St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series II: History. Russian Church History

Confessionalization theory appeared in the second half of the twentieth century to describe the history of the German Protestantism in XVI-XVII centuries. The theory infers the gradual isolation of the denomination religiously, culturally, socially and politically. Later, this same theory was used to describe the same process in the catholic countries. Today, the scientific community is actively discussing the possibility of an «orthodox» confessionalization. Further to this discussion, the author tries to clarify this theory. Firstly, if the straight and narrow sense the process of «confessionalization» (especially in the sense of «a new symbiosis between church and state institutions») is a particular modern history process and the product of modernization, then in a broader sense, in the sense of a strong commitment to the breeding of the traditions (not at all possible levels, but only on the mental or cultural), this process can be extended to other periods, and other denominations. Secondly, the very need of confessionalization (no matter how consistent is its realization), arises only in the common cultural fi eld where the borders should be raised. The need for this is confessionalization. The above mentioned theory is presented in this article on the example of the Russian Church tradition. Particularly, the confessionalization concept can explain the emergence of theological and philosophical ideas introduced by the fi rst Slavophiles.

confessionalization, social-cultural field, augustinism of the XVII century, slavia orthodoxa, society and people, Russian theological tradition, Laientheologie, Khomyakov, Dostoyevsky, Metropolitan Antony (Khrapovitsky).

1. Dmitriev M. V. 2012 “«Pravoslavnaja konfessionalizacija» v Vostochnoj Evrope vo vtoroj polovine XVI veka?” (“Orthodox Confessialization” in Eastern Europe in Seconf Half of XVI Century?), in Dorogobic'kij kraeznavchij zbirnik, Drogobich, 2012. vol. 16, pp. 133–152.
2. Kurbskij A., kn. 2011 “Predislovie k «Dialektike» Ioanna Damaskina” (Introduction to “Dialectic” of John Damascene), in Biblioteka literatury Drevnej Rusi, Saint-Petersburg, 2011, vol. 11, pp. 570–583.
3. Pikkio R. Istorija drevnerusskoj literatury (History of Old Russian Literature), Moscow, 2002.
4. Hjojzinga J. Teni zavtrashnego dnja (Shadows of Tomorrow), Saint-Petersburg, 2010.
5. Shonju P'er. Civilizacija klassicheskoj Evropy (Civilization of Classic Europe), Ekaterinburg, 2005.
6. Jakovlev A. I. Ocherki istorii russkoj kul'tury XIX veka (Essays on History of the Russian Culture of XIX Century), Moscow, 2010.
7. De controversiis christianae fi Bellarminus R. dei adversus hujus temporis haereticos, Neapolis, 1858.
8. Buddeus F. Institutiones theologiae dogmaticae, Lips, 1724.
9. 1995 “Konfessionale Musik“, in Die katholische Konfessionalisierung. Danckwart Marianne, Gütersloh, 1995, pp. 371–383.
10. Iansenius C. Augustinus, Lovanium, 1640.
11. Jedin Hubert. Geschichte des Koncils von Trident, Freiburg, 1939–1975.
12. Möhler J. A. Symbolik oder Darstellung der dogmatischen Gegensätze der Katholiken und Protestanten, nach ihren öffentlichen Bekenntnissschriften, Mainz, 1834.
13. Schneider H. 1983 “Johann Arndt und die makarianischen Homilien“, in Makarios-Simposium über das Böse, Wiesbaden, 1983, pp. 186–222.

Khondzinskii Pavel, archpriest

In the article state of Anglican religion in the Russian Empire of the late XIX — early XX century is observed, information about the number of parishes and their location, number of church members and proportion of Russian and British subjects among them is given. The specific status of Russian Anglican parishes (not included into the common imperial system of non-Orthodox church management but using the extraterritorial status under the auspices of the British embassy) is shown. Legal problems, which faced Anglicans residing in Russia due to extraordinary status of their church are described (such as difficulties with testifying of parish registers and solution of divorce cases, indefinity of the procedure of conversion from Anglican Church to other Protestant denominations, impossibility for Anglican parishes to obtain property in their own favour). The attempts of the problems’ regulation by Russian authorities by making the specific law for Anglican religion are written down; the law was to subordinate Anglican church to the Ministry of Internal Affairs on equal terms with other non-Orthodox Christian denominations in Russia. The ecumenical contacts between Anglican and Orthodox church and their possible influence over Russian government’s policy towards Anglican religion are touched upon. The article is based on the materials of Russian State Historical Archive, it includes references to the essay “Anglican Episcopal Church” by S.D. Bondar, published in 1911 and articles in modern scientific and encyclopedic editions, concerned with the Protestant denominations in Russia.

