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

In this article the relevance of the Orthodox dogmatics for linguistics and wider for the Humanities is demonstrated. The st. Gregory of Nyssa’s resolution of the problem of word (λ6γος) is that corresponding to the contemporary anthropocentric linguistics’ requests metaphysical platform which allows to develop the adequate for language facts theoretical model and concretize the methodology and the practice of their analysis. The author ascertains the central role of st. Gregory’s analogy from human word to Divine Word for clearing up the specifics of our word. This analogy allowed him to point out the unity of human mind (νοDς) and word ‘in nature’ (κατa τi νφUσιν) and the diff erence of them ‘in subject’ (τQ Uποκειμ£νC). On this base the researcher gives the definition of word as a manifestation of mind in name. The non-hypostatic status of word that does not exist separately from mind is also characterized in the article. This fact has a decisive signifi cance for determining by linguistics of its own subject of research. The complex perceptive-expressive ability of human mind acting as a word is shown. Besides, the cognitive etiology of name is analyzed. According to st. Gregory, name is an ‘image’ (τUπος) for thought. The semantic relation between name and thought is defined as a connection of manifestation (φαν£ρωσις) that is the correspondence in image. The author notes the need for more detailed conceptualization of the linguistic consequences from st. Gregory’s theological-philosophical doctrine of word, which have high importance for the whole humanitarian thought.

word(λόγος),mind(νοῦς),name(ὄνομα),image of the name(τύπος),the mental image(εἶδος),manifestation (φανέρ&#

1. Alpatov V. M. Ob antropotsentrichnom i sistemotsentrichnom podkhodakh k iazyku, in Voprosy iazykoznaniia. 1993. № 3. pp. 15–26.
2. Vdovichenko A. V. Grekoiazychnye bibleiskie teksty v predmetnoi i diskursivnoi modeliakh opisaniia. Dis. d-r. filol. nauk po spets-tiam 10.02.19 — Teoriia iazyka i 10.02.14 — Klassicheskaia filologiia. Moscow, 2013.
3. Vdovichenko A. V. «Primyshlenie» i «porozhdenie»: Evnomii i kappadokiitsy o sovremennykh problemakh filosofii iazyka, in Iazykovye parametry sovremennoi tsivilizatsii: Sb. trudov pervoi nauchnoi konferentsii pamiati akademika RAN Iu. S. Stepanova / V. Z. Dem'iankov, N. M. Azarova, V. V. Feshchenko, S. Iu. Bochaver, red. Moscow, 2013. pp. 314–321.
4. Vdovichenko A. V. Rasstavanie s «iazykom»: Kriticheskaia retrospektiva lingvisticheskogo znaniia. Moscow, 2009.
5. Dem'iankov V. Z. Dominiruiushchie lingvisticheskie teorii v kontse XX v., in Iazyk i nauka kontsa XX veka: Sb. st. Moscow, 1995. pp. 239–320.
6. Karfikova L. Imena i veshchi soglasno Evnomiiu Kizicheskomu i Grigoriiu Nisskomu / I. G. Bei, per, in Ε3ναι: Problemy filosofii i teologii. 2012. № 1 (001). pp. 282–306.
7. Kubriakova E. S. Paradigmy nauchnogo znaniia v lingvistike i ee sovremennyi status, in Izvestiia RAN. Seriia literatury i iazyka. 1994. T. 53. № 2. pp. 3–15.
8. Nesmelov V. I. Dogmaticheskaia sistema sviatogo Grigoriia Nisskogo. Kazan', 1887.
9. Stepanov Iu. S. Iazyk i metod. K sovremennoi filosofii iazyka. Moscow, 1998.
10. Troitskii S. V. Uchenie sv. Grigoriia Nisskogo ob imenakh Bozhiikh i imiabozhniki / A. Kovtun, K. Shakhbazian, sost. Krasnodar, 2002.
11. Pottier B. Dieu et le Christ selon Gregoirede Nysse. Etude systematique du «Contre Eunome» avec traduction inedite des axtraits d’Eunome. Namur, 1994.

