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

This article discusses the views of Anastasius of Sinai concerning the place that Classical Ancient philosophical legacy should occupy in dogmatics and dogmatic polemics with his main Christological work Viae Dux used as a source of the material. The article analyses the introductory section of the treatise where Anastasius of Sinai compares certain points of philosophical knowledge with points of the Christian faith and comes to the conclusion about the irrelevance of terminology and concepts of philosophy to Christology and Triadology. He proposes similar views throughout the treatise and emphasises that all major heretic mistakes are rooted in fondness for pagan philosophy. Particularly negative infl uence on the Christian thought had Aristotle with his doctrine of identity of nature and hypostasis. It is this doctrine, he believes, that underlies Monophysitism. It is shown that Anastasious of Sinai was insuffi ciently familiar with texts of Ancient philosophers. In most cases, when he refers to a certain philosophical statement, his source can be established only approximately. The article suggests that the sources of his views about philosophy were probably Christian adaptations of commentaries on Aristotle of the Neoplatonic school of Alexandria. The article also raises the question of the reasons for such a negative attitude of Anastasius of Sinai to Ancient philosophy; this attitude implies not only cautious interaction with it, which is typical, for example, of Leontius of Byzantium, Theodore of Raithu, Maximus the Confessor, John of Damascus, but also a radical critique of philosophical knowledge. Preliminary explanation is that the reason for this is the fact that the Monophysite theological tradition of the 6th — 7th centuries was to a greater extent dependent on Aristotle than Chalcedonian. In any case, the place of Viae Dux by Anastasius of Sinai in the late East-Christian theological tradition is unique. It is characterised by a desire to minimise the infl uence of the Ancient philosophical tradition on Christian theology. He proposes a system of work with theological concepts that would be independent of the “Hellenic” tradition.

Anastasius of Sinai, Ammonius of Alexandria, Aristotle, commentaries on Aristotle of Neoplatonic school of Alexandria, Neo-Chalcedonism, Monophysitism, Christology

