch-philosophische Aspekte der religionsphänomenologischen Methode des Gerardus van der Leeuw. Frankfurt am Main.
  4. Krasnikov A. (2004) Metodologiia klassicheskogo religiovedeniia [Methodology of Classical Religious Studies]. Blagoveshchensk (in Russian).
  5. Pylaev M. (2011) Kategoriia «sviashchennoe» v fenomenologii religii, teologii i fi losofi i 20 veka [Category of the “Sacred” in Phenomenology, Theology, and Philosophy of the 20th Century]. Moscow (in Russian).
  6. Tillikh P. (1998) Sistematicheskoe bogoslovie [Systematic Theology]. St. Petersburg (Russian translation).
  7. Söderblom N., Heiler F. (1981) Briefwechsel. 1909–1931. Paderborn.
  8. Vinokurov V. (2010) Vvedenie v fenomenologiiu religii [Introduction to Phenomenology of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
  9. Zabiiako A. (1998) Kategoriia sviatosti. Sravnitel’noe issledovanie lingvoreligioznykh traditsii [The Category of Sainthood. Comparative Study of Linguoreligious Traditions]. Moscow (in Russian).
Pylaev Maxim
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: Russian State University for the Humanities, 6 Miusskaya Sq., Moscow 125993, GSP-3, Russian Federation;
Post: Professor;
ORCID: 0000-0003-0110-8366;
Email: maximpylajew@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.
Пылаев М. А. Моральная религия в религиозной философии Л. Н. Толстого и либеральной теологии В. Германа // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. 2019. Вып. 82. С. 53-62. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201982.53-62
This article is intended to shed light on the transformations of Kantian ethical thought in theological ethics of W. Herrmann, one of the most prominent liberal theologists, and in theorising of religion in fi ction by L. Tolstoy. The main thesis of the article is that Christianity (the religion on the whole) in the framework of religiousphilosophical and theological cognition in Post-Enlightenment era is not able to make its essence explicit without addressing ethical topics. Herrmann did manage to propose an elaborate theological interpretation of Kant’s ethical substantiation of religion. This theologian linked the existence of moral law to the historical form of Revelation in the personality-related existence of its bearer. Employing F. Schleiermacher’s conception of religion, Herrmann analysed the functioning of the moral law in the ethical way of thinking of the empirical subject in such notions as faith, forgiving, love, salvation. Having proposed an exclusively moral interpretation of kerygma, Herrmann made it understandable to his contemporaries and at the same time preserved the unique character of the Christian message. Herrmann’s moral law becomes religion only through the bearer of Revelation, i.e. the person with high moral standards. While Schleiermacher unites transcendentalism with phychologism (as W. Dilthey wrote about this) in the conception of empirical religious feeling, Herrmann unites transcendentalism (Kant’s idea of the absolute moral law) with the historical Revelation in Jesus Christ. Belief in this person comes to be the beginning of the new, i.e. religious, life. In L. Tolstoy’s fi ction, Kantian understanding of religion intertwines, on the one hand, with a discourse similar to existential and philosophic and, on the other hand, with an interpretation of Christian ethics as the ethics of love for one’s neighbour through the idea of absolute non-resistance to the evil by force. Thus, the issue of the ethical substantiation of religion transcends not only the boundaries of Christian consciousness but also the limits of philosophy, the essence of which is determined by German idealism. Tolstoy’s ethical explanation of religion implies coherence with various types of religiosity as well as with various forms of philosophy. In other words, it confi rms the thesis about inexhaustible heuristic possibilities of explicating religious consciousness by means of moral categories.
morality, natural religion, liberal theology, freedom, self-consciousness, existence, borderline situation, Christianity
  1. Florovskii G. (1937) Puti russkogo bogosloviia [Paths of Russian Theology]. Paris (in Russian).
  2. Guseinov A., Apresian R. (2002) Etika [Ethics]. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Kant I. (1965) Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason], in Sochineniia v 6 tomakh [Works in 6 Volumes]. Vol. 4. Pt. 1. Moscow (Russian translation).
  4. Kant I. (1996) Religiia v predelakh tol’ko razuma [Religion within the Limits of Reason Only], in Traktaty [Treatises]. St Petersburg (Russian translation).
  5. Kerenskii V. (2016) “Shkola richlianskogo bogosloviia v liuteranstve” [School of Ritschlian Theology in Lutheranism], in A. Garnak. Tserkov’ i gosudarstvo vplot’ do ustanovleniia gosudarstvennoi tserkvi. Monashestvo, ego idealy i ego istoriia [Church and State up to the Establishment of the State Church. Monasticism, its Ideals and its History]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  6. Merezhkovskii D. (1995) L. Tolstoi i Dostoevskii [L. Tolstoy and Dostoevskii]. Moscow (in Russian).
  7. Pannenberg W. (1997) Problemgeschichte der neuren evangelischen Theologie in Deutschland. Göttingen.
  8. Sravnitel’noe bogoslovie: nemetskii protestantizm XX veka (2011) [Comparative Theology: German Protestantism of the 20th Century]. Moscow (in Russian).
  9. Tolstoi L. (1981) Smert’ Ivana Il’icha [The Death of Ivan Ilyich], in Sobranie sochinenii: v 20 tomakh [Collected Works: in 20 vols.]. Vol. 12. Moscow (in Russian).
  10. Tolstoi L. (1983) Ispoved’ [Confession], in Sobranie sochinenii: v 20 tomakh [Collected Works: in 20 vols.]. Vol. 16. Moscow (in Russian).
  11. Tolstoi L. (1983) Otets Sergii [Father Sergius], in Sobranie sochinenii: v 20 tomakh [Collected Works: in 20 vols.]. Vol. 12. Moscow (in Russian).
