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

Following a number of other scholars, the author of this article attempts to demonstrate main aspects of not only thoughts (theology and spiritual refl ection), but also of actions of Ambrose in order to present his image in a more contextualised framework. The study consists of three sections. The “prologue”, drawing on two treatises or a fragment of treatises (De fuga saeculi; De Iacob I), outlines Ambrose’s doctrine of grace. Despite seemingly contradicting expressions, these texts show that the idea of the divine donation in Christ is the centre of the religious experience of the bishop from Milan. The second section scrutinises dogmatic grounds of Ambrosian Christocentrism, i.e. the dosctrine of the Trinity (triadology) and of the Incarnation (Christology), which are developed by Ambrose with both Greek and Latin traditions as the foundation. Ambrose emphasises the doctrine of Christ as both the true God and the true man. As the third section shows, Ambrose’s spiritual experince is based on these dogmatic truths: via Christ-man to Christ-God; Christ as Way and Limit, — all these formulae imply, so to say, a pre-Augustinian fl avour. The result of the study can be boiled down to one phrase: Christus omnia. The unity of the contemplator’s thought and the pastor’s action is revealed in this love of Christ. Besides, the pastor is aff ecting or trying to aff ect the representative of the authorities, because Ambrose desired to lead the Empire and its rulers to Father via Christ in accordance with the Orthodox faith. Numerous borrowings from theology of his predecessors, no less than their creative rethinking, were ultimately aimed at the implementation of this very concept. Ambrose’s intuitions, pervading all his legacy, also open new perspectives; the bishop from Milan was in a certain sense an intellectual intermediary.

Ambrose of Milan, triadology, Christology, soteriology, exegesis, spirituality, Augustine, Latin Patristics

1. Grillmeier A. (1973) Le Christ dans la tradition chrétienne. De l’âge apostolique à Chalcédoine (451). Paris.
2. Madec G. (1998) “La centralité du Christ dans la spiritualité d’Ambroise”. In: L. F. Pizzolato, M. Rizzi (eds.) “Nec timeo mori”. Atti del Congresso internazionale di studi Ambrosiani nel XVI centenario della morte di sant’Ambrogio (Milano 4–11 aprile 1997), Milano, pp. 207–220.
3. Madec G. (1989) La patrie et la voix. Le Christ dans la vie et la pensée de saint Augustin. Paris.
4. Madec G. (1974) “L’homme intérieur selon saint Ambroise”. In: Ambroise de Milan. XVIe Centenaire de son élection épiscopale. Dix études rassemblées par Y.-M. Duval. Paris, pp. 283–308.
5. Madec G. (1974) Saint Ambroise et la philosophie. Paris.
6. Maes B. (1967) La loi naturelle selon Ambroise de Milan. Rome.
7. Nauroy G. (1985) “L’Écriture dans la pastorale d’Ambroise de Milan”. In: J. Fontaine, C. Pietri (eds.) Le monde latin antique et la Bible, Paris, pp. 371–408.
8. Studer B. (1989). Dieu sauveur. La rédemption dans la foi de l’Église ancienne. Paris.
9. Szabò F. (1967) Le Christ créateur chez saint Ambroise. Rome.
10. Tixeront J. (1921) Histoire des dogmes dans l’Antiquité chrétienne. T. 2: De saint Athanase à saint Augustin (318–430). Paris.

Mattei Paul

This article is devoted to the study of perception in the Russian written tradition of the preamble to the sixth novel of St. Justinian the Great. It contains a well-known theory of “symphony”. As follows from the text of the introduction to the novel, the signifi cance of the emperor for the emergence of “good harmony” is great: he must govern the Orthodox state in a fair way, take care of the clergy, monitor the observance of dogmata and canons. The role of the priesthood is reduced to prayer and performance of the sacraments. The preamble to the sixth novel was included in the collection on church issues, later translated into the Slavonic language. There are two versions of the novel in the Slavonic languages, the later of which considerably distorts the meaning of the text of the preamble. According to the later version, both the priesthood and the reign govern the state. Both editions are found in a number of manuscripts and had been circulating in Russia for several centuries. Up to a certain time, the diff erence in translation was not signifi cant for the perception of the preamble. Only in the 17th century, when the later edition of the translation became part of the Russian printed Books of the Helmsman, it infl uenced the formation of the concept of Patriarch Nikon. This concept assumed the existence of the “wise two” in the person of the king and the patriarch, to whom pertained all the duties before God in administrating the Orthodox people, whereas according to St. Justinian, these belonged to the Byzantine emperor.

church-state relations, symphony, empire, church, preamble to the sixth novel, emperor Justinian the Great, patriarch Nikon