D'iachenko Galina

*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 article is focused on religious views of Konstantine Pobedonostsev (1827– 1907), the prominent Russian statesman and conservative publicist who lead the religious policy of Russian autocracy on the post of the Chief Procurator of the Holy Synod in 1880–1905. The author’s main attention is concentrated on Pobedonostsev’s attitudes towards Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, two Western confessions which had many adherents on the territory of Russian Empire. The author seeks to demonstrate that, despite of the harsh religious policy of Pobedonostsev which made him known as «Russian Torquemada», his attitudes towards the Western confessions were rather complicated. The Chief Procurator rejected resolutely any possibility of the «heterodox» proselytism on the territory of Russian Empire, and this was the reason for the repressive measures he supported against Roman Catholicism and the charismatic protestant movements, pashkovism and stundism. At the same time, the religious teachings of the Roman Catholicism and Protestantism as such did not engender any negative feelings of Pobedonostsev. He even felt a sympathy towards certain traits of Protestantism such as Protestant labor ethics and cult of lawfulness. Some prominent Protestants who lived in Russia or visited it, such as Baroness E. F. Raden, the US Ambassador to Russia A. D. White, the prominent British Churchman W. J. Birkbeck and others, were friends or close acquaintances of the Russian conservative. The features of the personal attitudes of Pobedonostsev towards the Western faiths, first of all, towards Protestantism, infl uenced to some extend his religious policy on the post of the Chief Procuratorю

K. P. Pobedonostsev, M. Ledóchowski, E. F. Raden, A. D. White, A. P. Stanley, Chief Procurator, protestantism, Roman Catholicism, religious policy of Russian autocracy, Kulturkampf, Lutheranism, pashkovism, stundism.

1. Dalton H. On Religious Liberty in Russia. Open Letter to the Head of the Russian Synod Privy Councilor Constantine Pobiedonosieff. Leipzig; L., 1890.
2. White A. D. A Statesman of Russia. Constantine Pobedonostzeff // Century Illustrated Magazine. May 1898. Vol. 56. No.1. P. 113.
3. Dolbilov M. D. Russkii krai, chuzhaia vera. Etnokonfessional'naia politika imperii v Litve i Belorussii pri Aleksandre II. Moscow, 2010.
4. Pobedonostsev K. P. «Bud' tverd i muzhestven…» Stat'i iz ezhenedel'nika «Grazhdanin», in Pis'ma. Saint-Petersburg, 2011.
5. Pobedonostsev K. P. Baronessa Edita Fedorovna Raden (9 oktiabria 1885 g.), in Vechnaia pamiat'. Vospominaniia o pochivshikh. Saint-Petersburg, 1896.
6. Pobedonostsev K. P. Moskovskii sbornik, in Sochineniia. Saint-Petersburg, 1996.
7. Polunov A. Iu. K. P. Pobedonostsev v obshchestvenno-politicheskoi i dukhovnoi zhizni Rossii. Moscow, 2010.
8. Polunov A. Iu. Pod vlast'iu ober-prokurora: Gosudarstvo i tserkov' v epokhu Aleksandra III. Moscow, 1996.
9. Soroka M. Angliiskie kvakery i russkii golod, in Rodina. 2011. № 12.
10. Terner F. G. Vospominaniia zhizni F. G. Ternera. Saint-Petersburg, 1910. Part. 1.

Polunov Aleksandr

*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.

In the article we analyse the concept of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist of French theologian Y. de Montcheuil. Не did not published his article about the problem of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist till his death, that’s why his view on this problem stayed nearly unknown till the end of the 20th century. But in his article he formulated the crucial points of the new way of thinking about the real presence, which gave birth to the various alternative non-thomistic concepts of the real presence: ideas of transignification and transfinalization. We highlight the main problems of the traditional Catholic doctrine of the real presence in the 20th century and examine de Montcheuil’s concept in the context of the the offi cial teaching of Catholic Church in the 20th century. We explain why de Montcheuil’s concept could hardly be adopted in the context of the traditional Catholic doctrine of the real presence. Also we note, that some ideas of de Montcheuil are very close to the concept of the real presence of famous Russian theologian father Sergiy Bulgakov, who wrote his works about the Eucharist before de Montcheuil. We analyze de Montcheuil’s concept of the real presence from the Orthodox point of view and conclude that it is incompatible with the mainstream of patristic thought.

