/

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

St. Tikhon’s University Review I :100

THEOLOGY

Veviurko Il'ia

Messianic fragments of the Book Amos LXX in their eschatological context

Veviurko Il'ia (2022) "Messianic fragments of the Book Amos LXX in their eschatological context ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 9-23 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI2022100.9-23
In the book of the prophet Amos of the Septuagint there are two explicitly Messianic fragments, the first of which mentions the «anointed one» (Am 4:13), and the second «tabernacle of David» along with eschatological events associated with it (Am 9:11-12). However, other ancient versions of the Bible do not support the Septuagint (except for those dependent on it), which leads many researchers to look at the old Greek reading in Am 4:13 as a simple mistake of the translator or his misinterpretation of the original meaning of the text. At the same time, it cannot be said that in terms of interpretation, Masoretic reading provides more for understanding the book as a whole than that presented in the Septuagint. On the contrary, the use of structural analysis, which allows us to explore Am 4:13 by LXX in the context of parallel places within the book and its general eschatological storyline, creates a more coherent and clear picture associated with the archetypical confrontation of the «house of Jeroboam» and the «house of David» as embodiments of the sinful and righteous sides of Israel. The revelation of the «anointed one» in this regard turns out to be what heralds the end of the «house of Jeroboam» and opens up the prospect of judgment on Israel, but also its salvation in an eschatological perspective. The article consists of four main parts. The first of them examines the features of the Book of the Prophet Amos according to the Septuagint version as a translation, which allow us to draw preliminary conclusions about what may be the probable causes of discrepancies between the Hebrew and Greek texts. In the second part, the two Messianic fragments are analyzed mainly by their lexical composition, an analysis of specific discrepancies is carried out and ways of their interpretation are outlined. The third part is devoted to the explication of the eschatological line of the book. The fourth part establishes the place of the Messianic fragments and the parallel fragment Am 7:1-9 in the context of the eschatological content of this prophetic book as a whole.
Biblia, Septuagint, prophets, Amos, Messiah, eschatology
  1. Arsenii (Sokolov) (2012) Kniga proroka Amosa: vvedenie i kommentarii [Book of Prophet Amos: introduction and commentary]. Lisbon (in Russian).
  2. Brek D. (2006) Hiazm v Sviashhennom Pisanii [Chiasmus in Holy Scripture]. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Barton J. (2012) The Theology of the Book of Amos. Cambridge: University Press.
  4. Brooke G. (1980) “The Amos-Numbers Midrash (CD7l3b-8la) and Messianic Expectation”. Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, vol. 92, pp. 397–404.
  5. Campos M. (2011) “Structure and Meaning in the Third Vision of Amos (7:7–17)”. The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 11/3, pp. 1–28.
  6. Dafni E., Schart A. (2011) “Amos”, in M. Karrer, W. Kraus (eds) Septuaginta Deutsch: Erläuterungen und Kommentare zum griechischen Alten Testament. Bd. II, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, pp. 2339–2161.
  7. Eidenvall G. (2017) Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Yale: University Press.
  8. Garrett D. (2008) Amos: A Handbook of the Hebrew Text. Waco: Baylor University Press.
  9. Glenny W. (2013) Amos: A Commentary Based on Amos in Codex Vaticanus. Leiden: Brill.
  10. Glenny W. (2009) Finding Meaning in the Text: Translation Technique and Theology in the Septuagint of Amos. Leiden: Brill.
  11. Hadjiev Tch. (2009) The Composition and Redaction of the Book of Amos. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
  12. Halkin H. (ed.) (2011) The Selected Poems of Yehuda Halevi. Lexington: Nextbook.
  13. Howard G. (1970) “Some Notes on the Septuagint of Amos”. Vetus Testamentum, vol. 20, fasc. 1 (Jan.), pp. 108–112.
  14. Neusner J. et al. (eds) (1987) Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Cambridge: University Press.
  15. Möller K. (2003) A Prophet in Debate: The Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Book of Amos. London: Sheffield Academic Press.
  16. Orlov A. (2021) Slava Boga Nevidimogo: Predaniia o dvukh vladychestvakh na nebesakh i ranniaia khristologiia [The glory of the the invisible God: the legends about two realms in heavens and the early Christology]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  17. Park A. (2001) The Book of Amos as Composed and Read in Antiquity. New York: Peter Lang.

Veviurko Il'ia


Academic Degree: Candidate of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: St. Tikhon's Orthodox University; 6/1 Likhov pereulok, Moscow 127051, Russian Federation;
Post: senior lecturer;
ORCID: 0000-0002-1225-7474;
Email: vevurka@mail.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.

Arko Alenka

Electing and educating priests in the Church of Antioch in the second half of 4th century according to st. John Chrysostom’s "De sacerdotio"

