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

The article analyzes the ideological foundation of the exceptional position of papacy within the Universal Church, as it was revealed during the conflict between the papacy and the Church of Constantinople at the end of the 5th century. The perception of a specifi c role of Apostle Peter as a presumed first bishop of Rome found its application as a keystone of the argumentation, which pope Felix III (483–492) developed for a justifi cation of his political actions, which in their turn lead to the uncanonical condemnation of patriarch of Constantinople Acacius and the beginning of a long-termed schism between Rome and the Orient. This argumentation, or rather an ecclesiological concept, styled by many scholars as ‘petrine discourse’, both presented an underlying structure of papal ideology and was a primary motivation for concrete actions on the field of ecclesiastical policy of the popes.

Acacius of Constantinople, Pope Felix III, Pope Gelasius I, Church Politics, Schism, Petrine Discourse

1. Bacht H. 1953 “Die Rolle des orientalischen Mönchtums in den kirchenpolitischen Auseinandersetzungen um Chalkedon (431–519)“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 193–314.
2. Beck H.-G. Geschichte der orthodoxen Kirche im Byzantinischen Reich, Göttingen, 1980.
3. Blaudeau Ph. Alexandrie et Constantinople (451–491) de l’histoire à la géo-ecclésiologie, Rome, 2006.
4. Blaudeau Ph. 2012 “Between Petrine Ideology and Realpolitik. The See of Constantinople in Roman Geo-Ecclesiology (449–536)”, in Grig L., Kelly G. (eds.) Two Romes. Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity, Oxford, 2012, pp. 364–384.
5. Blaudeau Ph. Le Siège de Rome et l’Orient (448–536). Etude géo-ecclésiologique, Rome, 2012.
6. Brennecke H. Ch. 2007 “Chalkedonense und Henotikon. Bemerkungen zum Prozess der östlichen Rezeption der christologischen Formel von Chalkedon“, in Heil U., von Stockhausen A., Ulrich J. (eds.) Ecclesia est in re publica. Studien zur Kirchen- und Theologiegeschichte im Kontext des Imperium Romanum, Berlin, New York, 2007, pp. 259–290.
7. Caspar E. Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anfängen bis zur Höhe der Weltherrschaft, Tübingen, 1933, vol. 2.
8. Deliyannis D. 2014 “The Roman Liber pontificalis, Papal Primacy, and the Acacian Schism”, in Viator, 2014, vol. 45/3, pp. 1–16.
9. Demacopoulos G. The Invention of Peter: The Development and Reception of the Petrine Discourse at the Close of Christian Antiquity, Philadelphia, 2013.
10. Duchesne L. Histoire ancienne de l’Eglise, Paris, 1910, vol. 3.
11. Dvornik F. Byzantium and the Roman Primacy, New York, 1979.
12. Frend W. H. C. 1976 “Eastern Attitudes to Rome during the Acacian Schism”, in Studies in Church History, 1976, vol. 13, pp. 69–82.
13. Grillmeier A. Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche, Freiburg; Basel; Wien, 1991, vol. 2/1.
14. Haacke R. 1953 “Die kaiserliche Politik in den Auseinandersetzungen um Chalkedon (451–553)“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 95–177.
15. Haller J. Geschichte des Papsttums. Idee und Wirklichkeit, Stuttgart, 1950, vol. 1.
16. Hefele Ch. J., Leclercq H. Histoire des conciles d’après les documents originaux, Paris, 1908, vol. 2/2.
17. Fliche A., Martin V. (eds.) Histoire de l’église, Paris, 1948, vol. 4.
18. Mayeur J.-M., Pietri Ch., Pietri L., Vauchez A., Venard M. (eds.) Histoire du christianisme, Paris, 1998, vol. 3.
19. Jedin H., Dolan J. (eds.) History of the Church, New York, 1980, vol. 2.
20. Ηοfmann F. 1953 “Der Kampf der Päpste um Konzil und Dogma von Chalkedon von Leo dem Großen bis Hormisdas (451–519)“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 13–94.