Catholicism, systematic theology, real presence, Eucharist, transubstantiation, transignifi cation, transfinalization, Yves de Montcheuil.

1. Bulgakov S., prot. Evkharisticheskii dogmat, in On zhe. Evkharistiia. Moscow, 2005. pp. 188–205.
2. Malitskii N. Evkharisticheskii spor na Zapade v IX v., in Uchenye trudy Petrogradskoi dukhovnoi akademii. Sergiev Posad, 1917. Vol. 8. Part. 1–2; Vladimir, 1917. Part. 3.
3. Colombo C. Ancora sulla dottrina della transustanziazione e la fi sica moderna, in Scuola cattolica. 1956. Vol. 84. P. 263–288.
4. Colombo C. Theologia, fi lisofi a e fi sica nella doctrina della transustanziazione, in Scullo cattolica. 1955. Vol. 83. P. 89–124.
5. Denzinger H; Schonmetzer A. Enchiridion Symbolorum, defi nitionum et declarationum de rebus fi dei et morum. Barcione; Fribourgi Brisgoviae; Romae; Neo-Eboraci, 1965.
6. Foullioux E. Yves de Montcheuil, philosophe et theologien jesuite (1900–1944). P., 1995.
7. Grumett D. Yves de Montcheuil: action, justice, and the kingdom in spiritual resistance to Nazism, in Theological Studies. 2007. Vol. 68. P. 618–640.
8. Kilmartin Е. J. The Euсharist in the Wеst, Historу and Thеologу. Сollegeville, 1998.
9. Masi R. Teologia eucaristia e fi sica contemporanea, in Doctor communis. 1955. Vol. 8. P. 31–51.
10. McCord A. M. Some later medieval theories of the Eucharist: Thomas Aquinas, Gilles of Rome, Duns Scotus, and William Ockham. Oxford, 2010.
11. Montcheuil Y. de. L’eucharistie dans le Nouveau Testament, in Melanges theologiques. P., 1951. P. 23–48.
12. Montcheuil Y. de. La Raison de la Permanence du Christ sous les Especes eucharistiques d’apres saint Bonaventure et saint Thomas, in Recherche de Science Religieuse. 1939. P. 29.
P. 352–364.
13. Montcheuil Y. de. Signifi cation eschatologique du Repas eucharistique, in Recherches de Science Religieuse. 1946. T. 33. P. 10–43.
14. Schillebeeckx E. The Eucharist. L., 1968.
15. Selvaggy F. Realta fi sica e sostanza sensibile nella dottrina eucaristica, in Gregorianum. 1956. Vol. 37. P. 16–33.
16. Sesboue B. Yves de Montcheuil (1900–1944) Precurseur en theologie. P., 2006.
17. Vollert С. The Eucharist: Controversy on Transubstantiation, in Theological Studies. Baltimore, 1961. Vol. 22. P. 391–425.

Bakulin Ivan

The paper departs from differing of two modalities of the attitude of the theistic reason to the problem of evil, i.e. building of universally valid explanatonary models (theodicy) and apologies in the particular contexts (defense). The first one contradicts to the foundations of theistic world-view inasmuch as the biblical texts persuade one that causes of evil are particular and not universal and are far sometimes to be in the scope of a finite reason. In addition, logical problems with mutual correlation of the main theodicies are demonstrated. The modality of defense seems much more epistemically justified and actual, but here by no means all persuasive resources of controversy are used. The author suggests his own answers to some atheistic challenges, in the fi rst place unmasking double standards in the corresponding argumentation unavoidable for any wishful thinking and contraposes to the idea of multitude of gratuitous evils that of infinite profusion of undeserved boons.

evil, boons, sufferings, freewill, metaphysics, theodicy, defense, argumentation, wishful thinking, gratitude.