Arko Alenka (2022) "Electing and educating priests in the Church of Antioch in the second half of 4th century according to st. John Chrysostom’s "De sacerdotio" ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 24-44 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI2022100.24-44
The dialogue De sacerdotio is the first patristic text in which author tries to sketch the theology of the priesthood, namely as a synthesis of the ideals of strict ascetic life characteristic of monasticism and the life of the Christian community (metaphoricly – the desert and the city), personal holiness and service for the benefit of the Church, a synthesis of anthropological and ethical ideals of Hellenism and Christian faith and behaviors that follow from this. The dialoge was written by John Chrysostom during the Antiochian period of his life, the first years of his priestly ministry. First of all it emphasizes the great dignity of the sacrament of the priesthood, as well as the need to choose for this those whom God has called for priestly ministery, who are morally and intellectually prepared to respond to the specific situation of the Church and society in which the priest should serve. In the second half of the fourth century, Christianity was already the predominant religion in Antioch, although pagan elements were still present, along with Jewish and Manichean. The role of the Church in society was increasing and was becoming very important, as important tasks and responsibilities were entrusted to the Church then. However, it is clear from the words of John Chrysostom that many chose priesthood in pursuit of a career and an honorable place in society, and not as a response to the vocation of God and in a desire to operate for the benefit of the Body of Christ. Some of the worthy and experienced monks refused the priesthood in turn preferring, a quiet eremitic life. So, a correct understanding of the priesthood and preparation for such a ministry were extremely important, since the Church was facing serious challenges of mass adherence to it and therefore the question of how to prepare catechumens for Baptism and how to instruct believers, finding a special approach for everyone, as well as how to avoid scandals and derision of the Church by pagans because of unworthy priests.
patristics, John Chrysostom, Antioch, 4th century, sacrament of priesthood, education, comprehending vocation to priesthood, moral and intellectual education of priests
  1. Arko A. (2012) “Bazilij Veliki — Ad adolescentes v kontekstu odnosa cerkvenih očetov do antične kulture in šolstva”. Bogoslovni vestnik, vol. 72, pp. 167–178.
  2. Bonner S.F. (1977) Education in Ancient Rome. From the Elder Cato to the Younger Pliny. London: Methuen & Co Ltd.
  3. Brändle R. (2008) “This Sweetest Passage: Matthew 25:31–46 and Assistance to the Poor in the Homilies of John Chrysostom”, in S.R. Holman (ed.) Wealth and Poverty in Early Church and Society. Holy Cross Studies in Patristic Theology and History, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, pp. 127–139.
  4. Broc-Schmezer C. (2006) “De l’aumône faite au pauvre à l’aumône du pauvre: Pauvreté et spiritualité chez Jean Chrysostome”, in P. Delage (ed.) Les pères de l’Église et la voix des pauvres: Actes du Iie Colloque de la Rochelle (2–4 septembre 2005), La Rochelle: Histoire et Culture, pp. 131–148.
  5. Brottier L. (1991) “‘Et la fournaise devint source’. L’épisode des trois jeunes gens dans la fornaise (Dn 3) lu par Jeane Chrysostome”. Revue d’histoire et de phylosophie religeuses, vol. 71/3, pp. 309–327.
  6. Caltabiano M. (1996) “Litterarum lumen. Ambienti culturali e libri tra il IV e il V secolo”. Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum, Roma: Institutum Patristicum Agugustinianum, vol. 55.
  7. Carrara P. (1999) “Educazione dei fi gli nella tradizione patristica”, in M. Naldini (ed.) Matrimonio e famiglia. Testimonianza dei primi secoli, Bologna: EDB, pp. 122–142.
  8. Cioffi A. (1996) “Aretè e prove della vita in Giovanni Crisostomo”, in L’etica cristiana nei secoli III e IV: eredità e confronti. XXIV Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana (Roma, 4–6 maggio 1995), Roma: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, pp. 503–511.
  9. Criscuolo U. (1993) “Libanio. I latini e l’impero”, in F. Conca, I. Gualandri, G. Lozza (eds) Politica, cultura e religione nell’impero romano (secoli IV–VI) tra Oriente e Occidente. Atti del secondo convegno dell’Associazione di Studi Tardoantichi (Milano, 11–13 ottobre 1990), Napoli: M. D’Auria, pp. 153–169.
  10. Croucelle P. (1974) Connais-toi toi-mê me; de Socrate à saint Bernard. Paris: É tudes augustiniennes.