1. Chase M. (2010) “La subsistence néoplatonicienne: De Porphyre à Théodore de Raithu”. Chôra: Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médiévales, 7–8, p. 37–52.
2. Diekamp F. (ed.) (1938) Analecta Patristica. Texte und Abhandlungen zur griechischen Patristik. Roma.
3. Ebied К. Y., Van Roey A., Wickham L. К. (eds.) (1994–2003) Petri Callinicensis Patriarchae Antiocheni Tractatus Contra Damianum, vol. 1–4. Turnhout; Leuven.
4. Grillmeier A. (1986) Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche. Band 2/1. Das Konzil von Chalcedon (451): Rezeption und Widerspruch (451–518). Freiburg; Basel; Wien.
5. Hoek A. W. van den (1988) Clement of Alexandria and His Use of Philo in the Stromateis: An Early Christian Reshaping of a Jewish Model. Leiden.
6. Hovorun C. (2019) “Anastasius of Sinai and His Participation in the Monothelite Controversy”. Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 95, 3, p. 505–527.
7. Janssens B. (ed.) (2002) Maximi Confessoris Ambigua ad Thomam una cum Epistula secunda ad eundem. Turnhout, Leuven.
8. King D. (2015) “Logic in the Service of Ancient Eastern Christianity: An Exploration of Motives”. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 97, p. 1–33.
9. Kozlov M., Afi nogenov D. (eds) (1997) Tvoreniia Prepodobnogo Ioanna Damaskina. Khristologicheskie i polemicheskie traktaty. Slova na bogorodichnye prazdniki [Works of St. John of Damascus. Christological and polemical treatises. Orations on Virgin’s Holidays]. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Krausmüller D. (2015) “Responding to John Philoponus: Hypostases, Particular Substances, and Perichoresis in the Trinity”. Journal of Late Ancient Religion and Culture, 9, p. 13–28.
11. Krausmüller D. (2019) “The Problem of Universals in Late Patristic Theology”. Journal of Applied Logics — IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications, 6, 6, p. 1125–1142.
12. Lampe G. W. H. (1961) A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford.
13. Lourié B. (2019) “What Means ‘Tri-’ in ‘Trinity’? An Eastern Patristic Approach to the ‘Quasi- Ordinals’”. Journal of Applied Logics — IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications, 6, 6, p. 1093–1108.
14. Mariev S. (2017) “Neoplatonic Philosophy in Byzantium. Introduction”, in Mariev S. (ed.) Byzantium Byzantine Perspectives on Neoplatonism, Boston, p. 1–22.
15. Morlet S. (2019) “Un fragment méconnu des Stromates (de Clément ou d’Origène?) chez Anastase le Sinaïte”, in Bady G., Cuny D. (eds.) Les polémiques religieuses du Ier au IVe siècle de notre ère, Hommage à Bernard Pouderon, Paris, p. 329–345.
16. Pashin A. V. (2018) Glavnoe khristologicheskoe proizvedenie prepodobnogo Anastasiia Sinaita “Putevoditel”: monografiia [The main Christological work of St. Anastasius of Sinai ‘Viae Dux’: monography]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
17. Piret P. (1981) Le Christ et la Trinité selon Maxime le Confesseur. Paris.
18. Roueche M. (1971) “Notes on a Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides”. Greek, Roman and Byzantine studies, 12, p. 553–556.
19. Roueche M. (1974) “Byzantine Philosophical Texts of the Seventh Century”. Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 23, p. 61–76.
20. Roueche M. (1980) “A Middle Byzantine Handbook of Logic Terminology”. Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 29, p. 71–98.
21. Roueche M. (1990) “The Defi nitions of Philosophy and a New Fragment of Stephanus the Philosopher”. Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 40, p. 107–128.
22. Roueche M. (1999) “Did Medical Students Study Philosophy in Alexandria?” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, 43, p. 153–169.
23. Roueche M. (2002) “Why the Monad is Not a Number: John Philoponus and In De Anima 3”. Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 52, p. 95–133.
24. Shchukin T. (2019) “‘Chto skazhete ob etoi ploti?’: ‘sushchnost’’ i ‘priroda’ v traktate Leontiia Vizantiiskogo ‘Protiv nestorian i evtikhian’” [“What will you say about this fl esh?”: “substance” and “nature” in the treatise “Against the Nestorians and Eutychians” by Leontius of Byzantium]. ESSE. Filosofskie i teologicheskie issledovaniia, 4, 1, p. 213-227 (in Russian).
25. Shchukin T., Nogovitsin O. (2019) “Difficulties in Particular: Theological and Historical Context of the Anonymous Treatise ‘On the Common Nature and the Trinity’”. Scrinium. Journal of Patrology, Critical Hagiography, and Ecclesiastical History, 15, p. 218–238.
26. Shchukin T., Nogovitsin O. (2019) “Leontii Vizantiiskii i ego traktat ‘Oproverzhenie sillogizmov Sevira’” [Leontius of Byzantium and his treatise ‘Refutation of syllogisms of Severus’]. ESSE. Filosofskie i teologicheskie issledovaniia, 4, 2, p. 159‒184 (in Russian).
27. Shchukin T. (2017) “Myslitel, kotoryi ozhivil fi losofi iu: znachenie Mikhaila Psella dlia vizantiiskoj intellektualnoi traditsii” [The thinker who revived philosophy: the signifi cance of Michael Psellus for the Byzantine intellectual tradition]. ESSE. Filosofskie i teologicheskie issledovaniia, 2, 1/2, p. 428–447 (in Russian).
28. Shchukin T. (2018) “Vizantiiskie korni spora Ignatiia Brianchaninova i Feofana Zatvornika o prirode dushi: istoriia i tipologiia” [Byzantine roots of the dispute between Ignatiy Brianchaninov and Feofan Zatvornik about the nature of soul: history and typology], in Nauchnaia sessiia GUAP. Sbornik dokladov [Papers of Scientifi c Session of GUAP. Collection of articles], 1–3, St. Petersburg, p. 79–81 (in Russian).
29. Shchukin T. (2019) “Ierarkhiia v terminakh: razlichie mezhdu «sushchnost’iu» i «prirodoi» v sochineniiakh Mikhaila Psella” [Hierarchy in terms: the diff erence between ‘essence’ and ‘nature’ in writings of Michael Psellus”]. Aktualnye problemy iazyka i kultury. Trudy Vtoroi mezhvuzovskoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii so vserossiiskim uchastiem (Ekaterinburg, 31 oktiabria 2018 goda). Nauchnyi vestnik Uralskoi gosudarstvennoi konservatorii, 1 (19), p. 105–116 (in Russian)
30. Shchukin T. (2020) “Bog — forma, chelovek — materiia. Poniatiia ‘sushchnosti’ i ‘prirody’ v fi zike i khristologii Mikhaila Psella” [God is form, man is matter. The concepts of ‘essence’ and ‘nature’ in physics and Christology by Michael Psellus]. Khristianskoe chtenie, 1, p. 26–42 (in Russian).
31. Spáčil S. (1922–1923) “La teologia di S. Anastasio Sinaita”. Bessarione, 38, p. 157–178; 39, p. 15–44.
32. Stählin O., Früchtel L. and Treu U. (eds) (1970) Clemens Alexandrinus, vol. 3. Berlin.
33. Stoliarov A. (ed.) (1999) Fragmenty rannikh stoikov. Tom II. Khrisipp iz Sol. Chast I. Logicheskie i fizicheskie fragmenty. Fr. 1–521 [Fragments of the Early Stoics. Volume II. Chrysippus of Soli. Part I. Logical and physical fragments. Fr. 1–521]. Moscow (in Russian).
34. Uthemann K.-H. (2015) Anastasios Sinaites: Byzantinisches Christentum in den ersten Jahrzehnten unter arabischer Herrschaft. Berlin; Boston.
35. Uthemann K.-H. (2017) Studien zu Anastasios Sinaites: Mit einem Anhang zu Anastasios I. von Antiochien. Berlin.
36. Uthemann K.-H. (ed.) (1981) Anastasiae Sinaitae opera Viae Dux (Corpus christianorum. Series Graeca, 8). Brepols; Turnhout.
37. Watt J. W. (2013) “The Syriac Aristotle between Alexandria and Baghdad”. Journal of Late Ancient Religion and Culture, 7, p. 26–50.
38. Zachhuber J. (2020) “Aristotle in Theodore of Raïthu and Pamphilus the Theologian”, in Mazzanti A. M. (ed.) Un metodo per il dialogo fra le culture. La chrêsis patristica (Supplementi Adamantius, vol. IX). Brescia, p. 125-138.

Shchukin Timur

The author expresses gratitude to The Russian Foundation for Basic Research for the support provided in writing this paper

The article attempts to identify the key sources of anti-institutional discourse in the theological discourse of the Catholic Church in Germany after the Second Vatican Council and to analyse the use of the concepts of “charisma” and “institution”. The ideas of the Freckenhorst group, the most infl uential group of Catholic priests who advocated church reforms, are considered as an example of this theological argument. This intellectual community played a very special role in the Catholic renewal and impacted signifi cantly the regulation of the church life in Germany. The article analyses the works of three members of the group, i.e. Walter Kasper, Gotthold Hazenhüttl and Norbert Greinacher. At the heart of the church structure itself, they place charisma as an individual ministerial vocation of each member of the Christian community. The institutions of the Church were interpreted almost exclusively in a negative way. The article shows that the “student revolution” of 1968, “the theology of liberation”, but especially the Frankfurt School infl uenced the theology of this group. The criticism of modern society and political systems by the thinkers of Frankfurt School lies in the basis of the critical argumentation of Freckenhorst group. It is used in their criticism of the Catholic Church and its power institutions, considered, however, as an ideal of the New Testament. Therefore, the anti-institutional pathos has no convincing ecclesiastical or theological grounds. The author of the article notes that Christian priest has a particular role within the anti-institutional discourse. On the one hand, he is fully involved in the life of the community, on the other, he is a representative of the hierarchy. Hence, in the theology of Freckenhorster group, he either functions as a representative of the people, or as a representative of the “authoritarian” institution of the Church. This allows us to speak about the exceptional potential of the priest, both within the modern ecclesiology and in the modern social thought in the context of the revision of the traditional power relations.

