/

St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series I: Theology. Philosophy. Religious Studies

St. Tikhon’s University Review I :87

THEOLOGY

Kanaeva Elga

Attitude to the legacy of Thomas Aquinas in byzantine theology during the initial period of hesychastic discussions

Kanaeva Elga (2020) "Attitude to the legacy of Thomas Aquinas in byzantine theology during the initial period of hesychastic discussions ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 11-25 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.11-25
This article studies the fi rst episode in the encounter of Eastern theologians with theology of Thomas Aquinas (as it was presented by papal legates) which took place in the 1330s. It shows that of the two Orthodox authors, Barlaam and St. Gregory Palamas, the former took a harshly negative position, whereas the latter was positive. Barlaam, Thomas, and Palamas had similar views on natural theology which they considered to be possible, but Barlaam did not share Thomas’s opinion about the possibility of building the “sacred doctrine” (doctrina sacra) as an Aristotelian science. The article discusses Barlaam’s critical arguments against Thomas. It demonstrates that, on the one hand, Barlaam did not know many important points of Thomas’s theology (the theory of subalternation, the use of names “by analogy”), but, on the other hand, he found a number of weak points in his opponent’s reasoning (the problem of uniqueness and causality in theology). It is concluded that Barlaam had no acquaintance with the original texts of Thomas but used their interpretation. In a dispute with Barlaam, Gregory Palamas fi rst defended the possibility of building dogmatic theology as a science; at this stage he was methodologically close to Thomas using his own syllogisms of the procession of the Holy Spirit, but during the dispute he reshaped his position. Although at this stage of the development of his system, his proposed “demostration above demostration» did not became a programme, but the beginning of developing a question about the relationship between the essence and energy in God marked not only introducing the problems of Hesychasm to the discussions, but also made up a new step in the search for a way of including the reason into the process of cognition of theological truths. The article also concludes that Barlaam succeeded in playing the role of a critic of his opponents’ systems, which furthered their development. However, he himself did not manage to create his own synthesis.
Barlaam the Calabrian, method in theology, Byzantine logic, logic, anti-Thomism, Thomas Aquinas, dialectics, St. Gregory Palamas, Palamite controversy, faith and knowledge, history of theology, Byzantine philosophy
  1. Beyer H.-V. (1999) “Der Syllogismus des Gregorios Palamas, der zeigt oder geradezu beweist, dass der Heilige Geist einzig vom Vater ausgeht”. Antichnaia drevnost’ i srednie veka, 30, pp. 288–293 (Russian translation).
  2. Borodai T. (transl.) (2004) Thomas Aquinas. Summa contra gentiles. Moscow (Russian translation).
  3. Chenu M.-D. OP (1969) La Théologie comme science au XIIIe siècle. 3ème edn. Paris.
  4. Chenu M.-D. OP (1984) “Position de la theologie”, in Chenu M.-D. (ed.) La parole de Dieu. I La Foi dans l’intelligence. Paris.
  5. Demetracopoulos J. (2012) “The Influence of Thomas Aquinas on Late Byzantine Philosophical and Theological Thought: À propos of the Thomas de Aquino Byzantinus Project”. Bulletin de Philosophie Medievale, vol. 54, pp. 101‒124.
  6. Eremeev A., Iudin A. (transl.) (2002) Thomas Aquinas. Summa theologiae. Moscow (Russian translation).
  7. Fyrigos A. (1980) “Quando Barlaam Calabro conobbe il concilio di Lione II (1274)?” Rivista di studi bizantini e neoellenici, vols 17‒19, pp. 247‒265.
  8. Fyrigos A. (ed.) (1998) Barlaam Calabro. Opere contro i Latini. Citta del Vaticano.
  9. Fyrigos A. (2004) “Tomismo e antitomismo a Bisanzio (con una nota sulla Defensio S. Thomae adversus Nilum Cabasilam di Demetrio Cidone)”, in Molle A. (ed.) Tommaso d’Aquino († 1274) e il mondo bizantino. Venafro.
  10. Fyrigos A. (2005) Dalla controversia palamitica alla polemica esicastica (con un’edizione critica delle Epistole greche di Barlaam). Rome.
  11. Jenkins J. I. (1997) Knowledge and faith in Thomas Aquinas. Cambridge.
  12. Kakridis Y., Taseva L. (2014) Gegen die Lateiner. Traktate von Gregorios Palamas und Barlaam von Kalabrien in kirchenslavischer Übersetzung. Freiburg i. Br.
  13. Kanaeva E. (2019) “Ved’ sovershenno odno i to zhe “znat’ Boga” i “byt’ bogovidtsem””: Varlaam Kalabriiskii o metode v bogoslovii” [“It is Exactly the Same to Know God and to Be a Seer of God”: Barlaam the Calabrian on the Method in Theology”]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 81, pp. 50‒68 (in Russian)
  14. Khristov I. (2016) “Bytie i sushchestvovanie v diskussii sv. Grigoriia Palami i Varlaama” [Being and Existence in the Debate between St. Gregory Palamas and Barlaam], in G. Kapriev, I. Bei, S. Markov, S. Ribolov, S. Tutekov (eds) Sovremennaia bolgarskkaia patrologiia. Sbornik statei [Contemporary Bulgarian Patristic Studies. A Collection of Papers]. Kiev, pp. 125‒136 (in Russian).
  15. Kislas Th. (2001) “Introduction”, in Th. Kislas (ed.) Nil Cabasilas. Sur le Saint-Esprit. Paris.
  16. Krasikov S. (2004) “Grigorii Palama kak zashchitnik aristotelevskikh sillogizmov” [Gregory Palamas in Defence of Aristotelian Syllogisms]. Mir pravoslaviia, 4, pp. 125‒131 (in Russian).
  17. Meyendorff J. (1962) “Epistolai pros Akindynon kai Barlaam” [Epistles to Gregory Akindynos Barlaam], in P. K. Chrestou (ed.) Gregorioy toy Palama syggrammata, Thessaloniki, vol. 1, pp. 203–312 (in Greek).
  18. Papadopulos S. G. (1974) “Thomas in Byzanz. Thomas-Rezeption und Thomas-Kritik in Byzanz zwischen 1354 und 1435”. Theologie und Philosophie, 49, pp. 274‒305.
  19. Plested M. (2012) Orthodox Readings of Aquinas. Oxford.
  20. Rosental C. J. (2004) The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in Thomas Aquinas. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Massachusetts.
  21. Sinkewicz R. (1981) “The “Solutions” Addressed to George Lapithes by Barlaam the Calabrian and their Philosophical Context”. Mediaeval Studies, Toronto, 43, pp. 151–217.