Anglican Church, non-Orthodox churches, Protestantism, religious policy, parish, parish registers, divorce cases, Great Britain, Russian-British relationships, ecumenical movement

1. Bobylev A., Shtrikker G. 1999 “Evangelichesko-Ljuteranskaja Cerkov'” (Evangelic-Lutheran Church), in Nemcy Rossii: Jenciklopedija, Moscow, 1999, vol. 1 (A–I), pp. 750–757.
2. Bondar' S. D. Anglikanskaja Episkopal'naja Cerkov': Zapiska (Anglican Episcopal Church: Notice), Saint-Petersburg, 1911.
3. Krasnokutskaja L. I. 2000 “Iz istorii shotlandskoj kolonii Karras” (From History of Scottish Colony Karras), in Istorija Severnogo Kavkaza s drevnejshih vremen po nastojashhee vremja: Tezisy konferencii 30–31 maja 2000 g., Pjatigorsk, 2000, pp. 111–114.

Ambartsumov Ivan

Based on the previously unpublished documents of the National Archives of the Republic of Tatarstan for the first time in the national historiography the article examines the activities of the outstanding Russian church- and public figure and teacher Jacob Dmitrievich Koblov as Kazan diocesan anti — Muslim and anti-heathen missionary (1901–1907). The missionary service of Ja.D. Koblov was going on during the deep crisis of the Orthodox mission, which was the echo of the destructive phenomena occurring within the Russian Orthodox Church and the entire Russian society. During this period the state institutions, the church-community organizations are trying to develop new principles of ethnic and confessional and educational policy, of conducting interfaith dialogue. The announcement of religious freedom in 1905 complicated the implementation of the missionary work in multinational Kazan diocese with a signifi cant percentage of the Muslim population; it required a change in the nature and methods of missionary work, the development of new measures for the protection of Christian converts from the Tatar-Muslim influence. The cultural and educational measures come first, in particular, the increasing the number of schools of Kazan Orthodox missionary brotherhood of St. Gury, involvement of local non-Russian peoples in missionary and spiritual and educational activities. Thanks to the selfless activity of Orthodox missionaries, parish priests, teachers of fraternal schools in the Volga-Kama region they managed to reduce the rate of Islamization of the local non-Russian population (Kryashens, Chuvash, Mari, Udmurt) and save them from the real threat to the gradual dissolution of the Tatar-Muslim environment. It is concluded that Ja.D. Koblov made the signifi cant contribution in the development of the spiritual, educational and missionary work among the non-Russian peoples of the Volga-Kama region in the early twentieth century.

Ja.D. Koblov, the Russian Orthodox Church, Kazan diocese, missionary activity, anti-Muslim missionary, Orthodox Brotherhood of St. Gury, freedom of religion, the peoples of the Volga-Kama region, ethno-confessional interaction, inter-confessional dialogu

