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

The opposition of the categories of institutional and charismatic leadership has become a common topic of discussion in the social science of the XX century. However, this opposition has been discussed not only in sociology and political science, but also in theology and church law. This article is devoted to the charismatic-institutional concept of Eugenio Corecco (1931-1995), a Swiss Catholic canonist, Bishop of Lugano, a participant of the legal reform process in Catholic church law in the second half of the XX century. His concept was influenced by the legal theory of the German Catholic canonist Klaus Mersdorf, the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, the ideas about the charisma of the founder of the Communione e Liberazione (Communion and Liberation) movement Luigi Giussani and, finally, the reform of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. The first part of the article discuss how Corecco approaches the problem of church institutions in the modern era, critically starting from the legacy of the Church Public Law school of the XIX - early XX centuries. The second part is devoted to solving the institution-charisma problem in Corecco’s theology of law. It is shown how from the ideas of the Munich school, founded by Mörsdorf, about the Word and the Sacrament as the pillars of church legal order, the Swiss canonist comes to the idea of charisma as an essential element of church order. Referring to the canonical theory of the Protestant lawer Rudolf Sohm about the antagonism of law and the spiritual nature of the Church, Corecco suggests solving this dilemma through the term communio, which is key for the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council. He emphasizes that law serves church communion, therefore, along with the liturgical heritage, the charismatic experience of the past and present should be reflected in the canons of church law. In the third part, the problem of charisma is clarified in connection with a priest status and preaching in modern and postmodern society. According to Corecco, the necessary response to the crisis of church discipline in the Catholic Church of the 1960s and 1970s could be found in the attempts of canonists to rethink the relations of the episcopate, clergy and laity in the Church. In this context, he particularly emphasizes the importance of the including of charismatic element in the reformed post-conciliar Catholic theology and church law.

charisma, church institution, church law, canon law, Catholic Church, Eugenio Corecco, history of legal thought

1. Balthasar Hans Urs (1974) Pneuma und Institution. Skizzen zur Theologie. Vol. IV. Einsiedeln: Johannes Verlag.
2. Boni Geraldina (2015) “Il cardinale Giovanni Soglia Ceroni e lo jus publicum ecclesiasticum”. Historia ed Ius, 2015, vol. 8, paper 13, pp. 1–48.
3. Borgonovo G., Cattaneo A. (1997) “Nota biografica”, in Corecco E. Ius et communio: scritti di diritto canonico, vol. 1, Lugano-Casale Monferrato, pp. 5–20.
4. Congar Yves (1997) I believe in the Holy Spirit. New-York: Crossroad.
5. Corecco Eugenio (1970) La formazione della Chiesa cattolica negli Stati Uniti d’America attraverso l’attività sinodale con particolare riguardo al problema dell’amministrazione dei beni ecclesiastici. Brescia: Morcelliana.
6. Corecco Eugenio (1987) “Carisma”, in Digesto delle Discipline Pubblicistiche, vol. 2, Torino: UTET, pp. 504–508.
7. Corecco Eugenio (1977) “Diritto”, in F. Ardusso (ed.). Dizionario Teologico Interdisciplinare, vol. 1, Torino: Marietti, pp. 112–148.
8. Corecco Eugenio (1988) “Teologia del Diritto Canonico”, in G. Barbaglio, S. Dianich (eds). Nuovo Dizionario di Teologia, Torino: Paoline, pp. 1666–1700.
9. Corecco Eugenio (1981) “Considerazioni sul problema dei diritti fondamentali del cristiano nella Chiesa e nella società: aspetti metodologici della questione”, in I diritti fondamentali del cristiano. Atti del IV Congresso Internazionale di Diritto Canonico, Friburgo (Svizzera) 6–11 ottobre 1980, Friburgo-Milano: Herder-Giuffrè, pp. 1222–1225.
10. Corecco Eugenio (2005) Un vescovo e la sua Chiesa. Vol. 1. Siena: Cantagalli.
11. Corecco Eugenio (1989) “Istituzione e carisma in riferimento alle strutture associative”, in W. Aymans, K.-Th. Geringer, H. Schmitz (eds.). Das konsoziative Element in der Kirche (Akten des VI Internationalen Kongresses für Kanonisches Recht), St. Ottilien, pp. 79–98.
12. Corecco Eugenio (1980) “Premesse teologiche”, in Fumagalli C. O. Società civile e società religiosa di fronte al Concordato, Milano: Vita e Pensiero, pp. 21–22.
13. Corecco Eugenio (1982) “Profili istituzionali di Movimenti nella Chiesa”, in M. Camisasca, M. Vitali (eds). I Movimenti nella Chiesa negli anni ’80, Milano: Jaca Book, pp. 203–234.
14. Eisenstadt Shmuel (1968) “Introduction”, in M. Weber. On charisma and institution building. Chicago, pp. I–LVI.
15. Fadeev I, Anik′ev I. (2021) “Kodeks kanonicheskogo prava 1917 goda: kodifikatsiia i razvitie kanonicheskogo prava Latinskoi tserkvi v pervoi polovine XX veka” [The 1917 Code of Canon Law: codifi cation and development of Latin canon law in the first half of the 20th century]. Novaia i Noveishaia istoriya, vol. 4, pp. 184–201 (in Russian).
16. Fantappiè Carlo (2011) Storia del diritto canonico e delle istituzioni della Chiesa. Bologna: Il Mulino.
17. Fantappiè Carlo (2008) Chiesa romana e modernità giuridica. Vol. I: L’edificazione del sistema canonistico (1563–1903). Vol. II: Il Codex iuris canonici (1917). Milano: Giuff ré.
18. Fantappiè Carlo (2018) “Chiesa e sinodalità: per un confronto con Eugenio Corecco”. Ephemerides iuris canonici, vol. 58, pp. 461–478.
19. Freik N. (2001) “Politicheskaia kharizma: obzor zarubezhnykh kontseptsii” [The political charisma: review of foreign theories]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie, vol. 1, pp. 5–24(in Russian).
20. Gerosa Libero (2010) Teologia del diritto canonico: fondamenti storici e sviluppi sistematici. Lugano: EUPRESS.
21. Gerosa Libero (1989) Carisma e diritto nella Chiesa. Rifl essioni canonistiche sul «carisma originario» dei nuovi movimenti ecclesiali. Milano: Jaca book.
22. Gherri Paolo (2019) Introduzione critica alla teologia del diritto canonico. Torino: Giappichelli.
23. Hasenhüttl Gotthold (1969) Charisma. Ordnungsprinzip der Kirche. Freibourg: Herder.
24. Küng Hans (1967) Die Kirche. Freiburg: Herder.
25. Mörsdorf Klaus (1965) “Wort und Sakrament als Bauelemente der Kirchenverfassung”. Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht, vol. 134, pp. 72–79.
26. Rahner Karl (1958) Das Dynamische in der Kirche. Freiburg: Herder.
27. Tyushagin V. (2019) “Corpus Iuris Canonici”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia [Orthodox encyclopaedia], vol. 3, Moscow, pp. 155–156 (in Russian).
28. Vorontsov S. (2020) “Sviashchennik v svete stilei myshleniia: ierarhicheskaia i dolzhnostnaia spetsifi katsii” [The priest in the light of the thought style theory: hierarchical and official description”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 91, pp. 32–54 (in Russian).
29. Weber Max (2018) Khoziaistvo i obshchestvo. Ocherki ponimaiushchei sotsiologii [Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie]. Vol. 3. Moscow: Izdatel′skii Dom VShE (Russian translation).

