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

The aim of this article is to reveal the methods and characteristic features of Isidore of Seville’s interpretation of the anonymous text De septem ordinibus ecclesiae (5th — early 7th centuries). This text, traditionally attributed to St. Jerome, deals with the functions of church servants and clerics. Isidore reinterprets it in the second part of his book De ecclesiasticis offi ciis, also devoted to the origin and functions of clerics. Isidore often makes use of the text of his predecessor but almost never quotes the borrowed sentences completely and unchanged. The text of Ps.-Jerome was used by Isidore as a set of rhetorical patterns which he needed in order to express his own ideas. Thus, Isidore reinterprets the concept of sacerdos: in his text it is, fi rst of all, the bishop. Besides, Isidore fi lls the image of the bishop with new content; it is signifi cant that Isidore uses only the prologue from Ps.-Jerome’s text, rather than a specifi c chapter devoted to bishops. Isidore’s sacerdos, as opposed to the episcopus of Ps.-Jerome, is actively involved in the life of the Christian community: he preaches, instructs the fl ock, gives alms, takes part in legal proceedings and performs the sacraments.

Isidore of Seville, bishop, presbyter, De ecclesiasticis officiis, De septem ordinibus ecclesiae, Ps.-Isidore

1. Birkin M. Ju., “Svjashhenstvo episkopa v Toledskom korolevstve pervoj treti VII v. po dannym sochinenij Isidora Sevil’skogo: terminologicheskij aspekt”, in: Vestnik RGGU. Serija “Istorija. Filologija. Kul’turologija. Vostokovedenie”, 10, 2017, 23–30.
2. Ildefonsi Toletani episcopi De virginitate Sanctae Mariae, De cognitione baptismi, De itineri deserti, De viris illustribus, Turnhout, 2007.
3. Kottje R., “Isidor von Sevilla und der Chorepiscopat”, in: Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 28, 1972, 533–536.
4. Lawson A. C., “The sources of «De ecclesiasticis officiis» of Saint Isidore of Seville”, in: Revue Bénédictine, 50, 1938, 26–36.
5. LawsonC. M., “Notes on De ecclesiasticis officiis”, in: Díaz y Díaz M. C., ed., Isidoriana; colección de estudios sobre Isidoro de Sevilla, León, 1961, 299–304.
6. Lawson Ch. M., ed., Isidorus Hispalensis. De ecclesiasticis officiis, Turnholti, 1989.
7. Madoz J., San Isidoro de Sevilla: semblanza de su personalidad literaria, León, 1960.
8. Martín J. C., La “Renotatio librorum domini Isidori” de Braulio de Zaragoza (+ 651). Introducción, edición crítica y traducción, Logroño, 2002.
9. Martínez Díez G., El Epitome hispánico: una colección canónica española del siglo VII: estudio y texto crítico, Comillas, 1961.
10. Reynolds R., “The Pseudo-Hieronymian “De septem ordinibus ecclesiae”. Notes on its origins, abridgments and use in early medieval canonical collections”, in: Revue Bénédictine, 80, 1970, 238–252.
11. Séjourné P., Le dernier père de l’èglise. Saint Isidore de Séville. Son rôle dans l’ histoire du droit canonique, Paris, 1929.
12. Ukolova V. I., “«Razlichija» Isidora Sevil’skogo: Slovokak instrument poznanij a”, in: Srednieveka, 77, 2016, 368–376.
13. Voroncov S. A., “Filosofemy v pervojknige «Differencij » Isidora Sevil’skogo”, in: Vestnik PSTGU. Serija: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 50, 2013, 27–45

Marey Elena

*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 written in 2018 within the framework of the project "The Treatise by Isidore Of Seville ''About Church services'': translation, commentary, research" supported by RFBR Foundation.

This article deals with the ontological background of the discussion about divine energies in the 14th century. Specifi cally, since the concept of being was reduced to the essence, the status of energy became unclear, for the anousios energeia cannot be regarded as existing. The article shows that the existential dimension of the concept of energy, developed by Aristotle, in the era of Christological controversies recedes to the background, and the conceptual apparatus of ontology becomes so narrow that it seeks to eliminate everything that does not fi t into the framework of the opposition “essence vs. accidents” (ο¨σªα vs. συμβεβηκ´ς). The article also demonstrates that this circumstance is a philosophical base of the Palamitic disputes and their most important theoretical prerequisite. In the relevant scientifi c literature, these disputes are viewed from the theological point of view; the motivation of anti-Palamites therefore remains unclear. Presumably, it might have happened that for their personal reasons, they did not accept, for example, hesychastic practices, whereas they were urged to deny the concept of energies by their own “mental ontology”.