  11. De Lubac H. (1978) “Le Dialogue sur le Sacerdoce de saint Jean Chrysostome”. Nouvelle Revue Théologique, vol. 100, pp. 822–831.
  12. Dorries H. (1973) “Die Erneuerung des kirchlichen Amtes im vierten Jahrhundert. Die Schrift De sacerdotio des Johannes Chrysostomus un ihre Vorlage, die Oratio de fuga sua des Gregor von Nazianz”, in B. Moeller, G. Ruhrbach (eds) Bleibendes im Wandel der Kichengeschichte, Tübingen: Mohr, pp. 1–46.
  13. Dudley M. (1993) “Danger and Glory. Priesthood in the Writings of John Chrysostom”. Studia patristica, vol. 27, pp. 162–165.
  14. French D. R. (1998) “Rhetoric and the Rebellion of A.D. 387 in Antioche”. Historia, vol. 47, pp. 468–484.
  15. Leduc F. (1969) “Le theme de la vaine gloire chez saint Jean Chrysostome”. Proche Orient Chrétien, vol. 19, pp. 3–32.
  16. Loсhbrunner M. (1993) Über das Priestertum: Historisch-systematische Untersuchung zum Priesterbild des Johannes Chrysostomus. Bonn: Borengässer.
  17. Malingrey A.-M. (ed.) (1980) Jean Chrysostome. Sur le sacerdoce (Dialogue et Homélie). Sources chétiennes. Vol. 272. Paris: Les éditions du Cerf.
  18. Meyer L. (1933) Saint Jean Chrysostome maître de perfection chrétienne. Paris: Beauchesne.
  19. Molac P. (2005) “Des sources nazianzéennes au Discours sur le sacerdoce de saint Jean Chrysostome”. Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique, vol. 150, pp. 169–174.
  20. Monaci Castagno A. (1990) “Paideia classica ed esercizio pastorale nel IV secolo. Il concetto di “Synesis” nell’opera di Giovanni Crisostomo”. Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa, vol. 26, pp. 429–459.
  21. Nardi C. (1996) “Motivi diatribici in Giovanni Crisostomo”, in L’etica cristiana nei secoli III e IV: eredità e confronti. XXIV Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana (Roma, 4–6 maggio 1995), Roma: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, pp. 471–472.
  22. Nardi C. (2005) “Il De pueris di Giovanni Crisostomo: passione educativa e gusto del racconto”, in Giovanni Crisostomo. Oriente ed Occidente tra IV e V secolo. XXXIII Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana (Roma, 6-8 maggio 2004). Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum. Vol. 93. Roma: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, pp. 73–85.
  23. Orosz A. (2005) “La diff érence fondamental entre l’ascèse monastique et les tâches des prêtres (De sacerdotio VI.5–8)”, in Giovanni Crisostomo: Oriente e Occidente tra IV e V secolo. XXXIII Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana (Roma, 6–8 maggio 2004). Studia Ephemerides Augustinianum. Vol. 93, Roma, pp. 593–605.
  24. Pasquato O. (1992) “Ideale sacerdotale e formazione al sacerdozio del giovane Crisostomo: evoluzione o continuità”, in S. Felici (ed.) La formazione al sacerdozio ministeriale nella catechesi e nella testimonianza di vita dei Padri. Convegno di studio e di aggiornamento, Facoltà di lettere cristiane e classiche (Roma, 15–17 marzo 1990), Roma: Las, pp. 59–93.
  25. Pernot L. (2009) “Introduction: les manifestes grecs”, in P. Galand-Hallyn, V. Zarini (eds) Manifestes littéraires dans la latinité tardive. Poétique et rhétorique. Actes du Colloque international (Paris, 23–24 mars 2007), Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, pp. 11–14.
  26. Rentinck P. (1970) La cura pastorale in Antiochia nel IV secolo. Analecta Gregoriana. Roma: Università Gregoriana editrice.
  27. Roda S. (1985) “Fuga nel privato e nostalgia del potere nel IV sec. D.C. Nuovi accenti di un’antica ideologia”, in M. Mazza, C. Giuff rida (eds) La trasformazione della cultura nella Tarda Antichità. Atti del Convegno (Catania, 27 settembre — 2 ottobre 1982), Roma: Jouvence, pp. 95–108.
  28. Saba G. F. (2012) Il Dialogo sul sacerdozio di Giovanni Crisostomo: sintesi tra paideia classica e paideia greca? Bologna: Dehoniana libri.
  29. Sandwell I. (2007) Religious Identity in Late Antiquity. Greek, Jews and Christians in Antioche. Cambridge: CUP.
  30. Simonetti M. (2002) “Origene dalla Cappadocia ai capaddoci”, in M. Girardi, M. Marini (eds) Origene e l’alessandrinismo capaddoce (III–IV secolo), Bari: Edipuglia, pp. 13–28.
  31. Vacchina M. G. (1996) “San Giovanni Crisostomo: l’etica del fi losofo cristiano come pratica dell’agape”, in L’etica cristiana nei secoli III e IV: eredità e confronti. XXIV Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana (Roma, 4–6 maggio 1995), Roma: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, pp. 513–522.
  32. Zincone S. (2009) “Religione e società, città e campagna nell’ambiente antiocheno di Giovanni Crisostomo”. Annali di storia di esegesi, vol. 26, pp. 65–79.