Borshch Irina

*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.

The research was carried out at the expense of a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (project no. 19-78-10143). Organization of the project: St. Tikhon's Orthodox University for the Humanities.

The article is devoted to the consideration of such a phenomenon in theology and ecclesiology of the modern Catholic Church as synodality. In October 2021, the first phase of the XVI General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops of the Catholic Church dedicated to this topic was opened. The neologism “synodality” has been updated in Catholic theology since the pontificate of Pope Francis. Synodality is becoming one of the priority terms not only of the papal Magisterium, but also of that extensive theological reflection, which is trying not only to provide a fairly stable place for the new concept in modern Catholic ecclesiology, but also to find an adequate and relevant definition and argumentation for it. This is not about the accidental characteristics of synodal ecclesiology, but about attempts to develop an authentic theology of synodality, which, in its intuitions, seeks to embrace such a well-known and popular ecclesiological category of the Orthodox East as «sobornost’». Synodality, as the author tries to illustrate, goes far beyond hierarchical structures, representing in fact a special manner of existence and response (modus vivendi et operandi) of the Church as the People of God, a kind of her entelechy, rather than a purely operational method. Encompassing the entire spectrum of the relationship between the social and mystical dimensions of the Church, its institutional and charismatic character, its being ad intra and its missionary outcome ad extra, modern Catholic ecclesiology strives to give the theme of synodality not a functional character, but a priority, essential dimension of the Church and her mission in this the world.

Catholic Church, collegiality, Synod, synodality, ecclesiology, theology, People of God, Pope Francis, communion, mission

