/
St. Tikhon’s University Review. Series I: Theology. Philosophy. Religious Studies
St. Tikhon’s University Review I :6 (62)

THEOLOGY

Litvin Tat'jana
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.9-22
In the paper, the eschatological perspective of Paul’s First Epistle to the Thessalonians is considered. As tasks the following aspects are analyzed: fi rstly, the question of the resurrection (4. 13–18), secondly, features in the description of stylistics of expectations of the second coming (5. 1–11), the third — a possible interpretation of the term «kairos» (5. 1) and the fourth, the interpretation of the phenomenology of the 20th century for the concept of «parousia» in this letter. The hypothesis of our analysis is that the doctrine of the «parousia» can be considered as an idea with a special experience, the presence of God in the co-present, which does not contradict to the idea of waiting of his future coming event.
рarousia, Paul’s First Epistle to the Thessalonians, kairos, eschatology, phenomenology of time

1. Konacheva S. A. Bytie. Svjashhennoe. Bog. Hajdegger i filosofskaja teologija XX veka (Being. Sacred. God. Heidegger and Philosophical Theology of XX Century), Moscow, 2010.
2. MakDonal'd U. Biblejskie kommentarii dlja hristian (Bible Commentaries for Christians), in http://bibleist.ru/biblio.php?q=003/00005&f=13.html (Date: 30.04.2014).
3. Men' A., prot. 1993 “Kumranskaja obshhina i hristianstvo” (Qumran Community and Christianity), in Mir Biblii, 1993, vol. 1, in http://www.alexandrmen.ru/books/mirbibl/kumran.html#_ftn1 (Date: 30.04.2014)).
4. Stivenson Dzh. R. 2001 “Jeshatologija“ (Eschatology), in Ljuteranskaja dogmatika, Moscow, 2001, vol. 13.
5. Tillih P. 1995 “Kajros” (Kairos), in Izbrannoe. Teologija Kul'tury, Moscow, 1995. S. 216–235.
6. Tissen G. K. Lekcii po sistematicheskomu bogosloviju (Lectures for Systematic Theology), Saint-Petersburg, 1994.
7. Dunn J. D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle, Grand Rapids, 1998.
8. Howard T. L. 1988 “The Literary Unity of 1 Thessalonians 4. 13–5. 11”, in Grace Theological Journal, 1988, vol. 9/2, pp. 163–190.
9. Marshall H. 1982 “Pauline Theology in the Thessalonian Correspondence”, in Hooker M. D., Wilson S. G. (eds.) Paul and Paulinism. Essays In honour C. K. Barrett, London, 1982, pp. 173–183.
10. Peterson E. Die Einholung des Kyrios // Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie. 1930. № 7. S. 682–702.
11. Plevnik J. 1999 “1 Thessalonians 4, 17: The Bringing in of the Lord or the Bringing in of the Faithful?”, in Biblica, 1999, vol. 80, pp. 545–546.
12. Strawson P. F. Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics, London, 1959.
13. Witherington B. 1 and 2 Thesssalonians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, Downers Grove (Ill.), 2006.

Litvin Tat'jana

Ohme Heinz
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.23-34
The author examines the work of two German Protestant researchers who were active at the cusp of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Both were able to make a noticeable contribution to the field of Orthodox Christian studies. In spite of the fact that many Protestants viewed Eastern Orthodoxy as an almost pagan religion or as one hopelessly outdated and benighted, they were able to overcome these prejudices and study Orthodoxy from within through direct contact with Orthodox Christians themselves. Karl Beth travelled extensively around the Eastern Mediterranean and saw with his own eyes the lives of Orthodox Christians lived in conformity with the Gospel message reflecomparative rcted in their participation in the rites of the sacred liturgy. Karl Holl studied Russian Orthodoxy in depth through his reading of the Russian classics in the original language and their deeply religious thematic. This experience enabled both of these men to overcome the prejudices then rampant among German Protestants in regard to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
Karl Beth, Karl Holl, comparative religious studies, Eastern Christianity, Orthodoxy, Orthodox Liturgy. Orthodox Theology, religious experience, Russian culture, spirituality, Eucharist, religious syncretism