Kanaeva Elga


Place of work: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities; 6 Likhov pereulok, Moscow, 127051, Russian Federation;
Post: executive editor;
ORCID: 0000-0001-8909-8371;
Email: mvereskov@list.ru.
Malyshev Artem

From the Christology of “Perfection” to the Christology of “Humiliation”: christological discussions in Russian academic theology of the 19th century

Malyshev Artem (2020) "From the Christology of “Perfection” to the Christology of “Humiliation”: christological discussions in Russian academic theology of the 19th century ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 26-46 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.26-46
This article gives a historical analysis of the problem of the possibility for Christ to commit a sin as well as those conceptual Christological prerequisites that underlie this problem. It uses as an example Christology of St. Innokentiy (Borisov) and doctrines of theologians of Moscow Academy of the latter half of the 19th century related to the interpretation of temptations of Lord in the desert. The article expounds systematically the Christology of St. Innokentiy (Borisov), researches his original Christological conception of a gradual manifestation of Deity in Christ, analyses his views on the possibility for Christ to commit a sin. The Saint’s Christology has a clearly expressed moral-related and motivating tendency, i.e. Christ is presented as a pinnacle of moral perfection and an example for imitation. The foundation of the Saint’s doctrine is made up by his answer formulated in the conception of a gradual manifestation of Deity in Christ to Kant’s theses accepted as an axiom about the impossibility to imitate Christ without accepting the possibility for him to fall. The Saint agreed in his lectures that Christ was able to sin. The conception of a gradual manifestation of Deity in Christ was developed by archpriest Aleksandr Gorskiy, in whose lectures one can see an interest to the topic of temptations of Christ in the desert. Bishop Mikhail (Luzin), who became rector of Moscow Academy after archpriest Aleksandr, made more prominent the problem of the compatibility of the opinion about the possibility for Christ to experience inner struggle (which, in turn, implied the possibility for Him to fall) with the view about Christ’impeccability. This theological matter also interested Revd. Timofey Butkevich, who, in line with bishop Mikhail, tried to solve it in the exegesis of Christ’s temptation in the desert and followed the same principles as St. Innokentiy. Unlike these authors, M. M. Tareev built his Christological system on diff erent principles, i.e. on the new kenotic Christology. Christ is represented in his works not as an epitome of moral perfection that overcomes the temptations but as an example of religious humility. The article describes systematically his kenotic Christology which is characterised by a deliberate rejection of the doctrine about the possibility for Christ to sin but contains other, no less problematic theses of dogmatic nature.
Christology, self-consciousness, St. Innokentiy of Cherson, archpriest Alexander Gorskiy, bishop Mikhail (Luzin), archpriest Timofey Butkevich, M. M. Tareev
  1. Benevich G. (2014) “Bogoslovsko-polemicheskie sochineniia prp. Maksima Ispovednika i ego polemika protiv monoenergizma i monofelitstva” [Polemical Theological Works of St. Maxim the Confessor and His Polemics against Monoenergism and Monofelitism], in Maksim Ispovednik. Bogoslovsko-polemicheskie sochineniia (Opuscula Theologica et Polemica). Athos; St Petersburg, pp. 11–181 (in Russian).
  2. Breidert М. (1977) Kenotische Christologie des 19. Jahrhunderts. Gütersloh.
  3. Glubokovskii N. (2002) Russkaia bogoslovskaia nauka v ee istoricheskom razvitii i noveishem sostoianii [Russian Theology in its Historical Development and Present-Day Situation]. Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Iulaev K. (transl.) (2005–2006) “Kirill Aleksandriiskii, svt. Dialog o vochelovechenii Edinorodnogo” [Cyrillus Alexandrinus. De incarnationi Unigeniti]. Bogoslovskii vestnik, 5–6, pp. 65– 150 (Russian translation).
  5. Khondzinskii P. (2017) “Vospriiatie idei I. Kanta v bogoslovskom nasledii svt. Innokentiia (Borisova)” [“The Perception of Ideas of I. Kant in Theological Heritage of St. Innokenty (Borisov)”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia II: Istoriia, vol. 74, pp. 94–102 (in Russian).
  6. Köber B. (1995) Sündlosigkeit und Menschsein Jesu Christi: ihr Verständnis und ihr Zusammenhang mit der Zweinaturenlehre in der protestantischen Theologie der Gegenwart. Göttingen.
  7. Konsik I. (2005) “Christologie im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert”, in Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte. Freiburg, pp. 115–145.
  8. Lampe G. (1961) Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford.
  9. Lisovoi N. (2002) “Obzor osnovnykh napravlenii russkoi bogoslovskoi akademicheskoi nauki v XIX — nachale XX stoletiia” [Survey of Main Trends in Russian Theology in 19th — 20th Centuries]. Bogoslovskie trudy, 37, pp. 5–127 (in Russian).
  10. Malyshev A. (2019) “Khristologiia I. Kanta i svt. Innokentiia (Borisova): dogmaticheskii Aspect” [The Christology of I. Kant and of St. Innokenty (Borisov): Dogmatic Aspect], in XII Kantovskie chteniia. Kant i etika Prosveshcheniia: istoricheskie osnovaniia i sovremennoe znachenie: tez. dokl. mezhdunar. nauch. konf. [12th Kant-Readings. Kant and the Ethics of Enlightenment: Historical Roots and Contemporary Relevance]. Kaliningrad, pp. 109–110 (in Russian).
  11. Pawl T. (2016) In Defense of Conciliar Christology: A Philosophical Essay. Oxford.
  12. Pilipenko E. (2015) Katolitsizm [Catholicism], in Pravoslavnaia Entsiklopediia [Orthodox Encyclopaedia], vol. 32, pp. 49–84 (in Russian).
  13. Sil’chenkov N. (1997) Proshchal’naia beseda Spasitelia s uchenikami. Ev. Ioanna XIII, 31 — XVI, 33 (Opyt istolkovaniia) [The Last Talk of the Saviour with Disciples. John’s Gospel 13,31 — 16,33 (an Interpretation)]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  14. Sproul R. (2001) The Glory of Christ. St Petersburg (Russian translation).
  15. Zabolotnyi E., Kalinin M., Feodor (Iulaev) (transl.) (2015) “Kirill Aleksandriiskii, svt. Otvety Tiveriiu diakonu s bratiei” [Cyrillus Alexandrinus. Responsionum ad Tiberium diaconum]. Bogoslovskii vestnik, 18–19 (3–4), pp. 342–379 (in Russian).

Malyshev Artem


Student status: Graduate student;
Place of study: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities; 6/1 Likhov pereulok, Moscow 127051, Russian Federation;
ORCID: 0000-0002-3674-3303;
Email: artema.malishev@gmail.com.

