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

This Article discusses the question pertaining to the primacy of the Pope of Rome from the fi rst to the eighth centuries. The author criticizes the Roman Catholic teaching of the primacy of the pope as well as papal infallibility both of which were promulgated at the First Vatican Council in 1870. The author’s sources include an analysis of the proof texts employed by the Council: texts from scripture, from the works of early Christian fathers (Saint Ireneus and Saint Ambrose), from the works of the roman Pontiff s (Leo the Great, Hormisdus, and Gregory the great), on which the Council based its assumptions regarding the primacy of Peter and of the roman pontiff s. A panoramic view and detailed study of these documents lead the author to conclude that the doctrine of primacy has no real foundation in fact. The scriptures underscore the significance but not the particular office of Peter whose importance is founded in the fact that the apostle was at the head of the Christian community in Jerusalem. The Council incorrectly understood the proof texts on which it based the primacy doctrine separating them from their historical and social Sitz im Leben. The author pays particular attention to the historical circumstances surrounding the particular position of Rome as the capital city, the unique, for the western half of the Empire, apostolic origin of the see, its distance from Constantinople, and the relative independence of the popes in the face of the Byzantine emperors, an understanding which was not at all shared by the Eastern Churches. The author concludes that the pretensions of the popes to primacy were never accepted by the whole of the Church.

primacy, primacy in the Church, bishop, Saint Peter, Christ, Roman See, Pope of Rome, Byzantine Emperor, power, Ecumenical Council, Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Saint Augustine, Constantine the Great, Leo the Great, Gregory the Great, Eusebius of Caesarea.

1. Anton H. H. 1977. Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, vol. 88, pp. 38–84.
2. Anton H. H. 1985. Von der byzantinischen Vorherrschaft zum Bund mit den Franken von Sabinianus bis Paul I. Greschat M. (ed.) Das Papsttum I. Stuttgart, 1985. P. 100–114.
3. Barth R., Bedurftig F. Das Papstlexikon. München, 20052.
4. Baus K., Ewig E. Die Reichskirche nach Konstantin dem Grosen. Freiburg, 1973. Bd. 2.1.
5. Blank J. 1985. Petrus – Rom- Papsttum. Eine folgenreiche Geschichte. Von Aristi V. u. a. (eds.) Das Papsttum. Dienst oder Hindernis für die Okumene? Regensburg, 1985. P 9– 41.
6. Böttrich Ch. Petrus. Fischer, Fels und Funktionar. Leipzig, 2001.
7. Borgolte M. Petrusnachfolge und Kaiserimitation. Die Grablegen der Päpste, ihre Genese und Traditionsbildung. Gottingen, 1989.
8. Brändle R. 1992. Petrus und Paulus als nova sidera. Theologische Zeitschrift, vol. 48, pp. 207–217.
9. Brent A. Hippolytus and the Roman Church in the Third Century. Leiden, 1995.
10. Brox N. Greschat M. (ed.) Das Papsttum I. Stuttgart, 1985. P. 25–42.
11. Brox N. 1976. Probleme einer Frühdatierung des römischen Primats. Kairos, vol. 18, pp. 81–99.
12. Brox N. 1975. Rom und «jede Kirche» im 2. Jahrhundert. Zu Irenaeus, adv. Haer. III 3,2. Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum, vol. 7, pp. 42–78.
13. Caspar E. 1926. Die älteste römische Bischofsliste. Papsttum und Kaisertum. Paul Kehr zum 65. Geburtstag dargebracht. München, 1926. P. 1–22
14. Caspar E. Geschichte des Papsttums. Tübingen, 1930–1933.
15. Congar Y. 1975. Titel, welche für den Papst verwandt werden. Concilium, vol. 11, pp. 538–544.
16. Denzinger H. Kompendium der Glaubensbekenntnisse und kirchlichen Lehrentscheidungen. Freiburg, 199137.
17. Dinkler E. 1980. Petrus und Paulus in Rom. Gymnasium, vol. 87, pp. 1–37.
18. Erlemann K. 1998. Die Datierung des ersten Klemensbriefes - Anfragen an eine communis opinion. New Testament Studies, vol. 44, pp. 591–607.
19. Feldmeier R. Der erste Brief des Petrus. Leipzig, 2005.
20. Frohnhofen H. 1985. Der Erstapostel Petrus in den Sermones II – V Papst Leos I. Trierer Theologische Zeitschrift, vol. 94, pp. 212–222.
21. Fuhrmann H. Die Päpste. Von Petrus zu Johannes Paul II. München, 1998.
22. Fuhrmann H. 1971. Neuerungen in Theorie und Praxis des römischen Primates. Vom Frühmittelalter zur gregorianischen Reform. Concilium, vol. 7, pp. 254–256.
23. Gemeinhardt P. 2011. Petrus in Rom? Neue Diskussionen über eine alte Frage. Materialdienst des Konfessionskundlichen Instituts Bensheim, vol. 62, pp. 63–67.
24. Girardet K. M. 1974. Appellatio. Ein Kapitel kirchlicher Rechtsgeschichte in den Kanones des vierten Jahrhunderts. Historia, vol. 23, pp. 98–127.
25. Girardet K. M. Kaisergericht und Bischofsgericht. Bonn, 1975.
26. Girardet K. M. 1994. Gericht über den Bischof von Rom. Historische Zeitschrift, vol. 259, pp. 1–38.
27. Haendler G. 1985. Das Papsttum unter gotischer und byzantinischer Herrschaft. Von Hilarius bis Pelagius II. Greschat M. (ed.) Das Papsttum I. Stuttgart, 1985. P. 71–82.
28. Haller J. Das Papsttum. Idee und Wirklichkeit I. Stuttgart, 19502.
29. Hübner H. 1997. Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben Briefe des Ignatius. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, vol. 1, pp. 44–72.
30. Jenal G. 1985. Gregor I., der Große. Greschat M. (ed.) Das Papsttum I. Stuttgart, 1985. P. 83–99.
31. Kertelge K. 2001. Petrusamt. Steimer B. (ed.) Lexikon der Päpste und des Papsttums. Freiburg, 2001. P. 607–610.
32. Kettenhofen E. 1995. Sixtus I. Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, vol. 10, pp. 575–577.
33. Klausnitzer W. Der Primat des Bischofs von Rom. Entwicklung — Dogma — Okumenische Zukunft. Freiburg, 2004.
34. Lampe P. 1978/1979. Das Spiel mit dem Petrusnamen – Matt. XVI.18. New Testament Studies, vol. 25, pp. 227–245.
35. Luz U. 2006. Du bist Petrus – und auf diesem Felsen will ich das Papsttum gründen? Welt und Umwelt der Bibel. Stuttgart, 2006. P. 23–29.
36. Marot H. 1963. La collégialité et le vocabulaire épiscopal du Ve au VIIe siècle. Irenikon, vol 36, pp. 41–60; vol. 37, pp. 198–221.
37. Martin J. Der Weg zur Ewigkeit fuhrt uber Rom. Die Frühgeschichte des Papsttums und die Darstellung der  neutestamentlichen Heilsgeschichte im Triumphbogenmosaik von Santa Maria Maggiore in Rom. Stuttgart, 2010.
38. McCue J. 1971. Der römische Primat in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten. Concilium, vol. 7, pp. 245–250.
39. Ohlig K.-H. Braucht die Kirche einen Papst? Umfang und Grenzen des papstlichen Primats. Dusseldorf, 1973.
40. Rahner H. Kirche und Staat im frühen Christentum. Dokumente aus acht Jahrhunderten und ihre Deutung. München, 1961.
41. Schimmelpfennig B. Das Papsttum. Von der Antike bis zur Renaissance. Darmstadt, 2009.
42. Schmithals W. 2009. Zu Ignatius von Antiochien. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, vol. 13, pp. 181–203.
43. Seppelt F. X. Der Aufstieg des Papsttums, Geschichte des Papsttums I. Leipzig, 19392.
44. Sieben H. J. 1983. Sanctissimi Petri apostoli memoriam honoremus. Die sardicensischen Appellationskanones im Wandel der Geschichte. Theologie und Philosophie, vol. 58, pp. 501–534.
45. Speigl J. 1985. Die Päpste in der Reichskirche des 4. und frühen 5. Jahrhunderts. Greschat M. (ed.) Das Papsttum I. Stuttgart, 1985. P. 43–55.
46. Steimer B. (red.) Lexikon der Päpste und des Papsttums. Freiburg, 20013.
47. Stockmeier P. 1975. Die Übernahme des Pontifex-Titels im spätantiken Christentum. Schwaiger G. (ed.) Konzil und Papst. Historische Beitrage zur Frage der hochsten Gewalt in der Kirche. Festgabe für Hermann Tuchle. München, 1975. P. 75–84.
48. Stockmeier P. 1985. Leo I. der Große. Greschat M. (ed.) Das Papsttum I. Stuttgart, 1985. P. 56–70.
49. Stockmeier P. 1973. Primat und Kollegialität im Licht der alten Kirche. Theologisch- praktische Quartalschrift, vol. 121, pp. 318–328.
50. Stockmeier P. 1976. Römische Kirche und Petrusamt im Licht frühchristlicher Zeugnisse. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, vol. 14, pp. 357–372.
51. Ullmann W. Gelasius I. (492 — 496). Das Papsttum an der Wende der Spatantike zum Mittelalter. Stuttgart, 1981.
52. Wickert U. 1976. »Und wenn du dermaleinst dich bekehrst, so stärke deine Brüder«. Der Bischof von Rom und die Einheit der Christen. Catholica, vol. 30, pp. 269–294.
53. Winkelmann F. Die ostlichen Kirchen in der Epoche der christologischen Auseinandersetzungen (5. bis 7. Jahrhundert). Berlin, 19832.
54. Wirbelauer E. Leo der Grose und die Entstehung des Papsttums. Meier M. (ed.) Sie schufen Europa. Historische Portraits von Konstantin bis Karl dem Grosen. München, 2007. P. 78–92.
55. Wojtowytsch M. Papsttum und Konzile. Von den Anfangen bis zu Leo I. (440–461). Stuttgart, 1981.
56. Ziegler M. Successio. Die Vorsteher der stadtromischen Christengemeinde in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten. Bonn, 2007.
57. Zwierlein O. 2010. Kritisches zur Römischen Petrustradition und zur Datierung des Ersten Clemensbriefes. Gottinger Forum für Altertumswissenschaft, vol. 13, pp. 87–157.
58. Zwierlein O. Petrus in Rom: Die literarischen Zeugnisse. Mit einer kritischen Edition der Martyrien des Petrus und Paulus auf neuer handschriftlicher Grundlage. Berlin, 20102.