1. Benz E. Die Ostkirche im Lichte der protestantischen Geschichtsschreibung von der Reformation bis zur Gegenwart, Freiburg; München, 1952.
2. Die Religionswissenschaft der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellungen, Leipzig, 1926.
3. Elliger W. 150 Jahre Theologische Fakultät Berlin, Berlin, 1960.
4. Holl K. (ed.) Epiphanius: Ancoratus und Panarion, Berlin, 1933.
5. Harnack A. von. Das Wesen des Christentums, Gütersloh, 1999.
6. Harnack A. von. Das Wesen des Christentums, Leipzig, 1900.
7. Harnack A. von. 1916 “Der Geist der morgenländischen Kirche im Unterschied von der abendländischen“, in Idem. Aus der Friedens- und Kriegsarbeit, Gießen, 1916, pp. 101–140.
8. Herder J. G. V. Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit XVII. 3, Frankfurt, 1989.
9. Kattenbusch F. Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Confessionskunde, Freiburg, 1892, vol. 1.
10. Lilie R.-J. Byzanz. Kaiser und Reich, Köln, 1994.
11. Schneider E. 1953 “Das Lebenswerk Karl Beths“, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1953, vol. 78, pp. 695–704.
12. Stupperich R. 1972 “Karl Holls Oststudien und ihr Einfluß auf sein politisches Denken“, in Historische Zeitschrift, 1972, vol. 215, pp. 345–367.
13. Wallmann J. 1978 “Karl Holl und seine Schule“, in Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche, 1978, vol. 4, pp. 1–33.

PHILOSOPHY

Chaginsky Andrei
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.37-52
The problem of the myth is not something new to Russian thought of 20 century — the main approaches to its solution were developed in the 40s of the 19 century — so the research in the field of myth was based not only on the works of European thinkers, but also on the national tradition formed by that time. In particular, the article is centered on the approaches to understanding the myth developed in the Moscow intellectual milieu in the 20-ies of 20 century. The starting point of the study is the Vyacheslav Ivanov’s concept of myth, who developed the ideas of late Schelling’s works. The works of philosophers, who collaborated and communicated with V. Ivanov in Moscow until 1922 — Frank, Shestov, Florensky, Vysheslavtsev, Bulgakov, Losev, Berdyaev — are also studied. In the course of consideration of these theories the article focuses on the specifi c characteristics of the myth, as well as relations «myth — mythologeme — meaning» and «myth — symbol» uncovered by each thinker. In particular, an original A. F. Losev’s theory of the myth — miracle is studied, as it not only includes the elements of an earlier concepts, but also elevate the problem of the myth to a new level. The spectrum of actual at the time solutions to the problem of myth, thus obtained, allows to take a fresh look not only at the role of works by A. F. Losev in the Russian thought, but on the Russian religious philosophy of the beginning of the 20 century as a whole.
symbol, myth, mythology, religion, miracle, Russian philosophy.

1. Antonov K. M. 2009 “Problemy filosofii religii v «Nepostizhimom» S. L. Franka” (Problem of Religion Philosophy in “Incomprehensible” of S. L. Frank), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2009, vol. 2/26, pp. 72–92.
2. Antonov K. M. 2007 “Filosofija religii rannego S. L. Franka” (Religion Philosophy of Early S. L. Frank), in Vestnik MGU. Serija 7: Filosofija, 2007, vol. 5, pp. 63–76.
3. Bliskavickij A. A. Filosofija iskusstva Vjacheslava Ivanova: Dis. … kand. filos. nauk: 09.00.4 (Art Philosophy of Vjacheslav Ivanov: Dissertation), Moscow, 2013.
4. Bubbajer F. S. L. Frank: Zhizn' i tvorchestvo russkogo filosofa. 1877–1950 (S. L. Frank: Life and Works of Russian Philosophers. 1877–1950), Moscow, 2001.
5. Garber H. 2007 “Protiv voinstvujushhego misticizma A. F. Loseva” (Against Militant Mysticism of A. F. Losev), in Taho-Godi A. A., Troickij V. P. (eds.) Aleksej Fedorovich Losev: iz tvorcheskogo nasledija: Sovremenniki o myslitele, Moscow, 2007, pp. 545–546.
6. Il'in V. N. Shest' dnej tvorenija: Biblija i nauka o tvorenii i proishozhdenii mira (Six Days of Creation: Bible and Science about Creation and World Origin), Minsk, 2006.
7. Koneva L. A. 2011 “N. A. Berdjaev: mif kak osoboe proizvedenie” (N. A. Berdjaev: Myth as Special Work), in Vestnik Samarskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2011, vol. 1/2, pp. 10–16.
8. Losev A. F. 1998 “Teorija mificheskogo myshlenija u Je. Kassirera“ (Theory of Mythical Thought by E. Kassirer), in Troickij V. P. (ed.) Kassirer Je. Izbrannoe. Opyt o cheloveke, Moscow, 1998, pp. 730–800.
9. Maslin M. A., Apryshko P. P., Poljakov A. P. (eds.) Russkaja filosofija: Jenciklopedija (Russian Philosophy: Encyclopedia), Moscow, 2007.
10. Sycheva S. G. 2011 “Platon i Vjacheslav Ivanov: mifologija i simvolizm” (Plato and Vjacheslav Ivanov: Mythology and Symbolism), in Izvestija Tomskogo politehnicheskogo universiteta, 2011, vol. 319/6, pp. 99–101.
11. Taho-Godi A. A. 2001 “«Filosof hochet vse ponimat'». «Dialektika mifa» i dopolnenie k nej“ (“Philosopher Wants to Understand All”. “Myth Dialectics” and Additions to It), in Losev A. F. Dialektika mifa, Moscow, 2001, pp. 5–30.
12. Taho-Godi A. A. Losev, Moscow, 2007.