21. Kosiński R. 2010 “Dzieje Akacjusza, patriarchy Konstantynopola w latach 472–489“ (History of Acacius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in Years 472–489), in U schyłku starożytności. Studia źródłoznawcze, 2010, vol. 9, pp. 63–97.
22. Κötter J.-M. Zwischen Kaisern und Aposteln. Das Akakianische Schisma (484–519) als kirchlicher Ordnungskonflikt der Spätantike, Stuttgart, 2013.
23. Michel A. 1953 “Der Kampf um das politische oder petrinische Prinzip der Kirchenführung“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 491–562.
24. Pietri Ch. 1987 “D’Alexandrie à Rome: Jean Talaïa, émule d’Athanase au Ve siècle“, in Mélanges offerts à Claude Mondésert, Paris, 1987, pp. 277–295.
25. Revillout E. 1877 “Le premier schisme de Constantinople. Acace et Pierre Monge”, in Revue des questions historiques, 1877, vol. 22, pp. 83–134.
26. Richards J. The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages 476–752, London, 1979.
27. Salaville S. 1918–1919 “L’affaire de l’Hénotique ou le premier schisme byzantin au Ve siècle”, in Échos d’Orient, 1918, vol. 18/114, pp. 255–265; 1919, vol. 18/116, pp. 389–397; vol. 19/117, pp. 49–68; vol. 19/120, pp. 415–433.
28. Schwartz E. 1934 “Publizistische Sammlungen zum acacianischen Schisma“, in Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Abteilung. Neue Folge, München, 1934, vol. 10.
29. Townsend W. T. 1936 “The Henotikon Schism and the Roman Church”, in The Journal of Religion, 1936, vol. 16/1, pp. 78–86.
30. Ullmann W. Gelasius I. (492–496). Das Papsttum an der Wende der Spätantike zum Mittelalter, Stuttgart, 1981.
31. Ullmann W. 1960 “Leo I and the Theme of Papal Primacy”, in Journal of Theological Studies, 1960, vol. 11, pp. 25–51.
32. Wessel S. Leo the Great and the Spiritual Rebuilding of a Universal Rome, Leiden; Boston, 2008.
33. Winkelmann F. Die östlichen Kirchen in der Epoche der christologischen Auseinandersetzungen, Berlin, 1980.
34. Bolotov V. V. Lekcii po istorii Drevnej Cerkvi (Lectures for History of Ancient Church), Saint-Petersburg, 1918, vol. 4.
35. Gracianskij M. V. 2007 “«Pravoslavnaja partija» i prihod k vlasti imperatora Justina I (518–527 gg.)” (“Orthodox Party” and Coming to Power of Emperor Justin I (518–527)), in Vizantijskij vremennik, 2007, vol. 66, pp. 125–145.
36. Gracianskij M. V. 2000 “Akakianskaja shizma” (Acacian Schism), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, Moscow, 2000, vol. 1, p. 362.
37. Gracianskij M. V. 2014 “Vozniknovenie i razvitie koncepcii papskogo primata v I–V vv.” (Origin and Development of Pope Primate Concept in I–V Cent.), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 2/52, pp. 9–29.
38. Gracianskij M. V. 2015 “Prichiny i obstojatel'stva nachala «Akakianskoj» shizmy (484 g.)” (Reasons and Circumstances of Begin of “Acacian” Schism (484)), in Iresiona. Antichnyj mir i ego nasledie. Vyp. IV. Sb. nauch. trudov k 50-letiju professora N. N. Bolgova, Belgorod, 2015, pp. 188–200.
39. Maksimovich K. A. (ed.) Istorija Drevnej Cerkvi: Ucheb. posobie (History of Ancient Church: Textbook), Moscow, 2012, vol. 1: 33–843 gg.
40. Kulakovskij Ju. A. Istorija Vizantii (Byzantine History), Saint-Petersburg, 1996, vol. 1.
41. Maksimovich K. A. 2014 “Metarecenzija na: Zaharov G. E. Recenzija na monografiju: Demacopoulos G. E. The Invention of Peter: The Development and Reception of the Petrine Discourse at the Close of Christian Antiquity. Philadelphia, 2013” (Metareview on: Zaharov G. E. Review on Monography: Demacopoulos G. E. The Invention of Peter: The Development and Reception of the Petrine Discourse at the Close of Christian Antiquity. Philadelphia, 2013), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 5/55, pp. 149–156.