God, being, essence, energy, Palamism, anti-Palamism, ontology, theology

1. Bibihin V. V., Jenergija, Moscow, 2010.
2. Bolotov V. V., Sobranie cerkovno-istoricheskih trudov, Moscow, 1999.
3. Bradshaw D., “The presence of Aristotle in Byzantine theology”, in: Kaldellis A., Siniossoglou N., eds., The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium, Cambridge, 2017, 381–396.
4. Brentano F., O mnogoznachnosti sushhego po Aristotelju, St.-Petersbourg, 2012.
5. Brjedshou D., Aristotel’ na Vostoke i na Zapade: Metafi zika i razdelenie hristianskogo mira, Moscow, 2012, 23–77.
6. Chen Ch.-H., “Different Meanings of the Term εν£ργεια in the Philosophy of Aristotle”, in: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Malden, 1956, 17, 56–65
7. Dobrohotov A. L., Kategorija bytija v klassicheskoj zapadnoevropejskoj filosofii, Moscow, 1986.
8. Fehér I., “Heideggers Kritik der Ontotheologie”, in: Religion und Gott im Denken der Neuzeit, Paderborn, 2000, 200–223.
9. Fokin A. R., “Transformacij a aristotelevskih kategorij v teologii i kosmologii Maksima Ispovednika”, in: Filosofskij zhurnal, Moscow, 2017, 10, 43–45.
10. Gaginskij A. M., “Filosofskie kategorii v palamitskih sporah”, in: Bogoslovskij vestnik, Sergiev Posad, 2017, 24–25, 181–185.
11. Gaginskij A. M., “Onto-teologija i preodolenie metafi ziki: M. Hajdegger, Zh.-L. Marion i hristianskaja tradicij a”, in: Vestnik PSTGU I: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, Moscow, 2015, 60, 55–71.
12. Gajdenko P. P., Nauchnaja racional’nost’ i fi losofskij razum, Moscow, 2003.
13. Gutas D., Siniossoglou N., “Philosophy and “Byzantine philosophy””, in: Kaldellis A., Siniossoglou N., eds., The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium, Cambridge, 2017, 271–295.
14. Hajdegger M., Tozhdestvo i razlichie, Moscow, 1997.
15. Jaran F., “L’onto-théologie dans l’oeuvre de Martin Heidegger: Récit d’une confrontation avec la pensée Occidentale”, in: Philosophie, Paris, 2006, 91, 37–62.
16. Larchet J.-C., Théologie des énergies divines: Des origines à st. Jean Damascène, Paris, 2010.
17. Bruun O., Corti L., éds., Les Catégories et leur histoire, Paris, 2005.
18. Lilla S., Clement of Alexandria: A Study in Christian Platonism and Gnosticism, Oxford, 1971.
19. Μόσχος Δ., Πλατωνισμ‹ς Œ Χριστιανισμ‹ς; Ο• φιλοσοφικ˜ς προϋποθ˜σεις το ντιησυχασμο το Νικηφ‹ρου Γρηγορ (1293–1361), ùθýνα, 1998.
20. Menn S., “The Origins of Aristotle’s Concept of ¢νέργεια: ¢νέργεια and δžναμις”, in: Ancient Philosophy, Pittsburgh, 1994, 14, 73–114.
21. Sorabji R., ed., Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science, New York, 1987.
22. Sorabji R., Time, Creation and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, London, 1983.

Gaginsky Alexey

*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.

Changes that occurred in Europe during the transition to the Modern Era had a strong impact on theology. The author of this paper accepts the defi nition of Modernity given by J. Habermas and demonstrates how theology in the 16th century was infl uenced by the three “threshold events of Modernity” identifi ed by the German philosopher, namely the discovery of the New World, the Renaissance and the Reformation. One of the consequences of geographical discoveries was the acceleration of the process of secularisation and the formation of a new vision of goals and tasks of theology and its place among other scientifi c disciplines. The main features of the Renaissance relevant to theology were the anthropocentric worldview that replaced the theocentric worldview as well as the emergence of historical consciousness. The rise of classical philology and the new attitude towards the phenomenon of text led to the new way of reading and interpreting the Holy Scriptures. Many of these tendencies had a strong eff ect on the development of the Reformation and later came to be refl ected in its theology. This paper demonstrates how the rejection of scholastic schemes, which was prepared by humanists, was realised to its full extent in Protestant theology. On the other hand, the ideas of the Catholic Counter-Reformation were very important for further development of theology. Among these one can point out measures taken with regard to the reformation of theological education, introducing methods of adjacent academic spheres to theology, a new rise in scholasticism. The conclusion of the paper points to the importance for present-day theology to rethink and creatively assimilate the developments that occurred in European theology during the transition to Modernity in the 16th century.

theology, J. Habermas, Modernity, New Age, discovery of the New World, Renaissance, Reformation, Counter-Reformation