Kettenhofen Erikh

This article is concerned with one of the most discussed problem in the history of Byzantium regarding the origin and circumstances of the appearance of iconoclasm in the eighth century. The author studies the contradiction between the early and later sources about the role of the bishops in Asia Minor in the diffusion of the iconoclastic heresy, particularly that of Bishop Constantine of Nacolea. The agenda of the Eighth Ecumenical Council, in which Constantine is described as the major heresiarch of iconoclasm, serve as a primary later source. On the other hand, earlier sources include the epistles of Germanos I of Constantinople, which indicate the Orthodoxy of this hierarch particularly regarding the icons and their veneration. An apparent contradiction in historiography is usually resolved by means of an examination of still another work of Germanos, his tractate On Heresies and the Councils, the contents of which directly prove the guilt of Constantine of Nacolea in diffusing the heresy. But an analysis of this work clearly shows that Germanos was not really its author. But, on the other hand, Constantine of Nicolea is deliberately portrayed in this work as the person responsible for the diffusion of the heresy, in order to absolve from guilt, the real perpetrators, the Emperors Leo III and Constantine V of the Isaurian Dynasty, the descendants of whom emerged as the initiators of the Eighth Ecumenical Council and, paradoxically, the victorious conquerors of the Iconoclastic Heresy.

Patriarch Germanus, Constantine of Nacoleia, Thomas of Claudioupolis, Patriarch Tarasius, Emperor Leo III, Emperor Constantine V, Empress Irene, Emperor Constantine VI, iconoclasm, VII Ecumenical Council, heresy, icon, Patriarchate of Constantinople.

1. Afinogenov D. E. Konstantinopol’skij patriarhat i ikonoborcheskij krizis v Vizantii (784–847) (Patriarchate of Constantinople and Iconoclastic Crisis in Byzantium (784–847)). Moscow, 1997.
2. Alexander P. The Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople. Oxford, 1958.
3. Andreev I. D. German i Tarasij patriarhi Konstantinopol’skie (Germanus and Tarasius Patriarchs of Constantinople). Sergiyev Posad, 1907.
4. Auzepy M.-F. (éd). La vie d’Étienne le jeune par Étienne le diacre. Paris, 1997.
5. Gero S. Byzantine Iconoclasm during the Reign of Leo III. Louvain, 1973.
6. Gouillard J. 1965. L’hérésie dans l’empire byzantine des origines au XIIe siècle. Travaux et memoires, vol. 1, pp. 299–324.
7. Ladner G. B. 1940. Origin and Significance of Byzantine Iconoclastic Controversy. Medieval Studies, vol. 2, pp. 127–149.
8. Lamza L. Patriarch Germanos I. von Konstantinopel (715–730). Würzburg, 1975.
9. Ostrogorsky G. 1930. Les débuts de la Querelle des Images. Mélanges Charles Diehl. Paris, 1930, vol. 2, pp. 235–255.
10. Speck P. 1995. Die Affäre um Konstantin von Nakoleia. Byzantinische Zeitschrift, vol. 88, pp. 148–154.
11. Σταυριάνος Κ. Σ. Ἅγιος Γερμανὸς Α´ ὁ ὁμολογητὴς Πατριάρχης Κωνσταντινουπόλεως (St Germanus I. the Confessor, Patriarch of Constantinople). Ἀθῆνα, 2003.
12. Stein В. Der Beginn des Byzantinischen Bilderstreites und seine Entwicklung bis in die 40er Jahre des 8. Jahrhunderts. München, 1980.
13. Zaplatnikov S. V. 2013. Ideja Vselenskogo sobora v VIII veke (The Idea of an Ecumenical Council in the VIIIth Century). Materialy Ezhegodnoj bogoslovskoj konferencii PSTGU. Мoscow, 2013, pp. 259-261

Zaplatnikov Sergei

This article examines the thought of Bulgakov as regards the dogmatic formulation of the council of Chalcedon as well as his thoughts on the Holy Eucharist. The author wishes to describe the difficult path which Bulgakov followed to arrive at his understanding of the most fundamental points of Christian doctrine and during the course of which he was initially fascinated and later disenchanted by Roman Catholicism. This rather short period, usually known by the name of the Crimean Philosophy of Bulgakov, is one of the key moments in the whole of his activity and provided the final impetus for his turn to Sophiology. The author of this article describes how the return of Bulgakov to Russian Orthodoxy was accompanied by the philosopher’s rediscovery of Sophiology. Sophiology was interpreted by Bulgakov as relieving the existing antinomy between two opposing principles in both the mystery of the Eucharist and the mystery of the Incarnation, between the divine and the mortal. The problem of the consecration of the holy gifts was met and resolved by Bulgakov in the domain of Christology and more precisely in the doctrine of the body of Christ: the earthly or material body and the glorifi ed body, the reality of Christ’s body up until the Resurrection and after the Resurrection. This teaching about the relationship between the two realities of the corporality of Christ was little studied in Orthodoxy Theology before Bulgakov. It was interpreted by Bulgakov in the light of his Sophiology: the Incarnation as the absolute realization in human form of the divine sophiological prototype. The author of this article concludes that Bulgakov’s use of Sophiology provided him with a way to oppose and overcome Kant’s transcendentalism. Thus, it became one of the major facets of Russian Philosophy

S. N. Bulgakov, Sofi a, E. Kant, Thomas Aquinas, Eucharist, Consecration, Transubstantiation, dogma of Chalcedon, Incarnation of the Logos, Kenosis, antinomy, religious consciousness.