Gratsianskiy Mikhail

The article considers the concepts of violence and the sacred in the work of the French philosopher Georges Bataille. The author traces back the transformations of the concept of violence throughout the thinker’s carrier, namely in his early literary and philosophical experiences of the late 20s — early 30s, his reports for the College of Sociology (1937–1939) and his «systematic» postwar writings (1945–1962). The author also puts forward the hypothesis of the connection between the concept violence and the concept the sacred and demonstrates that it is most thoroughly represented in the last period of his work, although it may have been noted before. Diachronic consideration of the formation of these concepts allows the author to trace their correlation from the more or less random links mediated by artistic images and the other notions (sacrifi ce, for example) to their explicit identification with each other and the systematic development in relation to such concepts as nature, life, being, intimacy, the animal state, expenditure, sacrifice, war and eroticism

G. Bataille, the College of Sociology, violence, the sacred, intimacy, life, sacrifice, war, eroticism.

1. Boneckaja N. K. 2013 “Russkij Nicshe” (Russian Nitsche), in Voprosy filosofii, 2013, vol. 7, pp. 133–143.
2. Vajngrad M. 2004 “Kollezh sociologii i institut social'nyh issledovanij: Ben'jamin i Bataj” (Sociological College and Institute of Social Studies: Benjamin and Bataille), in Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2004, vol. 4/68, pp. 17–45.
3. D'jakov A. V. Zhak Lakan. Figura filosofa (Jacques Lacan. Figure of Philosopher), Moscow, 2010.
4. Zenkin S. N. 2006 “Konstruirovanie pustoty: mif ob Acefale” (Constructing of Void: Myth about Acephalous), in Dorofeev D. Ju. (ed.) Predel'nyj Bataj, Saint-Petersburg, 2006, pp. 118–131.
5. Zenkin S. N. Nebozhestvennoe sakral'noe. Teorija i hudozhestvennaja praktika (Non Divine Sacred. Theory and Art Practice), Moscow, 2014.
6. Zenkin S. 2006 “Sakral'naja sociologija Zhorzha Bataja” (Sacral Sociology of George Bataille), in Bataj Zh. Prokljataja chast'. Sakral'naja sociologija, Moscow, 2006, pp. 7–48.
7. Ostrouhov V. V. Nasilie skvoz' prizmu vekov. Istoriko-filosofskij analiz (Violence through Prism of Ages. Historical-Philosophical Analysis), Moscow, 2003.
8. Otto R. Svjashhennoe. Ob irracional'nom v idee bozhestvennogo i ego sootnoshenii s racional'nym (Sacred. About Irrational in Divine Idea and Its Correlation with Rational), Saint-Petersburg, 2008.
9. Ponomareva M. O. 2008 “L. I. Shestov kak predtecha postmodernizma” (L. I. Shestov as Precursor of Postmodernism), in HORA, 2008, vol. 2, pp. 91–98.
10. Pylaev M. A. Kategorija «svjashhennoe» v fenomenologii religii, teologii i filosofii XX v. (“Sacred” Category in Religion Phenomenology, Theology and Philosophy of XX Cent.), Moscow, 2011.