1. Avilova O. (2010) Uchenie o gosudarstve Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi v XX — nachale XXI v. [The Doctrine of State in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th — Early 21st Centurie]. Barnaul (in Russian).
2. Belyakova E., Shchapov Ya. (2005) Novelly imperatora Yustiniana v russkoi pis’mennoi traditsii [The Emperor Justinian’s Novels in the Russian Written Tradition]. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Belyakova E., Moshkova L., Oparina T. (2017). Kormchaya kniga: ot rukopisnoi traditsii k pechatnomu izdaniyu [The Book of the Helmsman: From the Manuscript Tradition to the Printed Edition]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Chichurov I. (1990) Politicheskaya ideologiya srednevekov’ia [Political Ideology of the Middle Ages]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Dagron G. (1996) Empereur et prêtre. Étude sur le «césaropapisme» byzantine. Paris (Russian translation 2010).
6. Dvornik F. (1956) “Byzantine Political Ideas in Kievan Russia”. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 1956, vol. 9/10, pp. 73‒121.
7. Dvornik F. (1966) Early Christian and Byzantine Political Philosophy: Origins and Background. Vol. II. Washington.
8. Emchenko E. (2000) Stoglav: Issledovanie i tekst. [Stoglav: Study and Text]. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Karagiannopulos I. (1992) I politiki theoria ton byzantinon [The Political Theory of the Byzantines]. Thessaloniki (in Greek).
10. Korogodina M. (2017) Kormchie knigi XIV — pervoi poloviny XVII veka [Books of the Helmsman of the 14th — First Half of the 17th Centuries]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
11. Meyendorff J. (1982). The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church. New York (Russian translation 2007).
12. Shchapov Ya. (1998) “Sobranie novell Yustiniana v 87 glavakh v drevnerusskoi pis’mennosti” [Collection of Justinian’s Short Stories in 87 Chapters in Old Russian Literature]. Drevnee pravo. IVS ANTIQVVM, vol. 1(3), pp. 108‒112 (in Russian).
13. Shevchenko M. (2012). K voprosu ob ideale gosudarstvennogo ustroistva v sochineniyah Maksima Greka [On the Question of the Ideal Government in the Works of Maxim the Greek]. Petrovskii sbornik. Omsk (in Russian).
14. Sil’vestrova E. (2007) Lex Generalis. Imperatorskaya konstitutsiya v sisteme greko-rimskogo prava V–X vv. [Lex Generalis. The Imperial Constitution in the System of Greek-Roman Law of the 5th — 10th Centuries]. Moscow (in Russian).

Bezhanidze Georgy

*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 studies the infl uence of the views formulated in the discussion about the parish reform by members of the Circle of those Seeking Christian Enlightenment and the Brotherhood of Saint Moscow Metropolitans Peter, Alexy, Iona and Philip on the notion of the Church by S. Fudel, the outstanding church writer of the 20th century. Sergei Iosifovich was a close friend of a number of prominent members of the Circle and the Brotherhood, amoung the founders of which was also his father, archpriest Iosif Fudel. Some of them, like N. D. Kuznetsov, argued in favour of restoration of independence of parishes as main units of church life, following the notion of the independent community formulated already by D. F. Samarin. Others, like L. A. Tikhomirov and D. A. Khomyakov, believed that the diocese rather than the parish was the main unit and emphasised the importance of a hierarchical structure, being cautious about the split-off of parishes. Both these stances revealed the heterogeneity of the parish as a territorial entity, as well as the insuffi cience of the notion of the layman. From projects based on this notion, the members of the Brotherhood went over to the thought about distinguishing actual members of the community from the mass of all church-goers. This problem came to be expressed only after the revolution in the notion of the inner border of the church in “Letters to Friends” by M. A. Novoselov. It was very clearly manifested in S. Fudel’s works, who employed a traditional notion of the member of the church as the “faithful”.

ecclesiology, parish, parish reform, Sergei Fudel, F. Samarin, M. Novoselov, Brotherhood of the Saint Metropolitans of Moscow, Church Enlightenment Circle