Chaginsky Andrei

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Razdyakonov Vladislav
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.55-69
The unpublished diary (around 1800 pages) by a prominent Russian spiritualist Maria Petrovna Saburova sheds light on social, psychological and ideological contexts and implications of spiritualist practice. The article analyses social relations in Saburova’s family and defines spiritualists’ practice as a sort of family crisis therapy. In Russia spiritualist theology, mostly implemented from the western spiritualist literature, contributed to women emancipation, but it wasn’t radical and used to rely on traditional patterns of social, in particular, masculine authority. Saburova’s cosmology highlights spiritualists’ critical attitude towards current social order and proposes a new spiritual bureaucracy as an ideal of possible social relations. Though in Russia as in the West authority of spirits used to be a foundation for spiritualists’ social and spiritual individualism, which led to social and gender emancipation, still, spiritualists activity took conservative stance: spiritualists followed spiritual patterns and believed that spiritual world was the only place for complete human liberation. Spiritualists used modernist discourse, talking about human emancipation from cultural and social authorities, but their both critical and positive propositions appealed to spiritual authority. Thus spiritualists’ rhetoric blended conservative authority and modern emancipation.
Russia, Social History, History of Religion, Aristocracy, XIX century, Modern Spiritualism, Gender, M. P. Saburova.

1. Brackett E. A. Materialized Apparitions. If not Beings from Another Life What Are They, Boston, 1885.
2. Braude A. Radical Spirits. Spiritualism and Women’s Rights in Nineteenth Century America, Bllomington, 2001.
3. Caroll B. E. 1997 “Spiritualist Religion and the Search for Order”, in Spiritualism in Antebellum America, Bloomington, 1997, pp. 1–15.
4. Du Prel K. Die Philosophie der Mystik, Leipzig, 1885.
5. Edmonds J., Dexter G. T. Spiritualism, New York, 1853, vol. 1; 1855, vol. 2.
6. Gibier P. Physiologie Transcendentale: Analyse des Choses, Paris, 1890.
7. Isaacs E. 1983 “The Fox Sisters and American Spiritualism”, in The Occult in America: New Historical Perspectives, Urbana, 1983, pp. 79–110.
8. Owen A. 2004 “At Home with the Theobald Family”, in The Darkened Room: Women, Power and Spiritualism in Late Victorian England, Chicago, 2004, pp. 75–106.
9. Pezanni А. Une Philosophie Nouvelle, Paris, 1872.
10. Todd T. O. Hydesville: the Story of the Rochester Knockings, which Proclaimed the Advent of Modern Spiritualism, Sunderland, 1905.
11. Gellenbah L. Chelovek, ego sushhnost' i naznachenie s tochki zrenija individualizma (Human, His Essence and Purpose from Individualism’s Point of View), Saint-Petersburg, 1885.