11. Stejnmec Zh.-L. 2006 “Bataj i kul't Mitry: k Istorii glaza” (Bataille and Cult of Mitra: to History of Eye), in Predel'nyj Bataj, Saint-Petersburg, 2006, pp. 195–210.
12. Timofeeva O. Vvedenie v jeroticheskuju filosofiju Zhorzha Bataja (Introduction to Erotical Philosophy of George Bataille), Moscow, 2009.
13. Trofimova K. P. 2008 “Kollezh sociologii o probleme sakral'nogo” (Sociology College about Problem of Sacred), in RELIGO. Al'manah Moskovskogo religiovedcheskogo obshhestva, Moscow, 2008, vol. 1: 2004–2007, pp. 30–42.
14. Fokin S. L. Filosof-vne-sebja. Zhorzh Bataj (Philosopher-Out-of-Self. George Bataille), Saint-Petersburg, 2002.
15. Arppe T. 2009 “Sacred Violence: Girard, Bataille and the Vicissitudes of Human Desire”, in Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory, 2009, vol. 10/2, pp. 31–58.
16. Black C. Sadism and Surrealism. The Marquis de Sade and the Surrealists, 2013.
17. Carrier M. 2006 “La communauté et la violence sacrée”, in Cahiers des imaginaires, 2006, vol. 6, pp. 65–92.
18. Cohen-Almagor R. 1991 “Foundations of Violence, Terror and War in the Writings of Marx, Engels and Lenin”, in Terrorism and Political Violence, 1991, vol. 3/2, pp. 1–24.
21. Direk Z. 2004 “Bataille on Immanent and Transcendent Violence”, in Bulletin de la Société de Philosophie de Langue Français, 2004, vol. 14/2, pp. 29 –49.
22. Durkheim É. Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse, Paris, 2013.
23. Feher M. Conjurations de la violence: introduction à la lecture de Georges Bataille, Paris, 1981.
24. Ffrench P. After Bataille: Sacrifice, Exposure, Community, Oxford, 2007.
25. Girard R. Je vois Satan tomber comme l’éclair, Paris, 1999.
26. Girard R. Violence et le sacré, Paris, 2012.
27. Hertz R. 1909 “Prééminence de la main droite. Étude sur la polarité religieuse”, in Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Étranger, 1909, vol. 68, pp. 553–580.
28. Hoffmann C. 2011 “Le sacré chez Georges Bataille”, in Communication, lettres et sciences du langage, 2011, vol. 5/1, pp. 72–81.
29. Kristeva J. Pouvoirs de l’horreur. Essai sur l’abjection, Paris, 1980.
30. Hollier D. (ed.) Le Collège de Sociologie. 1937–1939, Folio, 1995.
31. Noys B. Georges Bataille. A Critical Introduction, London, 2000.
32. 1937–1939 “Pour un Collège de Sociologie”, in Le Collège de Sociologie, 1937–1939.
33. Richman M. Sacred Revolutions: Durkheim and the Collège of Sociologie, Minneapolis, 2002.
34. Stronge P. 2006 “In the Name of All that is Holy: Classification and the Sacred”, in eSharp, 2006, vol. 7/7, in http://www.gla.ac.uk /research/az/esharp/issues/7/.
35. Traylor A.D. 2014 “Violence Has Its Reasons: Girard and Bataille”, in Contagion: Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture, 2014, vol. 21, pp. 131–156.
36. York J. D. 2003 “Flesh and Consciousness: Georges Bataille and Dionysian”, in Journal for Cultural and Religious Theory, 2003, vol. 4/3, pp. 42–57.