Second Vatican Council, Catholic Church, Catholic Renovation, Frankfurt School, charisma, institution, ecclesiology

1. Arens A. (1976) “Die Entwicklung des Priesterbildes in den kirchlichen Dokumenten von der Enzyklika „Menti Nostrae“ Papst Pius XII. (1950) bis zur Gemeinsamen Synode der Bistümer in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1975)“, in A. Arens (ed.) Pastorale Bildung: Erfahrungen und Impulse für Ausbildung und Fortbildung für den kirchlichen Dienst, Trier, p. 7–35.
2. Blank J. (1970) Das Evangelium als Garantie der Freiheit. Würzburg.
3. Brittain Ch. (2012) “The Frankfurt School on Religion”. Religion Compass, 6/3, p. 204–212.
4. Dols C., Ziemann B. (2015) “Progressive Participation and Transnational Activism in the Catholic Church after Vatican II: The Dutch and West German Examples”. Journal of Contemporary History, 50 (3), p. 465–485.
5. Fouilloux E. (1992) “«Fille aînée de l’Église» ou «pays de mission»? (1926–1958)”, in Rémond R. (ed.) Société sécularisée et renouveaux religieux (XXe siècle), Paris, p. 131–252.
6. Fromm E. (1990) Escape from freedom. Moscow (Russian translation).
7. Fromm E. (1992) Die Seele des Menschen. Moscow (Russian translation).
8. Frymer B. (2020) “Frankfurter school and Education”, in Steinberg S. R., Down B. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Critical Pedagogies, London, p. 94–103.
9. Fuchs O. (1986) Prophetische Kraft der Jugend? Zum theologischen und ekklesiologischen Ort einer Altersgruppe im Horizont des Evangeliums. Freiburg.
10. Fuchs O. (2017) “Ihr aber seid ein priesterliches Volk”: Ein Pastoraltheologischer Zwischenruf zu Firmung und Ordination. Mainz.
11. Gemeinsame Synode der Bistümer in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1976). Freiburg.
12. Greinacher N. (1971) “Herrschaftsfreie Gemeinde”. Concilium, p. 181–190.
13. Greinacher R. (2010) Von der Wirklichkeit zur Utopie: Der Weg eines Theologen. Frankfurt am Main.
14. Grenz S., Olson R. (2011) 20th-century Theology. Cherkasy (Russian translation).
15. Großbölting Th. (1997) Wie ist Christsein heute möglich? Suchbewegungen des nachkonziliaren Katholizismus im Spiegel des Freckenhorster Kreises. Altenberge.
16. Hasenhü ttl G. (1969) Charisma. Ordnungsprinzip der Kirche. Freiburg im Breisgau.
17. Hasenhüttl G. (1970) “Konfessionelle Momente in der Gottesfrage”. Concilium, p. 273–277.
18. Hasenhüttl G. (1974) “Kirche und Institution”. Concilium, p. 7–11.
19. Herzog D. (2006) “The Death of God in West Germany. Between Secularization, Postfascism and the Rise of Liberation Theology”, in M. Geyer, L. Hölscher (eds) Die Gegenwart Gottes in der modernen Gesellschaft. Transzendenz und religiöse Vergemeinschaftung in Deutschland, Göttingen, p. 431–466.
20. Holzbrecher S. (2014) “Der Aktionskreis Halle. Eine katholische Reformbewegung in der DDR zwischen Staat und Kirche”, in A. Merk, G. Wassilowski, G. Wurst (eds) Reformen in der Kirche. Historische Perspektiven, Freiburg im Breisgau, p. 292–311.
21. Horn G.-R. (2008) Western European Liberation Theology. The First Wave, 1924–1959. Oxford.
22. Karrer L. (1999) Die Stunde der Laien: von der Würde eines namenlosen Standes. Freiburg im Breisgau; Basel; Wien.
23. Käsemann E. (1968) Exegetische Versuche und Besinnungen. Göttingen.
24. Kasper W. (1969) “Die Funktion des Priesters in der Kirche”. Geist und Leben, 42, 1969, p. 102–116.
25. Kasper W. (1970) “Amt und Gemeinde (Referat am 14.2.1970)”, in Glaube und Geschichte, Mainz, p. 388–414.
26. Kasper W. (1976) “Die pastoralen Dienste in der Gemeinde”, in Synode der Bistü mer in der BRD, Offizielle Ausgabe I, Freiburg i. Br., p. 581–596.
27. Kasper W. (1994) Der Leitungsdienst in der Gemeinde. Referat beim Studientag der DBK in Reute. Bonn.
28. Kasper W. (2013) “Gemeinsames und besonderes Priestertum. Vier Aufgaben für eine Erneuerung des priesterlichen Dienstes”, in G. Augustin, K. Koch (eds) Priestertum Christi und priesterlicher Dienst, Freiburg im Breisgau, p. 9–23.
29. Kerstiens F. (2013) Umbrüche — Eine Kirchengeschichte von unten. Autobiographische Notizen. Berlin.
30. Laeyendecker B. (1990) “Septuagint. De lotgevallen van een beweging”, in O. Schreuder, L. van Snippenburg (eds) Religie in de Nederlandse samenleving. De vergeten factor, Baarn, p. 90–117.
31. Marcuse H. (1970) Triebstruktur und Gesellschaft. Frankfurt.
32. Marcuse H. (2003) Eros and Civilization. One-Dimensional Man. Moscow (Russian translation).
33. Mariante B. R. (1982) “The Frankfurt School and the Sociology of Religion: Religion a la Marx and Freud”. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 9, 1 (Fall/Winter 1981/82), p. 75–89.
34. Mendieta E. (ed.) (2005) The Frankfurt School on religion: key writings by the major thinkers. Abingdon.
35. Metz J. B. (1968) Zur Theologie der Welt. München.
36. Metz J. B. (1970) “Braucht die Kirche eine neue Reformation? Eine römisch-katholische Antwort”. Concilium, p. 265–270.
37. Preglau-Hämmerle S. (2012) Katholische Reformbewegung weltweit. Ein Überblick. Innsbruck- Wien.
38. Rahner K. (1970) Freiheit und Manipulation in der Kirche. München.
39. Reati F. (2002) God in the 20th Century — A Path to Understand God. Western Theology ofthe 20th Century. St. Petersburg (Russian translation).
40. Siebert R. J. (2001) The Critical Theory of Religion: The Frankfurt School. Lanham.
41. Utsch E., Klussmann C.-P. (ed.) (2010) Dem Konzil verpfl ichtet — verantwortlich in Kirche und Welt: Priester- und Solidaritätsgruppen in Deutschland (AGP) 1969–2010: eine Bilanz nach 40 Jahren. Berlin, Münster.
42. Zulehner P. M. (1991) Pastoraltheologie. Bd. 1. Fundamentalpastoral. Kirche zwischen Auftrag und Erwartung. Düsseldorf.