PHILOSOPHY

Malinov Alexey

V. I. Lamansky and Yu. F. Samarin: on the history of relationships

Malinov Alexey (2020) "V. I. Lamansky and Yu. F. Samarin: on the history of relationships ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 49-69 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.49-69
This article studies the history of relations of the two Slavophiles who belonged to two differenet generations, namely Yuriy Fyodorovich Samarin (1819‒1876) and Vladimir Ivanovich Lamanskiy (1833‒1914). The article shows the origins of the formation of Lamanskiy’s Slavophile views and specifi c features of his understanding of Slavophilism as well as his opinion about the origin of the Slavophile doctrine. It is demonstrated that initially Lamanskiy was an armchair Slavophile with a purely bookish interest, but his subsequent familiarisation with Slavic peoples, teaching Slavistics at St Petersburg University helped him develop an independent doctrine. Lamanskiy came to be the most prominent representative of Slavophilism in Petersburg and can be regarded as a scholar and an academic Slavophile. Drawing on his publications, letters and diaries, the article traces the history of his relations with Samarin. The latter, unlike I. S. Aksakov, did not come to be a link between Moscow and Petersburg Slavophiles and those who belonged to Slavophilism of diff erent generations. It should be taken into account that Lamanskiy and Samarin had diff erent backgrounds and diff erent occupations, but at the same time they had certain ideological and topic-related similarities, i.e. an interest in non-Slavonic population at the borders of the state, a broad understanding of Unia as a historical type or even a synonym of Westernism, criticism of the German “element”, inclination to practical activity, essayism. It is also shown that Lamanskiy’s views received a more conceptual expression in the framework of his political and geographical doctrine of the three worlds of civilisation.
Slavophilism, Slavic studies, Petersburg Slavophilism, problem of non-Slavonic population, generation, Samarin, Lamansky
  1. Badalian D. (2016) “Kniga Yu. F. Samarina “Okrainy Rossii” i tsenzura” [The Book by Yu. F. Samarin “Outskirts of Russia” and Censorship]. Trudy Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo instituta kul’tury, 213, pp. 60–69 (in Russian).
  2. Dokumenty k istorii slavianovedeniia v Rossii (1850–1912) (1948) [Documents on the History of Slavic Studies in Russia (1850–1912)]. Moscow, Leningrad (in Russian).
  3. Gershenzon M. (2003) “Uchenie o prirode soznaniia (Yu. Samarin, glavy iz knigi “Istoricheskie zametki”)” [The Doctrine of the Nature of Consciousness (Yu. Samarin, chapters from the book “Historical Notes”)], in B. Nol’de. Yurii Samarin i ego vremia. Moscow, pp. 265–297 (in Russian).
  4. Girenok F. (2014) “Samarin: russkie i okrainy Rossii” [Samarin: Russians and the Outskirts of Russia”]. Filosofiia khoziaistva, 3, pp. 197–203 (in Russian).
  5. Kupriianov V. A. (2018) “Lomonosovedenie v tvorchestve V. I. Lamanskogo” [Study of Lomonosov in the work of V. I. Lamansky]. Veche. Zhurnal russkoi filosofii i kul’tury, 30, pp. 223–240 (in Russian).
  6. Kupriianov V. A. (2018) “Rossiia i Evropa v rannem i pozdnem slavianofi l’stve (A. S. Khomiakov i V. I. Lamanskiy)” [Russia and Europe in the Early and Late Slavophilism (A. S. Khomyakov and V. I. Lamansky)]. Solov’evskie issledovaniya, 2, pp. 21–33 (in Russian).
  7. Mikhailova E. (2017) “Smyslovaia znachimost’ slavianofi l’stva v otsenke K. D. Kavelina” [Meaning-Related Signifi cance of Slavophilism in the Evaluation of K. D. Kavelin]. Filosofskii polilog. Zhurnal Mezhdunarodnogo tsentra izucheniia russkoi filosofii, 2, pp. 129–135 (in Russian).
  8. Pirozhkova T. (2017) ““Strashnaia kniga” Yu. F. Samarina (“Okrainy Rossii” v vospriyatii sovremennikov)” [“A Terrible Book” by Yu. F. Samarin (“Outskirts of Russia” in the Perception of Contemporaries)]. Vestnik moskovskogo universiteta, ser. 10, Zhurnalistika, 3, pp. 130–150 (in Russian).
  9. Malinov A. (ed.) (2009) “Pis’mo V. I. Lamanskogo K. S. Aksakovu” [Letter of V. I. Lamanskiy to K. S. Aksakov]. Veche. Zhurnal russkoi filosofii i kul’tury, 19, pp. 172–176 (in Russian).
  10. Serkova V. (1997) “Prostranstvo konteksta v ironiko-sud’bicheskikh i ironiko-istoricheskikh konstruktsiiakh i modeliakh istorii” [The Space of Context in the Ironic Fate-Related and Ironic History-Related Constructions and Models of History]. Metafizicheskie issledovaniia, 2, pp. 92–107 (in Russian).
  11. Skorokhodova S. (2011) ““Pis’ma iz Rigi” v istoriosofi i Yu. F. Samarina” [“Letters from Riga” in the Historiosophy of Yu. F. Samarin]. Solov’evskie issledovaniia, 4, pp. 101–113 (in Russian).
  12. Skorokhodova S. (2012) “Poniatiia “uniatstvo” i “iezuitizm” v kontekste istoriosofi i Yu. F. Samarina” [The Concepts of “Unia” and “Jesuitism” in the Context of the Historiosophy of Yu. F. Samarin]. Nauka i shkola, 5, pp. 174–179 (in Russian).
  13. Skorokhodova S. (2013) Filosofiia istorii Yu. F. Samarina v kontekste russkoi filosofskoi mysli XIX — pervoi chetverti XX veka [Philosophy of History of Samarin in the Context of Russian Philosophical Thought of the 19th — First Quarter of the 20th Century]. Moscow (in Russian).
  14. Skorokhodova S. (2018) “K voprosu o fi losofi i religii Yu. F. Samarina” [On the Question of Yu. F. Samarin’s Phiosophy of Religion]. Vestnik Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii, 1, pp. 224–234 (in Russian).
  15. Stennik Yu. (2004) Ideia “drevnei” i “novoi” Rossii v literature i obshchestvenno-istoricheskoi mysli XVIII — nachala XIX veka [The Idea of “Ancient” and “New” Russia in Literature and Socio- Historical Thought of the 18th — Early 19th Centuries]. St Petersburg (in Russian).