1. Antón A. (1977) La Iglesia de Cristo: El Israel de la Vieja y de la Nuova Alianza. Madrid.
2. Benedetto XVI (2006) “Discorso «Expergiscere homo» alla Curia romana (22.12.2005)”. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 98, pp. 40–53.
3. Borras A. (2014) “Trois expressions de la synodalité depuis Vatican II”. Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, vol. 90, pp. 643–666.
4. Calabrese G. (2021) Ecclesiologia sinodale: Punti fermi e questioni aperte. Bologna: EDB.
5. (1970) Catholicity and Apostolicity / One in Christ. Vol. 6 (3). Turvey.
6. Chenu M-D., Sigmond R. (eds) (1967) Verso il Sinodo dei vescovi: I problemi. Brescia: Queriniana.
7. Colombo G. (1985) “Il Popolo di Dio e il mistero della Chiesa nell’ecclesiologia post-conciliare”. Teologia, vol. 10, pp. 97–169.
8. Comblin J. (2002) O povo de Deus. São Paulo.
9. Congar Y. M. J. (1937) “Ecclesia de Trinitate”. Irenikon, vol. 14, pp. 131–146.
10. Congar Y. M. J. (1965) “La Chiesa come Popolo di Dio”. Concilium, vol. 1, pp. 19–43.
11. Dejaifve G. (1981) “L’Église, peuple de Dieu”. Nouvelle Revue Théologique, vol. 103, pp. 857–871.
12. Dragas G. (1981) “Orthodox Ecclesiology in Outline”. The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, vol. 26 (3), pp. 185–192.
13. Forte B. (1984) La Chiesa icona della Trinità: Breve ecclesiologia. Brescia.
14. Francesco PP. (2013) Evangelii Gaudium, available at: https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/ru/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html (30.01.2022) (Russian translation).
15. Francesco PP. (2015) “Commemorazione del 50° anniversario dell’istituzione del sinodo dei vescovi (17 ottobre 2015)”. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 107 (11), pp. 1138–1144.
16. Francesco PP. (2016) “Il santo popolo fedele di Dio”. Regno-Documenti, vol. 7 (61), pp. 201–204.
17. Henn W. (2004) Church: The People of God. New York.
18. Indelicato A. (2008) Il Sinodo dei vescovi: La collegialità sospesa (1965–1985). Bologna.
19. Insero W. (2007) La Chiesa è «missionaria per la sua natura» (AG 2): Origine e contenuto dell’aff ermazione conciliare e la sua recezione nel dopo Concilio. Roma.
20. Koval’ A. (transl.) (1998) Dokumenty II Vatikanskogo sobora [Documents of Second Vatican Council]. Moscow: Paoline (Russian translation).
21. (1965) La Costituzione dogmatica «De Ecclesia». Veronae.
22. (2018) La Sinodalità nella vita e nella missione della Chiesa / Comissione Teologica Internazionale. Città del Vaticano.
23. (1973) L’ecclesiologia dal Vaticano I al Vaticano II. Brescia.
24. Loew J. (2002) Vous serez mes disciples. Annonciateurs de l’Évangile. Réfl ections. Saint-Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo sv. Petra (Russian translation).
25. Ratzinger J. (1971) Il nuovo popolo di Dio: Questioni ecclesiologiche. Brescia.
26. Ratzinger J. (1987) Chiesa, ecumenismo e politica. Cinisello Balsamo: Paoline.
27. Ratzinger J. (1996) La via della fede: saggi sull’etica cristiana nell’epoca presente. Milano.
28. Repole R. (2017) Il sogno di una Chiesa evangelica: L’ecclesiologia di papa Francesco. Città del Vaticano.
29. Routhier G., Villemin L. (eds) (2006) Nouveaux apprentissages pour l’Église. Paris: Cerf.
30. Sartori L. (1997) “Trinità e Missione nel Concilio Vaticano II”. Ad Gentes, vol. 1, pp. 17–34.
31. Scola A. (1987) Avvenimento e tradizioni: Questioni di ecclesiologia. Milano: Jaca Book,.
32. Silanes N. (1981) “Trinidad y misión en el Vaticano II”. Estudios Trinitarios, vol. 15, pp. 321–362.
33. Silanes N. (1981) La Iglesia de la Trinidad: La Santíssima Trinidad en el Vaticano II: Estudio genético-teológico. Salamanca: Segretariado Trinitario.
34. (2021) Sinodo 2021–2023: Per una Chiesa sinodale: comunione, partecipazione, missione / Documento preparatorio. Città del Vaticano.
35. Spadaro A. (2013) “Intervista a papa Francesco”. La Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 164, pp. 449 –477.
36. Spadaro A., Galli C. (2018) “La sinodalità nella vita e nella missione della Chiesa”. La Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 4, pp. 55–70.
37. Spadaro A., Galli C. (ed.) (2016) La reforma y las reformas en la Iglesia. Santander.
38. (1963) The Church: Readings in Theology. New York.
39. (2021) Vademecum: Per il Sinodo sulla sinodalità. Città del Vaticano.
40. Valentini D. (ed.) (1994) L’ecclesiologia contemporanea. Padova.
41. Vier F. (ed.) (1965) A Igreja do Vaticano II. Rio de Janeiro.
42. Vitali D. (2012) Lumen Gentium: Storia, Commento, Recezione. Roma: Studium.
43. Vitali D. (2013) Popolo di Dio. Assisi.
44. Vitali D. (2014) Verso la sinodalità. Magnano: Qiqajon.
45. Wolanin A. (2000) Teologia della missione. Roma: PUG.

Maksimov Alexey, priest

The article presents a brief biography of the little-studied British deist Thomas Chubb (1679-1747) and a reconstruction of his ideas about capabilities of human mind. The goal of this article is to study the religious philosophy of T. Chubb that Russian studies does not distinguish from ideas of other deists. That is why the idea of the phenomenon of deism is still less clear in relation to foreign studies. The article analyzes and presents Chubbs concepts about the independence of religious truths from human perception, that are presented in «Discourse concerning Reason, with Regard to Religion and Divine Revelation» (1733) and «An Enquiry into the Ground and Foundation of Religion». The article documents that the English philosopher formulated three "author's" truths of natural religion: there is an initial difference between objects, independent of human perception; this distinction is the basis for human behavior; God made these foundations a moral rule for all people and for himself. The work identifies and analyzes the definition of the phenomenon of "deism" in Chubb's treatises, as well as an assessment of his philosophy in the context of this definition – the natural religion of reason or belief and just and sense of a Deity impressed upon the mind, and is the governing principle of a man’s-affections and actions. The correlation of the ideas of Thomas Chubb and Matthew Tindal is analyzed. At the end of the article, a brief conclusion is made about the place of T. Chubbs philosophy to deism in general. The author of this work believes that despite the absence of references to other deists by the English philosopher, the ideas of this thinker fit into their religious and philosophical system, specifically about the issue of understanding natural religion. The sources of this article are treaties «The Sufficiency of Reason in Matters of Religion, Farther Considered» (1732), «Discourse concerning Reason, with Regard to Religion and Divine Revelation» (1733), «Some reflections upon the comparative excellency and usefulness of moral and positive duties» (1733), «The true Gospel of Jesus Christ Asserted»(1741) and several other treatises.

deism, morality, religious philosophy, natural religion, Thomas Chubb, Herbert of Cherbury, Matthew Tindal

1. Birch J. C. P. (2019) Jesus in an Age of Enlightenment: Radical Gospels from Thomas Hobbes to Thomas Jefferson. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
2. Cassirer E. (1932) Die Philosophie der Aufklä rung. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Verlag.
3. Herbert E. (1937) De Veritate. By Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury. Translated with an Introduction by Meyrick H. Carre. Bristol: University of Bristol.
4. Hudson W. (2009) The English deists’ studies in early Enlightenment. London: Pickering&Chatto.
5. Roberts G. C. B. (2014) Historical argument in the writings of the English deists. Oxford.
6. Wigelsworth J. R. (2014) “‘God always acts suitable to his character, as a wise and good being’: Thomas Chubb and Thomas Morgan on Miracles and Providence”, in W. Hudson, D. Lucci, J. R. Wigelsworth (eds) Atheism and Deism Revalued Heterodox Religious Identities in Britain, 1650–1800, Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, pp. 157–172.
7. Wigelsworth J. R. (2005) ‘Their grosser degrees of infi delity’: deists, politics, natural philosophy, and the power of God in Eighteenth century England (PhD thesis), University of Saskatchewan.