1. Balakshin Iu., Ignatovich N. (eds.) (2018) “Samarin F. D. O zadachakh Bratstva Sviatitelei Moskovskikh Petra, Aleksiia, Iony i Filippa i o sposobakh razresheniia etikh zadach (1909)” [F. D. Samarin. On the Tasks of the Brotherhood of Saint Moscow Metropolitans Peter, Alexy, Iona and Philip and on the Ways to Accomplish these Tasks (1909)]. In: Istoriia tserkovnykh bratstv v Rossii [History of Church Brotherhoods in Russia]. Moscow. Pp. 114‒127 (in Russian).
2. Balashov N., archpriest, Saraskina L., Vorob’ev V., archpriest (eds.) 2001‒2005) Fudel’ S. I. Sobranie sochinenii: V 3 t. [Fudel S. I. Collection of Works, in 3 Vols.]. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Beglov A. (2014). “Zemskie proekty pereustroistva pravoslavnogo prikhoda v 1860–1890 e gg.” [Projects of Reformation of the Orthodox Parish in the 1860‒1890s]. Gosudarstvo. Religiia. Tserkov’ [State. Religion. Church], № 1 (32), pp. 172–200 (in Russian).
4. Beglov A. (2017) “Prikhodskoi vopros v istorii i v trudakh Sviashchennogo sobora Pravoslavnoi Rossiiskoi Tserkvi 1917–1918 gg.” [The Issue of Parish in the History and in the Work of the Holy Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917‒1918]. In: Dokumenty Sviashchennogo Sobora Pravoslavnoi Rossiiskoi Tserkvi 1917–1918 godov [Documents of the Holy Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917‒1918], vol. 14. Moscow, рp. 5–81 (in Russian).
5. Dashevskaia Z. (2012) “Obzor deiatel’nosti Bratstva Sviatitelei Moskovskikh Petra, Aleksiia, Iony i Filippa (1909–1917 gg.)” [Outline of Activities of the Brotherhood of Saint Moscow Metropolitans Peter, Alexy, Iona and Philip (1909‒1917)]. Al’manakh Sviato-Filaretovskogo pravoslavno-khristianskogo instituta, vol. 5, pp. 131–150 (in Russian).
6. Dubinin A., priest (2005) “Perepiska V. A. Kozhevnikova s F. D. Samarinym i deiatel’nost’ Kruzhka ishchushchikh khristianskogo prosveshcheniia” [Correspondence of V. A. Kozhevnikov and F. D. Samarin and Activities of the Circle of those Seeking Christian Enlightenment]. Bogoslovskie trudy, vol. 40, pp. 274–288 (in Russian).
7. Florenskii P., priest. (1996) Sochineniia v 4 tomakh [Works, in 4 Vols]. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Orekhanov Iu. (1997). “F. D. Samarin i ego arkhiv” [F. D. Samarin and His Archive]. Ezhegodnaia bogoslovskaia konferentsiia Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo Bogoslovskogo instituta. Moscow; available at http://kuz1.pstbi.ccas.ru/institut/book/1997/or.htm (20.09.2018) (in Russian).
9. Polishchuk E. (1994). “Mikhail Aleksandrovich Novoselov i ego «Pis’ma k druz’iam»” [Mikhail Novoselov and his “Letters to Friends”]. In: Novoselov M. A. Pis’ma k druz’iam. Moscow, pp. V–LIII (in Russian).
10. Polishchuk E. (ed.) (1994) Novoselov M. Pis’ma k druz’iam [Novoselov M. Letters to Friends]. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Paromov K. (2012) “Episkop Feodor (Pozdeevskii) i «Kruzhok ishchushchikh khristianskogo prosveshcheniia»: po perepiske uchastnikov” [Bishop Feodor (Pozdeevskii) and the Circle of those Seeking Christian Enlightenment]. Khristianskoe chtenie, № 3, pp. 66–108 (in Russian).
12. Polishchuk E. (ed.) (2013) “Pis’ma muchenika Mikhaila Novoselova F. D. Samarinu, 1905–1913 gg.” [Letters of the Martyr Mikhail Novoselov to F. D. Samarin]. Bogoslovskie trudy, vol. 45, pp. 425–473 (in Russian).
13. Ustav Bratstva Sviatitelei Moskovskikh Petra, Aleksiia, Iony i Filippa [Statute of the Brotherhood of Saint Moscow Metropolitans Peter, Alexy, Iona and Philip] (2018). In: Istoriia tserkovnykh bratstv v Rossii [History of Church Brotherhoods in Russia], рp. 110–113 (in Russian).
14. Vorob’ev V., Tiagunova N. (eds.) (2009) “Pis’ma S. I. Fudelia k M. F. Mansurovoi (1960–1970-e gg.)” [Letters of S. I. Fudel to M. F. Mansurova (1960‒1970s)]. Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. II: Istoriia. Istoriia Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi, vol. 3 (32) (in Russian).

Cherepanov Daniil

*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.