1. Bulgakov S. N. Pravoslavie. Ocherki uchenij a pravoslavnoj cerkvi (Orthodoxy. Outlines of Orthodox Church’s Doctrine). Kiev, 1991.
2. Bulgakov S. N. 1998. Из памяти сердца. Прага [1923–1924] (From the Memory of the Heart. Prague [1923-1924]). Issledovanija po istorii russkoj mysli. Ezhegodnik za 1998 god. Мoscow, 1998. P. 105–256
3. Bulgakov S. N. Evharistija (The Eucharist). Мoscow, 2005.
4. Bulgakov S. N. Ikona i ikonopochitanie. Dogmaticheskij ocherk (The icon and the Iconoduly. Dogmatic essay). Мoscow, 1996.
5. Bulgakov S. N. Svet Nevechernij (Unfading Light). Мoscow, 1994.
6. Bulgakov S. N. Agnec Bozhij. O Bogochelovechestve (The Lamb of God. On God-manhood). Мoscow, 2000.
7. Struve P. B. 1906. Несколько слов по поводу статьи С. Н. Булгакова (Some Words concerning the Article of S. Bulgakov). Poljarnaja zvezda, vol. 113, pp. 128–130.

Vaganova Natal'ia

The Russian intellectual world tends to regard Russian experimental spiritism as a rather simplistic phenomenon and stresses its positivistic character, directed at obliterating the distinction between spirit and matter, reason and faith. In this context, Spiritism is viewed as just one more component which contributed to the increasing secularization of western culture. But a detailed historical analysis of Russian experimental spiritism reveals a more nuanced and equivocal view of a discipline which juggled between science and religion. On the basis of unpublished and little known archival materials, the author of this article shows that Vagner and Aksakov, the two main proponents of Russian experimental spiritism, differed substantially in their attitude towards Christianity. Aksakov saw experimental spiritism as a way of formulating a new religion of rationality. But Vagner, on the other hand, regarded it as a way of converting unbelievers to the Orthodox faith. Discovering this basic diff erence between Vagner and Aksakov, allows the author of this article to show the link which appeared during the second half of the nineteenth century between the idea of the secularization of western society and the stereotypical impression of the essential conflict between science and religion. The marginal position of experimental spiritism to both science and religion allowed it to act on the side of both religion and science depending on the individual predispositions of its main proponents

N.P.Vagner, A.N. Aksakov, spiritism, experimental spiritism, kardecism, Christianity, science, religion, spirit, matter, reason, faith, secularization, superstition

1. Aksakoff A. N. 1869. Spiritualism in Russia. Human Nature, no. 30, pp. 456–461.
2. Boltinn A. P. 1865. Spiritizm (Spiritism). Raduga, 1865, vol. 4, pp. 1-22.
3. Chadwick O. The Secularization of the European Mind in the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge, 1990.
4. Conan-Doyle A. History of Spiritualism. London, 1926.
5. Glanvill J. Saducismus Triumphatus. London, 1682.
6. Gordin M. 2011. Seeing is Believing: Professor Vagner’s Wonderful World. Histories of Scientific Observation, pp. 135–155.
7. Kardec A. Le Spiritisme à sa plus simple expression. Paris, 1862.
8. Kardec A. Revue Spirite (1865). Create Space Independent Publishing Platform, 2010.
9. Lebedev M. 1866. Spirity i spiritizm (Spirits and Spiritualism). Hristianskoe chtenie, no. 7, pp. 24–101; no. 9, pp. 265– 315; no. 11. pp. 615–707.
10. Leskov N. S. 2000. Modnyj vrag cerkvi. Obshhestvennaja zametka (Spiritizm pod vzgljadom nashih duhovnyh pisatelej) (Fancy Enemy of the Church. Social Note (Spiritualism under the Glance of our Spiritual Writers)). Polnoe sobranie sochinenij v 30-ti tomah (Works in 30 volumes). Moscow, 2000. Vol. 7, pp. 740–752.
11. Mendeleev D. I. 1876. Dva publichnyh chtenija o spiritizme (Two Public Readings on Spiritualism). Materialy dlja suzhdenija o spiritizme (Materials concerning spiritualism). Saint-Petersburg, 1876. P. 322–327.
12. Oppenheim J. The Other World. Spiritualism and Psychical Research in England (1850–1914). Cambridge, 1985.
13. Oslon R. G. Science and Religion, 1450–1900. From Copernicus to Darwin. Baltimore, 2004.
14. O. P. Spiritizm pred sudom zdravogo smysla (Spiritualism and the Judgment of Common Sense). Saint-Petersburg, 1873.
15. Pribytkov V. I. Spiritizm v Rossii ot vozniknovenija ego do nastojashhih dnej (Spiritualism in Russia from its Genesis till Modern Days). Saint-Petersburg, 1901.
16. Snegirev V. A. 1871. Spiritizm kak religiozno-filosofskaja doktrina (Spiritualism as Religious-Philosophical Doctrine). Pravoslavnyj sobesednik (Orthodoxy interlocutor), no. 1, pp. 12–14, 279– 316; no. 3. pp. 9–51, 142–172, 282–330.
17. Stocking G. W. 1971. Animism in Theory and Practice: E. B. Taylor’s Unpublished Notes on «Spiritualism». Man, vol. 6, no. 1. pp. 88–104.
18. Turner F. Between Science and Religion: the Reaction to Scientific Naturalism in Late Victorian England. Yale, 1974.
19. Turner F. 1978. The Victorian Conflict between Science and Religion: A Professional Dimension. Isis, vol. 69, no. 3. pp. 356–376.
20. Helmstadter R. J., Lightman B. V. (ed.) Victorian Faith in Crisis: Essays on Continuity and Change in Nineteenth-Century Religious Belief. Stanford, 1991.
21. Vagner N. P. Skazki Kota-Murlyki (Tales of the Cat Murlyka). Moscow, 1991.
22. Vagner N. P. Rasskaz o zemnoj zhizni Iisusa Hrista po Sv. Evangelijam, narodnym predanijam i uchenijam Sv. Cerkvi (Story about Jesus Christ’s Life on Earth according to St. Gospels, Folk’s Legends and Doctrine of the St. Church). Saint-Petersburg, 1908.
23. Vinitsky I. Ghostly Paradoxes: Modern Spiritualism and Russian Culture in the Age of Realism. Toronto, 2009.