Arko Alenka


Academic Degree: Doctor of Theology;
Academic Rank: Professor;
Place of work: Catholic Major Seminary “Mary — Queen of Apostles”; Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation;
Post: professor;
ORCID: 0000-0003-3652-946X;
Email: alenka.arko@mail.ru.
Yachmenik Vyacheslav; Макарова Анна

“Prophecy must resurrect in the Church”: the figure of prophet in russian thought of the late 19th — early 20th century

Yachmenik Vyacheslav, Макарова Анна (2022) "“Prophecy must resurrect in the Church”: the figure of prophet in russian thought of the late 19th — early 20th century ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 45-64 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI2022100.45-64
The article focuses on the development of ideas about the prophet in Russia in the late 19th – the early 20th century. In the European discourse the understanding of the prophet as the bearer of the personal principle in religion most fully described by M. Weber. Since in Russian religious philosophy the conceptualization of the prophetic function appears in the works of V. Solovyov, the first part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the idea of a prophet in the theocratic concept of this thinker. Specific features of the system proposed by the Russian philosopher are characterized, where the prophet was considered as a link of the “triad” along with the priesthood and the kingdom. The constant characteristics of the prophet as the third principle of power in the Solovyov system are formulated. The second part of the article is devoted to the reception of Solovyov’s ideas in Russian theology and religious philosophy of the beginning of the 20th century. The discussions about the hierarchy and the intellectuals as carriers of the prophetic principle that arose at the Religious-Philosophical Meetings, and the positions on this issue of V. Ternavtsev and D. Merezhkovsky are characterized. The development of the idea of a prophet in the context of the discussion of the problem of power in the Church in the academic theology of M. Tareev, V. Troitsky, P. Florensky is traced. The interpretation of the Soloviev triad by S. Bulgakov and A. Kartashev, as well as criticism of the views of the latter by Merezhkovsky’s circle, is analyzed. It is noted that the participants in the discussions considered the prophetic principle as integrated into the church community or opposed to the church hierarchy. In conclusion, the development of the discourse about the prophet in the Russian tradition of the designated period is summed up, parallels with the search for Western explorers are noted. The article concludes that the common problem for Russian and European thinkers of the early 20th century is the distinction between priestly and prophetic principles in the religious community.
prophet, priest, authority, charisma, ecclesiology, theology
  1. Adair-Toteff C. (2014) “Max Weber’s charismatic prophets”. History of the Human Sciences, vol. 27, no. 1. pp. 3–20.
  2. Antonov K. (2020) “Kak vozmozhna religiia?”: Filosofi ia religii i filosofskie problemy bogosloviia v russkoi religioznoi mysli XIX–XX vekov [“How is religion possible?”: philosophy of religion and philosophical problems of theology in Russian religious thought of the 19th — 20th centuries]. Moscow: PSTGU (in Russian).
  3. Besschetnova E. (2021) “E.N. Trubetskoi i ego spor o teokratii s Vl.S. Solov′evym” [E.N. Trubetskoy and his dispute about theocracy with Vl.S. Solovyov]. Filosofskii Zhurnal, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 84–96 (in Russian).
  4. Coates R. (2017) “Mif o bozhestvennom pravitele v Tsare i revoliutsii″ (1907 g.)” [The myth of the sacred ruler in “Tsar and Revolution” (1907)]. Solov′evskie issledovaniia, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 72–84 (in Russian).
  5. Ermishin O. (2007) “Pravoslavnye idealy v moskovskom Religiozno-fi losofskom obshchestve pamiati Vl. Solov′eva” [Orthodox ideals in Moscow’s Religion-Philosophical Society in memoriam Vl. Soloviev’s]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofi ia. Religiovedenie, vol. 18, pp. 57–68 (in Russian).
  6. Ermishin O. et al. (eds) (2007) Religiozno-filosofskoe obshchestvo v Sankt-Peterburge (Petrograde): Istoriia v materialakh i dokumentakh: 1907–1917 [The Religious-Philosophical Society in Saint Petersburg (Petrograd): a history through materials and documents]. Moscow (in Russian).
  7. Ern V. (1991) Borba za Logos [The struggle for Logos]. Moscow (in Russian).
  8. Florenskii P. (2018) Bogoslovskie trudy: 1902–1909 [Theological works]. Moscow: PSTGU (in Russian).
  9. Gayda F. (2019) “Missiia intelligencii″ v publitsistike russkogo osvoboditel′nogo dvizheniia (1882–1909)” [The mission of the intelligentsia in the journalism of the Russian opposition movement (1882–1909)]. Voprosy filosofii, no. 9, pp. 141–149 (in Russian).