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.

The study was carried out with a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 18-78-10089). Organization of the project - Orthodox St. Tikhon Humanitarian University.

This article discusses the concept of wisdom as a sense of taste in the religious epistemology of Alexander of Hales (1185/86‒1245). The concept of wisdom as a sense of taste was quite common both in the tradition preceding Alexander and among his younger contemporaries (for example, it can be found in writings of Bonaventure and even of Thomas Aquinas). Alexander of Hales used this concept in order to solve some of the most important questions within his religious epistemology, the most important of which is recognising religious beliefs as having the highest epistemic status among all possible kinds of knowledge (belief — justifi ed belief — wisdom). The attribution of religious beliefs to wisdom, the highest form of knowledge, had a number of problems, e.g. why is an opinion based on authority placed higher than evidencebased knowledge?; why does higher knowledge begin precisely with faith, and not with rational reasoning?; what procedures can reliably transform religious beliefs into wisdom? The answers to these questions given by Alexander of Hales are analysed in the article in relation to the solutions proposed by his contemporaries. An analysis of the last of these questions led to the conclusion that the concept of wisdom as a sense of taste constituted a special procedure for verifi cation of religious beliefs. Following this, it becomes clear that wisdom in Alexander of Hales’ religious epistemology has at least two meanings. Firstly, it designates the highest type of knowledge available to man, and secondly, a special feeling that provides justifi cation of religious beliefs. In the final part, the article shows that religious epistemology of Alexander of Hales combines both evidentialist and anti-evidentialist traits. On the one hand, Alexander, like almost all his contemporaries, shares the fundamentalist scheme of knowledge and considers it the highest among those available to man and obligatory to any scientifi c knowledge. On the other hand, in order to justify religious beliefs, Alexander builds the concept of sense of wisdom, which echoes the concept of proper functioning as well as certain approaches in epistemologies of virtue and of authority

Alexander of Hales, science (scientia), theology, wisdom (sapientia), sense of taste, evidentialism, anti-evidentialist move

1. Alexander Halensis (1924) “Summa theologiae. Tractatus introductionis”, in Alexander de Hales. Summa Theologica. Liber I. Tomus I. Quaracchi. P. 1‒36.
2. Cortesi A. (ed.) (1962) Rolandus Cremonensis. Summa theologiae. Liber tercius. Bergamo.
3. Feldman R. (2003) Epistemology. Upper Saddle River, N.J.
4. Gasparov I. (2018) “‘Sensus divinitatis’ i “misticheskoe vospriiatie’: dve modeli epistemocheskogo opravdaniia religioznykh ubezhdenii” [“Sensus divinitatis” and “Mystical Perception”: two models of epistemic justifi cation of religious beliefs]. Filosofiia religii: analiticheskie issledovaniia, 2 (1), p. 50–66 (in Russian).
5. Gasparov I. (2020) “Alvin Plantinga i Foma Akvinskii o vozmozhnosti estestvennogo znaniia o Boge” [Alvin Plantinga and Thomas Aquinas on the possibility of natural knowledge of God]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 38 (1), p. 261‒283 (in Russian).
6. Greco J. (2017) “Knowledge of God”, in Abraham W. J., Aquino F. D. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Epistemology of Theology, Oxford. P. 9‒29.
7. Köpf U. (1974) Die Anfänge der theologischen Wissenschaftstheorie im 13. Jahrhundert. Tübingen.
8. Köpf U. (1980) Religiöse Erfahrung in der Theologie Bernards von Clairvaux. Tübingen.
9. Leclercq J. (1957) L’amour des lettres et le désir de Dieu: Initiation aux auteurs monastiques du Moyen-Age. Paris.
10. Niederbacher B., Leibold G. (eds) (2006) Theologie als Wissenschaft im Mittelalter. Texte, Übersetzungen, Kommentare. Münster.
11. Plantinga A. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief. Oxford.
12. Ross W. D. (ed.) (1924) Aristotle’s metaphysics. 2 vols. Oxford.
13. Ross W. D. (ed.) (1964) Aristoteles. Analytica priora et posteriora. Oxford.
14. Stegmüller F. (ed.) (1935) Robert Kilwardby (Robertus de Valle Verbi). De natura theologiae. Münster.

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.

This article addresses the legacy of Rudolf Otto, the most famous German phenomenologist of religion. First of all, it characterises his critics and shows that they all find the religious theory of R. Otto and his concept of mystical experience built around a religious experience that departs from rational schemes, which indicates its link to the psychological description of religious experiences by W. James. Further, referring to the works of R. Otto Kantisch-Fries’sche Religionsphilosophie und ihre Anwendung auf die Theologie: zur Einleitung in die Glaubenslehre für Studenten der Theologie (1909), Das Heilige (1917), and West-Östliche Mystik: Vergleich und Unterscheidung zur Wesensdeutung (1926), the article refutes claims of these critics. The article also examines Otto’s comparative analysis of the two mystics: the Indian philosopher Shankara and the German mystic Meister Eckhart. Otto observes that the numinous aspect, imposed on the metaphysical systems of Shankara and Meister Eckhart, turns the metaphysical systems into mystical. The article examines the methodological question of R. Otto if it is possible to speak of mysticism as a whole and discusses his division into two types, i.e. the mysticism directed inward, and mysticism directed outward. Besides, the article raises the question of to what extent it is possible to consider Otto a follower of F. Schleiermacher. It is concluded that Otto’s system cannot be called irrationalism; on the contrary, he sharply opposes all forms of irrational knowledge that reduce all religious life to emotions and experiences.