Razdyakonov Vladislav

The current situation of plurality epistemological provokes distinct lack of clear criteria for scientific criticism humanities texts. This research raises the question of verification procedure for knowledge obtained humanities, its status and importance. Changes relate to the modern paradigm of scientific methodology in general, which involves switching from a focus on results orientation to the process of getting the truth (W.V.O. Quine, Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend, Imre Lakatos, etc.). To determine the relationships with the text as a carrier of the alleged truth reception is off ered three formats of relations: Text – Author, Text – Reader and Text – Reviewer. The article stresses questions of general and specific objectives for the scientifi c peer review, as well as the problem of plagiarism and its ethical and legal consequences. It is proposed to consider plan algorithm scientific review of the 26 criteria for it, which will help to streamline Institute of scientific criticism. Recent cover content requirements (which include: the incorporation of a scientific context, the definition of methodological systems, structured research, avoiding plagiarism, there is a real «increase of knowledge» and applied significance, etc.) and technical design, the variable respectively specifi c edition. Compliance with a number of requirements set out will help improve the effi ciency and profitability of the humanities.

ontological pluralism, epistemological pluralism, «existential relativity», verifi cation, academization of knowledge, «presumption of innocence», plagiarism, the criteria for science review, scientifi c criticism

1. Eco U. Kak napisat’ diplomnuju rabotu (How to write degree work). Saint Petersburg, 2004.
2. Fejerabend P. Izbrannye trudy po metodologii nauki (Selected works on the Scientific Method).  Мoscow, 1986.
3. Lakatos I. Dokazatel’stva i oproverzhenija kak dokazyvajutsja teoremy (Method of Proofs and Refutations). Мoscow, 1967.
4. Muha O. Ja. 2012. Kriterii istinnosti i nauchnosti postmodernistskogo znanija (Criteria of the Varity and Scientific Character of the Postmodern Knowledge). Vestnik PSTGU І, vol. 1 (39), pp. 58–66.
5. Nikolaev E. Chto takoe plagiat, ili O zapadnyh standartah nauchnoj jetiki (What is Plagiarism, or on Western Scientific Ethics’ Standart) (URL: http://www.osvita.org.ua/articles/68.html)
6. Plagium vulgaris: kak predotvratit’ plagiat v nauke (How to avert Scientific Plagiarism) (http://www.ria.ru/ online/20110131/328762171.html#ixzz29a7MprUN)
7. Quine W. V. O. Ontological Relativity. The Journal of Philosophy, 1968, vol. 65, pp. 185-212.
8. Rorty R. 1998. Against Unity. The Wilson Quarterly, vol. 22 (1), рр. 28–38.
9. Vjatkin V. Ot plagiata k profanacijam (From Plagiarism to Profanation). Troickij variant (URL: http://trv-science.ru/2011/ 12/06/ot-plagiata-k-profanaci-yam/).

Mukha Ol'ga

This article analyzes the way Soviet experts in religious studies understood and explained the Second Vatican Council, especially its decisions relating to and its influence on the social doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. Questions of Scientifi c Atheism, a well-known Soviet periodical, regularly featured news about the Council, sometimes from Soviet researchers who themselves were familiar with its sessions. Interest in the Council was real and was demonstrated by the flow of publications dealing with the theme which included even translations from foreign languages. Soviet reception of the changes within the Roman Catholic Church was colored by the role which was accorded the Church by Soviet ideology. The Church was seen as the inspirer of western capitalist society. Thus, official research in the Soviet Union was limited to investigating those questions raised at the Council which were seen to be useful for Soviet ideological warfare. As a result, Soviet researchers from the nineteen-sixties to the nineteen-eighties touched upon several knotty problems inherent in the decisions of the Council as well as in Catholic social doctrine: the transformation of the Church’s position on society, solidarity, the definition of positions on certain issues, and others. Although the work of Soviet researchers was determined by their Marxist perspective, they are still of interest today

history of religious studies, Soviet religious studies, Catholicism, Roman Catholic Church, social doctrine, Vatican II.

1. Babosov E. M. Tejjardizm: popytka sinteza nauki i hristianstva (Teilahrd de Chardin’ Teaching. The Tentative Synthesis of Science and Christianity). Minsk, 1970.
2. Babosov E. M. Nauchno-tehnicheskaja revoljucija i modernizacija katolicizma (Scientific and Technical Revolution and Modernization of the Catholicism). Minsk, 1971.
3. Fal’koni K. Vatikanskij sobor i prichiny ego sozyva (Vatican Council and Causes of its Convocation). Мoscow, 1964.
4. Fomichenko V. V. Problema cheloveka i sovremennyj klerikal’nyj antikommunizm (Human Problem and Modern Clerical Anti-communism). Кiev, 1982.
5. Halik T. 2003. Vaticanum II: koniec katolicyzmu czy niedokonczona rewolucja? Wiez, vol. 45.10, pp. 35–43.
6. Heffner J. Hristianskoe social’noe uchenie (Christian Social Doctrine). Мoscow, 200 4.
7. Jastrebov I. B. 1968. Bibliografija rabot o II Vatikanskom sobore (Bibliography of the II Vatican). Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, vol. 6.
8. Jastrebov I. B. Social’naja filosofija katolicizma v XX veke (Catholic Social Philosophy in XX cen.). Кiev, 1988
9. Jastrebov I. B. Katolicizm v sovremennoj Francii (Catholicism in Modern France). Мoscow, 1973.
10. Kanapa Zh. Social’naja doktrina cerkvi i marksizm (Church Social Doctrine and the Marxism). Мoscow, 1964.
11. Kazanova A. Vtoroj Vatikanskij sobor: kritika ideologii i praktiki sovremennogo katolicizma (The Second Vatican Council: the Critics of Modern Catholicism’s Ideology and Practice). Мoscow, 1973.
12. Kanterov I. Ja. Vatikan pod natiskom ateizma (Vatican under Atheism’s Attack). Мoscow, 1972.
13. Koval’skij N. A. Katolicizm i mirovoe social’noe razvitie (Catholicism and World Social Development). Мoscow, 1974.
14. Korotkov N. D. Krizis filosofii katolicizma (Crisis of Catholicism’s Philosophy). Kiev, 1987
15. Kostjuk K. N. 1997. Social'noe uchenie katolicheskoj cerkvi (Social Teaching of theRoman-Catholic Church). Social’no- politicheskij zhurnal, vol. 5, pp. 103–118.
16. Kuzmickas B. Ju. Filosofskie koncepcii katolicheskogo modernizma (Philosophical Concepts of the Catholic Modernism). Vilnius, 1982.
17. Magister S. Politika Vatikana i Italija, 1943–1978 (Vatican Politics and Italy 1943–1978). Мoscow, 1982.
18. Markevich S. K. Tajnye nedugi katolicizma (Secret Afflictions of Catholicism). Мoscow, 1967.
19. McHugh F. P. Catholic social thought: renovating the tradition: A Keyguide to Resources. Leuven, 2008.
20. Minkjavichjus Ja. V. Katolicizm i nacija (Catholicism and Nation). Мoscow, 1971.
21. Minkjavichjus Ja. V. 1968. Novye tendencii v katolicheskoj filosofii (New Trends in the Catholic Philosophy). Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, vol. 6.
22. Mihajlova L. V. Katolicheskaja cerkov’ i rabochij klass FRG (Catholic Church and German Working-class). Мoscow, 1980.
23. Mchedlov M. P. Pod svodami sobora sv. Petra (Under Arches of St Peter’s Basilica). Мoscow, 1964.
24. Mchedlov M. P. 1968. Pereocenka cennostej (Soul-searching). Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, vol. 6.
25. Mchedlov M. P. Jevoljucija sovremennogo katolicizma (Evolution of the Modern Catholicism). Мoscow, 1967.
26. Ovsienko F. G. Jevoljucija social’nogo uchenija katolicizma (Evolution of Catholic Social Teaching). Мoscow, 1987.
27. Ovchinnikov V. G. Katolicheskaja cerkov’ v Zapadnoj Afrike: Ocherki istorii katolicheskogo missionerstva (Catholic Church in Western Africa: History of Catholic Missions). Мoscow, 1982.
28. Podberezskij I. V. Katolicheskaja cerkov’ na Filippinah (Catholic Church on the Philippines). Мoscow, 1988;
29. Ponomareva L. V. Ispanskij katolicizm XX veka (Spain Catholicism in XX cen.). Мoscow, 1989;
30. Potashinskaja N. N. Katolicheskaja cerkov’ i rabochee dvizhenie v Italii (Catholic Church and Working-class Movement in Italy). Мoscow, 1979.
31. Radugin A. A. Personalizm i katolicheskoe obnovlenie (Personalism and Catholic Renewal). Voronezh, 1982;
32. Ramm B. Ja. 1981. Issledovanie problem sovremennogo katolicizma v literature 70-h godov (Research of the Problems of Modern Catholicism in Literature of 1970-s). Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, vol. 28.
33. Shevcova L. F. Socializm i katolicizm (Socialism and Catholicism). Мoscow, 1982.
34. Shejman M. M. Katolicizm v menjajushhemsja mire (Catholicism in the Changing World). Мoscow, 1975.
35. Shejman M. M. 1968. Mezhdu dvumja soborami (Between two Councils). Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, vol. 6.
36. Vasilevskis Je. «Antropologicheskij povorot» v filosofii XX veka («Anthropological Turnabout» in XX century’s Philosophy). Vilnius, 1987. P. 158–165.
37. Vasilevskis Je. 1989. Antropologicheskie principy neotomistskogo personalizma Zh. Maritena i K. Vojtyly (Anthropological Approaches of the Neo-Thomistic Personalism of J. Maritain and K. Voityla). Vatikan i problemy sovremennosti, vol. 5, pp. 33–42.
38. Vasil’eva O. Ju. Russkaja Pravoslavnaja Cerkov’ i Vtoroj Vatikanskij Sobor (Russian Orthodox Church and the Second Vatican Council). Мoscow, 2004.
39. Velikovich L. N. 1966. Novye vejanija v sovremennom katolicizme (New Trends in the Modern Catholicism). Voprosy filosofii, vol. 7, pp. 143–153.
40. Velikovich L. N. Krizis sovremennogo katolicizma (Modern Catholicism’s Crisis). Мoscow, 1967.
41. Velikovich L. N. Religija i politika v sovremennom kapitalisticheskom obshhestve (Religion and Politics in the Modern Capitalistic Society). Мoscow, 1970.
42. Velichko O. I. Politicheskij katolicizm i rabochee dvizhenie v Avstrii, 1918-1984 (Political Catholicism and Working-class Movement in Austria, 1918–1984). Мoscow, 1985.