1. Antonov K. M., “Teologij a kak nauchnaja special’nost’”, in: Voprosy filosofii, 2012, 6, 73–84.
2. Batkin L. M., Leonardo da Vinchi I osobennosti renessansnogo tvorcheskogo myshlenija, Moscow, 1990.
3. Bedouelle Th., La théologie, Paris, 20092.
4. Berman M., All that is solid melts into air, Penguin Book, 1982.
5. Bibihin V. V., Novyj Renessans, Moscow, 1998.
6. Brettler M. Z., Enns P., Harrington D. J., The Bible and the Believer. How to Read the Bible Critically & Religiously, Oxford, 2012.
7. Carlos M. N., Eire. Reformations. The Early Modern World, 1450–1650, Yale, 2016.
8. Dil’tej V., Sobranije sochinenij, Moscow, 2001, 6.
9. Dil’tej V., Vozzrenie na mir i issledovanie cheloveka so vremen Vozrozhdenij a I Reformacii, Moscow, St. Petersbourg, 20132.
10. Francisco de Vitoris, “On the Law of war”, in: Pagden A., Lawrene J., eds., Political writings, Cambridge, 1991, 293–328.
11. Fransisko de Vitorija, “Lekcii ob indejcah i voennom prave”, in: Chelovek: mysliteli proshlogo o ego zhizni, smerti i bessmertii. Drevnij mir — jepoha Prosveshhenija, Moscow, 1991, 273–277.
12. Gillespi M., The Theological Origins of Modernity, Chicago, London, 2008.
13. Habermas Ju. Filosofskij diskurs o modern, Moscow, 2003.
14. Hallensleben B., “Bogoslovie Fomy Akvinskogo v prochtenii Tomasa de Vio Kaetana”, in: URL: http://www.bogoslov.ru/text/414464.html#_ftn31, 12.03.2018.
15. Hondzinskij P. V., “Antropologij a svjatitelja Feofana Zatvornika i zarozhdenie pervyh personalisticheskih koncepcij v russkom bogoslovii”, in: Vestnik PSTGU. I, 2017, 70, 11–27.
16. Karpov K. V., “Bonavantura o statuse teologii kak nauki”, in: Filosofija religii: al’manah, Moscow, 2015, 399–415.
17. Kaufman G., An essay on Theological method, Atlanta, 19953.
18. Kotljarov P. N., “Liberali erudition i aristotelevskoe nasledie: proekty reformy F. Melanhtona v Vittenbergskom universitete”, in: Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Serija: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2015, 3, 172–181.
19. Kuznecov V. G., Germenevtika I gumanitarnoe poznanie, Moscow, 1991.
20. Kyrlezhev A., “Recenzija na knigu: Gillespie M. A., The theological origins of modernity. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 2008”, in: Gosudarstvo, religija, cerkov’ v Rossiiizarubezhom, 2013, 31, 254–260.
21. Lubac de H., Exégèse médiévale. Les quatre sеns de L’Écriture. Seconde Partie, Aubier, 1964.
22. Lubac de H., L’Écriture dans la tradition, Paris, 1966.
23. McGrath A., Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation, Malden, 20042.
24. McGrath A., The genesis of doctrine. A study in the foundation of doctrinal criticism, Grand Rapids, 1997.
25. Mihajlov P. B., “Nachala bogoslovskogo znanija”, in: Vestnik PSTGU, I, 2011, 35, 7–21.
26. Oberman H. A., Forerunners of the Reformation. The Shape of Late Medieval Thought. Holt, Reinhart and Winston, New York, 1966.
27. Pelikan Ja., Hristianskaja tradicija. Istorija razvitija verouchenija, Moscow, 2007, 1.
28. Reinhardt N., “Just War, Royal Conscience and the Crisis of Theological Counsel in the Early Seventeenth Century”, in: Journal of Early Modern History, 2014, 18, 495–521.
29. Savinov R. V., “Problema sistematizacii v protestantskoj sholastike”, in: Vestnik PSTGU, I, 2016, 67, 59–72.
30. Scheible H., “Die Reform von Schule und Universität in des Reformationszeit”, in: Aufsätze zu Melanchton, Tübengen, 2010, 152–172.
31. Shmonin D. V., Vdovina G. V., Savinov R. V., Sholastika: ocherki istorii, St. Petersbourg, 2011.
32. Shmonin V. D. ,V teni Renessansa: vtoraja sholastika v Ispanii, St. Petersbourg, 2006.
33. Tejlor Ch., Sekuljarnyj vek, Moscow, 2017.
34. Vdovina G. V., Jazyk neochevidnogo. Uchenija o znakah v sholastike XVII v., Moscow, 2009.