1. Beil' P. Istoricheskii i kriticheskii slovar'. Moscow, 1968. T. 1.
2. Leibnits G. V. Sochineniia. Moscow, 1989.
3. Miurrei M., Rei M. Vvedenie v filosofiiu religii. Moscow, 2010.
4. Suinbern R. Sushchestvovanie Boga / M. O. Kedrova, per. Moscow, 2014.
5. Khaidegger M. Lektsii o metafizike / S. Zhigalkin, per., komment. Moscow, 2014.
6. Adams M. M. Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God, in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. 1989. Vol. 63 (Supplementary). P. 297–310.
7. Alston W. Some (Temporarily) Final Thoughts on the Evidential Arguments from Evil, in The Evidential Argument from Evil / D. Howard-Snyders, ed. Bloomington (IN), 1996. P. 317–318.
8. Chisholm R. The Defeat of Good and Evil, in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association. 1968. Vol. 42. P. 21–38.
9. Draper P. Pain and Pleasure: an Evidential Problem for Theists, in Philosophy of Religion: The Big Questions / E. Stump, M. J. Murray, eds. Malden, 1999. P. 164–175.
10. Mackie J. Evil and Omnipotence, in Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology of Contemporary Views / M. Stewart, ed. Boston, 1996. P. 333–344.
11. Moser P. Cognitive Idolatry and Divine Hiding, in Divine Hiddenness: New Essays / D. Howard-Snyder, P. Moser, eds. N. Y., 2001. P. 120–148.
12. Pike N. Hume on Evil, in Philosophical Review. 1963. Vol. 72. P. 180–197.
13. Plantinga A. The Nature of Necessity. Oxford, 1974.
14. Rowe W. The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism, in Philosophy of Religion: The Big Questions / E. Stump, M. J. Murray, ed. Malden, 1999. P. 157–164.
15. Schellenberg J. L. Replies to my colleagues, in Religious Studies. 2013. Vol. 49. P. 257–285.
16. Schellenberg J. L. Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason. Ithaka, 1993.
17. Schellenberg J. L. The Epistemology of Modest Atheism, in European Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 2015. Vol. 7, no. 1. P. 51–69.
18. Schellenberg J. L. The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (I), in Religious Studies. 2005. Vol. 41 (2). Р. 201–215.
19. Schellenberg J. The Will To Imagine: A Justifi cation of Skeptical Religion. Ithaca, 2009.
20. Shokhin V. Philosophical Theology and Indian Version of Theodicy, in European Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 2010. Vol. 2, no. 2. P. 192–193.
21. Wykstra S. The Humean Obstacle to Evidential Arguments for Suff ering. On Avoiding the Evils of Appearance, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 1984. Vol. 16. P. 73–93.

Shokhin 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.

Работа выполнена при финансовой поддержке РГНФ, грант No 15-03-00211 «Метафизи- ка в интеркультурном пространстве: история и современность»

The paper proposed an model of the phenomenon of Protestant Scholasticism, based on the description of the scholastic method of systematization. Proceeding from the thesis that the scholastic is (primarily) a systematic knowledge, indicate characteristics of this phenomenon, and the most important thinkers and their writings, and contribution to the development of the scientific systematization, which understood as a method of formation of the internal unity of the construction in various level and content. For Medieval and Post-Medieval Catholic scholasticism this principle was Corpus Aristotelicum, which basis evolved philosophical «courses» of the Dominicans, Franciscans, Jesuits and other religious thinkers. This way shaped method of intertextual reconstruction of order tradition. The Protestant scholasticism in the following Corpus Aristotelicum was taboo (Luther, Calvin almost completely denied the positive significance of Aristotle), bringing Protestants faced with the problem of the formation of new principles of systematization. Orthodox Lutherans and Calvinists thought initially offered a way to organize system of knowledge, well founded key theological principles (authority of Scripture, distinguish on God and the world, etc.). From these principles came Amand Polanus Nikolas Taurellus, Klemens Timpler. On the other hand, it took the form of an attempt to create a systematization that would give space for problems, it doesn’t directly follow from the confessional dogmatic. These efforts have made Rudolph Goclenius, developed a form of philosophical vocabulary and the philosophical principle of antinomy, and Balthasar Meissner, who created a kind of «meccano» that allows you to reconstruct both the theological and philosophical discourse than has significantly expanded the content of Protestant scholasticism. These facts allow to consider the Protestant scholasticism as a specific intellectual culture, reflecting the major tendencies of the Early Modern.