phenomenology of religion, religious studies, comparative religion, mysticism, metaphysics, irrational, R. Otto, Shankara, M. Eckhart, I. Kant, J. Fries

1. Barnes L. (1994) “Rudolf Otto and the Limits of Religious Description”. Religious Studies, 30 (2), p. 219‒230.
2. Frolov A. (2011) “Germenevticheskie podstupy k Sviashchennomu R. Otto” [Hermeneutical approaches to the Sacred by R. Otto]. Filosofiia religii. Al’manakh 2010‒2011 [Philosophy of Religion: Almanac 2010‒2011]. Moscow. P. 429‒442 (in Russian).
3. Isaeva N. (1991) Shankara i indiiskaia fi losofi ia [Shankara and Indian philosophy]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. James W. (1993) The Varieties of Religious Experience. Moscow (Russian translation).
5. Kant I. (1965) Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Moscow (Russian translation).
6. King R. (2013) Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and “The Mystic East”. New York.
7. Krasnikov A. (2007) Metodologicheskie problemy religiovedeniia [Methodological problems of religious studies]. Moscow (in Russian).
8. Meister E. (1991) Predigten. Moscow (Russian translation).
9. Meister E. (2001) Von Abegescheidenheit. Moscow; St. Petersburg (Russian translation).
10. Nosachev P. (2018) “Mnogoobrazie misticheskogo: «mistika» i «mistitsizm» v zapadnom ezoterizme kontsa XIX — nachala XX veka” [The varieties of the mystical: “mystic” and “mysticism” in the Western Esotericism of the late 19th — early 20th centuries]. Filosofiia religii: analiticheskie issledovaniia, 2(1), p. 5‒29 (in Russian).
11. Otto R. (1920) Das Heilige. Breslau.
12. Otto R. (1926) West-östliche Mystik: Vergleich und Unterscheidung zur Wesensdeutung. Gotha.
13. Otto R. (1936) The Idea of the Holy. London.
14. Otto R. (1988) Aufsätze zur Ethik. München.
15. Otto R. (2008) Das Heilige. St Petersburg (Russian translation).
16. Pylaev M. (2000) Fenomenologiia religii Rudol’fa Otto [The phenomenology of religion of Rudolf Otto]. Moscow (in Russian).
17. Pylaev M. (2006) Zapadnaia fenomenologiia religii [Western phenomenology of religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
18. Schmidt E. (2013) “The Making of “Mysticism” in the Anglo-American World: From Henry Coventry to William James”, in The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Christian Mysticism. Malden. P. 452‒472.
19. Shokhin V. (2016) “Filosofskaia teologiia i promezhutochnaia versiia ishvaravady” [Philosophical theology and the intermediary version of Īśvaravāda]. Voprosy filosofii, 9, p. 138‒147 (in Russian).
20. Shokhin V. (2017) “Real’nost’ i «zapakh real’nosti»: advaita na puti k stratifi katsionnoi ontologii. Shankara. Brakhmasutra-bkhash’ia. Chkhandog’opanishad-bkhash’ia”. Perevod s sanskrita i primechaniia V. Shokhina [“Reality and “a Smell of Reality”: Advaita on the Way to a Stratifi ed Ontology”, Shankara, “Brahmasutra Bhashya”, “Chandogyopanishad Bhashya”, translation and commentary by V. Shokhin]. Voprosy filosofii, 10, p. 182‒198 (in Russian).
21. Shokhin V. (2018) “Opredeleniia misticheskogo: pervyi opyt ekspozitsii” [Defi nitions of the mystical: the first experience in their exposition]. Filosofiia religii: analiticheskie issledovaniia, 1 (1), p. 7–29 (in Russian).
22. Stace W. T. (1961) Mysticism and Philosophy. London.
23. Strenski I. (2015) Understanding Theories of Religion: An Introduction. Chichester, West Sussex, UK.
24. Taves A. (2009) Religious Experience Reconsidered, A Building-Block Approach to the Study of Religion and Other Special Things. Princeton.
25. Vysheslavtsev B. (1928) “R. Otto West-Ostliche Mystic”. Put’, 13, p. 106‒109 (in Russian).
26. Waardenburg J. (2010) Reflections on the Study of Religion: Including an Essay on the Work of Gerardus van der Leeuw. Vladimir (Russian translation).

Samarina Tatiana

*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 second half of the 17th century was a turning point in religious life of the Protestant world of Europe. It was at this time that signifi cant changes occurred in relations between Christians and Jews. It was a time of amazing divergence, spiritual quest, of emergence of new religious groups and movements whose members considered personal mystical experience and collective eschatological expectations much more important than dogmatic diff erences and church rites. In this article, these features of that epoch are examined through an analysis of a concrete historical example of the biography of Johann Peter Speth, the theologian, mystic, and Hebraist, whose long journey through various Christian denominations ended with an adoption of Judaism. This act of a man well known in the Protestant world of German-speaking countries (among the pietists, he was even called the “second Luther”) made a very strong impression on his contemporaries. This event generated a great deal of controversy, not only about this person himself, who took the name Moses Germanus, but also on topics that were in the focus of attention of philosophers and theologians of that time, i.e. pantheism, materialism, atheism, the teaching of Spinoza, the attitude to Judaism and its signifi cance for the Christian world in anticipation of the end of time and coming of the Messiah, etc. At that time, a controversy erupted about how signifi cant the teaching of Kabbalah was for Spinoza’s philosophy, whether the study and use of Jewish mystical texts in Christian theology is acceptable, how well-founded is the idea of the existence of an “eternal philosophy” (philosophia perennis), following which one can find grains of true knowledge in religions and philosophies of ancient times. In the context of these disputes, the position of Johann Peter Speth himself, his argument in favour of his difficult choice, looks exceptional but interesting both in itself, and in connection with a broader question of forms and limits of religious tolerance, of problems of spiritual search and religious conversion.