Zygmont Aleksei

The paper is devoted to issues of existence of sophiological metaphysics in the USSR. The religious persecution and the particular qualities of the doctrine didn’t allow the sophiological studies to be continued neither in emigration nor in the Soviet Russia. The concept of Sophia, however, appeared in the representatives of «the alternative orthodoxy» scientific work. «The alternative orthodoxy» means Christian underground communities, arose in the Soviet period, that became combined by a charismatic leader — elder, denying of canonical hierarchy and their original tradition. Though, the extracts of the book «Religious basis for a political economy», connected to sophiology, were published in the Paris journal «The way». According to the assumption, made by A. Arzhakovsky, the author of that book was Basil (Krivoshein), the monk. In this paper the story of Krivoshein and sophiology relationship has been reconstructed and the real author of «Religious basis for a political economy» — the monk Onesimus (Paul) has been discovered. We have also analyzed the sophiological theme in works of the underground elders — Archbishop Anthony Michailovsky and Samuel Pasekun. We have found the plagiarism: «thoughts» by Michailovsky were created by Ye. Trubetskoy. The source of Pasekun sophiology has not become clear yet. After the analyses of representatives of «the alternative sophiology» work we have pointed out, that the sophiological writings by Michailovsky and Pasekun are interesting more for the fact of their existence and sphere of functioning, than for their contents. Their publications are suitable for a wide audience. But «the alternative sophiology» is still a marginal phenomenon by now. The scientific work by the monk Onesimus (Paul) needs to be analyzed more deeply.

Sophia, sophiology, palamism, energy, logos, Basil (Krivoshein), Onesimus (Paul), Anthony Michailovsky, Samuel Pasekun, alternative orthodoxy, elder

1. Arzhakovskij A. A. Zhurnal «Put'» (1925–1940). Pokolenie russkih religioznyh myslitelej v jemigracii (Journal “Put’” (1925–1940). Generation of Russian Religious Thinkers in Emigration), Kiev, 2000.
2. Bibihin V. V. Aleksej Fedorovich Losev. Sergej Sergeevich Averincev, Moscow, 2006.
3. Zol'nikova N. D. 2006 “Tema sofijnosti v nravouchitel'nom sbornike nepostojannogo sostava konca XIX — nachala XX v. Iz sobranija muzeja Nev'janskoj ikony (Ekaterinburg)” (Sophiology Theme in Moral Collection Book of Different Content of End of XIX — Begin of XX Cent.), in Vestnik cerkovnoj istorii, 2006, vol. 2.
4. Il'in V. N. 1996 “Statika i dinamika chistoj formy, ili Ocherk obshhej morfologii” (Statics and Dynamics of Pure Form, or Survey on General Morphology), in Voprosy filosofii, 1996, vol. 11, pp. 91–136.
5. Kosik O. V. 2009 “«Delo mitropolita Sergija» i uchastie v nem muchenika Mihaila (Novoselova)” (“Case of Metropolite Serguj” and Participation in It of Martyr Mihail (Novoselov)), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija II: Istorija. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi, 2009, vol. 2/31, p. 93.
6. Pankovec V., svjashh. Vash Bogomolec smirennyj starec. Muchenicheskaja zhizn' i Bogomudrye pisanija arhiepiskopa Antonija Mihajlovskogo (1889–1976) (Your Devotee Humble Starez. Martyr Life and Theowise Writings of Archbishop Antonij Mihajlovskij (1889–1976)), Azov, 2009.
7. Prishvina V. D. 1991 “Ieromonah Onisim (Pol') (1899–1930)” (Hieromonk Onisim (Pol) (1899–1930)), in Chelovek, 1991, vol. 5, pp. 110–112.
8. Prishvina V. D. Nevidimyj grad (Invisible City), Moscow, 2002.
9. Stamulis H. 2012 “Svjatoj Grigorij Palama v sovremennom grecheskom bogoslovii” (St Gregorius Palama in Modern Greek Theology), in Nasledie Svjatyh Otcov v XX veke: Itogi issledovanij, Moscow, 2012.
10. Taho-Godi A. A. Losev, Moscow, 2007.
11. Cerkov' vladyki Vasilija (Krivosheina) (Church of Archbishop Vasilij (Krivoshein)), Nizhnij Novgorod, 2004.