Polyakov Andrey

The article is devoted to the problem of understanding the secular as political theology in Russian religious philosophy of the first half of the 20th century. The connection between the concept of «political theology» and the concept of «secular» is carried out in accordance with the approach of K. Schmitt. Schmitt’s approach is proposed to be expanded to understand political theology as borrowing the structure of theistic theology by other means for secular purposes. In the article, this approach is used to identify what can be defined as the analysis of «political theologies» in the works of Russian religious philosophers of the first half of the 20th century. The study determines that the secular as political theology appears as the «religion of anthropolatry» of the Russian intelligentsia for Merezhkovsky and Bulgakov, and appears as the mythology of communism for Losev and Florensky. The article concludes that the political theologies of socialism and communism are the result of the secularization of the Jewish apocalyptic and Christian chiliasm for Bulgakov, Berdyaev, Losev. Whereas, socialism and communism are secular variants of Gnosticism, which he defines as «the heresy of utopianism» from Frank’s point of view. The article concludes that understanding of the secular as political theology allows us to interpret the phenomenon of religious conversion, which is considered as the beginning of Russian religious philosophy, as a transition from political theology to theistic theology, and not just as a transition from atheism and skepticism to faith. It also states the possibility of applying the concept of confessionalization to understand cultural criticism of modern political theologies by Russian religious philosophers of the first half of the 20th century.

Russian religious philosophy, secular, political theology, religion of anthropolatry, apocalyptics, myth, cult, Merezhkovsky, Bulgakov, Berdyaev, Frank, Florensky, Losev, religious conversion, confessionalization