Razdyakonov Vladislav

Vorontsova Elena
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.70-80
In this article we discuss the role of the family and the community in translation of religious knowledge. We focused on the local tradition of different groups of old believers in Vjatka region. We demonstrate the high vitality of Old Believer’s communities in the transformation of the world. From our point of view, a huge role here plays samples and ways of transfer of religious knowledge. We conventionally divide Old Believer’s community into three circles: core, inner circle, periphery. We highlight the following key factors: the role of an example of the believers for relatives, participation and environment in commemoration of dead, helping of the core of community for neophytes in learning religious knowledge.
old believers, religious education, Fedoseevtsy, Filllipovtsy, Pomortsy, family, community, field research

1. Antonovskij A. Ju. Niklas Luman: jepistemologicheskoe vvedenie v teoriju social'nyh system (Niklas Luhmann: Epistemological Introduction in Theory of Social Systems), Moscow, 2007.
2. Bojko E. S. Materinskaja rechevaja dejatel'nost' v sociume staroverov na Enisee: monografija (vtoroj vypusk) (Mother’s Speech Activity in Old Believers’ Society on Enisej: Monography (Issue 2)), Krasnojarsk, 2013.
3. Velikaja N. N. 2011 “Religioznoe obrazovanie u grebenskih kazakov-staroobrjadcev v XVIII–nachale XX v.” (Religious Education by Grebenskije Old Believer Cossacks in XVIII — Begin of XX Cent.), in Voprosy kazach'ej istorii i kul'tury, Majkop, 2011, vol. 7.
4. Voroncova E. V. Sovremennoe bytovanie duhovnyh stihov v srede staroobrjadcev (po materialam polevyh issledovanij na Vjatke): Dis. … kand. filos. nauk (Modern Existence of Spiritual Poems in Old Believer Society (on Field Researces on Vjatka): Dissertation), Moscow, 2015.
5. Gradobojnova E. V. 2008 “Konflikt kak sushhnostnaja harakteristika staroobrjadcheskoj sredy” (Conflict as Essence Characteristics of Old Believer Sphere), in Tradicionnaja kniga i kul'tura pozdnego russkogo Srednevekov'ja: Trudy Vserossijskoj nauchnoj konferencii k 40-letiju polevyh arheograficheskih issledovanij Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. M. V. Lomonosova, Jaroslavl, 2008, vol. 2, pp. 237–255.
6. Krivosheina E. I. 2010 “Specifika obrazovanija v staroobrjadcheskoj kul'ture v Vjatskom regione v period socializma” (Specifics of Education in Old Believer Culture in Vjatka Region in Socialist Period), in Nauchnye problemy gumanitarnyh issledovanij, 2010, vol. 2, pp. 102–108.
7. Kuprijanova I. V. 2014 “Shkol'noe delo v staroobrjadcheskih soobshhestvah Altaja v konce XIX — nachale XX veka” (School Case in Old Believer Societes of Altai in End of XIX — Begin of XX Centuries), in Mir nauki, kul'tury, obrazovanija, 2014, vol. 5/48, pp. 261–263.
8. Mosunov B. A. Knigopechatnik Luka Grebnev: Povest' i ocherki (Book Printer Luka Grebnev: Story and Essays), Kirov, 2008.
9. Plavskaja E. L. 2011 “Formirovanie sistemy muzykal'nogo obrazovanija v kul'ture rossijskogo staroobrjadchestva nachala XX veka (na materiale periodicheskih izdanij)” (Formation of Musical Education System in Culture of Russian Old Believers in Begin of XX Century), in Omskij nauchnyj vestnik. Kul'turologija. Iskusstvovedenie, 2011, vol. 2/96, pp. 205–207.
10. Rysakova P. I. 2008 “Koncepcija vospitanija N. Lumana: sistemno-funkcional'nyj podhod” (Educational Concept of N. Luhmann: Systematic-Functional Approach), in Sociologicheskoe obozrenie, 2008, vol. 2, pp. 141–145.
11. Sergeeva (Voroncova) E. V., Sokolova A. D., Judkina A. B. 2009 “Rasprostranenie i variativnost' zagovora «Son Bogorodicy» v Selivanovskom rajone Vladimirskoj oblasti” (Expansion and Variety of Charm “Dream of God Mother” in Selivanovskij Region of Vladimir Province), in Religiovedenie, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 37–50.
12. Fishman M. O. Zhizn' po vere: tihvinskie karely-staroobrjadcy (Life according to Faith: Karelian Old Believers of Tikhvin), Moscow, 2003.
13. Chernysheva M. B. 1982 “Muzykal'naja kul'tura russkogo naselenija Verhokam'ja” (Musica Culture of Russian Population of Verhokamje), in Russkie pis'mennye i ustnye tradicii i narodnaja kul'tura, Moscow, 1982, pp. 129–138.