Tribushnyi Dimitrii

The article represents an attempt to analyze peculiarities of the formation and development of the discourses of ritual. Author describes the results of semiotic and hermeneutic researches of ritual which are based on the concept of genetic connection religious ritual and sentences in natural language. The purpose of the study is, to identify features perpetrated of everyday actions that affect its ritualization. Ritual text is considered as inter discursive space in which situationally present a diff erent levels of values. Author uses the philosophical understanding of the concept of habitual and its linguistic expression. The article deals basic conditions which there should correspond the ritual text, and analysis of the connection between habitual action and perception of sacredness appropriate ritual. As an illustration, author used in the article any modern data of studies of religious. Studies carried out in the framework of semiotic and hermeneutic approaches. The author uses the elements of discourse analysis and comparative historical studies. Results of research are relevant to contemporary religious study, philosophy of religion and theology.

ritual, habitual, discourse ritual, Text, ritual language, hermeneutics, features ritual, religious communication

1. Brelich A. 1969 “Symbol of a Symbol”, in Myths and Symbols: Studies in Honor of Mircea Eliade, Chicago, 1969, pp. 163–179.
2. Cameron A. 1939 “Sapho’s Prayer to Aphrodite”, in Harvard Theological Review, 1939, vol. 32/1, pp. 1–17.
3. Campbell J. I. The Language of Religion, New York; London, 1971.
4. Clarahan M. A. 2009 “Mystagogy and Mystery”, in Worship, 2009, vol. 83/6, pp. 502–523.
5. Corrington R. S. Ecstatic Naturalism. Sing of the World, Bloomington (In.), 1994.
6. Feltmate D. 2013 “It’s Funny Because It’s True? The Simpsons, Satire, and the Significance of Religious Humor in Popular Culture”, in Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 2013, vol. 81/1, pp. 222–248.
7. Green J. B. 2002 “Scripture and Theology: Failed Experiments, Fresh Perspectives”, in Interpretations, 2002, vol. 56, pp. 5–20.
8. Harrison V. S. 2007 “Metaphor, religious language and religious experience”, in Sophia: International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 2007, vol. 46/2, pp. 127–145.
9. Penner H. H. 1985 “Language, Ritual and Meaning”, in Numen, 1985, vol. 32, pp. 1–16.
10. Pete Diamond A. R. 2008 “Interlocutions: the Poetics of Voice in the Figuration of YHWH and His Oracular Agent, Jeremiah”, in Interpretation, 2008, vol. 62/1, pp. 48–65.

Prilutskii Andrei

Contemporary sociology does not give a satisfactory answer to the question of what are the reasons for the weak influence of religion on norms and values observed in most post-socialist countries, including Russia. At the same time, in many countries religion has a significant impact on other areas of life. The issue of social factors and the mechanisms responsible for this effect becomes crucial for contemporary research. The knowledge of these factors is necessary for an adequate prediction of possible prospects for change in diff erent spheres of life in connection with a changing role of religion in public life and in the life of the population of a country. In this situation, it is not clear whether we should expect the growing influence of religion on society in Russia and other post-socialist countries, or, on the contrary, the decline of the impact in the regions where it still remains significant. One of the factors that influence the strength of association between individual religiosity and its consequences in the sphere of norms and values is religious socialization. Religion contains a set of attitudes, norms and values that are transmitted in the course of socialization. Religious socialization is a process of intera ction in which religious norms and values are transmitted from one generation to another, from group members to newcomers. The article discusses the problem of conceptualization of religious socialization and its application in the analysis of sociological data on micro- and macro- level.

sociology of religion, religiosity, Orthodox Christianity, religious socialization, agents of socialization, values.