Polskov Konstantin, archpriest

*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 history of the Young Earth creationism can be divided into two stages, namely the period of Scriptural geology, which lasted from the 1820s to the 1860s mostly in Britain, and the modern period, which began in the USA in the 1920s and continued into the 21st century. During both these periods, some Young-Earth creationists made attempts to employ the notions of evolution in order to bolster a highly literalistic interpretation of the biblical narrative about the Creation and the Flood. In their opinion, the hypothesis of ultra-rapid evolution off ered a plausible explanation of how a small number of species which were in Noah’s Ark could have produced the very diverse modern fauna of terrestrial organisms without supernatural interventions on the part of God. The fact that the elements of the theory of evolution were accepted by some prominent Young Earth creationists demonstrates that it would be an exaggeration to ascribe uncompromised hostility towards the idea of evolution to the Young Earth movement as a whole.

Young Earth creationism, theory of evolution, Darwin, the Flood, Adventism, Ellen White

1. Bont de R., “A Serpent without Teeth. The Conservative Transformism of Jean-Baptiste d’ Omalius d’ Halloy (1783–1875)”, in: Centaurus, 49, 2007, 114–137.
2. Burchfi eld J. D., Lord Kelvin and the Age of the Earth, London, 1975.
3. Darvin Ch., Proishozhdenie vidov, Moscow, London, 1935.
4. Goman’kov A. V., Biblija i priroda, Moscow, 2014.
5. Gould S. J., Time’s Arrow, Time’s Cycle: Myth and Metaphor in the Discovery of Geological Time, Cambridge, London, 1987.
6. Lamark Zh.-B., Izbrannye proizvedenij a v dvuh tomah, Moscow, 1955, 1.
7. Millhauser M., “The Scriptural Geologists: An Episode in the History of Opinion”, in: Osiris, 11, 1954, 65–86.
8. Numbers R. L., The Creationists: From Scientifi c Creationism to Intelligent Design, Cambridge, 2006.
9. O’ Connor R., “Young-Earth Creationists in Early Nineteenth-Century Britain? Towards a Reassessment of «Scriptural Geology»”, in: History of Science, 45, 2007, 357–403.
10. Roberts M., “Adam Sedgwick (1785–1873): geologist and evangelical”, in: Kölbl-Ebert M. ed., Geology and Religion: A History of Harmony and Hostility, London, 2009, 155–170.
11. Rudwick M. J. S., “Biblical Flood and geological deluge: the amicable dissociation of geology and Genesis”, in: Kölbl-Ebert M. ed., Geology and Religion: A History of Harmony and Hostility, London, 2009, 103–110.
12. Rudwick M. J. S., Worlds Before Adam: The Reconstruction of Geohistory in the Age of Reform, Chicago, London, 2008.
13. Rupke N. A., The Great Chain of History: William Buckland and the English School of Geology, 1814–1849, Oxford, New York, 1983.
14. Stiling R. L., “Scriptural Geology in America”, in: Livingstone D. N. et al., eds., Evangelicals and Science in Historical Perspective, New York, 1999, 177–192.
15. Swift A., in U. S., Belief in Creationist View of Humans at New Low, URL: http://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationistview-humans-new-low.aspx (data obrashhenija: 05.12.2017).

Khramov Alexander

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This article deals with the life and creative work of the Russian-Jewish philosopher Boris Stolpner (1871–1937), the important but undeservedly forgotten representative of the Russian thought of the Silver Age. For three decades he was at the heart of discussions on issues of religion, philosophy, literature, politics and was familiar with almost all outstanding representatives of the cultural life of Russia of that time. The focus of the article is Stolpner’s contribution to the cultural context of the Silver Age and his special method of polemics. The article also scrutinises his role in the work of the Religious-Philosophical Society of St. Petersburg, his relationship with V. V. Rozanov, A. F. Losev, etc. The article raises for the fi rst time the question of the signifi cance of Stolpner’s ideas for the perception of Jewish mysticism by Russian philosophers of the early twentieth century. The study is largely based on hard-to-access publications and archival materials that have not yet been made public.

Russian philosophy, Silver Age, Religious-Philosophical Society, State Academy of Art Culture, V. V. Rozanov, A. F. Losev, P. A. Florensky, S. N. Bulgakov, G. G. Shpet, Jewish mysticism, Kabbalah, Marxism