Malinov Alexey


Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Professor;
Place of work: St. Petersburg State University; 7/9 Universitetskaya emb., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation;
Post: Professor;
ORCID: 0000-0002-1252-9193;
Email: a.v.malinov@gmail.com.

*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.

Stepanova Elena

Divine command theory: logical refutation and theological justification

Stepanova Elena (2020) "Divine command theory: logical refutation and theological justification ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 70-86 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.70-86
In the article, the problem of sources of moral authority in intellectual history associated with Christianity is observed. Among possible concepts of moral sources, namely, virtue ethics, ethics of natural law, and divine command theory, the focus is on the latter. The author describes main principles of divine command theory (DCT): it is based on the conviction that the essence of morality, i. e. the concept of good and evil, justice and injustice, etc., directly depends on God’s commands and prohibitions. In the last decades of the twentieth century, the principle of divine command as an independent theory has obtained a fresh impetus in English-speaking analytic philosophy. The meta-ethical nature of the divine command theory reveals inself in defining ethical judgments through theological concepts. The main provisions of the divine command theory are defi ned: fi rstly, the identity of a prescribing or prohibiting divine will as a source of morality, and will in the form of obedience as the cause of moral action; secondly, a consideration of moral prescriptions as the subject of revelation (faith), but not of rational choice; thirdly, the sovereignty of God as a source of morality. The main critical arguments addressed to the divine command theory are considered: fi rstly, arguments, which arose from so-called “Euthyphro dilemma” related to the arbitrary nature of the concept of good, as well as to the question of what is primary — the concept of good or divine command; secondly, the incompatibility of the divine command theory with moral autonomy; thirdly, critique of the divine command theory from the standpoint of pluralism, and the problem of the DCT’s persuasiveness for unbelievers, or adherents of other religions besides Christianity. The author concludes that the divine command theory seems to be unconvinced from a rational point of view; at the same time, rational critical arguments seem to be useless for theologically-minded researchers. Nonetheless, such discrepancy does not exclude the need to find adequate forms of dialogue between believers and non-believers.
morality, revelation, obedience, divine command, Euthyphro dilemma, moral autonomy, pluralism
  1. Adams R. M. (1973) “Modifi ed Divine Command Theory of Ethical Wrongness”, in G. Outka, J. P. Reeder (eds) Religion and Morality. Garden City, pp. 320‒344.
  2. Adams R. M. (1987) The Virtue of Faith and Other Essays in Philosophical Theology. New York.
  3. Adams R. M. (1999) Finite and Infi nite Goods: A Framework for Ethics. New York.
  4. Adams R. M. (2003) “A Modifi ed Divine Command Theory of Ethical Wrongness”, in C. Taliaferro, P. J. Griffiths (eds) Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology. New Jersey, pp. 472‒473.
  5. Anscombe G. E. M. (1958) “Modern Moral Philosophy”. Philosophy: The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, XXXIII (124), pp. 1‒19.
  6. Appolonov A. (2002) “Zhizn’ i tvorchestvo Uil’yama Okkama” [Life and Works of William Ockham], in Uil’yam Okkam. Izbrannoe [William Ockham. Selected Works]. Moscow, pp. vii‒xxvii (in Russian).
  7. Austin M. W. (2018) “Divine Command Theory”, in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available at: https://www.iep.utm.edu/divine-c/ (7 December 2018).
  8. Brunner E. (2002) The Divine Imperative: A Study in Christian Ethics. James Clarke & Co.
  9. Habermas J. (2006) “Religion in the Public Sphere”. European Journal of Philosophy, 14 (1), pp. 1‒25.
  10. Hare J. E. (2011) “Ethics and Religion: Two Kantian Arguments”. Philosophical Investigations, 34 (2), pp. 151‒168.
  11. Hare J. E. (2017) “Divine Command Theory”, in S. Wilkens (ed.) Christian Ethics: Four Views. InterVarsity Press, pp. 125‒147.
  12. Hauerwas S. (1991) The Peaceable Kingdom: A Primer in Christian Ethics. Notre Dame, I: University of Notre Dame Press.
  13. Heltzel P. G. (2017) “A Prophetic Ethics Response”, in S. Wilkens (ed.) Christian Ethics: Four Views. InterVarsity Press, pp. 159‒164.
  14. Idziak J. M. (1979) Divine Command Morality: Historical and Contemporary Readings. New York.
  15. Idziak J. M. (1989) “In Search of Good Positive Reason for an Ethics of Divine Commands: Catalogue of Arguments”. Faith and Philosophy, 6 (4), pp. 47‒64.
  16. Idziak J. M. (2004) “Divine Commands are the Foundation of Morality”, in M. L. Peterson, R. J. VanArragon (eds) Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 292‒301.
  17. Kant I. (1980) “Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft”, in I. Kant. Traktaty i pis’ma [Treatises and Letters]. Moscow (Russian translation).
  18. Lewis C. S. (2004) “Mere Christianity”, in Sobranie sochineniy v 8 t. [Collected Works in 8 vols], vol. 1. Moscow; St Petersburg, pp. 11‒202 (Russian translation).
  19. Lobkovich N., Appolonov A. (eds) (2012) Thomas Aquinas. Summa theologiae, vol. 4. Moscow (Russian translation).
  20. Maiorov G. (ed.) (2001) Blazhennyi Ioann Duns Scotus. Izbrannoe [Ioannes Duns Scotus. Selected Works]. Moscow (Russian translation).
  21. Moore G. (1984) Principia Ethica. Moscow (Russian translation).
  22. Murray M., Rea M. (2010) An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion. Moscow (Russian translation).
  23. Nowell-Smith P. (1999) “Morality: Religious and Secular”, in E. Stump, M. J. Murray (eds) Philosophy of Religion: The Big Questions, Blackwell, pp. 6‒403.
  24. Ockham W. (2002) Izbrannoe [Selected Works]. Moscow (Russian translation).
  25. Quinn P. L. (1992) “The Primacy of God’s Will in Christian Ethics”. Philosophical Perspectives, 6, pp. 493‒513.
  26. Rorty R. (1994) “Religion as Conversation-Stopper”. Common Knowledge, 3, pp. 1‒6.
  27. Rorty R. (2003) “Religion in the Public Square: A Reconsideration”. Journal of Religious Ethics, 31 (1), pp. 141‒149.
  28. Swinburne R. (2016) The Coherence of Theism. Oxford.
  29. Vanier J., Hauervas S. (2015) Zhit’ mirno sredi nasiliia [Living Peacefully in the Violent World]. Kiev; Moscow (Russian translation).
  30. Waluchow W. J. (2003) The Dimensions of Ethics: An Introduction to Ethical Theory. Peterborough.
  31. Wilkens S. (ed.) (2017) Christian Ethics: Four Views. InterVarsity Press.