1. Bezrogov V. 2006 “Mezhdu Stalinym i Hristom: religioznaja socializacija detej v sovetskoj i postsovetskoj Rossii (na materialah vospominanij o detstve)” (Betwenn Stalin and Christ: Religious Socialization of Children in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia (on Materials of Childhood Memories)), in Antropologicheskij forum, 2006, vol. 4, pp. 130–162.
2. Bezrogov V. 2002 “Religioznaja socializacija i osushhestvlenie prava na veru v mezhpokolennyh otnoshenijah: XX vek i perspektiva” (Religious Socialization and Realization of Right to Faith in Intergenerational Relations: XX Century and Perspective), in Razvitie lichnosti, 2002, vol. 4, pp. 115–136.
3. Zabaev I. V., Melkumjan E. B., Oreshina D. A., Pavljutkin I. V., Pruckova E. V. 2013 “Vlijanie religioznoj socializacii i prinadlezhnosti k obshhine na rozhdaemost'. Postanovka problem” (Influence of Religious Socialization and Accessory to Community on Birth. Staging of Problem), in Demoskop Weekly, 1–19 maja 2013, vol. 553–554, in http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2013/0553/analit03.php (Date: 25.05.2015)).
4. Zorkaja N. A. 2009 “Pravoslavie v bezreligioznom obshhestve” (Orthodoxy in Non-Religious Society), in Vestnik obshhestvennogo mnenija: Dannye. Analiz. Diskussii, 2009, vol. 2/100, pp. 65–84.
5. Ipatova L. Tipy religioznogo obrashhenija sovremennyh verujushhih zhenshhin Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi MP. Dis. ... kand. soc. nauk (Types of Religious Conversion of Modern Women Believers of Russian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchate. Dissertation), Moscow, 2006.
6. Kaariajnen K., Furman D. E. 2007 “Religioznost' v Rossii na rubezhe XX–XXI stoletij” (Religiosity in Russian on Border of XX–XXI Centuries), in Obshhestvennye nauki i sovremennost', 2007, vol. 1, pp. 103–119; vol. 2, pp. 78–95.
7. Lebedev S. D. Dve kul'tury: Religija v rossijskom svetskom obrazovanii na rubezhe XX–XXI vekov (sociologicheskij analiz vzaimodejstvija) (Two Cultures: Religion in Russian Secular Education on Border of XX–XXI Centuries (Sociological Analysis of Interaction)), Belgorod, 2005.
8. Pruckova E. V. 2014 “Vlijanie religioznosti na bazovye cennosti naselenija evropejskih stran: jeffekt pervichnoj religioznoj socializacii” (Influence of Religiosity on Basic Values of Population of European Countries: Effect of Primary Religious Socialization), in Jasin E. (ed.) XIV Aprel'skaja mezhdunarodnaja nauchnaja konferencija po problemam razvitija jekonomiki i obshhestva: V 4 kn., Moscow, 2014, vol. 3, pp. 527–536.
9. Pruckova E. V. 2013 “Religioznost' i ee sledstvija v cennostno-normativnoj sfere” (Religiosity and Its Consequences in Value-Normative Sphere), in Sociologicheskij zhurnal, 2013, vol. 2, pp. 72–88.
10. Sinelina Ju. Ju. Izmerenie religioznosti naselenija Rossii: Pravoslavnye i musul'mane: suevernoe povedenie rossijan (Measuring of Religiosity of Russian Population: Orthodoxes and Muslims: Superstition Behavior of Russians), Moscow, 2006.
11. Sinelina Ju. Ju. 2013 “O dinamike religioznosti rossijan i nekotoryh metodologicheskih problemah ee izuchenija (religioznoe soznanie i povedenie pravoslavnyh i musul'man)” (About Dynamics of Russian Religiosity and Some Methodological Problems of Its Study (Religious Consciousness and Behavior of Orthodoxes and Muslims)), in Sociologicheskie issledovanija, 2013, vol. 10, pp. 104–115.
12. Skljarova T. V. 2009 “Religioznaja socializacija: problemy i napravlenija issledovanij”, in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija IV: Pedagogika. Psihologija, 2009, vol. 4/15, pp. 7–17.
13. Ufimceva E. I. 2013 “Osobennosti vocerkovlenija v ocenkah pravoslavnoj molodezhi” (Features of Converstion in Estimations of Orthodox Youth), in Sociologicheskie issledovanija, 2013, vol. 1, pp. 127–135.