1. Akimova M. V., Shapir M. I., “Boris Isaakovich Jarho i strategija “tochnogo literaturovedenija””, in: Jarho B. I. Metodologija tochnogo literaturovedenija: Izbr. trudy poteorii literatury, Moscow, 2006,VII–XXXII.
2. Blok A., Zapisnye knizhki, 1901–1920, Moscow, 1965.
3. Burmistrov K. Ju., “Imjaslavie i kabbala: O roli evrejskoj mistiki v polemike o pochitanii bozhestvennyh imen v Rossii nachala XX v.”, in: Mirovye religii v istorii, kul’ture i politike, Saint-Petersbourg, 2017, 455–506.
4. Burmistrov K., “The interpretation of Kabbalah in early 20th-century Russian Philosophy:Soloviev, Bulgakov, Florenskii, Losev”, in: East European Jewish Affairs, 2007, 37/2, 164–171.
5. Bychkov S., Hronika neraskrytogo ubijstva, Moscow, 1996.
6. Cadamagnani C., Per una scienza esatta della letteratura: Boris Isaakovič Jarcho nel contesto del formalismo russo, Pisa, 2012.
7. Chukovskij K. I., Dnevnik. 1901–1929, Moscow, 1991.
8. Dubnov S. M., Kniga zhizni. Vospominanija i razmyshlenija, Saint-Petersbourg, 1998.
9. Dubnova-Jerlih S., Hleb i maca. Vospominanija, stihi raznyh let, Saint-Petersbourg, 1994.
10. Durylin S. N., Tri besa, Moscow, 2013.
11. Ermichjov A. A., Religiozno-fi losofskoe obshhestvo v Peterburge (1907–1917). Hronika zasedanij , Saint-Petersbourg, 2007.
12. Ermishina O. T. (ed.), “Moskovskoe religiozno-fi losofskoe obshhestvo pamjati Vl. Solov’jova: Hronika russkoj duhovnoj zhizni”, in: Literaturovedcheskij zhurnal, 2011, 28, 210–267.
13. Filosofskaja jenciklopedija: V 5 t., Moscow, 1970.
14. Gershenzon M., “Pis’ma k L’vu Shestovu (1920–1925)”, in: Minuvshee. Ist. al’manah, 1991, 6, 237–312.
15. Kacis L. F., “B. G. Stolpner o evrejstve”, in: Issledovanija po istorii russkoj mysli. Ezhegodnik, 1999, Moscow, 1999, 259–330.
16. Kejdan V. I. (ed.), Vzyskujushhie grada. Hronika chastnoj zhizni russkih religioznyh filosofov v pis’mah i dnevnikah, Moscow, 1997.
17. Korsakov S. N., “Boris Grigor’evich Stolpner (po arhivnym materialam)”, in: Istorija filosofii, 2016, 21, 136–150.
18. Leont’ev A. A., “Aleksej Nikolaevich Leont’ev rasskazyvaet o sebe”, in: Voprosy psihologii, 2003, 2, 35–36.
19. Levickij V. (Cederbaum V. O.), Za chetvert’ veka. Revoljucionnye vospominanija 1892– 1917 g.g., Moscow, Leningrad, 1927.
20. Losev A. F., Iz rannih proizvedenij , Moscow, 1990.
21. Mandel’shtam N. Ja., Vospominanija, New York, 1970.
22. Pis’ma Aleksandra Bloka k rodnym, Moscow, Leningrad, 1927, 1.
23. Plotnikov N. S., “Iskusstvo i dejstvitel’nost’. Gegel’, Shpet i russkaja jestetika”, in: Vestnik Tomskogo gos. universiteta. Filosofija. Sociologija. Politologija, 2015, 32, 71–84.
24. Plotnikova N. S., Podzemskoj N. P. (ed.), Iskusstvo kak jazyk — jazyki iskusstva. Gosudarstvennaja akademija hudozhestvennyh nauk i jesteticheskaja teorija 1920-h godov /: V 2 t., Moscow, 2017, 2.
25. Poljak A., “Na zare rabochego dvizhenija v Zapadnoj Rossii”, in: Katorga i ssylka, 1928, 48, 7–17.
26. Proskurinoj V. (ed.), “Perepiska V. V. Rozanova i M. O. Gershenzona. 1909–1918”, in: Novyj mir, 1991, 3, 236–237.
27. Religiozno-filosofskoe obshhestvo v Sankt-Peterburge (Petrograde). Istorija v materialah i dokumentah: V 3 t., Moscow, 2009.
28. Rozanov V. V., Kogda nachal’stvo ushlo…, Moscow, 1997.
29. Rozanov V. V., Mimoletnoe, Moscow, 1994.
30. Shpet G. G., Iskusstvo kak vid znanija: Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury, Moscow, 2007.
31. Taho-Godi A. A., “Iz arheologii”, in: Vestnik RHD, 1997, 176, 146–153.
32. Taho-Godi A. A., “Ot dialektiki mifa k absoljutnoj mifologii”, in: Voprosy filosofii, 1997, 5, 167–180.
33. Trockij L. D., Literatura i revoljucija, Moscow, 1991.
34. Venditti M., “K sravnenij u nauchnyh metodologij B. I. Jarho i G. G. Shpeta”, in: Res philologica. Sbornik statej pamjati M. I. Shapira, Amsterdam, 2014, 429–440.
35. Vygotskaja G. L., Lifanova T. M., Lev Semenovich Vygotskij . Zhizn’. Dejatel’nost’. Shtrihi k portretu, Moscow, 1996.