After the Second Vatican Council, priesthood came to be one of the key themes in Catholic theology of the latter half of the 20th century. This article attempts to scrutinise the specifi c rhetoric that was generated around the topic of priesthood and became wide-spread in various spheres of theological studies. With Hans Kueng’s ideas as an example, the author of this article reconstructs, fi rstly, the main theses of the “new theology of priesthood” and, secondly, the argumentation underlying them. The conclusion is that with the crisis of priesthood in the background, not only there appears the criticism of the “traditional” priest, there develops a positive theological programme which aims, on the one hand, at the return to the tradition and Christian roots and, on the other hand, aims at the compatibility with the facts of life of the present-day world. At the same time, the rhetoric in question contains as its important part trenchant criticism of not solely the traditional theology of ecclesiastical ministry, but also of established practices of pastoral service and of parish life. This criticism is aimed at the accelerated renewal of the Catholic church life and the overcoming of the crisis of the traditional religious institutes. Conservative authors regard these attempts as “theologians’ subversions” and as the work aimed at aggravating the crisis. Following the analysis carried out in the article, this phenomenon in Catholic theology is termed “theological anticlericalism”.

priest, Catholic theology, Hans Küng, clericalization, anticlericalism, Second Vatican Council, ecclesiology

1. Arens A. (1976) “Die Entwicklung des Priesterbildes”. In: A. Arens (Hrsg). Pastorale Bildung: Erfahrungen und Impulse für Ausbildung und Fortbildung für den kirchlichen Dienst. Trier, ss. 9–12.
2. Baumgartner K. (1978) Der Wandel des Priesterbildes zwischen dem Konzil von Trient und dem II. Vatikanischen Konzil. München.
3. Blank J. (1969) “Kirchliches Amt und Priesterbegriff ”. In: F. Henrich (Hrsg.) Weltpriester nach dem Konzil. München.
4. Chernyi A. (2016) “Poniatie «krizisa sviashchenstva» v katolicheskom bogoslovii XX veka” [Notion of the “Crisis of Priesthood” in Catholic Theology of the 20th Century]. Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 6 (68), pp. 112–126 (in Russian).
5. Greschake G. (2000) Priester sein in dieser Zeit: Theologie — Pastorale Praxis — Spiritualität. Freiburg i. B, ss. 20–25.
6. Häring H., Nolte J. (Hrsgg.) (1971) Diskussion um Hans Küng, “Die Kirche”. Freiburg.
7. Hernoga J. (1997) Priestertum: Zur Nachkonziliaren Amtstheologie im Deutschen Sprachraum. Frankfurt am Main.
8. Karrer L. (1999) Die Stunde der Laien: von der Würde eines namenlosen Standes. Freiburg im Breisgau.
9. Kasper W. (1969) “Neue Akzente im dogmatischen Verständnis des Priesterlichen Dienstes”. Concilium. Bd. 5, ss. 164–170.
10. Kasper W. (1978) Zukunft aus dem Glauben. Mainz.
11. Klerikalismus heute? Würzburg, 1964 (Studien und Berichte der Katholischen Akademie in Bayern; 26).
12. Klostermann F., Rahner K., Schild H. (1972) Lexikon der Pastoraltheologie. Freiburg im Breisgau.
13. Knobloch S. (1996) Praktische Theologie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studium und Pastoral. Freiburg i. B.
14. Küng H. (1965) “Die charismatische Struktur der Kirche”. Concilium. Bd. 1, ss. 282–290.
15. Küng H. (1967) Die Kirche. Freiburg.
16. Küng H. (1970) Unfehlbar? Eine Anfrage. Zürich.
17. Küng H. (1971) Wozu Priester? Einsiedeln.
18. Küng G. (2012) Tserkov’ [Church]. Moscow (Russian translation).
19. Lefebvre M. (2007) Oni predali Ego. Ot liberalizma k otstupnichestvu [They Have Betrayed Him. From Liberalism to Apostasy]. St Petersburg (Russian translation).
20. Lehmann K. (1970) “Das Priesterliche Amt im priesterlichen Volk”. Gemeinde des Herrn № 83. Deutscher Katholikentag. Trier. S. 247.
21. May G. (2009) “Priestermangel”. Theologisches. Bd. 3/4. Ss. 98–114.
22. Neuner P., Zulehner P. M. (2013) Dein Reich komme. Eine praktische Lehre von der Kirche. Ostfildern.
23. Pesch W., Hünermann P., Klostermann F. (1971) Priestertum. Kirchliches Amt zwischen gestern und morgen. Aschaffenburg.
24. Schillebeeckx E. (1970) “Theologie des kirchlichen Amtes”. Diakonia. Bd. 1, ss. 147–161.
25. Schillebeecks E. (1981) Das kirchliche Amt. Düsseldorf.
26. Snela B. (1992) Priester-Bischof. Neues Handbuch theologischer Grundbegriffe. Bd. 4. München.
27. Xaver F., Klostermann F., Rahner K., Schurr V., Weber L. M. (Hrsgg.) (1969) Handbuch der Pastoraltheologie: Praktische Theologie der Kirche in ihrer Gegenwart. Bd. 4. Freiburg.
28. Zirker L. (1976) Leben im Dialog. Perspektiven für ein zeitgemäßes Priesterbild. Mainz.