Folieva Tat'iana

This article presents a panoramic view of religious publications which appeared in Russia from 2000 to 2013. Aside from monographs and textbooks, publications dealing with religious studies and periodicals were also examined. The material was divided into the following categories: the history and the methodology of religious studies, the philosophy of religion, the sociology of religion, the psychology of religion, and the phenomenology of religion (publications dealing with the history of religion were not taken into account). This bibliographical collection may serve as an important incentive for further analysis of the contemporary content of and perspectives for religious studies as an academic discipline in Russia.

history and methodology of religious studies, philosophy of religion, sociology of religion, psychology of religion, phenomenology of religion

1. Andresen D. Portal «Religioznaja zhizn’» (Portal «Religious Life») (URL: http://religious-life.ru/2013/04/religia-vo-ploti-part1/ и URL: http://religious-life.ru/2013/04/religiya-vo-plotipart2/).
2. Antonov K. M. Filosofi ja religii v russkoj metafi zike XIX — nachala XX veka (Philosophy of Religion in the Russian Metaphysics XIX — beg. XX cc.). Moscow, 2009.
3. Antonov K. M. 2011. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, vol. 5–6, pp. 7–21.
4. Antonov K. M. Portal «Religiopolis» (URL: http://www.religiopolis.org/publications/113-nauchnost-iili-profanatsij a-teologij a-ilii-religiovedenie.html).
5. Arinin E. I. 2003. Potylicyna I. N. (ed.) Problemy prepodavanija i sovremennoe sostojanie religiovedenija v Rossii (Problem of Teaching and Modern Religious Studies an Russia). Moscow, 2003. С. 76–80.
6. Arinin E. I. Religiovedenie (Religious Studies). Moscow, 2004.
7. Arinin E. I., Nefedova I. D. Psihologija religii (Psychology of Religion). Wladimir, 2005. Vol. 1–2.
8. Belik A. A. Kul’tura i lichnost’. Psihologicheskaja antropologija. Jetnopsihologija. Psihologija religii (Psychological Anthropology. Ethnopsychology. Psychology of Religion). Moscow, 2001.
9. Berlin W. F. e. a. (eds.) Contemporary Approaches to the Study of Religion. The Hague, 1984.
10. Bezrogov V. G., Pushkareva N. L. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 119–136.
11. Bibliograficheskij ukazatel’. Politologija, istorija, religiovedenie i filosofija (Bibliographical Index. Political science, History, Religious Studies and Philosophy). Barnaul, 2006.
12. Bocharov B. A. 2004. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 142–144.
13. Bochanov A. 2009. Brennoe i vechnoe: ideologija i mifologija social’nyh krizisov (Perishable and Eternal: Ideology and Mythology of Social Crisises). Novgorod, 2009. P. 259–261.
14. Brandenburg V. Ja. 2012. Izvestija IGU. Serija «Politologija. Religiovedenie», vol. 2 (9), pt. 1, pp. 165–172.
15. Burdo M., Filatov S. B. (eds.) Sovremennaja religioznaja zhizn’ v Rossii. Opyt sistematicheskogo opisanija (Modern Religious Life in Russia. Experience of Systematic Description). Moscow, 2003. Vol. 1; 2004. Vol. 2; 2005. Vol. 3.
16. Burdo M., Filatov S. (eds.) Atlas sovremennoj religioznoj zhizni Rossii (Atlas of Modern Religious Life in Russia). Мoscow, 2005–2006. Vol. 1–3.
17. Chesnokova V. F. Process vocerkovlenija naselenija Rossii (Process of Russian Populations’ Churching). Moscow, 2000.
18. Chesnokova V. F. Tesnym putem: process vocerkovlenija naselenija Rossii v konce XX v. (In a Narrow Way: Process of Russian Populations’ Churching in the End of XX cen.). Moscow, 2005.
19. Danilova V. E. (ed.) Filosofija religii: hrestomatija (Philosophy of Religion: Reading Book). Moscow, 2009.
20. Davydov I. P. 2012. Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I. Bogoslovie. Filosofija, vol. 6 (44), pp. 123–128.
21. Davydov I. P. Jepistema miforituala (Epistema and Mytho-Ritual). Moscow, 2013.
22. Ermishin O. Filosofija religii: koncepcii religii v zarubezhnoj i russkoj filosofii (Philosophy of Religion: Religious Conceptions in Foreign and Russian Philosophy). Moscow, 2008.
23. Filatov S. B. (ed.) Religija i obshhestvo: Ocherki religioznoj zhizni sovremennoj Rossii (Religion and Society: Outline of Religious Life in Modern Russia). Saint-Petersburg, 2002.
24. Flurnua T. 2008. RELIGO, vol. 1, pp. 203–222.
25. Folieva T. A. 2012. Izvestija IGU. Serija «Politologija. Religiovedenie», vol. 2 (9), pt. 1, pp. 205–212.
26. Gosudarstvo, religija, cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom (State, Religion, Church in Russia and Abroad). Мoscow, 2012. Vol. 3–4 (30).
27. Garadzha V. I., Garadzha E. V. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 180–190.
28. Garadzha V. I. Sociologija religii (Sociology of Religion). Moscow, 2007.
29. Gorjachenko E. A. 2010. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 150–156.
30. Gorohov A. A. 2009. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 103–113.
31. Gorohov A. A. Fenomenologija religii Mirchi Jeliade (M. Eliade’s Phenomenology of religion). Saint-Petersburg, 2011.
32. Gurevich P. S. (ed.) Filosofija religii: hrestomatija (Philosophy of Religion: Reading Book). Moscow, 2008.
33. Hoteeva M. S. 2011. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 153–159.
34. Ipatova I. P. 2006. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 88–101.
35. Jablokov I. N. Vvedenie v obshhee religiovedenie (Introduction to General Religious Studies). Moscow, 2001.
36. Jablokov I. N. Filosofija religii. Aktual’nye problemy (Philosophy of Religion. Actual Problems). Moscow, 2007.
37. Mitrohin L. Filosofskie problemy religiovedenija (Philosophical Problems of Religious Studies). Saint-Petersburg, 2008.
38. Jablokov I. N. 2011. Gosudarstvo, religija, Cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 1, pp.165–173.
39. Jakovlev A. I. Religioznoe soznanie (Religious Consciousness). Moscow, 2004.
40. Jelbakjan E. S. 2006. Pahomov S. V. (ed.) Tret’i Torchinovskie chtenija. Religiovedenie i vostokovedenie (III Readings in Hounor of Torchin. Religious Studies and Oriental Studies). Saint-Petersburg, 2006. P. 291–297.