Scholasticism, Protestantism, Early Modern, Philosophy, Theology, systematization, Polanus, Taurellus, Timpler, Goclenius, Meissner.

1. Bokhenskii Iu. M. Sovremennaia evropeiskaia filosofiia. Moscow, 2000.
2. Vdovina G. V. Iazyk neochevidnogo. Ucheniia o znakakh v skholastike XVII veka. Moscow, 2009.
3. Dil'tei V. Vozzrenie na mir i issledovanie cheloveka so vremen Vozrozhdeniia i Reformatsii. Moscow, 2015.
4. Konle A. Filipp Melankhton i Iugo-Zapadnaia Germaniia, in Dispozitsii Srednevekov'ia v istorii mirovoi kul'tury: Al'manakh / O. E. Dushin, red. Saint-Petersburg, 2010. P. 131–133.
5. Sekundant S. Aristotel' i protestantskaia metafizika XVII veka, in Doksa. Zbіrnik naukovikh prats' z fіlosofії ta fіlologії. 2005. Vol. 8. P. 132.
6. Spektorskii E. Problema sotsial'noi fiziki v XVII stoletii. T. 1. Moscow, 2006
7. Khegglund B. Istoriia zapadnogo bogosloviia. B.m., 2008.
8. Shmonin D. V. V teni Renessansa: Vtoraia skholastika v Ispanii. Saint-Petersburg, 2006.
9. Luther М. An libri philosophorum sint utiles aut inutiles ad theologiam. §§ 3, 8, 9, 15 // D. Martin Luther. Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Weimar, 1888. Bd. 6. P. 29.
10. Sgarbi М. Abraham Calov and Immanuel Kant. Aristotelian and Scholastic Traces in the Kantian Philosophy, in Historia Philosophica. 2010. Vol. 8. Р. 55–62.
11. Wolff Ch. Philosophia Prima sive Ontologia: Methodo Scientifi ca pertractata, qua omnis Cognitionis Humanae Principia continentur. Francofurti & Lipsiae, 1736.

Savinov Rodion

*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.

Статья подготовлена в рамках проекта «Свобода и субъективность в реформационном учении Мартина Лютера и в философии Нового времени» (грант РГНФ No 16-03-0009

Following article suggests a conceptual analysis of polemics on the question of origin and nature of religion which took place on pages of «Young Guard» and «Under the banner of Marxism» between M. Pokrovsky and I. Skvortsov-Stepanov in 1922– 1923. In the first part of the article the author examines the political, intellectual and social-biographical contexts of the polemics. Second part is devoted to explication of the main points of conceptions of authors under discussion in religious studies: their understanding of science, their interpretations of «historical materialism», their understanding of mutual relations of practice of «struggle against religion», anti-religious propaganda and scientific studying of religion in the context of struggle of classes, their decisions of questions of origin of religion, basic moments of its history. The third part examines the polemics itself: its total movement, basic ideas, argumentation of participants, their systems of values, varieties of Marxist approach to the study of religion, understanding of history of religion, its relation to its economic basis, their attitude to ideas of A. Bogdanov, A. Lunacharsky and other thinkers. In conclusion the author make a number of preliminary findings for discussion on significance and meaning of the polemics in question, its «ethos», its place in the history of soviet «scientific atheism», its role in development of psychology of religion in Russia.

religion, historical materialism, psychology of religion, history of religion, scientific atheism, fear of death, Marxism, I. Skvortsov-Stepanov, M. Pokrovsky, A. Bogdanov, “Under the Banner of Marxism”.