Chernyi Aleksei, priest

*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 development and criticism of the ontological proof of God’s existence, the so-called argumentum Anselmi. Its brief description demonstrates its heterogeneity, which came to be object of criticism in the subsequet theological tradition. The most infl uential was the criticism put forward by Albertus Magnus and Thpmas Aquinas, who considered argumentum Anselmi as a proof of the not-beingproved existence of God. Fr. Suarez is the sole exception in the row of scholastic interpreters; he identifi ed the viability of this argument in the internal experience. In the period of neoscholasticism (1820‒1870), the Catholic thinkers shared the opinion about the vulnerability of argumentum Anselmi, and explicitly or implicitly accepted the criticism of this proof off ered by Kant. Formulations of argumentum Anselmi served the aim of translating the philosophical language of Modern Time into the language of scholasticism. However, during the modernist crisis (1900‒1910s), the necessity of a new address to argumentum Anselmi emerged. Ed. LeRoy’s disproof of the possibility to prove God’s being generated criticism from the Neo-Thomist R. Garrigou-Lagrange, who, arguing in favour of the viability of rational theology, attempted to exonerate argumentum Anselmi. Refuting the conventionalist and pragmatic understanding of truth, he employs the resources of neo-scholastic epistemology and provides grounds for the possibility to think about the reality of the supreme being. Thus, the content of argumentum Anselmi, on the one hand, gave impetus to developing various approaches to the proof of God’s existence, and, on the other hand, served as a link between the New European and post-mediaeval scholastic traditions.

Neo-Scholasticism, Neo-Thomism, Anselm, proofs of the existence of God, Thomas Aquinas, theology, philosophy

1. Appolonov A. (ed.) (2002) U. Okkam U. Izbrannoe [W. Ockham. Selected Works]. Moscow (Russian translation).
2. Borodai T. (transl., ed.) (2004) Thomas Aquinas. Summa contra gentiles. Moscow (Russian translation).
3. Frank S. (2000) Predmet znaniia. Dusha cheloveka [Object of Knowledge. Soul of Man]. Minsk; Moscow (in Russian).
4. Garrigou-Lagrange R. (1938) De Deo Uno. Commentarium in Primam partem S. Thomae. Torino; Roma.
5. Russel B. (2002) A History of Western Philosophy. Rostov on Don (Russian translation).
6. Reati F. (2002) Bog v 20 veke: chelovek — put’ k ponimaniiu Boga (Zapadnoe bogoslovie 20 veka) [God in the 20th Century — A Path to Understand God (Western Theology of the 20th Century)]. St. Petersburg (Russian translation).
7. Vdovina G. (2017) “Dokazatel’stva sushchestvovaniia Boga v «Metafi zicheskikh rassuzhdeniiakh» Fransisko Suaresa” [Arguments for the Existence of God in Francisco Suarez’ «Metaphysical Disputations»]. Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, № 73, pp. 69–82 (in Russian).

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.

This article analyses views of the psychologist V. I. Mamleev (1902‒1943) on the nature of religion. It scrutinises main elements of his doctrine, namely his criticism of foreign theories (S. Freud’s and L. Lévy-Bruhl’s), the distinction between religious ideology and religious psychology, conception of the unconscious and its influence on religious views, as well as the project of study of deconversion. The article also shows which of these topics were later employed by Soviet psychology of religion, and integrates the scholar into a certain tradition of the Soviet religious studies. The most prominent place in theoretical legacy of V. Mamleev is occupied by the criticism of Western approaches in religious studies, which he classifi es according to a range of grounds. The article pays special attention to this aspect and demonstrates which parts of this criticism may be regarded as reasonable (e.g. the erroneous character of some generalisations of psychoanalysts, non-historism of Lévy-Bruhl’s and Freud’s theories, etc.), and which are related to the scientist’s ideological background (e.g. the ideas of class-conditioned and idealistic character of foreign theories, their “bourgeois” fl avour). This distinction is signifi cant in the context of studies in the sphere of the humanities in the USSR in the 1920s. The article draws on rare and archival sources, which allows us to trace the evolution of Mamleev as a scholar. These range from studies in history and theory of law to the study of religious psychology. Besides, he was interested in both the processes characteristic of the religious consciousness and psychological features of the transition from faith to atheism, which is confi rmed by the plan of study of this phenomenon, discovered by the author of the article among Mamleev’s documents; this plan is analysed in the fi nal section of the article.

psychology of religion, history of science, religious studies, scientifi c atheism, thinking, psychoanalysis, culture, unconscious