Vorontsova Elena

Kolkunova Kseniia
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.81-93
Since early 1990s sociologists of religion have been noticing in the USA and Europe an appearance of a group, self-identifying as spiritual, but not religious. The word spirituality has been gaining popularity on political, media, and scientifi c levels. Alongside this tendency the number of «spiritual but not religious» grows. First, this group was discovered among baby-boomers with higher level of individualism, aversion of religious institutes, reaching out for personal experience. Now these groups are discovered in different countries, Russia included. This paper reviews several surveys conveyed in the US, Great Britain, Austria. Surveys show that the group of spiritual but not religious is usually heterogeneous, with unifying feature for them would be not common notion of spirituality, but mostly general distrust of religion. But only a part of them can be called active «bricoleurs», that is, constructs own worldview, using elements of both Eastern and Western religions, as well as New Age and secular sources.
spirituality, religiosity, sociology of religion, psychology of religion

1. Kargina I. G. Sociologicheskie refleksii sovremennogo religioznogo pljuralizma (Sociological Reflexions of Modern Religious Pluralism), Moscow, 2014.
2. Kolkunova K. A., Malevich T. V. 2014 “Ponjatie «duhovnost'» v sovremennoj rossijskoj literature” (Idea of “Spirituality” in Modern Russian Literature), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 6/56, pp. 72–88.
3. Orehanov Ju. L. 2015 “Patchwork-Religiosität («loskutnaja religioznost'»): osobennosti izuchenija javlenija v sovremennom nemeckom kontekste” (Patchwork-Religiosität: Features of Phenomenon Study in Modern German Context), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija 1. Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2015, vol. 6/62.
4. Orehanov Ju. L. 2014 “Sekuljarizacija i postmodern: religioznye processy v molodezhnoj srede v sovremennoj Rossii i Evrope i ih social'no-bogoslovskaja refleksija” (Secularization and Postmodern: Religious Processes in Youth Sphere in Modern Russia and Europe and Their Social-Theological Reflexion), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija 1. Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 6/56, pp. 101–118.
5. 2006 “Religiovedenie” (Religious Studies), in Zabijako A. P., Krasnikov A. N., Jelbakjan E. S. (eds.) Jenciklopedicheskij slovar', Moscow, 2006.
6. Stepanova E. A. 2010 “Novaja duhovnost' i starye religii” (New Spirituality and Old Religions), in Svobodnaja mysl', 2010, vol. 11/1618, pp. 113–126.
7. Folieva T. A. 2014 “Religioznaja samosocializacija vzroslyh kak brikolazh (po dannym kachestvennogo issledovanija)” (Religious Self-Socialization of Adults as Bricolage (on Data of Qualitative Research)), in Sociologija religii v obshhestve pozdnego moderna, Belgorod, 2014, pp. 283–287.
8. Barker E. “The Church without and the God within: Religiosity and/or Spirituality?”, in The Centrality of Religion in Social Life…, pp. 187–202.
9. Beckford J. A. 2003 “Social Movements as Free-floating Religious Phenomena”, in Fenn R. K. (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Sociology of Religion, 2003.
10. Bellah R. N., Madsen R., Sullivan W. M., Swidler A., Tipton S. M. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life, Berkeley; Los Angeles, 1985.
11. Bucher A. Psychologie der Spiritualität. Handbuch, Beltzt, 2007.
12. Dillon M., Wink P., Fay K. 2003 “Is Spirituality Detrimental to Generativity?”, in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 2003, vol. 42, pp. 427–442.
13. Fuller R. Spiritual, but not Religious: Understanding Unchurched America, Oxford, 2001.
14. Furseth I., Repstad P. An Introduction to the Sociology of Religion. Classical and Contemporary Perspectives, Aldershot, 2006.
15. Garcia-Zamor J.-C. 2003 “Workplace Spirituality And Organizational Performance”, in Public Administration Review, 2003, vol. 63, pp. 355–363.
16. Hanegraaff W. J. 1999 “New Age Spiritualities as Secular Religion: a Historian’s Perspective”, in Social Compass, 1999, vol. 46.