Judaism, Jewish mysticism (Kabbalah), Protestantism, pietism, Hebraism, Spinoza, eschatology, Messiah, religious conversion, dialogue of religions

1. Benz E. (1979) “La Kabbale chrétienne en Allemagne du xvi au xviii siècle”, in A. Faivre, F. Tristan (eds) Kabbalistes Chrétiens. Paris. P. 89–148.
2. Burmistrov K. (2002) “Die hebräischen Quellen der Kabbala Denudata”. Morgen-Glantz, 12, p. 341–376.
3. Burmistrov K. (2013) Evreiskaia filosofiia i kabbala. Istoriia, problemy, vliianiia [Jewish philosophy and Kabbalah. History, problems, influences]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Burmistrov K. (2017) “Spinoza i kabbala: konfl ikty, vliyaniya, istochniki” [“Spinoza and Kabbalah: Conflicts, Influences, Sources”], in O. Belova (ed.) Kontakty i konfl ikty v slavianskoi i evreiskoi kul’turnoi traditsii [Contacts and confl icts in the Slavonic and Jewish cultural traditions]. Moscow. P. 10–32 (in Russian).
5. Christian Knorr von Rosenroth. Dichter und Gelehrter am Sulzbacher Musenhof (1989). Amberg.
6. Coudert Allison P. (1994) “The Kabbala Denudata: Converting Jews or Seducing Christians?” in R. Popkin, G. Weiner (eds ) Jewish Christians and Christian Jews. Dordrecht. P. 73–96.
7. Coudert Allison P. (1995) Leibniz and the Kabbalah. Dordrecht.
8. Coudert Allison P. (1999) The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century. Leiden.
9. Coudert Allison P. (2001) “Kabbalistic Messianism versus Kabbalistic Enlightenment”, in M. Goldish, R. H. Popkin (eds) Jewish Messianism in the Early Modern World. Dordrecht. P. 107–124.
10. Coudert Allison P. (2004) “Five Seventeenth Century Christian Hebraists”, in A. P. Coudert, J. S. Shoulson (eds.) Hebraica Veritas? Christian Hebraists and the Study of Judaism in Early Modern Europe. Philadelphia. P. 286–308.
11. Coudert Allison P. (2004) “Judaizing in the Seventeenth Century: Francis Mercury van Helmont and Johann Peter Späth (Moses Germanus)”, in M. Mulsow, R. H. Popkin (eds) Secret Conversions to Judaism in Early Modern Europe. Leiden. P. 71–121.
12. Endel’ M. (2018) “Spinoza bez maleishago sumneniia kabbalistvuet»: o ranee neizvestnom perevode na russkii iazyk knigi Ioganna Vakhtera «Elucidarius cabbalisticus” [“Spinoza is without any doubt a kabbalist: on a previously unknown translation of the book Elucadrius Cabbalisticus (“Explanation of Kabbalah”) by Johann Wachter”]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 77, p. 100–117 (in Russian).
13. Finke M., Handschur E. (1991) “Christian Knorr von Rosenroth Lebenslauf aus dem Jahre 1718”. Morgen-Glantz, 1, p. 33–48.
14. Greisinger L. (2006) “Chiliasten und «Judentzer»: Eschatologie und Judenmission im protestantischen Deutschland des 17. Und 18. Jahrhunderts”. Kwartalnik Historii Żydów, 4, p. 535–575.
15. Hallamish M. (1999) An Introduction to the Kabbalah. Albany.
16. Jaitner K. (1997) “Die Juden in der frühen Neuzeit”. Morgen-Glantz, 7, p. 241‒263.
17. Kilcher A. (1997) “Lexikographische Konstruktion der Kabbala. Die Loci communes cabbalistici der Kabbala Denudata”. Morgen-Glantz, 7, p. 67–125.
18. Kilcher A. (2000) “Synopse zu Knorr von Rosenroths Kabbala Denudata”. Morgen-Glantz, 10, p. 201–220.
19. Leibniz G. (1954) Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Erste Reihe. Bd. 5. Berlin.
20. Leibniz G. (1989). Sochineniia v 4-kh tomakh [Works in 4 vols]. Moscow.
21. Mahlev H. (2010) “Der Schöpff er aller Dinge hat einmahl die gebenedeyte Weißheit in Jacob wohnen heissen, [...] und so thut Er keinen Heyden: Johann Peter Späths Auseinandersetzung mit der Kabbala”. Morgen Glantz, 20, p. 205–225.
22. Mahlev H. (2012) “‘Spinosismus’ als ‘Philosemitismus’?”. Morgen-Glantz, 22, p. 91–113.
23. Mahlev H. (2017) “Daß ein Pietist ein guter Cabbalist und Judæus mysticus sey. Pietismus und Philosemitismus bei Christian Friedrich Bücher”, in P. Theisohn, G. Braungart (eds) Philosemitismus: Rhetorik, Poetik, Diskursgeschichte. Paderborn. P. 63–81.
24. Marcus R. (1950/51) “On Biblical Hypostases of Wisdom”. Hebrew Union College Annual, 23, p. 157–171.
25. Popkin R. (1992) “Spinoza, Neoplatonic Kabbalist?”, in L.E. Goodman (ed.) Neoplatonism and Jewish Thought. Albany. P. 387–409.
26. Popkin R. (1992) The Third Force in Seventeenth-Century Thought. Leiden.
27. Reichert K. (1997) “Christian Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century”, in J. Dan (ed.) The Christian Kabbalah, Cambridge (Mass.). P. 127–148.
28. Rensoli L. (2011) La polémica sobre la Kabbalah y Spinoza: Moses Germanus y Leibniz. Granada.
29. Rensoli-Laliga L. (2012) “Johann Peter Spaeth”, in Biographisch-Bibliographischen Kirchenlexikons, Bd. XXXIII, 1267–1278. Herzberg.
30. Salecker K. (1931) Christian Knorr von Rosenroth (1636–1689). Leipzig.
31. Samter N. (1895) “Johann Spaeth (Moses Germanus), der Proselyt”. Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums, 3, p. 178–187, 221–230, 271–281.
32. Schmidt-Biggemann W. (2013) Geschichte der christlichen Kabbala. Bd. II. Stuttgart.
33. Schoeps H. (1952) Philosemitismus im Barock. Religions- und geistesgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. Tübingen.
34. Scholem G. (1927) Bibliographia Kabbalistica. Leipzig.
35. Scholem G. (1974) Kabbalah. Jerusalem.
36. Scholem G. (1984) “Die Wachterische Kontroverse über den Spinozismus und ihre Folgen”, in K. Gründer, W. Schmidt-Biggermann W. (eds) Spinoza in der Frühzeit siener religiözen Wirkung, Heidelberg. P. 15–25.
37. Scholem G. (1991) On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead. New York.
38. Schröder W. (1994) “Einleitung”, in V. W. Schröder (ed.) Wachter J. G. Der Spinozismus im Jüdenthumb (1699). Stuttgart; Bad Cannstatt.
39. Schulitz J. (1993) Jakob Boehme und die Kabbalah. Eine vergleichende Werkanalyse. Frankfurt a. M.
40. Schulze W. (1955) “Jacob Boehme und die Kabbala”. Judaica (Zürich), 11, p. 12–29.
41. Vileno A., Wilkinson R. (2018) “La dernière oeuvre de Christian Knorr de Rosenroth: le Messias puer”. BABELAO, 7, p. 137–147.
42. Wachter J. (1699) Der Spinozismus im Jüdenthumb. Amsterdam.
43. Wagenseil J. (1705) Benachrichtigungen wegen einiger die Judenschaff t angehende wichtigen Sachen. Leipzig.
44. Wappmann V. (1993) “Knorrs von Rosenroth Sulzbacher Freundeskreis”. Morgen-Glantz, 3, p. 19–69.
45. Wappmann V. (1995) Durchbruch zur Toleranz: Die Religionspolitik des Pfalzgrafen Christian August von Sulzbach, 1622–1708. Neustadt.
46. Wappmann V. (1995) “Sulzbach als Drukort im 17. Jhdt”. Morgen-Glantz, 5, p. 175–195.
47. Wolfgang Ph. (ed.) (1963) Das Zeitalter der Aufklärung. Bremen.
48. Wulf J.-H. (2012) Spinoza in der jüdischen Aufklärung. Berlin.
49. Zeller R. (1997) “Der Paratext der Kabbala Denudata. Die Vermittlung von jüdischer und christlicher Weisheit”. Morgen-Glantz, 7, p. 141–169.