Burmistrov Konstantin

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

In a number of areas of religious studies, such as sociology of religion, economy of religion, etc., the question of the nature of the infl uence of religion on certain aspects of life, namely politics, economics, family relations, has been developed for a long time. However, the analysis of the real or potential infl uence of Orthodoxy on people’s behaviour in diff erent spheres of life is only beginning. One of the virtues that is typical of Orthodoxy is “humility”. In order to carry out empirical studies that would allow us to assess how humility aff ects personal attitudes toward diff erent spheres of life and the person’s behaviour, it is necessary to create an instrument that would make it possible (at least in the form of a rough approximation) to evaluate the person’s possession of this ethos. This article carries out preliminary research for the construction of the scale of “humility” and gives a review of existing attempts in empirical studies to measure this virtue. This review covers such approaches as “virtues in action”, “HEXACO. Six major dimensions of personality”, “Relational humility”, “Self-focus” and “Otherfocus combination”, “Humility in positive psychology», «dispositional humility» and some others. Certain scales, such as “Relational humility scale”, “State humility scale”, “Disposition Humility scale”, “Humility as a combination of low attention to Self and high attention to the Other” (low self-focus, high other-focus), are being analysed as well. The article also discusses main diffi culties encountered by the developers of these scales.

humility, positive psychology, humility in trait theory, measuring of humility, operationalisation, humility scale, ethos