Stepanova Elena


Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Sofia Kovalevskaya str. 16, Ekaterinburg, 620108 Russia;
Post: Principal Research Fellow;
ORCID: 0000-0002-2559-3573;
Email: stepanova.elena.a@gmail.com.

*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.

Shushakov Egor

Genesis of the term noosphere and its use by P. Teilhard de Chardin and V. I. Vernadsky

Shushakov Egor (2020) "Genesis of the term noosphere and its use by P. Teilhard de Chardin and V. I. Vernadsky ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 87-105 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.87-105
This article reconstructs the genesis of the term noosphere and its understanding by P. Teilhard de Chardin and V. I. Vernadsky. The article demonstrates that the main difference in the concepts of noosphere of V. I. Vernadsky and P. Teilhard de Chardin initially originates from their diff erent interpretations of the concept biosphere and their opposing opinions about the fi nal stage of historical process. The author of this article disagrees with the point of view according to which V. I. Vernadsky was very little infl uenced by Teilhard de Chardin. Besides, the article identifi es their similar and dissimilar points as to the idea of noosphere. It shows the continuity of views of E. Leroy and Teilhard de Chardin on the phenomenon of noosphere. Besides, it pays attention to the infl uence of Revd. P. Florensky on Vernadsky. The former proposed the term pneumatosphere which is similar to the term noosphere. The article claims that the opinion of F. T. Yanshina about the independence of Vernadsky from the infl uence of philosophical views of Teilhard de Chardin is wrong, though this opinion is popular in Russian studies of Teilhard de Chardin and Vernadsky. The article shows that Teilhard de Chardin develops the conception of noosphere independently of Vernadsky. It argues that it was he who authored the term noosphere and not E. Leroy, as many Russian authors think. The article concludes that Vernadsky’s reception of the idea of noosphere and pneumatosphere demonstrates this scholar’s openness to ideas that are explicitly or implicitly religion-related. However, it does not seem possible to correlate Vernadsky’s world outlook with taking this fact into account. In conclusion, the article proposes a possibility of correlating the two theories of noosphere for creating a holistic conception which would describe the impact of human mind on biosphere.
V. I. Vernadsky, P. Teilhard de Chardin, E. Leroy, P. Florensky, noosphere, biosphere, pneumatosphere, antroposphere, theosphere, hominisation
  1. Aksenov G. (2010) Vernadskii [Vernadsky]. Moscow (in Russian).
  2. Babosov E. (1970) Teiiardizm: popytka sinteza nauki i khristianstva [Teilhardism: an Attempt of Synthesis of Science and Christianity]. Minsk (in Russian).
  3. Barthélemy-Madaule M. (1963) Bergson et Teilhard de Chardin. Paris.
  4. Florenskii P. (1993) “Pis‘mo V. I. Vernadskomu” [Letter to V. I. Vernadsky], in Russkii kosmizm: antologiia fi losofskoi mysli [Russian Cosmism: Anthology of Philosophical Thought]. Moscow, pp. 162–165 (in Russian).
  5. Gacheva A. (2016) “L’idée de noosphère et le cosmisme des années 1920‒1930”, in M. Dennes (ed.) Vernadsky, la France et l’Europe. Bordeaux, pp. 141–160.
  6. Gavriushin N. (2019) “O predystorii poniatiia «noosfera»” [On the Background of the Notion “Noosphere”], in U kolybeli smyslov: stat’i raznykh let [At the Cradle of she Sense: Articles of Diff erent Times]. Moscow, pp. 643–645 (in Russian).
  7. Girenok F. (1987) Ekologiia. Tsivilizatsiia. Noosfera [Ecology. Civilisation. Noosphere]. Moscow (in Russian).
  8. Grinevald J. (2016) “Clarifi cation des conceptions de la biosphère et de la noosphère chez Teilhard de Chardin et Vernadsky”, in M. Dennes (ed.) Vernadsky, la France et l’Europe. Bordeaux, pp. 87–102.
  9. Gutner G. (2010) “Noosfera” [Noosphere], in Novaia filosofskaia entsiklopediia [New Encyclopaedia of Philosophy]. Moscow, pp. 107–108 (in Russian)
  10. Ianshin A. (1994) “Zhivoe veshchestvo i biosfera v trudakh V. I. Vernadskogo” [Living Matter and Biosphere in Works of V. I. Vernadsky], in Zhivoe veshchestvo i biosfera [Living Matter and Biosphere]. Moscow, pp. 3–15 (in Russian).
  11. Ianshina F. (1994) “O poiavlenii i pervonachal’nom tolkovanii termina «noosfera»” [On the Emergence and the First Interpretation of the Notion Noosphere]. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii nauk, 64 (11), pp. 1016–1022 (in Russian).
  12. Le Roy E. (1927) L’exigence idealiste et le fait d’evolution. Paris.
  13. Le Roy E. (1928) Les origines humaines et l’evolution de l’intelligence. Paris.
  14. Levit G. S. (2000) “The Biosphere and the Noosphere Theories of V. I. Vernadsky and P. Teilhard de Chardin: A Methodological Essay”. Archives internationales d’histoire des sciences, 50 (144), pp. 160–177.
  15. Moiseev N. (1990) Chelovek i noosfera [Man and Noosphere]. Moscow (in Russian).
  16. Novikov Yu., Rezhabek B. (2018) Vklad E. Le Roy i P. Teilharda de Chardena v razvitie konzepzii noosfery [Contribution of E. Le Roy and P. Teilhard de Charden in Development of the Concept of Noosphere], available at: http://www.nff edorov.ru/w/images/3/36/Lerua.pdf (09.08.2018) (in Russian).
  17. Semenova S. (2009) Palomnik v budushchee. P’er Teiiar de Sharden [A Pilgrim to the Future. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  18. Semenova S. (2016) “V. I. Vernadsky, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin et l’idée de noosphère”, in M. Dennes (ed.) Vernadsky, la France et l’Europe. Bordeaux, p. 49–70.
  19. Shushakov E. (2017) “Evolutsionnaia antropologiia i ponimanie pervorodnogo grekha v tvorchestve P. Teiara de Shardena” [Evolutional Anthropology and Understanding of Original Sin in Works of P. Teilhard de Charden]. Religiovedenie, 2, p. 58–63 (in Russian).
  20. Shushakov E. (2018) “Kontseptsiia tvoreniia mira i eskhatologicheskie predstavleniia v tvorchestve P. Teiara de Shardena” [The Concept of Creation of the World and Eschatological Ideas in Works of P. Teilhard de Charden]. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Serija 7: Filosofia, 3, p. 100–112 (in Russian).
  21. Sorokina M. (2016) “Mythes et archives. La France et les chercheurs français dans la vie et l’oeuvre scientifi que de l’académicien V.I. Vernadsky” in M. Dennes, (ed.) Vernadsky, la France et l’Europe. Bordeaux, pp. 31–48.
  22. Startsev E. (2008) “Teoantropokosmizm P. A. Florenskogo” [Theoantropocosmism of P. A. Florensky]. Izvestiia Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. «Politologiia. Religiovedenie», 1, pp. 332–344 (in Russian).
  23. Strugovshchikov E. (2004) P’er Teiiar de Sharden i pravoslavnoe bogoslovie [Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Orthodox Theology]. Moscow (in Russian).
  24. Teilhard de Charden P. (2012) Le Phénomène humaine. Moscow (Russian translation).
  25. Teilhard de Chardin P. (1958) “La Place de l’Homme dans la Nature”, in La vision du passé. Paris, pp. 245–256.
  26. Teilhard de Chardin P. (1962) “L’Esprit de la Terre”, in L’Energie humaine. Paris, pp. 23–57.
  27. Teilhard de Chardin, P. (1958) “L’Histoire Naturelle du Monde”, in La vision du passé. Paris, pp. 143–157.
  28. Teilhard de Chardin, P. (1958) “L’Hominisation”, in La vision du passé. Paris, pp. 75–111.
  29. Teilhard de Chardin, P. (1958) “Sur l’Apparence nécessairement discontinue de toute série evolutive”, in La vision du passé. Paris, p. 159–162.
  30. Teilhard de Chardin, P. (1962) “L’Energie humaine”, in L’Energie humain. Paris: Edition du Seuil, p. 141–200.
  31. Teilhard de Chardin, P. (2016) “Annexes 5: La lettre de Teilhard de Chardin à Vernadsky”, in M. Dennes (ed.) Vernadsky, la France et l’Europe. Bordeaux, pp. 344.
  32. Vernadsky V. (1988) “Neskol’ko slov o noosfere” [Some Words about the Noosphere], in Filosofskie mysli naturalista [Philosophical Thoughts of the Naturalist]. Moscow, pp. 19–209 (in Russian).
  33. Vernadsky V. (1991) Nauchnaia mysl’ kak planetnoe iavlenie [Scientifi c Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon]. Moscow (in Russian).
  34. Vernadsky V. (1993) “L’autotrophie de l’humanité”, in Russkii kosmizm: antologia filosofskoi mysli [Russian Cosmism: Antology of Philosophical Thought]. Moscow, pp. 288–302 (Russian translation).