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.

This article off ers theoretical approaches to the analysis of the phenomenon of Soviet ideology and specifi es the relationship between the processes of secularisation and sacralisation in Soviet society. The historical process of the 20th century led to a complex transformation of the worldview of the Soviet man. At the beginning of the Soviet period, there was a replacement of the Orthodox faith, the bearer of which was the peasant majority of the population of the USSR, with a Soviet ideological construction. In many ways, this construction falls under the concept of quasireligion; it has its own doctrine, ideological narrative, proletarian morality, specifi c civil rites, party structure similar to the Church. A special Soviet culture was created, guided by the principles of socialist realism and having its own specifi c symbolism. A significant place in the Soviet quasi-religion was occupied by the cult of the leader. The main diff erence between Soviet ideology and traditional religion was a complete absence of a transcendental component which was replaced by the eschatologism of the beginning of a new historical aeon, the building of paradise on Earth. At the same time, there was a process of secularisation in consciousness of the Soviet people through an educational system in which they acquired a positivist picture of the world deprived of sacred features. This rationalisation of consciousness, as well as the political events of the 50s, led to a gradual loss of attractiveness of Soviet ideology for a large part of the population, but, on the other hand, intensifi ed the spiritual quest of Soviet people in the post-war period of Soviet history. These quests were directed towards traditional Orthodoxy, towads various forms of esotericism, towards increased interest in paranormal phenomena. Following this, in the late Soviet period there appeared a worldview that can be characterised as inclined to all mysterious, unusual, miraculous. One can regard this as a manisfestation of the innate fondness for the transcendental, generally typical of people. It is possible to agree with N. Demerath who argued that secularisation and sacralisation are symbiotic processes. The rejection of a traditional religion (secularisation) led to uncritical acceptance of the Communist quasi-religious ideology (sacralisation), disappointment in it and acquisition of the positivist worldview (secularisation); this leads to a crisis and again pushes the person to religion in its more traditional understanding (sacralisation). Therefore, the current religious situation in Russia can be described as post-secular.

Soviet secularisation, Soviet ideology, Soviet society, sacralisation, quasireligion, sacred, cult of Lenin, implicit religiosity, post-secular society