1. Antonov K. M. Ot dorevoliutsionnoi nauki o religii k sovetskomu religiovedeniiu: stanovlenie «sovetskoi» formatsii diskursa o religii, in «Nauka o religii, «nauchnyi ateizm», religiovedenie»: aktual'nye preoblemy nauchnogo izucheniia religii v Rossii XX — nachala XXI veka. Moscow, 2014. P. 27–58.
2. Bogdanov A. A. Na polputi, in Nauchnye izvestiia. Sb. 1: Ekonomika. Istoriia. Pravo. Moscow, 1922. S. 185–191.
3. Bogdanov A. A. Prazdnik bessmertiia. Saint-Petersburg, 2014. P. 351–369.
4. Bogdanov A. A. Tektologiia. Vseobshchaia organizatsionnaia nauka. Moscow, 2003. P. 250.
5. Bogdanov A. A. Filosofiia zhivogo opyta. Saint-Petersburg, 1912.
6. Bulgakov S. N. O zakonomernosti sotsial'nykh iavlenii // On zhe. Ot marksizma k idealizmu. Saint-Petersburg, 1903. P. 6–7.
7. Bukharin N. I. Teoriia istoricheskogo materializma. Moscow, 1921.
8. Gorin P. O. M. N. Pokrovskii — bol'shevik-istorik. Minsk, 1933.
9. Gubanov N. I. Razrabotka problem ateizma v sovetskoi filosofskoi nauke, in Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma. Moscow, 1967. Vol. 4. P. 183–204.
10. Dzheims U. Mnogoobrazie religioznogo opyta. Moscow, 1993. P. 33.
11. Zybkovets V. F. I. I. Skvortsov-Stepanov: Ocherk zhizni i literaturno-ateisticheskoi deiatel'nosti //
12. Zybkovets V. F. Ob odnoi pouchitel'noi diskussii, in Voprosy istorii religii i ateizma. Moscow, 1959. Vol. 7. P. 303–313.
13. Kunov G. Vozniknovenie religii i very v Boga / I. Stepanov, per. Moscow; Petrograd. 1919.
14. Lenin V. I. O znachenii voinstvuiushchego materializma, in Pod znamenem marksizma. 1922. № 3. P. 5–12.
15. Lunacharskii A. V. Religiia i sotsializm. Saint-Petersburg, 1908. T. 1. P. 44–45; 1911. T. 2. P. 364.
16. Maksimov M. V. K 90-letiiu filosofskogo parokhoda, in Solov'evskie issledovaniia. 2013. Vol. 1(37). P. 184–189.
17. Malevich T. V., Folieva T. A. Estestvennost' religii i estestvennaia religiia v kognitivnom religiovedenii, in Filosofiia i kul'tura. 2014. № 11 (83) P. 1605–1617.
18. Malinovskii Br. Nauchnaia teoriia kul'tury. Moscow, 2005.
19. Marks K. Pis'mo k P. V. Annenkovu // On zhe. Nishcheta filosofii. Moscow, 1987. P. 147.
20. Motovnikova E. N. «Pod znamenem marksizma» — «Mysl'»: germenevticheskaia kolliziia 1922 g., in Voprosy filosofii. 2013. № 11. P. 123–136.
21. Ot redaktsii // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1922. № 1–2. P. 3–4.
22. Pis'mo tov. L. D. Trotskogo // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1922. № 1–2. P. 5–7.