  12. Tolstoi L. (1993) Put’ zhizni [Path of Life]. Moscow (in Russian).
  13. Zen’kovskii V. (1991) Istoriia russkoi filosofii [History of Russian Philosophy]. Vol. 1. Pt. 2. Leningrad (in Russian).
Pylaev Maxim
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: Russian State University for the Humanities, 6 Miusskaya Sq., Moscow 125993, GSP-3, Russian Federation;
Post: Professor;
ORCID: 0000-0003-0110-8366;
Email: maximpylajew@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.
Пылаев М. А. Абсолютность христианства у Э. Трельча в связи с метафизическим и неметафизическим обоснованием историзма // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. 2020. Вып. 88. С. 30-42. DOI: 10.15382/sturI202088.30-42
This article is intended to answer the question of the possible coherence of the principles of historicism developed by the Neo-Kantian tradition (V. Windelband, G. Rickert) in their refl ection in philosophical theology of E. Trelch and in the conception of absoluteness of Christianity. The article studies the metamorphoses of historical thinking in the post-Hegel philosophy of history of the 19th century in their determining infl uence on the liberal theology of Trelch. The article also discusses the possibility of building a non-metaphysical philosophy of history and its relationship with Christian theology. The metaphysical substantiation of historicism in the context of the concept of absoluteness of Christianity uses the example of the projects of G. Hegel and F. Schleiermacher. A characteristic feature of the metaphysical form of historicism is its inextricable connection with dialectics. According to Hegel, historical life has a logical structure; substance (spirit) realises itself in history. According to Schleiermacher, the absolute reveals itself in historical forms of religious consciousness. Comparative historical religious studies allow Trelch to give a new answer to the question of the absoluteness of Christianity. Absoluteness loses its metaphysical nature and is determined by the uniqueness and specifi city of any historical event. Trelch preserves the transcendent in history not in form of a metaphysical absolute, but in form of religious values. Developing the concept of Rickert’s historicism, Trelch highlights three aspects of a historical setting. This is a method of historical criticism, correlation and analogy. Trelch, following Rickert, actualises the meaning of a historical event through feeling. Thus, for Trelch, the religious feeling combines the possibility of cognition of the transcendental with the help of the religious a priori and the ability to empirically explicate this knowledge. Trelch adopts the personality-oriented concept of Windelband’s history and extrapolates it to Christianity as the bearer of the values of personalism. A comparative and historical study of religion reveals, according to Trelch, the absoluteness (uniqueness) of Christianity in ethical personalism. Trelch sees the historical uniqueness of Christianity in the humanism of the Sermon on the Mount. This implies sacrifi cial love for one’s fellow men, including love for enemies. Relativism of the principles of historicism presupposes various forms of non-historical substantiation of historicism. Thus, it acts as a source of various concepts of the absoluteness of Christianity.
Neocantianism, liberal theology, absoluteness of Christianity, historicism, Trelch, Rickert, Windelband
  1. Altizer T. (2010) The Gospel of Christian Atheism. Moscow (Russian translation).
  2. Dilthey W. (1966) Leben Schleiermachers. Bd. II. Berlin.
  3. Ern V. (2000) Bor’ba za Logos. G. Skovoroda. Zhizn’ i ucheniie [Struggle for the Logos. G. Skovoroda. Life and Teaching]. Minsk; Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Hegel G. (1935) Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Geschichte. Moscow; Leningrad (Russian translation).
  5. Morozova E., Pylaiev M. (2018) “Transtsendental’no-fi losofskiie predposylki teologii i religiovedeniia F. Schleiermahera” [Transcendental-philosophical background of theology and religious studies of F. Schleiermaher]. Studia Religiosa Rossica, 1, pp. 84‒101 (in Russian).
  6. Rickert H. (1998) Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft. Moscow (Russian translation).
  7. Spiess E. (1927) Die Religionstheorie von Ernst Troeltsch. Paderborn.
  8. Tillich P. (1998) Systematische Theologie. Bd. 1. St Petersburg (Russian translation)
  9. Tillich P. (2000) Systematische Theologie. Bd. 3. Moscow.; St Petersburg (Russian translation).
  10. Troeltsch E. (1969) Die Absolutheit des Christentums und die Religionsgeschichte. München; Hamburg.
  11. Troeltsch E. (1994) Der Historismus und seine Probleme. Moscow (Russian translation).
  12. Troeltsch E. (2011) “Über historische und dogmatische Methode in der Theologie”, in Sravnitel’noie bogosloviie: nemetskii protestantizm XX veka [Comparative theology: German Protestantism of the 20th century]. Moscow. Pp. 21‒45 (Russian translation).
  13. Troeltsch E. (2017) “Der Platz des Christentums unter den Weltreligionen”, in Handbuch Theologie der Religionen. Freiburg; Basel; Wien.
  14. Ukolov K. (2008) “Problemy religioznogo apriori v zapadnoi religioznoi fi losofi i (E. Triolch, P. Tillikh)” [The problem of the religious a priori in western religious philosophy (E. Troeltsch, P. Tillich)]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I. Bogosloviie. Filosofiia, 3, pp. 45‒59 (in Russian).
  15. Windelband W. (1994) “Das Heilige”, in Filosofiia kul’tury: izbrannoie [Philosophy of culture: Selected works]. Moscow. Pp. 317‒339 (Russian translation).
  16. Windelband W. (1994) “Kritische oder genetische Methode?”, in Filosofiia kul’tury: izbrannoe [Philosophy of culture: Selected works]. Moscow. Pp. 260‒288 (Russian translation).
Pylaev Maxim
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: Russian State University for the Humanities, 6 Miusskaya Sq., Moscow 125993, GSP-3, Russian Federation;
Post: Professor;
ORCID: 0000-0003-0110-8366;
Email: maximpylajew@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.