1. Aliaev G., Rezvykh T. (2019) “Problema teoditsei — istochnik russkogo revoliutsionnogo sotsializma″. Parizhskii doklad Semena Franka 1938 goda” [“The problem of theodicy as a the source of Russian revolutionary socialism». Semyon Frank’s Paris report of 1938]. Vestnik Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 20–25 (in Russian).
2. Antonov K. (2002) “Problema religioznogo obrashcheniia v tvorchestve S. L. Franka” [The problem of religious conversion in the works of S. L. Frank]. Religiovedenie, no. 4,pp. 39–51 (in Russian).
3. Antonov K. (2003) “Fenomen religioznogo obrashcheniia i ego znachenie v istorii russkoi mysli” [The phenomenon of religious conversion and its signifi cance in the history of Russian thought], in Istoriia mysli. Russkaia myslitel′naia traditsiia. Vypusk 2 [The history of thought. Russian tradition of thought. Issue 2], Moscow: Vuzovskaia kniga, pp. 4–21 (in Russian)
4. Antonov K. (2009) “Fenomen religioznogo obrashcheniia i stanovlenie refl eksivnykh struktur religioznykh traditsii” [The phenomenon of religious conversion and the formation of reflexive structures of religious traditions]. Religiovedenie, no. 4, pp. 90–102 (in Russian).
5. Antonov K. (2015) “¯Ia, blagodarenie Bogu, ne bogoslov…″: stanovlenie russkoi religioznoi filosofii i istoki kontseptsii zapadnogo pleneniia pravoslavnogo bogosloviia” [“I, thank God, am not a theologian...”: the formation of Russian religious philosophy and the origins of the concept of Western captivity of Orthodox theology]. Khristianskoe chtenie, no. 3, pp. 68–92 (in Russian).
6. Antonov K. (2020) “Kak vozmozhna religiia?: Filosofiia 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 XIX–XX centuries], vol. 2. Moscow: PSTGU (in Russian).
7. Berdiaev N. (1955) Istoki i smysl russkogo kommunizma [The origins and meaning of Russian communism]. Paris: YMCA-PRESS (in Russian).
8. Berdiaev N. (2002) Smysl istorii. Novoe srednevekov′e [The meaning of history. The new Middle Ages]. Moscow: Kanon+ (in Russian).
9. Berman A. (2020) “Nachal′naia istoriia khristovshchiny: ot ekstaticheskogo dvizheniia k konfessionalizatsii sekty” [The initial history of Christism: from the ecstatic movement to the confessionalisation of the sect]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov′ v Rossii i za rubezhom, no. 3, pp. 38–62 (in Russian).
10. Bulgakov S. (1993) “Apokaliptika i sotsializm (Religiozno-fi losofskie paralleli)” [Apocalypticism and socialism (religious and philosophical parallels)], in Bulgakov S. N. Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh. Tom 2. Izbrannye stat′i [Essays in two volumes. Vol. 2. Selected articles], Moscow: Nauka, pp. 368–434 (in Russian).
11. Bulgakov S. (1993) “Geroizm i podvizhnichestvo (Iz razmyshlenii o religioznykh idealakh russkoi intelligentsii)” [Heroism and asceticism (from refl ections on the religious ideals of the Russian intelligentsia)], in Bulgakov S. N. Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh. Tом 2. Izbrannye stat′i [Essays in two volumes. Vol. 2. Selected articles], Moscow: Nauka, pp. 302–342 (in Russian).
12. Dmitriev A. (2004) “Esteticheskaia avtonomiia i istoricheskaia determinatsiia: russkaia gumanitarnaia teoriia pervoi treti XX v. v svete problematiki sekuliarizatsii [Aesthetic autonomy and historical determination: Russian theory of the humanities of the fi rst third of the XX century in the light of the problems of secularisation], in Zenkin S. (ed.) Russkaia teoriia: 1920–1930-e gody. Materialy 10-kh Lotmanovskikh chtenii [Russian Theory: 1920–1930s. Materials of the 10th Lotman readings], Moscow: RGGU, pp. 11–48 (in Russian).
13. Dmitriev M. (2012) “¯Pravoslavnaia konfessionalizatsiia″ v Vostochnoi Evrope vo vtoroi polovine XVI veka?” [“Orthodox confessionalisation” in Eastern Europe in the second half of the XVI century?], in Dorogobits’kii kraeznavchii zbirnik. V. XVI [Dorogobitsky collection of articles in local history], Drogobich: Kolo, pp. 133–152 (in Russian).
14. Fegelin E. (2021) The New Science of Politics. Introduction. St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal′ (Russian translation).
15. Filippov A. (2016) “K istorii poniatiia politicheskogo: proshloe odnogo proekta” [On the history of the concept of the political: the past of one project], in Shmitt K. Poniatie politicheskogo[The concept of the political], St. Petersburg: Nauka, pp. 433–551 (in Russian).
16. Florenskii P. (1996) “Predpolagaemoe gosudarstvennoe ustroistvo v budushchem” [The supposed state structure in the future], in Florenskii P.A. Sochineniia [Collected works] in 4 vols. Vol. 2, Moscow: Mysl′, pp. 647–681 (in Russian).
17. Florenskii P. (2000) Sochineniia [Collected works] in 4 vols. Vol. 3 (2). Moscow: Mysl′ (in Russian).
18. Florenskii P. (2004) Sobranie sochinenii. Filosofi ia kul′ta (Opyt pravoslavnoi antropoditsei) [Collected works. The philosophy of the cult (The experience of Orthodox anthropodicy)]. Moscow: Mysl′ (in Russian).
19. Frank S. (2019) “<Dukhovnye istoki russkoi revoliutsii>” [<Spiritual origins of the Russian Revolution>]. Vestnik Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii, no. 2, pp. 11–19 (in Russian).
20. Frank S. (1990) “Etika nigilizma (K kharakteristike nravstvennogo mirovozzreniia russkoi intelligentsii)” [Ethics of nihilism (To the characterisation of the moral worldview of the Russian intelligentsia)], in Frank S. L. Sochineniia [Collected works], Moscow: Pravda, pp. 77–110 (in Russian).
21. Frank S. L. (1996) “Bol′shevizm i kommunizm kak dukhovnye iavleniia” [Bolshevism and Communism as spiritual phenomena], in Frank S.L. Russkoe mirovozzrenie [Russian worldview], St. Petersburg: Nauka, pp. 137–149 (in Russian).
22. Frank S. (1996) “Eres′ utopizma” [The heresy of Utopianism], in Frank S.L. Russkoe mirovozzrenie [Russian worldview], St. Petersburg: Nauka, pp. 72–86 (in Russian).
23. Frank S. (1996) “Religiozno-istoricheskii smysl russkoi revoliutsii” [Religious and historical meaning of the Russian revolution] in Frank S.L. Russkoe mirovozzrenie [Russian Worldview], St. Petersburg: Nauka, pp. 119–137 (in Russian).
24. Frank S. (2011) Svet vo t′me. Opyt khristianskoi etiki i sotsial′noi fi losofi i [Light in the darkness. The experience of Christian ethics and social philosophy]. Minsk: Izdatel′stvo belorusskogo ekzarkhata (in Russian).
25. Gutner G. (2015) “Sekuliarnost′, postsekuliarnost′ i russkaia religioznaia fi losofi ia” [Secularity, post-secularity and Russian religious philosophy]. Vestnik Sviato-Filaretovskogo instituta, no. 16, pp. 63–82 (in Russian).
26. Hervieu-Léger D. (1993) La religion pour mémoire. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf.
27. Kamnev V., Kamneva L. (2016) “Religioznoe i sekuliarnoe v russkoi fi losofi i” [Religious and secular in Russian philosophy”]. Vestnik SPbGU. Ser. 17. Filosofiia. Konfliktologiia. Kul′turologiia. Religiovedenie, no. 1, pp. 13–20 (in Russian).
28. Khondzinskii P. (2015) “Pole″ konfessionalizatsii: opyt prilozheniia teorii k russkoi dukhovnoi traditsii” [“Field” of confessionalisation: an attempt of applying theory to the Russian spiritual tradition]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, no. 2, pp. 9–17 (in Russian).
29. Kurennoi V. (2013) “Irratsional’naia storona ratsional’nogo” [The non-rational side of the rational]. Otechestvennye zapiski, no. 1, pp. 70–78 (in Russian).
30. Liubbe G. (2016) Im Zug der Zeit. Verkürzter Aufenthalt in der Gegenwart. Moscow (Russian translation).
31. Liuks L. (2014) Dva oblika totalitarizma. Sravnitel′nye ocherki ob istokakh i kharaktere bol’shevizma i natsional-sotsializm [Two faces of totalitarianism. Comparative essays on the origins and nature of Bolshevism and National Socialism]. Eichstätt: Forum noveishei vostochnoevropeiskoi istorii i kul′tury (in Russian).
32. Liut′ko E. (2017) “Stanovlenie konfessional′nogo bogosloviia v Rossii XVIII–XIX vv.” [The formation of confessional theology in Russia of the XVIII–XIX centuries]. VestnikPSTGU. Seriia II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, vol. 78, pp. 46–64 (in Russian).
33. Losev A. (2001) Dialektika mifa [Dialectics of myth]. Moscow: Mysl′ (in Russian).
34. Löwith K. (1990) Sämtliche Schriften. Band 2: Weltgeschichte und Heilsgeschehen. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler.
35. Marquard O. (1973) “Schwierigkeiten mit der Geschichtsphilosophie”, in Marquard O. Schwierigkeiten mit der Geschichtsphilosophie. Aufsätze, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, pp. 13–34.
36. M’er K. I. (2020) “Russkaia religioznaia fi losofi ia v sekuliarnyi vek” [Russian religious philosophy in the secular age]. Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik, vol. 35, pp. 263–282 (in Russian).
37. Milbank G. (2008) “Political Theology and the New Science of Politics”. Logos, no. 4, pp. 33–54 (Russian translation).
38. Pavlov I. (2021) Vliianie sekuliarnykh i antisekuliarnykh aspektov “novogo religioznogo soznaniia” na stanovlenie metafi ziki N. A. Berdiaeva [The influence of secular and antisecular aspects of the “new religious consciousness” on the formation of N.A. Berdyaev metaphysics]. Moscow (in Russian).
39. Pavlov I. (2019) “Dialektika sekuliarizatsii v Rossii: k otsenke Istorii russkoi filosofii″ Vasiliia Zen′kovskogo” [Dialectics of secularization in Russia: an assessment of the “History of Russian Philosophy” by Vasily Zenkovsky]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov′ v Rossii i za rubezhom, no. 3, pp. 253–276 (in Russian).
40. Prokop′ev A. (2004) “Vvedenie. Reformaiia, Kontrreformatsiia, Konfessionalizatsiia” [Introduction. Reformation, Counter-Reformation, Confessionalisation], in A. Iu. Prokopev (ed.) Konfessionalizatsiia v Zapadnoi i Vostochnoi Evrope v rannee Novoe vremia. Doklady russko-nemetskoi nauchnoi konferentsii [Confessionalisation in Western and Eastern Europe in early modern times. Reports of the Russian-German conference], St. Petersburg: Aleteia, pp. 7–30 (in Russian).
41. Schmitt K. (2016) Politische Theologie. St. Petersburg: Nauka (Russian translation).
42. Solov′ev A. P. (2017) “Modernyi traditsionalizm protiv moderna: kritika progressa v Rossii vtoroi poloviny XIX v. (sluchai arkhiepiskopa Nikanora [Brovkovicha] i K. N. Leont′eva)” [Modern traditionalism against modernity: criticism of progress in Russia in the second half of the XIX century (the case of Archbishop Nikanor [Brovkovich] and K. N. Leontiev)]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie, no. 2, pp. 253–274 (in Russian).
43. Solov′ev A. (2021) “Obrazy sekuliarizatsii v russkoi religioznoi fi losofi i vtoroi poloviny XIX veka” [Images of secularisation in Russian religious philosophy of the second half of the XIX century]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviia Sankt-Peterburgskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii, no. 4, pp. 108–126 (in Russian).
44. 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 of the XIX — fi rst half of the XX centuries in the context of the history of religion: from religious conversion to cultural criticism and confessionalisation]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviia Sankt-Peterburgskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii, no 1, pp. 118–134 (in Russian).
45. Terpstra M. (2011) Democratie als cultus: over politiek en religie. Amsterdam: Boom.
46. Uait G. (2016) “Edinoverie i kontseptsiia konfessionalizatsii: diskursivnye zametki” [‘Edinoverie’ and the concept of confessionalisation: discursive remarks]. Quaestio Rossica, no. 4, pp. 179–191 (in Russian).
47. Zenkovskii V. V. (2001) Istoriia russkoi filosofii [History of Russian philosophy]. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt, Raritet (in Russian).
48. Zveerde E. van der (2012) “Osmyslivaia ¯sekuliarnost’″” [Comprehending “secularity”]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov′ Rossii i za rubezhom, no. 2, pp. 69–113 (in Russian).