  10. Hilarion (Troitsky) (2004) Tvoreniia [Works]. Moscow (in Russian).
  11. Khondzinskiy P. (2018) “Pozdnie slavianofi ly i liberal′noe dukhovenstvo v nachale XX v.” [The late Slavophiles and the liberal clergy], in Sobor i sobornost′: k stoletiiu nachala novoi epokhi. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii [Sobor and sobornost′: the 100th anniversary of the beginning of a new era. Materials of the international conference], Moscow, pp. 215–227 (in Russian).
  12. Khondzinskiy P. (2019) “Dva Iudy” [Two Judases], in U istokov i istochnikov: na mezhdunarodnykh i mezhdisciplinarnykh putiakh. Iubilejnyi sbornik v chest′ Aleksandra Vasil′evicha Nazarenko [At the roots and sources: on international and interdisciplinary paths. Colelction of articles in honour of Alexander Vasilievich Nazarenko], Moscow, pp. 445–456 (in Russian).
  13. Kippenburg H. G., Riesebrodt M. (eds) (2001) Max Weber’s ‘Religionssystematik’. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  14. Kiseleva I. (2020) “Prorok″ (1826) A.S. Pushkina i Prorok″ (1841) M.Iu. Lermontova: sravnitel′naia semantika motivnogo kompleksa” [The Prophet by A.S. Pushkin (1826) and The Prophet by M.Yu. Lermontov (1841): a comparative semantics of the motifs]. Problemy istoricheskoi poetiki, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 111–129 (in Russian).
  15. Kondakov I., Korzh Ju. (2000) “Friedrich Nietzsche v russkoi kul′ture Serebrianogo veka” [Friedrich Nietzsche in the Russian culture of the Silver age]. Obschestvennye nauki i sovremennost′, no. 6, pp. 176–186 (in Russian).
  16. Koroleva S. (2019) “Prorocheskaia tema v stikhotvorenii A.S. Pushkina Prorok″: dialog s traditsiei i epokhoi” [The theme of the prophet in Alexander Pushkin’s poem The Prophet: a dialogue with the tradition and the epoch]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no. 61, pp. 206–225 (in Russian).
  17. Le Rider J. (2000) Modernité viennoise et crises de l’identité. Paris.
  18. Lyutko E., Chernyi A. (2020) “Die Geistlichkeit in der Auff assung des Moskauer Metropoliten Filaret: Akzentwechsel in der russischen Theologie des Priestertums von der zweiten Hälfte des 19. bis zum Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts”. Ostkirchliche Studien, no. 2, pp. 1–21.
  19. Manchester L., Sdvizhkov D. (eds) (2019) Vera i lichnost′ v meniaiushchemsia obshchestve: Avtobiografika i pravoslavie v Rossii kontsa XVII — nachala XX veka [Faith and selfhood in a changing society: autobiography and Orthodoxy in Russia from the end of the 17th to the beginning of the 20th century]. Moscow (in Russian).
  20. Nethercot F. (2008) Une rencontre philosophique. Bergson en Russie (1907–1917). Moscow (Russian translation).
  21. Pavliuchenkov N. (2021) “Retseptsiia P.A. Florenskim naslediia V.S. Solov′eva: ot filosofi i k bogosloviiu vseedinstva” [Reception by P.A. Florensky of V.S. Soloviev’s heritage: from philosophy to theology of pan-unity]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 96, pp. 41–60 (in Russian).
  22. Polovinkin S. M. (ed.) (2005) Zapiski peterburgskikh Religiozno-fi losofskikh sobranii (1901–1903) [Transactions of Saint Petersburg Religious-Philosophical Meeting]. Moscow (in Russian).
  23. Rupp J. (1975) Message ecclesial de Solowiew. Paris; Bruxelles.
  24. Samarina T. (2018) “Teoriia urovnei religioznosti v klassicheskoi fenomenologii religii” [Theory of levels of religiosity in classical phenomenology of religion]. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 101–109 (in Russian).
  25. Skobelev M., Khangireev I. (2019) “Iulius Vell′gauzen i German Gunkel: metodologiia bibleiskogo issledovaniia” [Julius Wellhausen and Hermann Gunkel: biblical studies and methodology]. Bogoslovskii vestnik, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 17–37 (in Russian).
  26. Teslya A. (2019) “The Protestant Ethic in the Russian Context: Peter Struve and Sergey Bulgakov Read Max Weber (1907–1909)”. Russian Sociological Review, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 107–119.
  27. Trubetskoy E. (1994) Smysl zhizni [The meaning of life]. Moscow (in Russian).
  28. Vorontsov S. (2020) “Sviashchennik v svete stilei myshleniia: ierarkhicheskaia i dolzhnostnaia spetsifi katsii” [The priest in the light of styles of thinking: hierarchical and offi cial descriptions]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 91, pp. 32–54 (in Russian).
  29. Weber M. (2016–2019) Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie: in 4 vols. Moscow (Russian translation).
  30. Weber M. (2017) Die Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen. Vergleichende Religionssoziologische Versuche. Konfuzianismus und Taosismus. St Petersburg (Russian translation).