Shushakov Egor


Place of work: Lomonosov Moscow State University; 27 building 4 Lomonosovsky prospekt, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation;
Post: Postgraduate student;
ORCID: 0000-0003-0007-0888;
Email: heliografos@mail.ru.

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Kharitonova Yuliya

Phenomenon of priesthood in ancient Greek religion: its conceptual schemes and perspectives of research in western science of the 19th — 21st centuries

Kharitonova Yuliya (2020) "Phenomenon of priesthood in ancient Greek religion: its conceptual schemes and perspectives of research in western science of the 19th — 21st centuries ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 109-127 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.109-127
The article gives a comparative analysis of conceptual approaches to the phenomenon of priesthood in Ancient Greece in western scientifi c literature of the 19th — 21st centuries. It studies the problem of institualisation of the class of priests in the present-day western science. Based on the analysis of V. Burkert’s works, it formulates an “axiom” as an inventory of comparative and apophatic statements about ancient priests. It is argued that to these belong the closedness and elitism of the class of priests; the absence of the system of initiation; the absence of a unifi ed practice independent of the localisation of the cult; the absence of a uniform doctrine. The formulation of the statements of the “axiom” helps to identify in the relevant literature a conventional scheme of five conceptual approaches to the phenomenon pf priesthood in Ancient Greece. The unifi cation of these conceptual approaches in a holistic structure (by the principle of the attitude of the authors to the role of the priest and the problem of the institution of priests) allows one to construct a system of perceiving the priesthood: priests of the polis, diviners and seers, intermediaries between the worlds of people and gods, keepers of rituals, experts in communicating with the divine. In its fi nal part, the article formulates three questions to the relevant scientifi c literature which are necessary to verify the proposed conceptual scheme of “perceiving the priests”: 1) the problem of Christianity-centred perception of priests; 2) the problem of ignoring rituals of rural sanctuaries and giving priority to urban temples; 3) the problem of the phenomenon of the “attitude to the divine reality” in connection with priesthood in Ancient Greece. The solution for these questions (i.e. fi nding the link between the rite of sacrifi ce with divination practices, the study of the phenomenon of “divine obsession” and attention to temple practices of rural sanctuaries) allows one to look at the study of Greek priests in the context of the history of ancient magic as an evolution of the system of ritual and cult-related practices.
classical studies, history of religions, Ancient Greek religion, Ancient Greek ceremonies, ancient magic, ancient priesthood, polis religion
Beard M., North J. (1990) PaganPriests: Religion and Power in the Ancient World. London. 1990.Bremmer J.N. (2008) PriestlyPersonnel of the Ephesian Artemision: Anatolian, Persian, Greek, and RomanAspects // Practitioners of the Divine: Greek Priests and ReligiousOfficials from Homer to Heliodorus. ed. B. Dignas, K. Trampedach. HellenicSrudies Series 30. Washington, DC. 2008. P. 37-54.Bremmer J.N. (1994) GreekReligion. Oxford University Press, 1994.Bremmer J.N. (1999) GreekReligion. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1999.Buraselis K. (2008) Priesthoodsfor Sale. Comments on Ideological and Financial Aspects of the Sale ofPriesthoods in the Greek Cities of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods //Religion and Society. Rituals, Resources and Identity in the AncientGreco-Roman World. The BOMOS Conferences 2002-2005. Rome, 2008. P. 125-131.Burkert W. (1972) Homo Necans.Interpretationen altgriechischer Opferriten und Mythen. Berlin, 1972.Chaniotis A. (1972) Priests asRitual Experts in the Greek World // Practitioners of the Divine: GreekPriests and Religious Officials from Homer to Heliodorus. ed. B. Dignas, K.Trampedach. Hellenic Srudies Series 30. Washington, DC. 2008. P. 17-37.Connelly J.B. (2007) Portrait of aPriestess. Women and Ritual in Ancient Greece. Princeton, 2007.Dignas B., Trampedach K. (2008) Practitionersof the Divine: Greek Priests and Religious Officials from Homer to Heliodorus.ed. B.Dignas, K.Trampedach. Hellenic Srudies Series 30. Washington,DC. 2008.Dodds E.R. (1951) The Greeks andthe Irrational. Berkeley. 