Solovev Artem

*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.

In the article the author analyzes the arguments of the theist W.L. Craig for the existence of the omnipotent, all-good, timeless God of classical theism as well as counter-arguments of W. Sinnot-Armstrong. W.L. Craig used five arguments, they are Kalam cosmological argument, fine-tuning argument, objective moral values argument, argument from the testimonies of the gospels and argument from religious experience. Craig seeks to show that when we take all these arguments together, they increase the probability of the existence of the God of classical theism. Sinnot-Armstrong, in turn, criticized all these arguments and seeks to show with varying levels of credibility that every Craig’s argument can be refuted within the framework of an atheistic approach. He exposes the argument from the existence of objective moral values to the most detailed criticism, while speaking from the position of moral realism and Platonism. Sinnot-Armstrong criticized fine-tuning argument least convincingly. He accepted the fact that there is no good atheistic response to this argument, but he used usual rhetorical attacks against theism. He uncritically repeated the model of the war between science and religion. As a result of the analysis of the controversy between Craig and Sinnot-Armstrong, the author of the article comes to several conclusions. Firstly, atheism is combined with various metaphysical attitudes, from naturalism to Platonism. Secondly, an atheist may hold different views on the problem of free will between determinism and indeterminism. Thus, since atheism is very heterogeneous in itself, most of the Sinnot-Armstrong counter-arguments are not universally applicable to atheists.