17. Heelas P., Woodhead L. The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion is Giving Way to Spirituality, Malden (MA), 2004.
18. Hervieu-Leger D. 2008 “Religious individualism, Modern Individualism and Self-Fulfilment: a Few Reflections on the Origins of Contemporary Religious Individualism”, in Barker E. (ed.) The Centrality of Religion in Social Life: Essays in Honour of James A. Beckford, Burlington (VA), 2008.
19. Hill P. C., Pargament K. II., Hood R. W., McCullough Jr., M. E., Swyers J. P., Larson D. B. Zinnbauer B. J. 2000 “Conceptualizing Religion and Spirituality: Points of Commonality, Points of Departure”, in Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 2000, Vol. 30.
20. Houtman D., Aupers S. 2007 “The Spiritual Turn and the Decline of Tradition: The Spread of Post-Christian Spirituality in 14 Western Countries, 1981–2000”, in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 2007, vol. 46.
21. Johnson T. J., Sheets V. L., Kristeller J. 2008 “Empirical Identification of Dimensions of Religiousness and Spirituality”, in Mental Health, Religion, & Culture, 2008, vol. 11, pp. 745–767.
22. Lyon D. Jesus in Disneyland: Religion in Postmodern Times, Oxford, 2000.
23. Marler P., Hadaway C. K. 2002 “«Being Religious» or «Being Spiritual» in America: A Zero-Sum Proposition?”, in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 2002, vol. 41, pp. 289–300.
24. Martin D. A General Theory of Secularization, New York, 1978.
25. Miller W. R., Martin J. E. 1988 “Spirituality and Behavioral Psychology: Toward Integration”, in Miller W. R., Martin J. E. (eds.) Behavior Therapy and Religion: Integrating Spiritual and Behavioral Approaches to Change, Newbury Park (CA), 1988.
26. Palmisano S. 2010 “Spirituality and Catholicism in Italy”, in Journal of Contemporary Religion, 2010, vol. 25, pp. 221–241.
27. Popp-Baier U. 2010 “From Religion to Spirituality: Megatrend in Contemporary Society or Methodological Artefact? A Contribution to the Secularization Debate from Psychology of Religion”, in Journal of Religion in Europe, 2010, vol. 3/1, pp. 34–67.
28. Possamai A. 2003 “Alternative Spiritualities and the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism”, in Culture and Religion, 2003, vol. 4, pp. 31–45.
29. Rao K., Ball D., Hampton R. 2006 “Spiritual but not Religious: Insights from an Online Panel”, in Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research Conference, 2006, in http://www.kumarrao.net/wp/2006/11/spiritual-but-not-religious-insights-from-an-online-panel/ (Date: 07.10.2015)).
30. Roof W. C. A Generation of Seekers, San Francisco, 1993.
31. Schmidt L. E. Restless Souls: The Making of American Spirituality, San Francisco, 2005.
32. Shorto R. 1997 “Belief by the Numbers”, in The New York Times Magazine, December 7. 1997.
33. Streib H. 2008 “More Spiritual than Religious: Changes in the Religious Field Require New Approaches”, in Streib H., Dinter A., Söderblom K. (eds.) Lived Religion — Conceptual, Empirical and Practical-Theological Approaches. Essays in Honor of Hans-Günter Heimbrock, Leiden, 2008, pp. 53–67.
34. Streib H., Hood R. W. 2011 “«Spirituality» as Privatized Experience-Oriented Religion: Empirical and Conceptual Perspectives”, in Implicit Religion, 2011, vol. 14/4, p. 437.
35. Voas D., Bruce S. 2007 “The Spiritual Revolution: Another False Dawn for the Sacred”, in Flanagan K., Jupp P. C. (eds.) A Sociology of Spirituality, Aldershot, 2007.
36. Wilson B. Religion in Sociological Perspective, Oxford, 1982.
37. Wuthnow R. After Heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s, Berkeley, 1998.
38. Wuthnow R. Remaking the Heartland: Middle America since the 1950s, Princeton, 2013.
39. Zinnbauer B. J. et al. 1997 “Religion and Spirituality: Unfuzzying the Fuzzy”, in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1997, vol. 36, pp. 549–564.
40. Zinnbauer B. J., Pargament K. I., Scott A. B. 1999 “The Emerging Meanings of Religiousness and Spirituality: Problems and Prospects”, in Journal of Personality, 1999, vol. 67.
41. Zwingmann C., Klein C., Büssing A. 2011 “Measuring Religiosity/Spirituality: Theoretical Differentiations and Categorization of Instruments”, in Religions, 2011, vol. 2.