23. Pokrovskii M. N. Istoriia religii na kholostom khodu (Nechto vrode reziume) // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1923. № 2–3. P. 202–210.
24. Pokrovskii M. N. Otvet t. Stepanovu // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1923. № 1. P. 142–159.
25. Pokrovskii M. N. Ocherk istorii russkoi kul'tury. Kursk, 1924.
26. Pokrovskii M. N. Strakh strakha smerti i proizvodstvennoe znachenie religii // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1922. № 9–10. P. 113–125.
27. Reisner M. A. Freid i ego shkola o religii, in Pechat' i revoliutsiia. 1924. № 1. P. 40–60; № 2. P. 81–106.
28. Rikkert G. Nauki o prirode i nauki o kul'ture. Moscow, 1998.
29. Ringer F. K. Zakat nemetskikh mandarinov. Akademicheskoe soobshchestvo v Germanii, 1890–1933. Moscow, 2008.
30. Skvortsov-Stepanov I. I. Izbrannye ateisticheskie proizvedeniia. Moscow, 1959.
31. Skvortsov-Stepanov I. I. O dushe, zagrobnoi zhizni, o boge i bessmertii // Molodaia gvardiia. 1922. № 4–5. P. 105.
32. Skvortsov-Stepanov I. I. Popovskii pokhod protiv naroda // On zhe. Izbrannye ateisticheskie proizvedeniia. Moscow, 1959. P. 42–46.
33. Skvortsov-Stepanov I. I. Strakh smerti protiv istoricheskogo materializma // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1922. № 11–12. P. 82–113
34. Skvortsov-Stepanov. Smert' strakha smerti kak itog moei polemiki s t. M. N. Pokrovskim // Pod znamenem marksizma. 1923. № 2–3. P. 192–202.
35. T. V. Estestvennost' religii i estestvennaia religiia v kognitivnom religiovedenii, in Filosofiia i kul'tura. 2014. № 11 (83) P. 1605–1617.
36. Tokarev S. A. Religiia v istorii narodov mira. Moscow, 2005.
37. Sheinman M. M. I. I. Skvortsov-Stepanov (K 100-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia), in Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma. Moscow, 1970. Vol. 10. P. 253–269.
38. Eil'derman G. Pervobytnyi kommunizm i pervobytnaia religiia (v istoriko-materialisticheskom osveshchenii). Moscow, 1923.
39. Belzen J. The Historicocultural Approach in the Psychology of Religion: Perspectives for Interdisciplinary Research, in Journal for the Scientifi c Study of Religion. 1997. Vol. 36, no. 3. P. 358–371.
40. Studying Religions with the Iron Curtain Closed and Opened. The Academic Study of Religion in Eastern Europe / T. Bubik, H. Hoff mann, eds. Brill. Leiden; Boston, 2015.
41. Thrower J. Marxist-Leninist scientifi c atheism and the study of religion and atheism in the USSR. B., 1983.