1951.Flower Michael A. (2008) TheIamidae: A Mantic Family and Its Public Image // Practitioners of theDivine: Greek Priests and Religious Officials from Homer to Heliodorus. ed. B.Dignas, K. Trampedach. Hellenic Srudies Series 30. Washington, DC. 2008.P. 187-207.Garland R. (1984)Religious Authority in Archaic andClassical Athens // ABSA 79, 1984. P. 75–76.Gernet L. (1932) Le culte // Gernet L. Boulanger A. Le Génie grec dans la religion,1932. P. 205–206.Graf F. (1997) GriechischeReligion // Nesselrath, 1997. S. 457–504.Hamilton R. (1985) EuripideanPriests // HSCP. 1985. 89:53–73.Harris D. (1995) The Treasures ofthe Parthenon and Erechtheion. Oxford, 1995.Henrichs A. (2008) Introduction.What Is a Greek Priest? // Practitioners of the Divine: Greek Priests andReligious Officials from Homer to Heliodorus. ed. B. Dignas, K. Trampedach.Hellenic Srudies Series 30. Washington, DC. 2008. P. 1-17.Hermann K.F. (1858) Lehrbuch dergottesdienstlichen Alterthümer der Griechen. Vol. 2. Heidelberg, 1858.Horster М., Klöckner А. (2013) Citiesand Priests: Cult personnel in Asia Minor and the Aegean islands from theHellenistic to the Imperial period. Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche undVorarbeiten (64). Walter de Gruyter. Berlin, 2013.James О. (1955) The nature and function of priesterhood. Thames and Hudson, 1955.Kern O. (1926)Die Religion der Griechen. Vol. 1.Berlin. 1926.Lambert S.D. (2010) A Polis andits Priests: Athenian Priesthoods Before and After Pericles’ Citizenship Law// Historia. 2010. Bd. 59. H. 2. S. 143-175.Lobeck C.A. (1829) Aglaophamussive de theologiae mysticae Graecorum causis libri tres. Königsberg, 1829.Lorenz K. (1963) Das sogenannte Böse zur Naturgeschichte der Aggression. Verlag Dr. G Borotha-Schoeler. Vienna, 1963.Müller K.O. (1825) Prolegomena zu einer wissenschaftlichenMythologie. Göttingen, 1825.Neumann J. (1998) Priester. Cancik, Gladigow, Kohl, 1998.Nietzsche F. (1967) DerGottesdienst der Griechen. 1875–1876. // Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe.Ed. G. Colli and M. Montinari. Berlin, 1967. 2.5:355–520.Nilsson M.P.(1967) Geschichte der griechischenReligion. Vol. 1. 3rd ed. Munich. 1967.Rohde E. (1901) Die Religion derGriechen (1894) // Kleine Schriften. Vol. 2. Tübingen, 1901:332-333.Sabourin L. (1973) Priesthood. Acomparative Study. 1973.Sourvinou-Inwood C. (1988) FurtherAspects of Polis Religion // AASA 10 (1988):259–274. Reprinted in Buxton,2000. P. 39-42.Stengel P. (1920) Die griechischenKultusaltertümer. 3rd ed. Munich, 1920.Tsoukala V. (2009) Honorary Sharesof Sacrificial Meat in Attic Vase Painting // Hesperia. 2009. Vol. 78. № 1.P. 1-40.Vernant J.-P. (1974) Mythe etsociété en Grèce ancienne. Paris, 1974.Wilamowitz-MoellendorffU. (1931) Der Glaube der Hellenen. Vol. 1. Berlin. 1931.Burkert V. (2004) Grecheskaya religiya: arhaika i klassika.Alettejya. 2004.Golubcova E.S.(1985) Mirovozzrenie gorozhanina ikrest'yanina Maloj Azii v I—III vv. // Kul'tura Drevnego Rima. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1985. S. 356-387.Dmitrieva T.N.(2000) ZHertvoprinoshenie: poiski istokov// ZHertvoprinosheniya: Ritual v kul'ture i iskusstve ot drevnosti do nashihdnej. M., 2000. S. 11–22.Kofanov L.L.,CHaplygina N.A. (1994) Religiya iobshchestvo v Drevnem Rime. M., 1994.Lenskaya V.S.(2011) Elevsinskie zhrecheskie rody// VDI. 2011. № 2. S. 25-26.Lenskaya V.S.(2011) Mladshij kul'tovyj personal vdrevnej Grecii // Problemy istorii, filologii, kul'tury. 4 (34).Magnitogorsk., 2011. S. 322-336.Lenskaya V.S.(2012) Tipy kul'tov v Afinah //Vostok, Evropa, Amerika v drevnosti. Vyp. 2.Sbornik nauchnyh trudov XVII Sergeevskih chtenij. M. 2012. S. 80-90.Lenskaya V.S.(2013) Privilegii i l'goty zhrecov vDrevnej Grecii // Mnemon, 13. SPb, 2013. S. 103-116.Lenskaya V.S.(2017) CHastnye zhertvoprinosheniya vdrevnej Grecii // Problemy istorii, filologii, kul'tury 4 (2017). S. 47-63.Majorova N.G.(2000) Rimskie fecialy: kto oni? //Trudy istoricheskogo f-ta MGU. Seriya III. Instrumente studiorum (6). Trudykafedry drevnih yazykov. M.; SPb.: Aletejya, 2000. S. 52–61.Nemirovskij A.I.(1964) Ideologiya i kul'tura rannegoRima. Voronezh, 1964.Smorchkov A.M. (1996)Polozhenie zhrechestva v epohu rannejRespubliki // Ius antiguum. Drevneepravo. M., 1996. № 1. S. 42-46.Tokmakov V.N.(1997) Sakral'no-pravovye aspektyritualov zhrecheskoj kollegii saliev v arhaicheskom Rime // Iusantiguum. Drevneepravo. M., 1997. № 2. S. 9-17.SHtaerman E.M.(1985) Drevnejshaya rimskaya religiya –religioznaya obshchina // Kul'tura Drevnego Rima. M., 1985. T. 1. S.106-144.SHtaerman E.M.(1987) Social'nye osnovy religii DrevnegoRima. M., 1987.

Kharitonova Yuliya


Student status: Graduate student;
Place of study: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities; 6/1 Likhov pereulok, Moscow 127051, Russian Federation;
ORCID: 0000-0002-2998-7836;
Email: skriptorika@gmail.com.