1. Andrianov N., Lopatkin R., Pavliuk V. (1966) Osobennosti sovremennogo religioznogo soznaniia [Features of Contemporary Religious Mind]. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Antonov K. (2014) “Retseptsiia klassicheskogo psikhoanaliza v russkoi religioznoi mysli i sovremennye psikhoanaliticheskie teorii religii” [Reception of Classical Psychoanalysis in Russian Religious Thought, and Contemporary Psychoanalytical Theories of Religion]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia, vol. 5 (55), pp. 56–58 (in Russian).
3. Bernal D. (1956) Nauka v istorii obshchestva [Science in the History of Society]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Borunkov Iu. (1971) Struktura religioznogo soznaniia [Structure of Religious Mind]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Damte D. (2015) “Psikhologiia religii M. Popovoi” [M. Popova’s Psychology of Religion]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia, vol. 2 (58), pp. 89–101 (in Russian).
6. Damte D. (2017) “Psikhoanaliz i religiia: vzgliad sovetskikh issledovatelei”. In: Antonov K. (ed.) Otechestvennaia i zarubezhnaia psikhologiia religii: paralleli i peresecheniia v proshlom i nastoiashchem [Russian and Foreign Psychology of Religion: Parallels and Intersections in the Past and in the Present]. Moscow, pp. 149–166 (in Russian).
7. Duluman E., Lobovik B., Tancher V. (1970). Sovremennyi veruiushchii: Sotsial’no-psikhologicheskii ocherk [Religious Person of the Present Day: Social and Psychological Profile]. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Frank S. (1930). “Psikhoanaliz kak mirosozertsanie” [Psychoanalysis as Contemplation of the World]. Put’, vol. 25, pp. 22–51 (in Russian).
9. Freid Z. (1997). Ocherki po psikhologii seksual’nosti [Essays on Psychology of Sexuality]. Minsk (Russian translation).
10. Fress P., Piazhe Zh. (1966). Eksperimental’naia psikhologiia [Experimental Psychology], vol. 1. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Leibin V. (2000) Freid i Rossiia [Freud and Russia]. Moscow; Voronezh (in Russian).
12. Maiskii V. (1930) Freidizm i religiia: Kriticheskii ocherk [Freudism and Religion: Critical Essay]. Moscow (in Russian).
13. Malakhova I. (1980) Anatomiia religioznoi very [Anatomy of Religious Faith]. Moscow (in Russian).
14. Mamleev V. (1930) “Z. Freid. Budushchnost’ odnoi illiuzii” [S. Freud. The Futurity of One Illusion]. Antireligioznik, vol. 7, pp. 119–124 (in Russian).
15. Mamleev V. (1930) “L. Levi-Briul’. Pervobytnoe myshlenie” [L. Lévy-Bruhl. Primitive Mentality]. Antireligioznik, vol. 4, pp. 99–101 (in Russian).
16. Mamleev V. (1930). “Povedenie bez instinkta i «religioznyi instinkt»” [Behaviour with no Instinct and “Religious Instinct”]. Ateist, vols. 56–57, pp. 113–127 (in Russian).
17. Mamleev V. (1930) “Problema darvinizma v psikhologii v sviazi s issledovaniem Kelera” [Problem of Darwinism in Psychology in Connection of Keler’s Study”]. Antireligioznik, vols. 11, pp. 44–53 (in Russian).
18. Mamleev V. (1930) “Problema pervobytnoi primitivnoi psikhiki” [Problem of Primordial Primitive Psyche]. Antireligioznik,vol. 5, 30–42; vol. 6, pp. 46–53 (in Russian).
19. Mamleev V. (1930) “Freidizm i religiia” [Freudism and Religion]. Ateist, vol. 52, pp. 30–68 (in Russian).
20. Mamleev V. (1931). Nauka i religiia o povedenii zhivotnykh i cheloveka [Science and Religion on the Behaviour of Animals and Man]. Moscow (in Russian).
21. Ochirov D. (1981) Ot religioznoi very k ateizmu [From Religiosity to Atheism]. Ulan-Ude (in Russian).
22. Popova M. (1973) Kritika psikhologicheskoi apologii religii: Sovremennaia amerikanskaia psikhologiia religii [Criticism of Psychological Apology of Religion: Contemporary American Psychology of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
23. Popova M. (1985) Freidizm i religiia [Freudism and Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
24. Popper K. (1983) Logika i rost nauchnogo znaniia: Izbrannye raboty [Logic and Growth of Scientifi c Knowledge: Selected Works]. Moscow (Russian translation).
25. Raik T. (2017) “Ritual. Psikhoanaliticheskoe issledovanie. Vvedenie” [Rite. Psychoanalytical Study. Introduction]. Magnum ignotum. Moscow, vol. 4, pp. 29–50 (in Russian).
26. Reisner M. (1924) Liubov’, pol i religiia [Love, Sexus, and Religion]. Riazan’ (in Russian).
27. Reisner M. (1924) “Freid i ego shkola o religii” [Freud and his School on Religion]. Pechat’ i revoliutsiia, vol. 1, pp. 40‒60; vol. 3 (2), pp. 81–106 (in Russian).
28. Reisner M. (1925) Nuzhna li vera v boga? O vere, tserkvi i gosudarstve [Is Faith in God Necessary? On Faith, Church, and State]. Moscow (in Russian).
29. Rubinshtein S. (1946) Osnovy obshchei psikhologii [Foundations of General Psychology]. Moscow (in Russian).
30. Rutkevich A. (1987) Psikhoanaliz i religiia [Psychoanalysis and Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
31. Rutkevich A. (2000) “Nauchnyi status psikhoanaliza” [Scientifi c Status of Psychoanalysis]. Voprosy filosofii, vol. 10, pp. 9–14 (in Russian).
32. Svobodnyi P. (1967). Religioznye chuvstva i puti ikh preodoleniia [Religious Feelings and Ways to Overcome them]. Rovno (in Russian).
33. Thurnwald R. (1922) Psychologie des primitiven Menschen. München.
34. Ugrinovich D. (1966) “O spetsifi ke i strukture religioznogo soznaniia” [On the Specifi city and Structure of Religious Mentality]. Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, vol. 1, pp. 36–68.
35. Ugrinovich D. (1965) Filosofskie problemy kritiki religii [Philosophical Problems in Criticism of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
36. Ugrinovich D. (1986) Psikhologiia religii [Psychology of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
37. Zhdan A. (2012) Istoriia psikhologii [History of Psychology]. Moscow (in Russian).