Antonov Konstantin

*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.

Статья написана в рамках гранта РГНФ № 16-03-00799 «Психология религии в России XIX — начала XXI века»

The article suggests sociological analysis of the social relationships in the parish as a factor which promotes parish social work development. The paper is based on the data of two field research. First (quantitative) source is a survey of the on–line educational course on church social work participants, conducted in 2014–201530. The second source of data is a qualitative study «Social work organization on the Russian Orthodox Church parishes in the first half of XXI. Sociological Analysis31». Within this research in 2012–2013, 154 in-depth interviews were conducted with parishioners, priests, and non–parishioners, involved into parish non–liturgical activities in 10 regions of Russian Federation. Basing on the empirical data, in the first part of the analysis we trace the connection between the type of priests and laity social relationship in the parish and the quantitative indicators of parish social work development. These indicators are the number of non–liturgical activities in the parish, the number of people involved into parish social activities, and the number of organizations the parish has contacts with. In the Second part of the article, we present the description of the parish prior (head of a parish) styles of working with people in the relation of these styles to the formation of different types of priests–laity cooperation and promotion of the corresponding types of social work in the parish.

parish sociology, faith–based social work, parish social work in the Russian Orthodox Church, priest, social relationship in the parish, fi eld research.

1. Vrublevskaia P. Issleduia tserkovnuiu obshchinu v malom gorode: rol' sviashchennika i drugie aspekty pravoslavnoi obshchinnosti, in Laboratorium. Zhurnal sotsial'nykh issledovanii. 2015. №. 3.
2. Doklad Patriarkha Moskovskogo i vseia Rusi Kirilla na Arkhiereiskom Sobore Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi (2 fevralia 2013 g.). URL: http://sobor.patriarchia.ru/db/text/2770923.html (data obrashcheniia: 16.09.2016).
3. Zabaev I. V., Oreshina D. A., Prutskova E. V. Spetsifika sotsial'noi raboty na prikhodakh Russkoi pravoslavnoi tserkvi: problema kontseptualizatsii, in Zhurnal issledovanii sotsial'noi politiki. 2013. T. 11. № 3. P. 355–368.
4. Zorkaia N. A. Pravoslavie v bezreligioznom obshchestve, in Vestnik obshchestvennogo mneniia: Dannye. Analiz. Diskussii. 2009. №. 2 (100). P. 65–85.
5. Medvedeva G. P. Sotsial'naia rabota kak ob"ekt tselostnogo poznaniia, in Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. Lobachevskogo. Sotsiologiia. Psikhologiia. Filosofiia. 2009. № 5. P. 325–328.
6. O printsipakh organizatsii sotsial'noi raboty v Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi. URL:http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/1401894.html (data obrashcheniia: 28.08.2016).
7. Stenogramma vstrechi predsedatelia Pravitel'stva RF V. V. Putina so Sviateishim Patriarkhom Kirillom i liderami traditsionnykh religioznykh obshchin Rossii 8. 02. 2012. URL: http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/2005767.html (data obrashcheniia: 14.08.2016).
8. Filatov S. B., Lunkin R. N. Statistika rossiiskoi religioznosti: magiia tsifr i neodnoznachnaia real'nost', in Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia. 2005. №. 6. P. 35–5.
9. Iudin G. B., Oreshina D. A. Daroobmen i reguliatsiia potrebitel'skogo kreditovaniia v soobshchestvakh: sluchai pravoslavnykh prikhodskikh obshchin, in Sotsiologicheskii zhurnal. 2016. T. 22. №. 2. P. 110–134.
10. Ammerman N. Pillars of Faith. Berkley, 2005.
11. Cavendish J. C. Church-based Community Activism: A Comparison of Black and White Catholic Congregations, in Journal for the Scientifi c Study of Religion. 2000. Vol. 39. №. 1. P. 64–77.
12. Chaves M. Congregations in America. Cambridge (MA), 2004.
13. Chaves M., Alison E. Following Wave III: Religious Congregations in 21st Century America. 2015. Durham (NC). P. 22. URL: http://www.soc.duke.edu/natcong/study.html (data obrashcheniia: 01.09.2016).
14. Cnaan R. A. The Newer Deal. Social Work and Religion in Partnership. N. Y., 1998.
15. Fichter J. H. Priest and people. Chicago, 1965.
16. Fichter J. H. Social relations in the urban parish. Chicago, 1954.
17. Harris M. Quiet care: Welfare work and religious congregations, in Journal of Social Policy. 1995. Vol. 24. №. 01. P. 53–71.
18. Leedge D. C. Parish Organizations: Parish Life among the Leaders, in Notre Dame Study of Catholic Parish Life. 1987. Report № 9. URL: http://icl.nd.edu/assets/39493/report8.pdf (data obrashcheniia: 12.10.2016).
19. Leedge D. C. Parish Organizations: People’s Needs, Parish Services, and Leadership, in Notre Dame Study of Catholic Parish Life. 1987. Report № 8. URL: http://icl.nd.edu/assets/39493/report8.pdf (data obrashcheniia: 12.10.2016).
20. Manfreda K. L., et.al. Web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates, in International Journal of Market Research. 2008. Vol. 50, no. 1. P. 79–104.
21. meta-analysis of response rates in web or internet-based surveys, in Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2000. Vol. 60, no. 6. P. 821–836.
22. Notre Dame Study of Catholic Life Since Vatican II. Informatsiia i otchety ob issledovanii. URL: http://icl.nd.edu/initiatives-projects/church-life-research/ (data obrashcheniia: 30.08.2016).
23. Nulty D. The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done?, in Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2008. Vol. 33, no. 3. P. 301–314.
24. Schuyler J. B. Northern parish: a sociological and pastoral study. Chicago, 1960.
25. Swatos W. H. Jr. Congregationalism, in Encyclopedia of Religion and Society / W. H. Jr. Swatos, ed. 1998. URL:http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/ (data obrashcheniia: 12.09.2016).
26. The Emerging Parish: the Notre Dame Study of Catholic Life Since Vatican II / J. Gremillion, J. Castelli, eds. San Francisco, 1989.

Oreshina Dar'ia