14. Filatov S. B., Lunkin R. N. 2005 “Statistika rossijskoj religioznosti: magija cifr i neodnoznachnaja real'nost'” (Statistics of Russian Religiosity: Cipher Magic and Polysemantic Reality), in Sociologicheskie issledovanija, 2005, vol. 6, pp. 35–45.
15. Folieva T. A. 2012 “Religioznaja socializacija: Ponjatija i problemy” (Religious Socialization: Ideas and Problems), in Izvestija Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serija «Politologija. Religiovedenie», 2012, vol. 2/9, pp. 205–212.
16. Chesnokova V. F. Tesnym putem: process vocerkovlenija naselenija Rossii v konce XX veka (By Narrow Way: Conversion Process of Russian Population in End of XX Century), Moscow, 2005.
17. Bengtson V. L., Copen C. E., Putney N. M., Silverstein M. A. 2009 “Longitudinal Study of the Intergenerational Transmission of Religion”, in International Sociology, 2009, vol. 24/3, pp. 325–345.
18. Chipriani R. 1988 “«Diffused Religion» and New Values in Italy”, in Beckford J. A., Luckmann T. (eds.) The Changing Face of Religion, London; New Delhi, 1988, pp. 28–48.
19. Finke R., Adamczyk A. 2008 “Cross-National Moral Beliefs: The Influence of National Religious Context”, in The Sociological Quarterly, 2008, vol. 49, pp. 617–652.
20. Glass J., Bengtson V. L., Dunham C. C. 1986 “Attitude Similarity in Three-Generation Families: Socialization, Status Inheritance, or Reciprocal Influence?”, in American Sociological Review, 1986, vol. 51/5, pp. 685–698.
21. Karpov V., Lisovskaya E., Barry D. 2012 “Ethnodoxy: How Popular Ideologies Fuse Religious and Ethnic Identities”, in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 2012, vol. 51/4, pp. 638–655.
22. Luckmann T. The Invisible Religion. The Problem of Religion in Modern Society, New York; London, 1967.
23. Mueller T., de Graaf N., Schmidt P. 2011 “Religious Socialization in a Religious Diverse Context: A Network Explanation Tested with 41 Nations”, in Conference Papers — American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, 2011.
24. Norenzayan A., Shariff A. F. 2008 “The Origin and Evolution of Religious Prosociality”, in Science, 2008, vol. 322, pp. 58–62.
25. Pascarella E. T., Terenzini P. T. How College Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research, San Francisco, 1991.
26. Saroglou V., Delpierre V., Dernelle R. 2004 “Values and religiosity: a Meta-Analysis of Studies Using Schwartz’s Model”, in Personality and Individual Differences, 2004, vol. 37, pp. 721–734.
27. Sherkat D. Religious Socialization and the Family: An Examination of Religious Influence in the Family over the Life Course. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, Duke University, 1991.
28. Stark R. 1996 “Religion as Context: Hellfire and Delinquency One More Time”, in Sociology of Religion, 1996, vol. 57/2, pp. 151–163.
29. Stark R., Finke R. Acts of Faith: Exploring the Human Side of Religion, Berkeley, 2000.

Prutskova Elena

The published S. Durylin’s text contains his view of eschatological representations in the Russian culture. Durylin considers that in Ancient Russia expectation of the Apocalypse wasn’t obviously expressed. It began to amplify from XVII century when Russia as the state prospered more and more and increased in sizes. The state became stronger, the expectation of a doomsday is stronger. The external progress of Russia was stronger, the more strongly the Russian people waited for the Judgement. The author finds this position not only in national representations, but also and in representatives of the Сhurch point of view, and in the Russian philosophy — at K. Leontyev and V. Solovyov. This point of view has no analogs among philosophers of the beginning of the XX century.

Eschatology, Time, Apocalypse.

Rezvykh Tat'iana