41. Jelbakjan E. S. 2011. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp. 141–162.
42. Jelbakjan E. S. Portal «Religiopolis» (URL: http://www.religiopolis.org/index.php/publications/81-profannaja-teologij a-ili-profanatsij a-nauki).
43. Kaariajnen K., Furman D. (eds.) Starye cerkvi, novye verujushhie. Religija v massovom soznanii postsovetskoj Rossii (Old Churches, New Believers. Religion in Mass Consciousness of Post-Soviet Russia). Moscow, 2000.
44. K., Furman D. (eds.) Novye cerkvi, starye verujushhie — starye cerkvi, novye verujushhie. Religija v postsovetskoj Rossii (New Churches, Old Believers — Old Churches, New Believers. Religion in Mass Consciousness of Post-Soviet Russia). Moscow, 2007.
45. Kimeljov Ju. A. Filosofija religii (Philosophy of Religion). Moscow, 1998.
46. Kolkunova K., Kostylev P., Miroshnikov I., Safronov R. 2007–2008. Archaeus: Studies in the History of Religion, vol. 11–12, pp. 305–332.
47. Kormilina Zh. V., Panchenko A. A., Shtyrkov S. A. (eds.) Sny Bogorodicy. Issledovanija po antropologii religii (Theotokos’ Dreams. Studies on Anthropology of Religion). Saint-Petersburg, 2006.
48. Kormilina Zh. V. 2012. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp 195–201.
49. Kostylev P. N. 2006. Sibir’ na perekrestke mirovyh religij (Siberia on Crossroads of World Religions). Novosibirsk, 2006. P. 61–65.
50. Kostylev P. N. 2008. Sbornik «Dni nauki fi losofskogo fakul’teta», vol. 5, pp. 16–17.
51. Kostylev P. N. 2011. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Serija 7. Filosofija, vol. 5, pp. 74–82.
52. Kostylev P. N., Kolkunova K. A., Folieva T. A. (eds.) Religiovedenie na postsovetskom prostranstve (Religious Studies in Post-Soviet Space). Moscow, 2011.
53. Koval’ A. N., Mushelishvili N. N., Sergeev V. M., Spivak D. L. 2005. Religiovedenie, vol. 2,
pp. 88–97.
54. Krasnikov A. N., Gavrilina L. M., Jelbakjan E. S. (eds.) Problemy filosofi i religii i religiovedenija (Problems of Philosophy of Religion and Religious Studies). Kaliningrad, 2003.
55. Krasnikov A. N. 2001. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 5–9.
56. Krasnikov A. N. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 96–104;
57. Krasnikov A. N. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 96–103.
58. Krasnikov A. N., Tazhurizina Z. A. 2003. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 147–156.
59. Krasnikov A. N. 2006. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp. 93–111.
60. Krasnikov A. N. 2006. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp. 179–188.
61. Krasnikov A. N. Metodologija klassicheskogo religiovedenija (Methodology of Classical Religious Studies). Blagoveshchensk, 2004.
62. Krasnikov A. N. Metodologicheskie problemy religiovedenija (Methodological Problems of Religious Studies). Moscow, 2007.
63. Krjukov D. S. 2009. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 132–145;
64. Krjukov D. S. 2012. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp.152–163.
65. Kristensen U. B. 2005. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 115–121.
66. Majkova Je. Ju. Sociologija religii (Sociology of Religion). Tver, 2004.
67. Mak-Dugoll V. 2008. RELIGO, vol. 1, pp. 223–235.
68. Markin R. V. 2010. Aktual’nye problemy socio-gumanitarnogo znanija, vol. 42, pp. 154–160.
69. Medvedko S. V., Jelbakjan E. S. 2001. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 90–100.
70. Medvedko S. V., Jelbakjan E. S. 2001. Sociologichski issledovanija, vol. 8, pp. 103–111.
71. Medvedko S. V., Jelbakjan E. S. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 104–110.
72. Men’shikova E. V. 2008. Vestnik RSPR, vol. 1, pp. 70–76.
73. Mihel’son O. K. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 52–71.
74. Novaja literatura po social’nym i gumanitarnym naukam. Religiovedenie: bibliograficheskij ukazatel’ (New Publications in Sociology and Humanity Studies. Religious Studies: index). Moscow, 1993–2009.
75. Opalev S. A. 2010. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, vol. 3–4, pp. 170–189.
76. Отто R. 2003. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 113–128.
77. Отто R. 2004. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp. 125–132.
78. Отто R. 2004. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 140–145; 2005. Vol. 1, pp. 141–144.
79. Отто R. Svjashhennoe (The Holy). Saint-Petersburg, 2008.
80. Ovsienko F. G. 2004. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 116–130.
81. oni R. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 149–155.
82. Pismanik M. G. Lekcii po religiovedeniju (Lections on Religious Studies). Perm, 2006.
83. Pivovarov D. Filosofija religii (Philosophy of Religion). Moscow, 2006.
84. Pivovarov D. Gnoseologija religii (Gnosiology of Religion). Yekaterinburg, 2009.
85. Pivovarov D. Ontologija religii (Ontology of Religion). Saint-Petersburg, 2009.
86. Pjusiajnen I. Portal «Religioznaja zhizn’» (Portal «Religious Life») (URL: http://religious-life.ru/2013/04/pyysiainen/).
87. Pylaev M. A. 2003. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 63–72.
88. Pylaev M. A. 2005. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 69–78.
89. Pylaev M. A. 2008. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 118–127.
90. Pylaev M. A. 2009. Vestnik Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Serija «Filosofskie nauki. Religiovedenie», vol. 12, pp. 149–167.
91. Pylaev M. A. 2011. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, vol. 5–6, pp. 22–35. Shahnovich M. M. 2004. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 117–128.
92. Pylaev M. A. Kategorija «svjashhennoe» v fenomenologii religii, teologii i filosofii XX veka (Category of «Holy» in XX century’s Phenomenology of Religion, Theology and Philosophy). Moscow, 2011.
93. Radugin A. A. Vvedenie v religiovedenie: teorija, istorija i sovremennye religii (Introduction to Religious Studies: Theory, History and Modern Religions). Moscow, 2004.