Damte David

*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 history and current state of Belokrinitskaya community in the town of Ivanovo. In the 19th — early 20th centuries, this was one of the major Russian centres of Old Believers, but nowadays there is only one small community in the town; it has a number of typical problems, ranging from the lack of a prayer room to the unwillingness of the young to continue the tradition. With one family as an example, the article demonstrates the changes that took place among the local Old Believers in the Soviet time, as well as main events and confl icts that aff ected the life of the community. The authors of the paper also raise the question about the character of the religiosity of modern urban Old Believers. They analyse the religious practice and circle of reading of a hereditary female Old Believer, her world outlook and self-identifi cation. We also touch upon the question about the commonly shared criteria of religiosity, e.g. the frequency of the prayer, going to church, sacrament of communion. By means of a specifi c example and employing a wide range of personal sources, we show the problem of collision of the traditional (Old Faith) and nontraditional, esoteric (urban), worldview. Particular attention is paid to the image of the representative of a traditional culture that has established in relevant scientifi c literature, as well as the infl uence of this image on academic researchers.

Ivanovo, old believers, religiosity, esoteric, fi eld research, belokrinitskie

1. Baldin K. (2002) Vichugskaya storona [Vichuga Land]. Ivanovo (in Russian).
2. Chesnokova V. (2005) Tesnym putem: protcess votscerkovleniya naseleniya Rossii v kontse XX veka [In a Narrow Way: Сhurching of the Population of Russia at the End of the 20th Century]. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Evgeniya [Voloshina I.] (2006) Chelovek zhivet i v mire inom [Man Lives in the Other World]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Gadamer H.-G. (1960) Wahrheit und Methode. Moscow (Russian translation 1988).
5. Kaariajnen K., Furman D. (2000) Starye tserkvi, novye veruyushchie. Religiya v massovom soznanii postsovetskoi Rossii [Old Churches, New Believers. Religion in Mass Consciousness of Post-Soviet Russia]. Moscow; St. Petersburg (in Russian).
6. Kabanov A. (2010) Staroobryadtsy vladimirskikh i kostromskikh zemel’ [Old Believers of Vladimir and Kostroma Regions]. Ivanovo (in Russian).
7. Kerov V. (2004) «Se chelovek i delo ego...»: konfessional’no-ehticheskie faktory staroobryadcheskogo predprinimatel’stva v Rossii [“This is Man and his Work…”: Confessional and Ethical Factors of the Old Believers’ Entrepreneurship in Russia]. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Martinovich V. (2015) Netraditsionnaya religioznost’: vozniknovenie i migratsiya. Materialy k izucheniyu netraditsionnoi religioznosti [Non-Traditional Religiosity: Genesis and Migration. Materials for the Study of Non-Traditional Religiosity]. Minsk (in Russian).
9. Pozdeeva I. (2016) Chelovek. Kniga. Istoriya. Moskovskaya pechat’ XVII v. [Man. Book. History. Moscow Publishing in the 17th Century] Moscow (in Russian).
10. Prutskova E. (2017) “Religioznost’ i bazovye tsennosti rossiyan (po dannym “Evropeiskogo sotsial’nogo issledovaniya” i vserossiiskogo issledovaniya “Ortodoks Monitor”)” [Religiosity and Core Values of Russians (according to the data of the “European Social Study” and All-Russian Study “Orthodox Monitor”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, vol. 72, pp. 126‒143 (in Russian).
11. Prutskova E. (2010) “Religioznost’: sposoby operatsionalizatsii i kolichestvennoi otsenki” [Religiosity: Ways to Operationalise and Quantify]. Materialy seminara “Sotsiologiia religii”. Seriia “Kolichestvennye issledovaniya religii. Mezhdunarodnaya praktika”. Moscow (in Russian).
12. Sinelina Y. (2001) “O kriteriyah opredeleniya religioznosti naseleniya” [On the Criteria for Identifying the Religiostity of Population]. Sociologicheskie issledovaniya, vol., pp. 89‒96 (in Russian).
13. Zol’nikova N. (1998) “Eskhatologiia eniseiskogo starovera-knizhnika chasovennogo soglasiia Isaia Nazarovicha (1970-e gg.)” [Eschatology of the Old Believer Isay Nazarovich from the Enisei River]. Ural’skij sbornik. Istoriia. Kul’tura. Religiia. Ekaterinburg, vol. 2, pp. 73‒80 (in Russian).
14. Zontikov N. (2015) Staroobryadcheskii episkop Gerontii (Lakomkin): krestnyj put’ svyatitelya [The Old Believer Bishop Gerontiy (Lakomkin): Way to Calvary] Kostroma (in Russian).