Atheism, cosmological argument, fine-tuning argument, Kalam cosmological argument, objective moral values, religious experience, theism

1. Craig W. (2010) “Kalam Cosmological Argument”. Filosofiia religii: al′manakh. 2008–2009 [Philosophy of religion: Anthology. 2008–2009], pp. 110–136 (Russian translation).
2. Craig W. L., Sinnot-Armstrong W. (2004) God? A Debate Between A Christian and An Atheist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Harris S. (2012) Free will. New York: Free Press.
4. Hume D. (2020) An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Moscow: RIPOL klassik (Russian translation).
5. James W. (2017) The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt (Russian translation).
6. Jansen G. (2012) “Critical Notice of Alvin Plantinga’s Where the Confl ict Really Lies”. Grazer Philosophische Studien, vol. 85, pp. 291–295.
7. Kahane G. (2011) “Should We Want God to Exist?”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 674–696.
8. Lushnikov D. (2018) “Teizm i novyi ateizm″: k voprosu o polemike A. Plantingi i D. Dennetta” [Theism and “New Atheism”: on the controversy between A. Plantinga and D. Dennett]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviya SPbDA, vol. 1 (2), pp. 19–32 (in Russian).
9. Murphy M. (2002/2019) “Theological Voluntarism”, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/voluntarism-theological/ (21.02.2022).
10. Oppy G. (1996) “Theism, Atheism and Big Bang Cosmology“. Faith and Philosophy, vol. 13 (1), pp. 125–133.
11. Reichenbach B. (2004/2021) “Cosmological Argument”, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/cosmological-argument/ (21.02.2022).
12. Schellenberg J. L. (2021) Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt (Russian translation).
13. Sinnot-Armstrong W. (2006) Moral Scepticisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Sleptsova V. (2019) “Kosmologicheskii argument v sovremennoi polemike teizma i ateizma (debaty Dzh. Kholdeina i Dzh. Smarta)” [The cosmological argument in the modern polemic of theism and atheism (debate between J. Haldane and J. Smart)]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviia SPbDA, vol. 1 (3), pp. 112–120 (in Russian).
15. Stenger V. J. (2011) The Fallacy Of Fine-Tuning. Why The Universe Is Not Designed For Us. New York: Prometheus Books.
16. Sysoev M. S. (2020) “Religioznyi opyt i svidetel′stvo” [Religious experience and testimony”]. Filosofiia. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, vol. 4 (4), pp. 50–76 (in Russian).

Sleptsova Valeriya

*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.

This paper studies the features of the so-called “speculative theology” of Amun-Re, the most prominent trend of ancient Egyptian religious and theological thought of the XV-XIII centuries BC on the example of two of its most significant texts, Cairo (Pap. Boulaq 17 Pap. Kairo CG 58038) and Leiden (Pap. Leiden I 350) hymns to Amun. Unlike earlier forms of Egyptian spiritual culture, for the first time in the history of ancient Egyptian religion, it creates the image of a transcendent deity, the connection of the believer with whom is now carried out through direct personal contact, and not through traditional forms of worship for the Egyptian religion. At the same time, many features of the image of Amun in the Theban “speculative theology” of the New Kingdom can already be considered as an attempt at a fundamentally new reflection of traditional categories of ancient Egyptian culture, such as, for example, “Maat” (world-order, justice, truth), both based on traditional values and departing from them. The reason for this was the crisis of traditional ideas about Maat after the Amarna era, which fundamentally changed the nature of popular piety and at the same time the basic principles of Egyptian religious and political ethics. From the point of view of the mythogenic conception of the genesis of philosophy, “speculative theology” - both in Egypt of the New Kingdom and somewhat later in archaic Greece – is of exceptional interest as the most important "transitional form" on the path of transformation of primitive myth into philosophical discourse and at the same time an interesting example of the interpenetration and joint evolution of mythological, religious and emerging philosophical worldview. Not always turning into a full-fledged philosophical tradition (this is exactly what happens, in particular, with the Theban “speculative theology” of Amun-Re), it nevertheless demonstrates the complex ways of transforming the spiritual world of the ancient man of the Eastern Mediterranean, thanks to which the spiritual transformation of the "axial time" became possible in many ways. By the example of the image of Amun, the transformation of ideas about religious experience in the Egyptian culture of the era of the New Kingdom is also studied.

pre-philosophy, theology, mythology, axial age, divinity, theocosmogony, Amun

1. Assmann J. (1999) Ägypten. Theologie und Frömmigkeit einer frühen Hochkultur. Moscow: Pristsels (Russian translation).
2. Assmann J. (2011) Steinzeit und Sternzeit. Altägyptische Zeitkonzepte. München: Wilhelm Fink.
3. Emelyanov V. (2009) “Predfilosofiia Drevnego Vostoka kak istochnik novogo fi losofskogo diskursa” [Pre-philosophy of the Ancient East as a source of new philosophical discourse”]. Voprosy filosofii, no. 9, pp. 153–163 (in Russian).
4. Faulkner R.O. (1933) The papyrus Bremner-Rhind (British museum №10188). Bruxelles: Edition de la fondation egyptologique reine Elisabeth.
5. Gardiner A.H. (1957) Egyptian Grammar. An Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs. 3rd edition, revised. Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, Griffith Institute.
6. Hornung E. (1995) Echnaten. Die Religion des Lichtes. Zürich: Artemis.
7. Luiselli M. M. (2004) Der Amun-Re Hymnus des P. Boulaq 17 (P. Kairo CG 58038). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
8. Quack J.-F. (2020) “Papyrus Moscow 167 and the question of narrative myth in Ancient Egypt”, in Aegyptiaca Rossica. Supplementum, Moscow: Russkii fond sodeistviia obrazovaniiu i nauke, pp. 307–322.
9. Pavlova O. (1984) Amon Fivanskii. Ranniaia istoriia kul′ta (V–XVII dinastii) [Amon of Thebes. The early history of the cult (V–XVII dynasties)]. Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).
10. Semushkin A. (2009) Genezis drevnegrecheskoi fi losofi i [Development of Ancient Greek philosophy], in Izbrannye sochineniia [Selected works], Moscow: RUDN, vol. 1, pp. 157–196 (in Russian)

Zhdanov Vladimir

*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 paper has been supported by the RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership Program, and was funded by the Russian Science Foundation, grant no. 22-28-00162, “The 'Axial Age' Conception in Intercultural Dialogue”.