94. Rahmanin A. Ju. 2009. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, vol. 1–2, pp. 7–23.
95. Rjazanova E. V. 2007. Jablokov I. N. (ed.) Vvedenie v obshhee religiovedenie (Introduction to General Religious Studies). Moscow, 2007. P. 255–328.
96. Robozeeva A. A. 2011. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 122–129.
97. Russele K., Agadzhanjan A. (eds.) Religioznye praktiki v sovremennoj Rossii (Religious Practices in Modern Russia). Moscow, 2006.
98. Russele K., Agardzhanjan A. (eds.) Prihod i obshhina v sovremennom pravoslavii: Kornevaja sistema rossijskoj religioznosti (Parish and Community in Modern Orthodoxy: Root System of Russian Religiosity). Moscow, 2011.
99. Safronov R. O. 2009. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, vol. 1–2, pp. 24–44.
100. Shahnovich M. M. 2005. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 118–133.
101. Shahnovich M. M. Ocherki po istorii religiovedenija (Essays on History of Religious Studies). Saint-Petersburg, 2006.
102. Shahnovich M. M. Religiovedenie (Religious Studies). Moscow, 2006.
103. Shahnovich M. M. 2008. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 193–200.
104. Shahnovich M. M., Chumakova T. V. 2012. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 191–202.
105. Shahov M. O. 2004. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 136–141.
106. Sharma A. 2011. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, vol. 5–6, pp. 44–54.
107. Shmelev V. Ju. 2009. Izvestija IGU. Serija «Politologija. Religiovedenie», vol. 1 (3), pp. 310–316.
108. Shokhin V. K. 2009. Diogenes, vol. 56 (125), pp. 125–137.
109. Shohin V. K. 2007. Filosofi ja religii: al’manah 2006–2007, vol. 1, pp. 15–88.
110. Shohin V. K. Vvedenie v fi losofi ju religii (Introduction to Philosophy of Religion). Moscow, 2010.
111. Shohin V. K. (ed.) Filosofija religii: Al’manah 2006–2007. Moscow, 2007. Vol. 1.
112. Shohin V. K. (ed.) Filosofija religii: Al’manah 2008–2009. Moscow, 2010. Vol. 2.
113. Shohin V. K. (ed.) Filosofija religii: Al’manah 2010–2011. Moscow, 2011. Vol. 3.
114. Shohin V. K. 2012. Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I. Bogoslovie. Filosofija, vol. 6 (44), pp. 129–137.
115. Shvechikov A. Religiovedenie: bibliografija rossijskih izdanij (1990–2002) (Religious Studies: Index of Russian Publications). Saint-Petersburg, 2005.
116. lina Ju. Ju. Izmenenie religioznosti naselenija Rossii: pravoslavnye i musul’mane (Change of Russian Populations’ Religiosity: Orthodox and Muslims). Moscow, 2006.
117. Sinelina Ju. Ju. Koncepcii sekuljarizacii v sociologicheskoj teorii. Teoreticheskie aspekty izuchenija religioznosti naselenija v sociologii religii (Conceptions of Secularization in Sociological Theory. Theoretical Aspects of Religiosity’s Research in Sociology of Religion). Moscow, 2009.
118. Sjorensen J. Portal «Religioznaja zhizn’» (Portal «Religious Life») (URL: http://religiouslife. ru/2013/04/sorensen-religion-in-mind-part1/ URL: http://religious-life.ru/2013/04/sorensen-religion-in-mind-part2/).
119. Skogorev A. P. «Religiovedenie». Predmetno-tematicheskij ukazatel’ literatury («Religious Studies». Object-subject index). Moscow, 2008.
120. Smagin B. A. Religiovedenie (Religious Studies). Saint-Petersburg, 20034.
121. Smirnov M. Ju. 2007. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 154–163.
122. Smirnov M. Ju. 2007. Religiovedenie, vol. 2. pp. 145–154.
123. Smirnov M. Ju. Ocherk istorii rossijskoj sociologii i religii (History of Russian Sociology and Religion). Saint-Petersburg, 2008.
124. Smirnov M. Ju. 2009. Vestnik moskovskogo universiteta. Serija 7. Filosofija, vol. 1, pp. 90–106.
125. Smirnov M. Ju. Sociologija religii: Slovar’ (Sociology of Religion: Dictionary). Saint-Petersburg, 2011.
126. Smirnov M. Ju. Religija i povsednevnost’: proshloe, nastojashhee i budushhee (Religion and Every Day Life: Past, Present and Future) (URL: http://www.rodon.org/relig-091007130819).
127. Smirnov M. Ju. Religija i religiovedenie v Rossii (Religion and Religious Studies in Russia). Saint-Petersburg, 2013.
128. Storchak V. M. 2006. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 138–151.
129. Trofi mova Z. P., Jablokov I. N. (eds.) 50 let kafedre filosofi i religii i religiovedenija filosofskogo fakul’teta MGU imeni M. V. Lomonosova (50 Anniversary to Philosophy of Religion and Religious Studies Department at Philosophical Faculty of Moscow State Lomonosov’s University). Moscow, 2009.
130. Uzlaner D. A. 2008. Religiovedenie, vol. 2, pp. 135–148.
131. Waardenburg J. (ed.) Classical Approaches to the Study of Religion. Aims, Methods and Theories of Research. The Hague, 1973.
132. Veremchuk V. I. Sociologija religii (Sociology of Religion). Мoscow, 2004.
133. Zabijako A. P. 2002. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp. 133–137.
134. Zabijako A. P. 2005. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 134–140.
135. Zabijako A. P. 2008. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 180–186.
136. Zabijako A. P. 2010. Religiovedenie, vol. 4, pp. 152–164.
137. Zabijako A. P. 2011. Religiovedenie, vol. 1, pp. 114–126.
138. Zabijako A. P. 2011. Religiovedenie, vol. 3, pp. 88–94.
139. Zabijako A. P., Krasnikov A. N., Jelbakjan E. S. (ed.) Religiovedenie. Jenciklopedicheskij slovar’ (Religious Studies. Dictionary). Moscow, 2006.
140. Zabijako A. P., Krasnikov A. N., Jelbakjan E. S. (ed.) Jenciklopedija religii (Dictionary of Religions). Moscow, 2008.
141. Zen’ko Ju. M. Psihologija i religija (Psychology and Religion). Saint-Petersburg, 2002.
142. Zen’ko Ju. M. Psihologija religii (Psychology of Religion). Saint-Petersburg, 2009.
143. Zen’ko Ju. M. 2009. Gosudarstvo, religija, cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 3, pp. 196–210.
144. Zhane P. 2008. RELIGO, vol. 1, pp. 179–202.
145. Zuev Ju. P., Shmidt V. V. (eds.) 2009. Voprosy religii i religiovedenija. Moscow, 2009. Vol. 1.
146. Zuev Ju. P., Shmidt V. V. (eds.) 2010. Voprosy religii i religiovedenija. Moscow, 2010. Vol. 2, 4, 6.