Kolkunova Kseniia

Orekhanov Iurii, archpriest
DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201562.94-112
The article is devoted to the analysis of the phenomenon of «Patchwork-Religiosität» in today’s youth, which is popular in the Western religious studies. The author believes that the «Patchwork-Religiosität» is one of the essential features of the current religious situation. There are three main aspects of the analysis: substantial, functional and discursive. In the first part of the article the author examines the comprehension of the content of the phenomenon of «Patchwork-Religiosität» in modern German theology, sociology and psychology of religion. In the second part different approaches, in which this phenomenon becomes a matter of analysis, are discussed as sociological incident, as a problem of church organizations and as a challenge to theology. As a result, the author shows that the «Patchwork-Religiosität» has become one of the most eff ective forms of resistance to the charms of the world based on material of German research. At the same time, this phenomenon is a real challenge to traditional religious communities in Germany for the past 25 years. Not only sociological approaches play a significant role in learning but also psychological approaches. The focus of this article is a review of some religious trends among young people in the context of modern German experience. It can be noted that the actual scientific topic is one of the most important tendency in the religious life of today’s young people: the presence of secularization and appearance of a particular kind of religiosity. This kind of religiosity needs unique religious experience characterized by the following three common features: a) subcultural context i.e. religious self-determination within a certain subculture; b) the singular gap i.e. a total departure from traditional notions of religion itself and Christianity in particular, and as a result, the rejection of «the faith of the fathers»; c) Lastly, «Patchwork-identity» or «Patchwork-Religiosität» is a special phenomenon in the religious life of modern European youth, characterized by the desire of the self-building their religious scale and formulate ethical principles. At the same time the material for this religious work can serve completely heterogeneous theories and practices. It appears that the «Patchwork-Religiosität» as a religious phenomenon has been knowing and studying in Europe for about 40 years, but it isn’t presented very good in the Russian historiography. This article is devoted to the detailed description of this phenomenon on the material of German research.
Religiosity, Individualization of the Religious experience, Infl uence of the Tradition, Functional Aspects of the Religion