The article is devoted to the study of the idea of a human in the context of the modern memetic theory of religion. The work consistently reveals the main provisions of the memetic concept in the works of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and Susan Blackmore. Richard Dawkins is regarded as the founder of the replicator-centric interpretation of the evolutionary process, which contributed to the formation of the idea of the meme as a unit of cultural information. Memes compete with each other in the process of cultural evolution, pursuing their own benefits, regardless of the possible benefits of host organisms. To such "selfish" memes, R. Dawkins, first of all, refers to religious ideas. R. Dawkins' concept has a popular scientific character and its author, considering a person to be a bearer of memes, does not clarify the ways of interaction between specific memes and the human mind. This philosophical aspect of the memetic concept is developed in the theory of Daniel Dennett, who, distracting from the scientific (biological) context, builds a naturalistic metanarrative based on the concept of memes. D. Dennett argues that the human mind is not only an effective means of transportation for memes, but also literally an artifact created in the process of memetic evolution and acquired, thanks to it, a tendency to select and prefer certain (evolutionarily successful) types of memes ... Such an interpretation of man is consolidated in the psychological theory of S. Blackmore, who asserts that the theory of memes finally and convincingly debunks both the religious ideas about the free and autonomous personality of God, who is responsible for the existence of the world, and the traditional ideas about the free and autonomous personality of man, who is responsible both for his own existence in general, and, in particular, for the morally significant decisions of their lives. S. Blackmore proposes to consolidate the new concept of a person as a vehicle with appropriate psychological techniques that get rid of the "false" feelings of their own autonomy and freedom. The author of this article considers the memetic concept of religion, culture and man as a non-trivial version of classical naturalism and suggests the possible productivity of criticism of this concept based on the unique Christian interpretation of personality as irreducibility to nature.

evolution, meme, memetics, atheism, Christianity, human philosophy, philosophy of religion, Christian anthropology

1. Blackmore S. (1999) The Meme Machine. Oxford University Press.
2. Blackmore S. (2000) “The Power of Memes”. Scientific American, vol. 283, no. 4, pp. 64–73.
3. Blackmore S. (2009) “The third replicator is among us”. New Scientist, vol. 203, pp. 36–39.
4. Borisov E. (2009) Osnovnye cherty postmetafi zicheskoi ontologii [The main features of postmetaphysical ontology]. Tomsk: Izdatel′stvo Tomskogo universiteta (in Russian).
5. Dawkins R. (1989) The Selfish Gene. Moscow: Corpus AST (Russian translation).
6. Dawkins R. (2008) The God Delusion. Moscow: Izdatel′stvo KoLibri (Russian translation).
7. Dekart R. (1989) Sochineniya v 2 tomakh [Works in 2 vols]. Vol. 1. Moscow: Mysl′ (Russian translation).
8. Dennet D.C. (2006) Breaking the spell: Religion as a natural phenomenon. New York: Viking.
9. Dennett D. (1995) Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life. Moscow: NLO (Russian translation).
10. Dennett D. (2008) “Toward a Buyer’s Guide to Religions”. Logos, vol. 4 (67), рр. 3–27 (Russian translation).
11. Geertz A.W. (2013) “New atheistic approaches in the cognitive science of religion: on Daniel Dennett Breaking the spell (2006) and Richard Dawkins the God delusion (2006)”. Gosudarstvo, religiia, Tserkov′ v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 3 (31), pp. 77–109 (Russian translation).
12. Lossky V. (2003) Bogovidenie [The vision of God]. Moscow: AST (in Russian).
13. McGrath A. (2013) Dawkins’ God: Genes, Memes and the Meanings of Live. Wiley-Blackwell.
14. Plantinga A. (2007) The Dawkins Confusion: Naturalism ‘ad absurdum’, available at https://www.booksandculture.com/articles/2007/marapr/1.21.html (24.05.2022).
15. Plantinga A. (2012) “Science or naturalism? The contradictions of Richard Dawkins”. ABC Religion & Ethics, available at https://www.abc.net.au/religion/science-or-naturalism-the-contradictions-of-richard-dawkins/10100636 (24.05.2022).
16. Polyakov E. (2010) “Memetika: nauka ili paradigma?” [Memetics: science or paradigm?]. Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Philosophy, vol. 2, pp. 160–165 (in Russian).
17. Rassel B. (1987) Why I Am Not a Christian. Moscow: Politizdat (Russian translation).
18. Schmemann A. (2003) Za zhizn′ mira [For the life of the world]. Moscow: Izdatel′stvo khrama sviatoi muchenitsy Tatiany (in Russian).
19. Shokhin V. (2016) “V chem vse-taki novizna ¯novogo ateizma″?” [After all, what is the novelty of the new atheism?]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 3 (65), pp. 149–157 (in Russian).
20. Vattimo G. (2007) After Christianity. Moscow: Tri kvadrata (Russian translation).

Khitruk Ekaterina

*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.