Yachmenik Vyacheslav


Student status: Graduate student;
Place of study: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for Humanities; Moscow, Russia;
ORCID: 0000-0003-4624-5962;
Email: yachmenik94@mail.ru.

Макарова Анна


Student status: Graduate student;
Academic Rank: Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences;
Place of study: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for Humanities;, Moscow, Russia;
Post: lecturer;
ORCID: 0000-0002-0787-1592;
Email: zair-anna@mail.ru.
Article is prepared within the “Russian religious academic theology of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century: ideas and contexts” project with assistance of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University and Fund “The Live Tradition”.

PHILOSOPHY

Malinov Alexey

V. I. Lamansky and the origins of “russian byzantism”

Malinov Alexey (2022) "V. I. Lamansky and the origins of “russian byzantism” ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 67-87 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI2022100.67-87
The article deals with the attitude of the largest Russian Slavist Vladimir Ivanovich Lamansky (1833-1914) to the history and cultural heritage of Byzantium. It is noted that although the term "Byzantism" characterises the philosophical-historical doctrine of K.N. Leontiev, a number of statements developed in K.N. Leontiev's concept were expressed earlier by V.I. Lamansky. It is suggested that Lamansky had an influence on Leontiev's views, especially on Byzantium. The development of Lamansky's views on Byzantium from his first monograph "On the Slavs in Asia Minor, Africa and Spain" up to his last unfinished book "The Slavonic Hagiography of St. Cyril as a Religious Epic and a Historical Source" is shown. The article points out the similarity between V.I. Lamansky's doctrine on the difference of ages of peoples and cultures and the organiccist conceptions of N.Y. Danilevsky and K.N. Leontiev. Lamansky's interpretation of the mutual relations between Slavs and Greeks, and the relationship between Slavs and the Eastern Roman Empire is considered. It is noted that the main influence of Byzantium was connected to the development of state conceptions of the Slavs and acceptance of Orthodoxy. The special significance of Orthodoxy lay in the recognition of the rights of national languages (divine service in native languages and the development of writing systems), which led to a better acquaintance of Orthodox peoples with Christian doctrine. V.I. Lamansky's opinion on the causes of the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire is given: oblivion of the universal meaning of Christianity, Hellenization, and spread of nationalism. V. I. Lamansky's understanding of the meaning of the empire, i.e. the united Christian kingdom which Russia is heir to, is revealed. The article concludes that Lamansky's interest in the study of Byzantium resulted from his own historiosophic doctrine of three civilizational worlds (Romano-Germanic, Greek-Slavic and Asian).
Byzantism, Lamansky, Leontiev, Orthodoxy, Empire, Greeks, Slavs, Byzantium, historical organism
  1. Beshchetnova E. (2017) Vladimir Solov′ev i Konstantin Leont′ev o bytii Rossii: v predchuvstvii katastrofy [Vladimir Soloviev and Konstantin Leontiev on Russia’s existence: in premonition of catastrophe]. Moscow; St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  2. Buzeskul V. (2008) Vseobshchaia istoriia i ee predstaviteli v Rossii v XIX i nachale XX veka [Universal history and its representatives in Russia in the 19th and early 20th centuries]. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Fetisenko O. (2012) “Geptastilisty”: Konstantin Leont′ev, ego sobesedniki i ucheniki: Idei russkogo konservatizma v literaturno-khudozhestvennykh i publitsisticheskikh praktikakh vtoroi poloviny XIX — pervoi chetverti XX veka [“Heptastylists”: Konstantin Leontiev, his interlocutors and disciples: Ideas of Russian conservatism in literature, art, and journalism of the second half of the 19th — first quarter of the 20th century]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  4. Fetisenko O. (2020) “Nasledniki Vizantii″ v otsenke druzei i nedrugov: Rossiiskaia gosudarstvennost′ kak skvoznaia tema vostochnykh povestei″ K.N. Leont′eva” [“Heirs of Byzantium” in the assessment of friends and foes: Russian state as a cross-cutting theme of K.N. Leontiev′s “Eastern novels”]. Dva veka russkoi klassiki, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 250–259 (in Russian).
  5. Korol′kov A. (1991) Prorochestva Konstantina Leont′eva [The prophecies of Konstantin Leontiev]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  6. Korol′kov A. (2015) “Russkaia ideia i obshchechelovecheskaia kul′tura” [The Russian idea and universal culture]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriia 17. Filosofiia. Konfliktologiia. Kul′turologiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 127–133 (in Russian).
  7. Kotel′nikov V. (2017) Konstantin Leont′ev. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  8. Kozlovskaia N., Sergeeva E. (2016) “Filosofskii termin vizantizm″ v trudakh K.N. Leont′eva i V.S. Solov′eva” [Philosophical term “Byzantism” in the works of K.N. Leontiev and V.S. Soloviev”]. Solov′evskie issledovaniia, vol. 3 (51), pp. 26–33 (in Russian).
  9. Kudriashev V. (2015) “K.N. Leont′ev v russkom natsional′nom diskurse vtoroi poloviny XIX v.” [K.N. Leontiev in the Russian national discourse of the second half of the 19th century]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, vol. 401, pp. 100–107 (in Russian).
  10. Kunil′skaia D. (2020) “Vizantizm K.N. Leont′eva v kontekste russkikh sporov” [K.N. Leontiev’s Byzantism in the context of Russian discussions]. Uchenye zapiski Petrozavodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 58–63 (in Russian).
  11. Lin′kova E. (2006) “Vizantizm kak osnova rossiiskoi gosudarstvennosti v istoriosofskoi kontseptsii F.I. Tiutcheva” [Byzantism as the basis of Russian state in the historiosophic concept of F.I. Tiutchev]. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriia: Istoriia Rossii, vol. 3, pp. 177–182 (in Russian).
  12. Mikerin A. (2017) “Politicheskoe nasledie Vizantii v obshchestvennoi mysli Rossii XIX — nachala XX vv.” [Political heritage of Byzantium in the public thought of Russia in the 19th — early 20th centuries]. Vestnik Kazanskogo iuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii, vol. 1 (27), pp. 125–131 (in Russian).
  13. Savel′eva M. (2017) “Sootnoshenie mifologicheskogo i ratsional′nogo v doktrine vizantizma” [The balance of the mythological and the rational in the doctrine of Byzantism]. Filosofskii polilog. Zhurnal Mezhdunarodnogo tsentra izucheniia russkoi filosofii, vol. 2, pp. 54–64 (in Russian).
  14. Tyapin I. (2019) “Problema istoricheskogo vozrasta Rossii v kontseptsii O. Shpenglera (v kontekste vliianiia N.Ia. Danilevskogo i K.N. Leont′eva)” [The problem of Russia’s historical age in the conception of Spengler (in the context of infl uence of Danilevsky and Leontiev)]. Filosofskii polilog. Zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo tsentra izucheniia russkoi filosofii, vol. 2, pp. 37–45 (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.