1. Aca C. 2010 “«Ich bin meine eigene Sekte». Volkskundliche Religionsforschung und Patchwork — Religiosität“, in Mohrmann R. (ed.) Alternative Spiritualität heute, Berlin, 2010, pp. 9–18.
2. Barz H. 1992 “«Wer glaubt denn heute noch an die sieben Gebaute?». Ergebnisse und Provokationen der empirischen Studie «Jugend und Religionen»“, in Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Evangelischen Jugend in der Bundesrepublik Deutchland. Studientexte, Stuttgart, 1992, vol. 2.
3. Barz H. Jugend und Religion, Opladen, 1992/1993.
4. Barz H. Was Jugendlichen heilig ist!? Prävention im Bereich Sinnfragen, Patchwork-Religion, Heilsversprechen, Okkultismus, Freiburg, 1998.
5. Beck U. Der eigene Gott. Von der Friedensfähigkeit und den Gewaltpotential der Religionen, Frankfurt am Main, 2008.
6. Bochinger C., Engelbrecht M., Gebhardt W. Die unsichtbare Religion in der sichbaren Religion — Formen spiritueller Orientierung in der religiösen Gegenwartskultur, Stuttgart, 2009.
7. Bucher R. 2005 “Entmonopolisierung und Machtverlust. Wie kam die Kirche in die Krise?“, in Bucher R. (ed.) Die Provokation der Krise. Zwölf Fragen und Antworten zur Lage der Kirche, Würzburg, 2005, pp. 11–29.
8. Först J. 2013 “Abschied von der «Patchwo rkreligiosität»?: von der pastoralen Kompetenz, moderne religiöse Orientierungen existentiell zu entschlüsseln und theologisch zu deuten“, in Bibel und Liturgie, 2013, vol. 86/2.
9. Först J. 2005 “Esoterik in der Basilika? Suchbewegungen im kirchlichen Binnenraum pastoraltheologisch betrachtet“, in Bibel und Liturgie, 2005, vol. 78/3, pp. 175–185.
10. Friedrich W. Graf. Missbrauchte Götter. Zum Menschenbilderstreit in der Moderne, München, 2009.
11. Friesl Ch., Polak R. 2002 “Theoretische Weichenstellungen“, in Polak R. (ed.) Megatrend Religion? Neue Religiosität in Europa, Ostfildern, 2002.
12. Gebhardt W. 2013 “Believing without Belonging? Religiöse Individualisierung und neue Formen religiöser Vergemeinschaftung“, in Kreutzer A., Gruber F. (ed.) Im Dialog. Systematische Theologie und Religionssoziologie, Freiburg, 2013.
13. Gensicke Th. 2006 “Jugend und Religiosität“, in Jugend 2006. Eine pragmatische Generation unter Druck, Frankfurt am Main, 2006, p. 209.
14. Großbölting Т. Der verlorene Himmel. Glaube in Deutschland seit 1945, Göttingen, 2013.
15. Hempelmann R. 2008 “Patchwork-Religiosität — ein Thema von bleibender Aktualität“, in Evangelische Zentralstelle für Weltanschauungsfragen, Stuttgart, 2008, vol. 71/4, p. 123.
16. Kögler I. 2014 “«Nun sag, wie hast du’s mit der Religion?». Am Beispiel jugendlicher Religiosität“, in Österreichisches Religionspädagogisches Forum, 2014, vol. 22, p. 12.
17. Kögler I. 2010 “Patchworkreligion, Theodiversität und eigener Gott: nicht nur eine kommunikative Herausforderung“, in Theologisch-praktische Quartalschrift, 2010, vol. 158/1, p. 11.
18. Kögler I. 2001 “Soundtrack des Lebens und Sehnsucht nach Erlösung“, in Kabus W. (ed.) Popularmusik und Kirche — kein Widerspruch, Frankfurt am Main, 2001, p. 143f.
19. Friesl Ch., Kromer I., Polak R. (eds.) Lieben-Leisten-Hoffen. Die Wertewelt junger Menschen in Österreich, Wien, 2008.
20. Luckmann T. 1979 “The Structural Conditions of Religious Consciousness in Modern Societies”, in Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, 1979, vol. 6, pp. 121–137.
21. Matthes J. 1992 “Auf der Suche nach dem «Religiösen». Reflexionen zu Theorie und Empirie religionssoziologischer Forschung“, in Sociologia Internationalis, 1992, vol. 30, pp. 129–142.
22. Polak R., Friesl Ch. Die Suche nach der religiösen Aura. Analysen zum Verhältnis von Jugend, Transzendenz und Religion, Wien, 1988.
23. Schenker D. 2009 “Religion: Jugendliche als Seismografen“, in Dermot O., Schenker D. Ansichten vom Göttlichen. 22 Jugendliche, Zürich, 2009, p. 193f.
24. Schimank U. Die Entscheidungsgesellschaft. Komplexität und Rationalität der Moderne, Wiesbaden, 2005.
25. Streib H. 2012 “Jugendtheologie als narrativer Diskurs“, in Schlag T., Sweitzer F. u. a. Jugendtheologie. Grundlagen — Beispiele — kritische Diskussion, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 2012, p. 163.
26. Streib H., Gennerich C. Jugend und Religion. Bestandsaufnahmen, Analysen und Fallstudien zur Religiosität Jugendlicher, Weinheim; München, 2011.
27. Thonak S. Religion in der Jugendforschung. Eine kritische Analyse der Shell Jugendstudien in religionspädagogischer Absicht, Leipzig, 2003.
28. Orehanov G., prot. 2014 “Sekuljarizacija i postmodern: religioznye processy v molodezhnoj srede v sovremennoj Rossii i Evrope i ih social'no-bogoslovskaja refleksija“ (Secularization and Postmodern: Religious Processes in Youth Sphere in Modern Russia and Europe and Their Social-Theological Reflexion), in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 6/56, pp. 101–118.

Orekhanov Iurii, archpriest

BOOK REVIEWS

Nyebolszin Antal
PDF

Nyebolszin Antal

Shokhin Vladimir
PDF

Shokhin Vladimir

Shilov Evgenii, priest
PDF

Shilov Evgenii, priest

Nosachev Pavel
PDF

Nosachev Pavel