1. Antonov K. (2016) “Psikhologiia «strakha smerti» vs sotsiologiia «kontrrevoliutsionnoi ideologii»: polemika M. N. Pokrovskogo i I. I. Skvortsova-Stepanovva (1922–1923) i puti izucheniia religii v SSSR” [Psychology of “fear of death” vs sociology of “ideology of counterrevolution”: Polemics of M. Pokrovsky and I. Skvortsov-Stepanov (1922–1923) and ways of studying religion in the USSR]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 5, p. 73‒98 (in Russian).
2. Bekhterev V. (1999) “Bessmertie chelovecheskoi lichnosti kak nauchnaia problema” [Immortality of human personality as a scientifi c problem], in V. Bekhterev. Psikhika i zhizn’. Izbrannye trudy po psikhologii lichnosti v 2 tomakh [Psyche and life. Selected works on psychology of personality in 2 volumes], vol. 1. St Petersburg. P. 225‒252 (in Russian).
3. Berdiaev N. (1990) Istoki i smysl russkogo kommunizma [The origin of Russian communism]. Мoscow (in Russian).
4. Bruk S., Pokshishevskii V. (1977) “Soiuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik. Naselenie” [The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Population], in Bol’shaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia [Large Soviet Encyclopaedia], vol. 24, 2. Moscow. P. 14‒17 (in Russian).
5. Demerath N. J. (2000) “The Varieties of Sacred Experience: Finding the Sacred in a Secular Grove”. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 39 (1), p. 1‒11.
6. Durkheim E. (2018) Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse: le système totémique en Australie. Moscow (Russian translation).
7. Eliade M. (2015) Traite d’histoire des religions. Moscow (Russian translation).
8. Firsov S. (2003) “Perevernutaia religiia: sovetskaia mifologiia i kommunisticheskii kul’t (k voprosu o novom revoliutsionnom soznanii i «osvobozhdennom» cheloveke)” [Inverted religion: Soviet mythology and the communist cult (on the question of the new revolutionary consciousness and the «liberated» man)”]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov‚ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 1, p. 91‒109 (in Russian).
9. Fromm E. (2018) Haben oder Sein? Мoscow (Russian translation).
10. Garadzha V. (2004) “Sekuliarizatsiia”, in Ivin A. (ed.) Filosofiia: Entsiklopedicheskii slovar’ [Philosophy: An encyclopaedic dictionary]. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Glebova I. (2010) “Vopros o vlasti v revoliutsiiakh 1917: sotsiokul’turnyi kontekst” [The question of power in the revolutions of 1917: sociocultural context”]. Politiia, 1, p. 5‒29 (in Russian).
12. Grois B. (2015) “Russkii kosmizm: biopolitika bessmertiia” [Russian cosmism: biopolitics of immortality], in Grois B. (ed.) Russkii kosmizm: antologiia [Russian cosmism: anthology]. Moscow. P. 6‒31 (in Russian).
13. Iakovlev A. (1972) “Protiv antiistorizma” [Against anti-historicism]. Literaturnaia gazeta, 46 (in Russian).
14. Iurchak А. (2014) Eto bylo navsegda, poka ne konchilos’: Poslednee sovetskoe pokolenie [Everything was forever until it was no more: the last Soviet generation]. Moscow (in Russian).
15. Karpov V. (2012) “Kontseptual’nye osnovy teorii desekuliarizatsii” [The conceptual foundations of the desecularisation theory”]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2, p. 114‒164 (in Russian).
16. Kolkunova K. (2010) “Ninian Smart i sovremennoe religiovedenie” [Ninian Smart and modern religious studies]. Religiovedcheskie issledovaniia, 1‒2, p. 137‒142 (in Russian).
17. Kolkunova K. (2010) “Podkhody k issledovaniiu kvazireligii v zapadnom religiovedenii i teologii” [Approaches to the study of quasi-religions in Western religious studies and theology]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriia 7. Filosofiia, 6, p. 96‒102 (in Russian).
18. Krementsov N. (2014) Revolutionary Experiments. The Quest for Immortality in Bolshevik Science and Fiction. Oxford.
19. Madsen R. (2012) “What Is Religion? Categorical Reconfi gurations in a Global Horizon” in P. Gorsky et al. (eds) The Post-secular in Question: Religion in Contemporary Society. London P. 23‒42.
20. Nosachev P. (2012) “Prolegomeny k izucheniyu sovetskogo ezotericheskogo podpol’ia 60‒ 80-kh gg. XX v.” [An introduction to the study of the Soviet esoteric underground of the 1960s — 1980s]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 4, p. 53‒61 (in Russian).
21. Novgorodtsev P. (1991) Ob obshchestvennom ideale [On social ideal]. Moscow (in Russian).
22. Pronina I. N. (2015) “Massovyi prazdnik v sovetskoi sotsiokul’turnoi modeli” [Mass festivity in the soviet socio-cultural model]. Vestnik Cheliabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiia, Sotsiologiia, Kul’turologiia, 19 (374), p. 114–121 (in Russian).
23. Rakhmanin A. (2017) “Sviashchennoe i religiia: opredeleniia, kategorii, kontsepty” [Religion and the sacred: defi nitions, categories, and concepts”]. Religiovedcheskie issledovaniia, 1, p. 84‒116 (in Russian).
24. Shokhin V. (2018) “Fenomen ateisticheskogo fi deizma” [The phenomenon of atheistic fi deism]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviia Sankt-Peterburgskoi dukhovnoi akademii, 1, p. 6‒18 (in Russian).
25. Sinelina Iu. (2004) Sekuliarizatsiya v sotsial’noi istorii Rossii [Secularisation in the social history of Russia]. Мoscow (in Russian).
26. Smolkin-Rothrock V. (2012) “Problema «obyknovennoi» sovetskoi smerti: material’noe i dukhovnoe v ateisticheskoi kosmologii” [Ordinary death in the Soviet Union: the material and spiritual in atheist cosmology]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov‚ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 3‒4, p. 430‒463 (in Russian).
27. Sokolova A. (2011) “Pokhorony bez pokoinika: transformatsii traditsionnogo pokhoronnogo obriada” [Funeral without a corpse: transformations of the traditional funeral ritual]. Antropologicheskii forum, 15, p. 187‒202 (in Russian).
28. Sviatogor A. (2015) “«Doktrina ottsov» i anarkhizm-biokosmizm” [“The doctrine of the fathers” and anarchism-biocosmism], in Grois B. (ed.) Russkii kosmizm: antologiia [Russian cosmism: anthology]. Moscow. P. 138‒155 (in Russian).
29. Taylor Ch. (2017) A Secular Age. Мoscow (Russian translation).
30. Tillich P. (1995) Theology of Culture. Moscow (Russian translation).
31. Tumarkin N. (1999) Lenin zhiv. Kul’t Lenina v Sovetskoi Rossii [Lenin Lives! The cult of Lenin in Soviet Russia]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
32. Uzlaner D. (2010) “Sovetskaia model’ sekuliarizatsii” [Soviet model of secularisation]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, 6, p. 62‒69 (in Russian).
33. Vernadskii G. (2000) Lenin — krasnyi diktator [Lenin, the red dictator]. Moscow (in Russian).
34. Vishev I. (1990) Problema lichnogo bessmertiia [The problem of personal immortality]. Novosibirsk (in Russian).
35. Waardenburg J. (1986) Religionen und Religion: Systematische Einführung in die Religionswissenschaft. St Petersburg (Russian translation).
36. Zhidkova E. (2012) “Sovetskaia grazhdanskaia obriadnost’ kak al’ternativa obriadnosti religioznoi” [The Soviet civic rituals as an alternative to religious rites]. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov‚ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 3‒4, p. 408‒429 (in Russian).
37. Zhiromskaia V. (2000) “Otnoshenie naseleniia k religii: po materialam perepisi 1937 goda” [Population’s attitude to religion: based on the census of 1937], in Trudy Instituta rossiiskoi istorii RAN 1997‒1998, 2, p. 324‒338 (in Russian).

Gipp Konstantin, archpriest