The study was supported by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (Project No. 21-18-00153, St. Petersburg State University).
Antonov Konstantin

The problem of “hellenisation of christianity” in the german theology and russian religious thought of the late 19th — early 20th centuries: prince S. N. Trubetskoy and A. von Harnak

Antonov Konstantin (2022) "The problem of “hellenisation of christianity” in the german theology and russian religious thought of the late 19th — early 20th centuries: prince S. N. Trubetskoy and A. von Harnak ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 88-113 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI2022100.88-113
The article compares the philosophical-theological and historical-religious ideas and concepts of Prince S. N. Trubetskoi, a religious philosopher of the circle of V. S. Solovyov, a historian of philosophy and religion, and A. von Harnack, the largest representative of Protestant liberal theology of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries, famous for his concept of the "Hellenization of Christianity". The first part of the article establishes the basis for comparing the ideas of the two authors, identifies their starting points and preconditions, and discusses their place in the history of Christian thought in the context of the idea of religious crisis and the dialectic of confessionalization and deconfessionalization. Further, on the basis of recently published "Philosophical Correspondence" of the Trubetskoy brothers, the question of personal acquaintance of the thinkers and its role in the reception of Harnack's ideas in Russian thought is discussed. In the third part, the author reveals the elements of the positive reception of Harnack's ideas by Trubetskoi - on the basis of the data of the same Correspondence and the article "Ethics and dogmatics". The article points to Trubetskoy's perception of Harnack's critique of Orthodoxy, compares their understanding of the significance of historical research for philosophical and theological work, and their interpretation of the religious ideal of the kingdom of God.Part 4 outlines the main points of Trubetskoi's polemic with the German thinker - on the basis of the data from Correspondence, his article "Ethics and Dogmatics", and the major historical theological work of the philosopher, "Doctrine of the Logos in its History". The focus is on questions of Old Church Christology and the problem of the "Hellenization of Christianity," an argument related to the notion of the Jewish origin of Gnosticism. The author emphasizes the significant role of V. Solov'ev's personality and ideas in shaping Trubetskoi's attitude toward Harnack. In conclusion, general conclusions are made about the relationship between Trubetskoi's and Harnack's ideas and about the role of the reception of the German theologian's ideas in the formation of Trubetskoi's own position and the history of Russian religious thought as a whole.
S. N. Trubetskoi, A. von Harnack, V. Solov'ev, philosophical theology, Hellenization of Christianity, Gnosticism, Logos, Dogma, Dogmengeschichte
  1. Antonov K. (2020) €Kak vozmozhna religiia?″ Filosofi ia religii i fi losofskie problemy bogosloviia v russkoi religioznoi mysli XIX — XX vekov [“How is religion possible?”: philosophy of religion and philosophical problems of theology in Russian religious thought of the 19th — 20th centuries]. Moscow: PSTGU (in Russian).
  2. Ermishina Ks. (ed.) (2021) Filosofskaia perepiska brat′ev Trubetskikh. Iz arkhiva kniagini Ol′gi Nikolaevny Trubetskoi [The philosophical correspondence of the Trubetskoi brothers. From the archives of Princess Olga Nikolaevna Trubetskaya]. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Ern V. (1991) “Metody istoricheskogo issledovaniia i kniga Garnaka Sushchnost′ khristianstva″” [Methods of historical research and Harnack’s Essence of Christianity], in Sochineniia [Works], Moscow, pp. 245–264 (in Russian).
  4. Gaidenko P. (1994) “Konkretnyi idealizm″ S.N. Trubetskogo” [“Concrete idealism” of S.N. Trubetskoi], in S.N. Trubetskoi, Sochineniia, Moscow, pp. 3–42 (in Russian).
  5. Harnak A. (2001) “Das Wesen des Christentums”, in Rannee khristianstvo [Early Christianity], vol. 1, Moscow, pp. 9–180 (Russian translation).
  6. Harnak A. (2001) “Dogmengeschichte”, in Rannee khristianstvo [Early Christianity], vol. 2, Moscow, pp. 87–508 (Russian translation).
  7. Harnak A. (2009) “Fünfzehn Fragen an die Verächter der wissenschaftlichen Theologie unter den Theologen”, in Sravnitel′noe bogoslovie: nemetskii protestantizm XX veka. Teksty s kommentariiami [Comparative theology: German Protestantism of the 20th century. Texts with commentary]. Moscow: PSTGU, pp. 154–156 (Russian transtlation).
  8. Kozyrev A. (2007) Solov’ev i gnostiki [Solovyov and the Gnostics]. Moscow (in Russian).
  9. Miroshnikov I. (2010) “Iudeiskie istoki gnostitsizma. S.N. Trubetskoi i sovremennoe religiovedenie” [Jewish origins of Gnosticism. S.N. Trubetskoi and modern religious studies], in Antichnost′ i kul′tura Serebrianogo veka: K 85-letiiu A.A. Takho-Godi [Antiquity and the culture of the Silver Age: For the 85th anniversary of A.A. Takho-Godi]. Moscow, pp. 434–441 (in Russian).
  10. Orekhanov G. (2016) Lev Tolstoi. “Prorok bez chesti”: khronika katastrofy [Leo Tolstoy. “A prophet without honour”: a chronicle of disaster]. Moscow (in Russian).
  11. Pylaev M. (2014) “Dogmengeschichte″ A. fon Garnaka i liberal′no-teologicheskaia kontseptsiia ellinizatsii khristianstva” [Adolf von Harnack’s Dogmengeschichte and the liberal theological concept of the Hellenisation of Christianity], in Religiovedcheskie issledovaniia, vol. 1–2 (9–10), pp. 86–101 (in Russian).
  12. Pylaev M. (2021) Filosofskie nachala nemetskoiazychnoi teologii XIX–XX vekov [Philosophical foundations of German-language theology in the 19th and 20th centuries]. Moscow: PSTGU (in Russian).
  13. Rumiantseva M. (2015) “Kompensatornaia teoriia v rabotakh Germanna Liubbe i Odo Markvarda” [Compensatory theory in the works of Hermann Lübbe and Odo Marquard]. Vestnik Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni A. S. Pushkina, vol. 2 (1), pp. 140–150 (in Russian).
  14. Solov′ev A. (2022) “Russkaia religioznaia filosofiia XIX — pervoi poloviny XX vv. v kontekste istorii religii: ot religioznoi konversii k kul′tur-kritike i konfessionalizatsii” [Russian religious philosophy in the 19th and the First Half of the 20th centuries in the context of the history of religion: from religious conversion to cultural criticism and confessionalisation]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviia Sankt-Peterburgskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii, vol. 1 (13), pp. 1–17 (in Russian).
  15. Solov′ev Vl. (1988) “Opravdanie dobra” [The justifi cation of the good], in Sochineniia [Works], vol. 1, Moscow, pp. 47–580 (in Russian).
  16. Solov′ev Vl. (1989) “Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve” [Lectures on Godmanhood], in Sochineniia [Works], vol. 2, Moscow, pp. 5–174 (in Russian).
  17. Trubetskoi S. (1994) “Uchenie o Logose v ego istorii” [The doctrine of the Logos in its history”], in Sochineniia [Works], Moscow, pp. 43–482 (in Russian).

Antonov Konstantin


Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: St. Tikhon's Orthodox University for Humanities; 6/1 Lihov per., Moscow, 127051 Russian Federation;
Post: Head of the Department of Philosophy and religious studies;
ORCID: 0000-0003-0982-2513;
Email: konstanturg@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.

This article was supported by RFBR Grant No. 21-011-44030, "Thinking of Being and Belief in Revelation: Paths of Correlation in German-Speaking Protestant Theology and Russian Religious Philosophy in the 20th Century.

RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Pronina Tatiana; Prytkova Darya

Religious education in russian schools: teacher’s opinions (based on interviews and questionnaires)

Pronina Tatiana, Prytkova Darya (2022) "Religious education in russian schools: teacher’s opinions (based on interviews and questionnaires) ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 117-135 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI2022100.117-135
The article publishes an analysis of opinions of teachers in the subject Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics in the secondary school in Russia. The relevance of the study is due to the necessity of empirical verifi cation of already proposed and existing worldview-related and methodological approaches in the sphere of religious education. The study included in-depth interviews with teachers, assessment of children’s knowledge, attendance of classes and workshops of teachers, interviews with teachers of further education courses, with university teachers specialising in religious studies and theology, as well as with researchers in theology. The project is region-specifi c; the article uses results of surveys and interviews carried out in St. Petersburg and Leningrad Region. Several pieces of evidence ae compared with results of surveys in other Russian regions. The main fi ndings are as follows. The study refl ects the contemporary Russian teacher with typical social and demographic characteristics; the modules of the Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics are taught by primary school teachers; most of them are positive about the introduction of this school subject; according to studies in St. Petersburg and Leningrad Regions, most teachers prefer non-confessional general modules; study materials are usually evaluated positively, but it is mentioned that they may have drawbacks in terms of the contemporary means of presenting information and in terms of the perception and demands of present-day students; most teachers have attended additional courses in the subject and evaluated them as useful, but said that they still do not have enough knowledge in religious cultures; interaction with religious institutions when teching modules in specifi c religious cultures is rare, the most successful interaction of this kind is seen in confessional schools; parents can discuss and choose the module in Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics in parents’ meetings; the teachers say that in these meetings parents were off ered an opportunity to discuss and select the module of Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics, any coersion being absent, but the role of the teachers is decisive. The main conclusion is that the implementation of the Fundamentals of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics has gone through the formative stage and has gone over to the stage of discussing the content of the modules and accumulating the experience in teaching practices.
Foundations of Religious Cultures and Secular Ethics, Russian school, opinion of teachers in St. Petersburg and Leningrad Region, internet survey, interview
  1. Bokova O. (2015) “Diskussiia o teologii v Rossiiskoi vysshei shkole” [Discussion about theology in the Russian higher school]. Vestnik LGU im. A.S. Pushkina, vol. 4, pp. 194–201 (in Russian).
  2. Chesnokova V. (2000) Votserkovlennost′: fenomen i sposoby ego izucheniia [Regular churchgoing: the phenomenon and ways of its study]. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Gasparishvili A., Ionov A., Riazantsev V., Smolentseva A. (2006) Uchitel′ v epokhu peremen [Teacher in the era of change]. Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Ivaniushina V., Aleksandrov D. (2016) “Sushchestvuet li diff erentsiatsiia uchitelei v rossiiskih shkolah?” [Does there exist a diff erentiation of teachers in Russian schools?]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, vol. 9, pp. 59–65 (in Russian).
  5. Kolodin A. (1998) “Religioznoe obrazovanie v gosudarstvennoi shkole” [Religious education in public school]. Shkola, vol. 6, pp. 42–68 (in Russian).
  6. Kolodin A. (1998) “Religioznoe obrazovanie: problemy ostayutsia” [Religious education: there are still problems]. Uchitel′, vol. 6, pp. 14–18 (in Russian).
  7. Metlik I. (2019) “Izuchenie dukhovno-nravstvennoi kul′tury narodov Rossii v formirovanii sotsiokul′turnogo opyta shkol′nikov: usloviia, dinamika i modeli razvitiia” [The study of the spiritual and moral culture of the peoples of Russia in the formation of the sociocultural experience of schoolchildren: conditions, dynamics and models of development], in I. Vagner, M. Gur′ianova, I. Usol′tseva (eds) Sotsiokul′turnyi opyt sovremennykh detei i ego razvitie v protsesse vospitaniia [Sociocultural experience of present-day children and its development in the process of education], Moscow, pp. 186–212 (in Russian).
  8. Pronina T. (2017) “Prepodavanie Osnov pravoslavnoi kul′tury″ v Tambovskoi oblasti: uspekhi i problemy” [Teaching Foundations of Orthodox Culture in schools of Tambov Region: achievements and problems]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov′ v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 35 (4), pp. 119–138 (in Russian).

Pronina Tatiana


Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Academic Rank: Associate Professor;
Place of work: Pushkin Leningrad State University; St. Petersburg, Russia;
Post: researcher at the Center for religious and ethnopolitical studies;
ORCID: 0000-0002-8902-9154;
Email: tania_pronina@mai.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.


Prytkova Darya


Student status: Master's Degree Student;
Academic Rank: Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences;
Place of study: Pushkin Leningrad State University; St. Petersburg, Russia;
ORCID: нет;
Email: dariya.prytkova@yandex.ru.
The reported study was funded by RFBR according to the research project № 21-011-44106\21.

BOOK REVIEWS

Nosachev Pavel

The technique of omission in the present-day sociology of exorcism — Rev. of G. Giordan, A. Possamai (eds). The Social Scientific Study of Exorcism in Christianity. NY: Springer, 2020

Nosachev Pavel (2022) "The technique of omission in the present-day sociology of exorcism". Rev. of G. Giordan, A. Possamai (eds). The Social Scientific Study of Exorcism in Christianity. NY: Springer, 2020, Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 139-146 (in Russian).

PDF

Nosachev Pavel


Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: Higher School of Economics; 20 Myasnitskaya Ulitsa, Moscow, 101000 Russian Federation;
Post: associated professor;
ORCID: 0000-0002-0884-4705;
Email: pavel_nosachev@bk.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.

Kolkunova Ksenia

Rev. of G. Larsson, J. Svensson, A. Nordin (eds). London Building Blocks of Religion: Critical Applications and Future Prospects. Equinox Publishing, 2020. 136 p.

Kolkunova Ksenia (2022) Rev. of G. Larsson, J. Svensson, A. Nordin (eds). London Building Blocks of Religion: Critical Applications and Future Prospects. Equinox Publishing, 2020. 136 p., Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2022, Iss. 100, pp. 147-152 (in Russian).

PDF

Kolkunova Ksenia


Academic Degree: Candidate of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: RUDN University, 117198, Russian Federation, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str.6;
Post: specialist;
ORCID: 0000-0003-4655-6488;
Email: ksenia.kolkunova@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.