Vorontsova Elena

This article examines the understanding of the social network and lays the foundation for the possibility of applying the social network approach to the sociology of religion. During the last twenty years, Russian sociological circles have been actively discussing the question of whether Orthodoxy exerts any influence on contemporary Russia. Until the present, the amount of influence has been calculated by examining how people identify themselves and by how frequently they practice their religion. With the help of an apparatus of network analysis, an attempt is made in this article to detect still another way religion influences Russian today. The authors suggest a threepart typology of the way a contemporary person relates to religion: conversion, linkage through a social network, linkage through publicly visible marks of religiosity. With the aid of the foregoing, one can hazard the hypothesis that the second factor is of prime importance especially in countries threatened by forced secularization. The authors question the social mechanics gearing the functioning of contemporary Russian society and attempt to calculate the potential outreach of the contemporary Russian Orthodox parish. Data collected by the authors allow one to suppose that the influence of linking oneself to religion through and amid the various facets of life of the average Russian may be just as effective as the conversion experience

sociology of religion, analysis of social networks, parish community, religiosity, Russian Orthodox Church

1. Barnes J. 1954. Class and Committees in a Norwegian Island Parish. Human Relations, vol. 7, pp. 39‒58.
2. Boissevain J. Friends of Friends. Networks, Manipulators and Coalitions. Oxford, 1974.
3. Boissevain J. 1968. The Place of Non-Groups in the Social Sciences. Man N. S., vol. 3.4, pp. 542‒556.
4. Chesnokova V. F. Tesnym putem: process vocerkovlenija naselenija Rossii v konce XX v. (In a Narrow Way: Process of Russian Populations’ Churching in the End of XX cen.). Moscow, 2005.
5. Cohen A. 1977. Review of «Friends of Friends». Man N. S., vol. 12.2, pp. 347‒348.
6. Filatov S. B., Lunkin R. N. 2005. Statistika rossijskoj religioznosti: magija cifr i neodnoznachnaja real'nost' (Stats of the Russian Religiousity: Magic of Figures and Diverse Reality). Sociologicheskie issledovanija, vol. 6, pp. 35‒45.
7. Granovetter M. 2009. Sila slabyh svjazej (Power of the Weak Bonds). Jekonomicheskaja sociologija, vol. 10.4, pp. 31‒50.
8. Haythornthwaite C. 2002. Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media. The Information Society, vol. 18.5, pp. 385‒401.
9. Ipatova L. Tipy religioznogo obrashhenija sovremennyh verujushhih zhenshhin Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi MP (Types of Religious Conversion of Russian Orthodox Church’s Modern Women). Moscow, 2006.
10. Kaariajnen K., Furman D. E. 2007. Religioznost' v Rossii na rubezhe XX–XXI stoletij (Religiosity in Russia at the turn of the XX–XXI century). Obshhestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, vol. 1, pp. 103‒119; vol. 2, pp. 78‒95.
11. Lebedev S. D., Suhorukov V. V. 2013. Tesnyj put' ne tuda? (Cramped Way in the wrong direction?). Sociologicheskie issledovanija, vol. 1, pp. 118–126.
12. Lofland J., Skonovd N. 1981. Conversion Motifs. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 20.4, pp. 373‒385.
13. Martin A., Wellman B. 2011. Social Network Analysis: An Introduction. Carrington P., Scott J. (eds.) Handbook of Social Network Analysis.Thousand Oaks (CA), 2011. P. 11–25.
14. Oksanen A. Religious Conversion. A Meta-Analytical Study. Lund, 1994.
15. Rambo L. Understanding Religious Conversion. New Haven, 1993.
16. Wohlrab-Sahr M., Karstein U., Schmidt-Lux Th. Forcierte Sakularitat. Religioser Wandel und Generationendynamik im Osten Deutschlands. Frankfurt am Main, 2009.
17. Sigutin A. 2012. Problemy podnimalis' neprostye (The were raised Complicated Problems). Obninsk. Gorodskaja gazeta, vol. 122 (3692). P. 2.
18. Sinelina Ju. Ju. 2006. Dinamika processa vocerkovlenija pravoslavnyh (The Dynamics of Churching of Orthodox People). Sociologicheskie issledovanija, vol. 11, pp. 89–97
19. Sorokin P. Sistema sociologii (System of Sociology). Moscow, 1993. Vol. 2.
20. Zabaev I. Social’naja dejatel’nost’ Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi. Zapros so storony naselenija (Social Activity of Russian Orthodox Church. Population’s Inquiry) (URL: http://socrel.pstgu.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ Социальная-деятельность-Церкви_Запрос-со-стороны-населения.ppt).
21. Zorkaja N. A. 2009. Vestnik obshhestvennogo mnenija. Dannye. Analiz. Diskussii, vol. 2 (100), pp. 65‒84.

Zabaev Ivan

Since the 1950s, United States Supreme Court holdings have transformed the United States from a polity in which there was a soft establishment of Christianity to a polity in which there is now the establishment of a strong laicism. This essay begins with a brief review of some of the steps through which this transformation occurred in the United States through Supreme Court decisions beginning in the late 1940s. This paper demonstrates that the United States have moved beyond a separation of church and state to an established secular state that establishes policies and laws that are hostile to religious commitments. Such a state is not neutral with respect to religion. This paper demonstrates the extent to which the attempt to be neutral with respect to religion has led to non-neutral policies that privilege ways of life and conceptions of the good that reject religion.

Religion, Christianity, Morality, Principles of Morality, bioethics, laicism, Constituion, Separation of Church and State.

1. Ackerman B. Social Justice in the Liberal State. New Haven, 1980.
2. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Committee on Bioethics. 1995. Pediatrics, vol. 95. pp. 314–417.
3. Ameson R. 2003. Klosko G., Wall S. (eds.) Perfectionism and Neutrality: Essays in Liberal Theory. Lantham, 2003. P. 191–218.
4. Breitowitz Y. 1992. The brain death controversy in Jewish law. Jewish Action, vol. 52, pp. 61–66.
5. Davies M. For Altar and Throne: The Rising in the Vendee. St. Paul (MN), 1998.
6. Engelhardt H., Tristram Jr. Bioethics and Secular Humanism. London, 1991.
7. Engelhardt H., Tristram Jr. The Foundations of Bioethics. New York, 1996.
8. Engelhardt H., Tristram Jr. 2010. Politea, vol. 97, pp. 59–79.
9. Engelhardt H., Tristram Jr. 2011. Christian bioethics after Christendom: living in a secular fundamentalist polity and culture. Christian Bioethics, vol. 17(1), pp. 64–95.
10. Glendon M. A., Yanes R. 1991. Structural free exercise. Michigan Law Review, vol. 90, pp. 477–550.
11. Greenawalt K. 1986. The limits of rationality and the place of religious conviction: Protecting animals and the environment. William and Mary Law Review, vol. 27, pp. 1011–1065.
12. Gutmann A. 1995. Ethics, vol. 105, pp. 557–579.
13. Gutmann A., Thompsons D. Why Deliberate Democracy? Princeton (NJ), 2004.
14. Iltis A. 2009. The failed search for the neutral in the secular: public bioethics in the face of the culture wars. Christian Bioethics, vol. 15(3), pp. 220–233.
15. Iltis A. 2010. Toward a coherent account of pediatric decision making. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, vol. 35, pp. 526–552.
16. Neuhaus R. The Naked Public Square: Religion and Democracy in America. Grand Rapids (MI), 19862.
17. Ollick R. S. 1991. Brian death, religious freedom, and public policy: New Jersey’s landmark legislative initiative. Kennedy Institute of Ethics, vol. 1, pp. 275–288.
18. Patridge B. 2010. Adolescent psychological development, parenting styles and pediatric decision making. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, vol. 35, pp. 518–525.
19. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge (MA), 1971.
20. Rawls J. Political Liberalism. New York, 1993.
21. Sechter R. A French Genocide: The Vendee. Notre Dame (IN), 2003.
22. Weithorn L. 1983. Children’s capacities to decide about participation in research. IRB: a review of human subjects research, vol. 5(2), pp. 3.
23. Weithorn L., Campbell S. B. 1982. The competence of children and adolescents to make informed treatment decisions. Child Development, vol. 53, pp. 1589–1598.

Iltis Anna