Vorontsova 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.

Sundukova Daria

This work was supported by Russisn Fondfor basic research18-39-00087/18.

This article discusses the possibility of building confession-oriented religious studies. It employs the material of studies by T. Samarina, particularly her article “Designer Project of Phenomenological Understanding of Religion: F. Max Mueller’s Comparativism”. I put forward a number of critical comments as to the scientifi c methodology of T. Samarina’s article. Particularly, I draw attention to the fact that the substitution of discourses is taking place. T. Samarina desires to present the religious and philosophical mentality of M. Mueller as his science of religion. Besides, the criteria of phenomenology of religion are not necessary nor suffi cient for the defi nition of its specifi city. Finaly, T. Samarina radically rethinks both Russian and foreign tradition of interpretation of phenomenology of religion. This article proposes for consideration the author’s own understanding of the conceptual nature of phenomenology of religion. In the fi rst hand, this science is related to the discussion about the sacred. The uniting of the non-unifyable takes place within its framework, i.e. philisophy, theology, and religious studies, ideal religion, empirical religion and confessional faith. Phenomenology of religion, in all probability, was called to overcome the drawbacks of only philosophical, only theological, or only religious-science study of religion. The result of the genesis of phenomenology of religion was separation from religious studies. I believe that the dissociation of philosophy of religion, including phenomenology of religion, and religious studies is unavoidable.

phenomenology of religion, religious studies, M. Mueller, confession-oriented religious studies, theology

1. Gantke W. (1998) Der umstrittene Begriff des Heiligen. Eine problemorientierte religionswissenschaftliche Untersuchung. Marburg.
2. Hegel G. (1975) Filosofiia religii [Philosophy of Religion]. Moscow (Russian translation).
3. Kehnscherper J. (1998). Theologisch-philosophische Aspekte der religionsphänomenologischen Methode des Gerardus van der Leeuw. Frankfurt am Main.
4. Krasnikov A. (2004) Metodologiia klassicheskogo religiovedeniia [Methodology of Classical Religious Studies]. Blagoveshchensk (in Russian).
5. Pylaev M. (2011) Kategoriia «sviashchennoe» v fenomenologii religii, teologii i fi losofi i 20 veka [Category of the “Sacred” in Phenomenology, Theology, and Philosophy of the 20th Century]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Tillikh P. (1998) Sistematicheskoe bogoslovie [Systematic Theology]. St. Petersburg (Russian translation).
7. Söderblom N., Heiler F. (1981) Briefwechsel. 1909–1931. Paderborn.
8. Vinokurov V. (2010) Vvedenie v fenomenologiiu religii [Introduction to Phenomenology of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Zabiiako A. (1998) Kategoriia sviatosti. Sravnitel’noe issledovanie lingvoreligioznykh traditsii [The Category of Sainthood. Comparative Study of Linguoreligious Traditions]. Moscow (in Russian).

Pylaev Maxim

*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.

Tsygankov 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.

I thank the scientific director of the Research Center Sergiy Bulgakov in Friborg Regula M. Zwahlen for the support rendered to her during the preparation of the review.

Pimenov Sergey

*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.

Kolkunova Ksenia

*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.

Karpov Kirill

*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.

Chentsova Daria