1. Adnès P., “Humilité”, in: Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1969, 7, 1136–1187.
2. Allport G. W., “Traits revisited”, in: American psychologist, 1966, 21/1, 1–10.
3. Ashton M. C. et al., “A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages”, in: Journal of personality and social psychology, 2004, 86/2, 356.
4. Ashton M. C., Lee K., “A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality”, in: European Journal of Personality, 2001, 15/5, 327–353.
5. Ashton M. C., Lee K., “The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality”, in: Journal of personality assessment, 2009, 91/4, 340–345.
6. Baxter R., “Christian Directory”, in: Orme W. (ed.), The Practical Works of The Rev. Richard Baxter, London, 1830.
7. Bulgakov S., Dva grada. Issledovanija o prirode obshhestvennyh idealov, Saint-Petersbourg, 2008.
8. Chaplin W. F., John O. P., Goldberg L. R., “Conceptions of states and traits: dimensional attributes with ideals as prototypes”, in: Journal of personality and social psychology, 1988, 54/4, 541–557.
9. Crowne D. P., Marlowe D., “A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology”, in: Journal of consulting psychology, 1960, 24/4, 349–354.
10. Davis D. Relational Humility, Richmond, 2010.
11. Dihle A., “Demut”, in: Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Sachwörterbuch zur Auseinandersetzung des Christentums mit der antiken Welt, 1957, 3, 735–778.
12. Dik B. J., Morse J., White M., Shimizu A. B., “Humility in career development”, in: Worthington E. L., Davis D. E., Hook J. N. (ed.),Handbook of humility: Theory, research, and applications, London, 2016, 207–220.
13. Farrell J. E. et al., “Humility and relationship outcomes in couples: The mediating role of commitment”, in: Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 2015, 4/1.
14. Fenigstein A., Scheier M. F., Buss A. H., “Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory”, in: Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 1975, 43/4, 522–527.
15. Goldberg L. R., “An alternative “description of personality”: the big-fi ve factor structure”, in: Journal of personality and social psychology, 1990, 59/6, 1216–1229.
16. Guiso L., Sapienza P., Zingales L., “People’s opium? Religion and economic attitudes”, in: Journal of monetary economics, 2003, 50.1, 225–282.
17. Harrison L., Evrei, konfuciancy i protestanty: kul’turnyj kapital i konec mul’tikul’turalizma, Moscow, 2014.
18. Hill P. C., Laney E. K., Edwards K. J., Wang D. C., Orme W. H., Chan A. C., & Wang F. L., “A few good measures: Colonel Jessup and humility”, in: Worthington E. L., Davis D. E., Hook J. N. (eds.), Handbook of humility, New York, 2017, 119–133.
19. John O. P., Angleitner A., Ostendorf F., “The lexical approach to personality: A historical review of trait taxonomic research”, in: European journal of Personality, 1988, 2.3, 171–203.
20. Jum D., “Issledovanie o principah morali”, in: Jum D. Sochinenija, 1996, 2, 267.
21. Kant I., Lekcii po jetike, Moscow, 2005.
22. Kernis M. H. et al., “There’s more to selfesteem than whether it is high or low: The importance of stability of self-esteem”, in: Journal of personality and social psychology, 1993, 65.6, 1190–1204.
23. Knorre B. K., “Kategorii viny i smirenij a v sisteme cennostej cerkovno-prihodskoj subkul’tury”, in: Prihod i obshhina v sovremennom pravoslavii, 2011, 317–340.
24. Kruse E., Chancellor J., Lyubomirsky S., “State humility: Measurement, conceptual validation, and intrapersonal processes”, in: Self and Identity, 2017, 16.4, 399–438.
25. Landrum R. E., “Measuring dispositional humility: A first approximation”, in: Psychological Reports, 2011, 108.1, 217–228.
26. Lee K., Ashton M. C., “The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages”, in: Journal of personality, 2008, 76.5, 1001–1054.
27. Lee K., Ashton M., The HEXACO Personality Inventory — Revised. A Measure of the Six Major Dimensions of Personality. Scale Descriptions, available at: http://hexaco.org/scaledescriptions (15.08.2017).
28. Linley P. A. et al., “Positive psychology: Past, present, and (possible) future”, in: The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2006, 1.1, 3–16.
29. Marlow D., Crowne D. P., “Social desirability and response to perceived situational demands”, in: Journal of consulting psychology, 1961, 25.2, 109–115.
30. McCleary R. M., Barro R. J., “Religion and economy”, in: The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2006, 20, 49–72.
31. McClelland D., The achieving society, Princeton, 1961.
32. McElroy S., A review of humility measures and a test of the social oil hypotheses, Atlanta, 2017.
33. Nadelhoff er T. et al., “Some varieties of humility worth wanting”, in: Journal of Moral Philosophy, 2017, 14, 1–32.
34. Nicshe F., “K genealogii morali”, in: Nicshe F. Sochinenija: V 2 t., Moscow, 1996, 407–524.
35. Pervin L. A., Dzhon O. P., Psihologija lichnosti, Moscow, 2001.
36. Peterson C., Seligman M., Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classifi cation, Oxford, 2004.
37. Peterson C., Seligman M., Humility and modesty. In Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification, Oxford, 2004.
38. Raskin R. N., Hall C. S., “A narcissistic personality inventory”, in: Psychological reports. 1979, 45, 590.
39. Raskin R., Hall C. S., “The Narcissistic Personality Inventory: Alternative form reliability and further evidence of construct validity”, in: Journal of personality assessment, 1981, 45, 159–162.
40. Reid C. A. et al., “Actor–partner interdependence of humility and relationship qua lity among couples transitioning to parenthood”, in: The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2018, 13, 122–132.
41. Rosenberg M., Conceiving the self, Malabar, 1986.
42. Rosenberg M., Society and the adolescent selfimage, Princeton, 1965, 11.
43. Rowatt W. C. et al., “Development and initial validation of an implicit measure of humility relative to arrogance”, in: The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2006, 1.4, 198–211.
44. Scheler M., “On the rehabilitation of virtue”, in: American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, 2005, 79, 21–37.
45. Schmitt N., “Uses and abuses of coeffi cient alpha”, in: Psychological assessment, 1996, 8, 350.
46. Seligman M. E. P., “The president’s address”, in: American Psychologist, 1999, 54, 559–562.
47. Tangney J. P., “Humility: Theoretical Perspectives,Empirical Findings and Directions for Future Research”, in: Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 2000, 19, 70–82.
48. Veber M., Izbrannye proizvedenija, Moscow, 1990.
49. Veber M., “Sociologij a religij ”, in: Izbrannoe. Obraz Obshhestva, Moscow, 1994, 207–208.
50. Welzel C., Inglehart R. F., “Misconceptions of measurement equivalence: Time for a paradigm shift”, in: Comparative Political Studies, 2016, 49, 1068–1094.
51. Wright J. C. et al., “The psychological signifi cance of humility”, in: The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2017, 12, 3–12.
52. Zabaev I. Koloshenko J. Zueva A., “Humility and the gift: the elective affi nity of institutions and ethics in Orthodox parishes”, in: Jekonomicheskaja sociologija, 2015, 16, 118–139.
53. Zabaev I. V., Osnovnye kategorii hozjajstvennoj jetiki sovremennogo russkogo pravoslavija: Sociologicheskij analiz, Moscow, 2012.

Zabaev Ivan

*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 written within the framework of the project supported in a form of grant in accordance with the decree of the President of the Russian Federation (№ 79-rp 01.04.2015) and on the basis of the tender held by Institute of socio-economic and political researches (ISEPR Foundation)

The religious choice as part of the process of conversion constitutes the border beyond which the change of individual worldview takes place. In the social perspective, the conversion leads to the change of religious identity and an affi liation to a certain religious institution. Proselytising activity and personal factors can act as incentives of conversion. The appeal to religion as part of the process of self-design of the individual is one of the steps that determine one’s own religiousness. This act can be prolonged in time and can be made under the infl uence of a number of internal and external factors. At the same time, the fact of implementation of the religious choice acts as a point which allows one to record the change in one’s worldview. In conditions of pluralism of beliefs in the former Soviet Union, the choice of religion implanted in tradition is caused by a set of objective and subjective factors. In order to achieve the goal of the research, methods of the qualitative sociology including the explanation of motives of actions and intentions through communicative interaction with the subject have been used. The analysis of a series of interviews became the basis for the determination of hierarchy of motives and incentives for making the religious choice possible. For Orthodoxy, these are the established way of life, existence of family traditions, fashion trends, stereotypes of everyday consciousness referring to traditional character of religious consciousness.