DISCUSSION

Gadzhikurbanov Aslan

Secular ideas in work of Spinoza

Gadzhikurbanov Aslan (2020) "Secular ideas in work of Spinoza ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 131-142 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI202087.131-142
A. V. Appolonov’s article “On the Concepts of “the Secular” and “Religion” of Benedict de Spinoza in the Context of John Milbank’s Hypothesis of the “Construction” of the Secular” is of a polemic character, which gives it a special acuity. At the same time, the author of the article does not fully recognise the presence in Spinoza’s works of a conscious desire to form secular ideas. The idea of autonomy of natural law from the Divine subject had been invented long before Hugo Grotius, but it was Spinoza who made it clearly expressed in the formula Deus sive Natura. One can argue about a naturalisation of the image of God in Spinoza’s reasoning, which was destructive for the orthodox Christian theology. It is probable that the process of secularisation, or deconsecration, of the Christian worldview in the European Enlightenment of the 17th century to a considerable extent originates from the naturalisation of divine functions or prerogatives, in particular from the mathematisation of God’s creative potencies when shaping the world. However, Spinoza admits, alongside the predominantly naturalistic (geometrical and causal) scenario, two more scenarios, i.e. theologicalreligious and metaphysical. Though Spinoza argues about the “sacralisation of the supreme power”, is it not possible to see in this process the objective realisation of a certain secular programme, part of which is the state as a secular institution? In order to consider universum from a naturalistic viewpoint, it is not necessary to see God having withdrawn from it; another thing is even more dangerous for the Christian idea of God, namely to be God oneself, being totally immersed in the world that is governed by natural laws. As for the scholastic formula etsi Deus non daretur, it can hardly be regarded as a mere example of a “mental experiment”.
Spinoza’s works, secular ideas, natural law, naturalisation, Deus sive Natura, image of God, 17th-century Enlightenment, sacralisation of supreme power, etsi Deus non daretur, mental experiment
  1. Appolonov A. (2018) ““Etsi Deus non daretur” (“Kak esli by Boga ne bylo”): Gugo Grotsiy i skholasticheskaya teologiya” [“‘Etsi Deus non daretur’ (‘As if God did not Exist’). Hugo Grotius and Scholastic Theology”]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Svyato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriya I: Bogosloviye. Filosofiya, 77, pp. 63‒71 (in Russian).
  2. Feuer L. S. (2017) Spinoza and the Rise of Liberalism. Routledge.
  3. Gadzhikurbanov A. (2014) Etika Spinozy kak metafi zika morali [Spinoza’s Ethics as Metaphysics of Morality]. Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Garadzha V. (2000) “Sekuliarizm” [“Secularism”], in Novaya filosofskaia enciklopediia, vol. 3. Moscow, pp. 512‒513 (in Russian).
  5. Israel J. (2001) Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650‒1750. Oxford.
  6. Milbank J. (2002) Theology and Social Theory. 2nd ed. Malden.
  7. Nadler S. (2011) A Book Forged in Hell. Spinoza’s Scandalous Treatise and the Birth of the Secular Age. Princeton.
  8. Smith D. E. (1967) India as a Secular State. Princeton University Press.
  9. Spinoza B. (1999) Works in Two Volumes. St Petersburg (Russian translation).
  10. Terence I. (2008) The Development of Ethics. A Historical and Critical Study. Vol. I: From Socrates to the Reformation. Oxford.

Gadzhikurbanov Aslan


Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: Lomonosov Moscow State University; Shuvalovskiy korpus, Leniniskie gory, Faculty of Philosophy, Moscow, 119991, GSP-1;
Post: Associate Professor;
ORCID: 0000-0003-2398-0008;
Email: gadzhikurbanov@yandex.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.

BOOK REVIEWS

Antonov Nikolay

Rev. of Gomola A. Conceptual Blending in Early Christian Discourse. A Cognitive Linguistic Analysis of Pastoral Metaphors in Patristic Literatur. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018. 244 p.

Antonov Nikolay (2020) Rev. of Gomola A. Conceptual Blending in Early Christian Discourse. A Cognitive Linguistic Analysis of Pastoral Metaphors in Patristic Literatur. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018. 244 p., Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 145-148 (in Russian).

PDF

Antonov Nikolay


Student status: Graduate student;
Place of study: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities; 6/1 Likhov pereulok, Moscow, 127051, Russian Federation;
Post: Member of the Ecclesiastical Institutions Research Laboratory, St. Tikhon’s University;
ORCID: 0000-0002-6588-1633;
Email: nickforgo@gmail.com.
Mikhaylov Petr

Henri de Lubac's fight for the Supernatural — Rev. of T & T Clark Companion to Henri de Lubac / Ed. by J. Hillebert. London; NY: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2017 — 492 p.

Mikhaylov Petr (2020) "Henri de Lubac's fight for the Supernatural". Rev. of T & T Clark Companion to Henri de Lubac / Ed. by J. Hillebert. London; NY: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2017 — 492 p., Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 148-153 (in Russian).

PDF

Mikhaylov Petr


Academic Degree: Candidate of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for Humanities; 6/1 Likhov pereulok, 127051 Moscow, Russian Federation;
ORCID: 0000-0003-3492-5055;
Email: locuspetri@rambler.ru.

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Lavrentiev Andrey

Rev. of Kruck, G., Valentin, J. (Hgg.). Rationalitätstypen in der Theologie. Basel: Herder, 2017. – 231 S.

Lavrentiev Andrey (2020) Rev. of Kruck, G., Valentin, J. (Hgg.). Rationalitätstypen in der Theologie. Basel: Herder, 2017. – 231 S., Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 154-157 (in Russian).

PDF

Lavrentiev Andrey


Academic Degree: Candidate of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: Institute of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication (Sechenov University); 3/1 Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya Str., Moscow, 123242, Russian Federation;
Post: associate professor;
ORCID: 0000-0003-4533-8972;
Email: lavandrus@yandex.ru.

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Lega Viktor

Rev. of Ward, Keith. The Christian Idea of God. A Philosophical Foundation for Faith. Cambridge Studies in Religion Philosophy and Society. Cambridge University Press, 2017 — 230 p.

Lega Viktor (2020) Rev. of Ward, Keith. The Christian Idea of God. A Philosophical Foundation for Faith. Cambridge Studies in Religion Philosophy and Society. Cambridge University Press, 2017. — 230 p., Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2020, Iss. 87, pp. 158-163 (in Russian).

PDF

Lega Viktor


Academic Degree: Candidate of Sciences* in Theology;
Place of work: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities; 6/1 Likhov pereulok, Moscow 127051, Russian Federation;
Post: Head of chair of Philosophy, Theological Department;
ORCID: 0000-0002-3378-0651;
Email: legavp@gmail.com.

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.