religion, Orthodoxy, modern religiousness, individualism, conversion, religious choice, believers, Perm’ Region

1. “The Emergence of Conversion in a Hindu-Buddhist Polytropy: The Kathmandu Valley, Nepal, c. 1600‒1995”, in: Comparative Studies in Society and History, 47/4, 2005, 755–780.
2. Ardasheva L., “Osnovnye paradigmy v izuchenii religioznogo obrashhenij a”, in: Religiovedenie, 2, 2013, 150–161.
3. Asad T., “The Construction of Religion as an Anthropological Category”, in: Lambek M., ed., A reader in the anthropology of religion, Malden, 2006, 110–126.
4. Baer M. D., Honored by the Glory of Islam: Conversion and Conquest in Ottoman Europe, New York, 2008.
5. Borovik I., “Institutional and private religion in Poland”, in: New religious phenomena in Central and Eastern Europe, Krakow, 1997, 235-255.
6. Buckser A., Glazier St. D., The Anthropology of Religious Conversion, Lanham (MD), 2003.
7. Bulanova I., “Specifi ka religioznosti v zavisimosti ot tipa religioznoj konversii”, in: Vestnik LGU, 5, 2014,146–155.
8. Bulliet W., Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period: An Essay in Quantitative History, Cambridge (MA), 1979.
9. Cleary E. L., “The Catholic Charismatic Renewal: Revitalization Movements and Conversion”, in: Conversion of a Continent: Religious Change in Latin America, New Brunswick (NJ), 2008, 153–173.
10. Dobbelaere K., “Assesing secularization theory”, in: New Approaches to the Study of Religion, Berlin, 2, 2004, 229–253.
11. Farhadian Ch. E., “Conversion”, in: Lindsay J., ed., Encyclopedia of Religion, Detroit (MI), 3, 2005,15–24.
12. Folieva T. A., “Racional’nyj / intellektual’nyj tipy religioznogo obrashhenija”, in: Psihologij a religii: mezhdu teoriej i jempirikoj, Moscow, 2015, 121–136.
13. Gooren G., Religious Conversion and Disaffi liation: Tracing Patterns of Change in Faith Practices, New York, 2010.
14. Hefner R., ed., Conversion to Christianity: Historical and Anthropological Perspectives on a Great Transformation, Berkeley, Los Angeles, 1993.
15. Heredia R. K., “Interrogations from the Margins: Conversion as Critique”, in: History and Sociology of South Asia, 5/2, 2011, 83–102.
16. Ignat’ev A., “Pjat’ bazovyh konceptov sociologii religii”, in: Sociologicheskoe obozrenie, 13/3, 2014, 155–170.
17. Ipatova L., “Teorii religioznogo obrashhenija”, in: Religiovedenie, 4, 2006, 88–101.
18. Kisala R., “Urbanization and religion”, in: New Approaches to the Study of Religion, Berlin, 2, 2004, 255–274.
19. Köse A., Conversion to Islam: A Study of Native British Converts, London, 1996.
20. Köse A., Loewenthal K. M., “Conversion Motifs among British Converts to Islam”, in: International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 2000, 101–110.
21. Ljubimova A., “Teorii religioznoj konversii i novye religioznye dvizhenij a v Rossii”, in: Vestnik RHGA, 10/1, 2009, 70–74.
22. Lofl and J., Stark R., “Becoming a World-Saver: A Theory of Conversion to a Deviant Perspective”, in: American Sociological Review, 30, 1965, 862–875.
23. McGinty A. M., Becoming Muslim: Western Women’s Conversion to Islam, New York, 2006.
24. Ostrovskaja E. A., “Mnozhestvennye sovremennosti ortodoksal’nogo evrejstva Sankt- Peterburga”, in: SOCIS, 5, 2017, 93–102.
25. Rambo L. R., “Conversion: Toward a Holistic Model of Religious Change”, in: Pastoral Psychology, 38, 1989, 47–63.
26. Rambo L. R., “Current Research on Religious Conversion”, in: Religious Studies Review, 8/2, 1982, 146–159.
27. Rambo L. R., “Theories of Conversion”, in: Social Compass, 46/3, 1999, 259–271.
28. Rambo L. R., Farhadian Ch. E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Religious Conversion, New York, 2014.
29. Rambo L. R., Understanding Religious Conversion, New Haven, 1993.

Ryazanova Svetlana

*According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.

This paper is a polemic answer to professor K. Antonov published in the volume 74 of this Journal

Kireevsky, history of philosophy, german idealism, Hegelianism, faith

Bulanenko Maxim, диакон

*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.

Golovnina Natalia