1. Bagrecov L. 1904 “Ocherk arhipastyrskoj dejatel'nosti Vysokopreosvjashhennogo Arsenija (Brjanceva), arhiepiskopa Har'kovskogo i Ahtyrskogo vo vremja ego pjatiletnego upravlenija Kazanskoj eparhiej, v svjazi s obshhim obzorom ego svjatitel'skogo sluzhenija” (Survey of Bishop Activity of His Eminence Arsenij (Brjancev), Archbishop of Har’kov and Ahtyrsk in Time of His Five Years Ruling of Kazanskaja Diocese, in Connection with General Survey of His Bishop Service), in Vera i razum, 1904, vol. 17/1, p. 207.
2. Ishakov R. R. Ja. 2008 “D. Koblov o kul'turno-religioznoj zhizni povolzhskih musul'man v nachale XX v.” (D. Koblov about Cultural-Religious Lif of Muslims in Povolzh’e in Begin of XX Century), in Izvestija Samarskogo nauchnogo centra Rossijskoj akademii nauk, 2008, vol. 10/1, pp. 60–64.
3. Koblov Ja. 1902 “Kreshhenie 48 chelovek jazychnikov-cheremis v prihode B. Musheran' Carevo-kokshajskogo uezda 10 marta 1902 g.” (Baptize of 48 People Pagans-Cheremises in Parish of B. Mushran’ Carevo-kokshajskij District 10 March 1902), in Izvestija po Kazanskoj eparhii (IKE), 1902, vol. 9, pp. 400–407.
4. Koblov Ja. 1903 “Sredi kreshhenyh tatar i otstupnikov Mamadyshskogo uezda” (Midst of Baptized Tatars and Apostates of Mamadyshskij District), in IKE, 1903, vol. 24, p. 780–800.
5. Koblov Ja. D. O sostojanii missionerskogo dela v Kazanskoj eparhii za 1903 g. Otchet eparhial'nogo protivomusul'manskogo i protivojazycheskogo missionera (About Condition of Missionary Work in Diocese of Kazan’ for 1903. Report of Diocese Antimuslim and Antipagan Missionary), Kazan', 1904.
6. Koblov Ja. D. Mechty tatar-magometan o nacional'noj obshheobrazovatel'noj shkole (Dreams of Muslim Tatars about National General School), Kazan', 1908.
7. Koblov Ja. D. O tatarizacii inorodcev Privolzhskogo kraja (About Tatarization of Non-Russian People of Privolzhskij Province), Kazan', 1910.
8. Ponjatov A. N. 2003 “Nekotorye aspekty missionerskoj dejatel'nosti «Bratstva svjatitelja Gurija»” (Some Aspects of Mission Activity of “Brotherhood of St. Bishop Gurij”), in Pravoslavnyj sobesednik, Kazan', 2003. vol. 2/5, p. 65.
9. Chikurova O. V. Istoricheskie aspekty vzaimodejstvija islama, hristianstva (pravoslavija) i jazychestva v Volgo-Kam'e (na primere udmurtskogo jetnosa): Dis. … kand. ist. nauk (Hitorical Aspects of Interaction of Islam, Christianity (Orthodoxy) and Paganism in Volgo-Kam’e (on Example of Udmurt Ethnos). Dissertation), Izhevsk, 2004.
10. Chikurova O. V. 2013 “Dejatel'nost' Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi «dlja ograzhdenija inorodcev ot vlijanija magometan» (Volgo-Kam'e, vtoraja polovina XIX – nachalo HH v.)” (Activity of Russian Orthodox Church “for Guarding of Non-Russian People from Muslim Influence”), in Istoricheskie, filosofskie, politicheskie i juridicheskie nauki, kul'turologija i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, Tambov, 2013, vol. 8/34/2, pp. 205–210.

Chikurova Ol'ga

The given article provides a historiographical overview of the problems of sociopolitical position of the Russian Orthodox clergy during the revolutionary period of 1905–1907. The author considers the investigations, the most significant on this issue, expanding on the works of the post-Soviet era. The article presents the subjects and stages in the historiography of problem of clergy political orientation, provided that there are three historiographical stages, which stand out: Soviet, post-Soviet and modern. In the course of historiographical analysis the author touches upon issues related to the Vyborg appeal, the priests’ participation in the revolutionary upheaval, the position of the Holy Synod during the revolution, the beginning of a Revivalist movement in the Church, items on political leaning of liberal minded part of clergy. The political orientation of the revivalist movement is revealed in conjunction with its connection with the party of Cadets. The idea is substantiated that the historical connection, established between an autocratic government and the Church, had an impact on the clergy socio-political position during first Russian revolution. The article emphasizes the idea that in the struggle against the revolutionary movement the clergy had joined the forces with the autocracy and supported the government at all stages of the revolution. The author came to a conclusion that the Soviet historiography consistently maintained the view of the Church as an ally of the autocracy, while post-Soviet researchers have fixed their look on extension of liberal sympathies in the Church milieu during the revolution of 1905–1907, and the presence of political heterogeneity in the clerical sphere and the participation of the Orthodox clergy in the first Russian revolution let cast doubt on the existing point of view on this issue in the Soviet era.

Orthodox clergy, the first Russian revolution, the Holy Ruling Synod, Orthodox Russian Church, Renovationist movement, socio-political position, historiography, political orientation, constitutional democratic party, autocracy.

1. Bychkov S. S. Russkaja Cerkov' i imperatorskaja vlast': Ocherki po istorii Pravoslavnoj Rossijskoj Cerkvi (1700–1917 gg.) (Russian Church and Emperor Power: Essays on History of Russian Orthodox Church (1700–1917)), Moscow, 1998.
2. Gordienko N. S., Kurochkin P. K. (1969) “Liberal'no-obnovlencheskoe dvizhenie v russkom pravoslavii” (Liberal-Obnovlencheskoe Movement in Russian Orthodoxy), in Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, Moscow, 1969, vol. 7, pp. 313–340.
3. Zyrjanov P. N. Pravoslavnaja cerkov' v bor'be s revoljuciej 1905–1907 gg. (Orthodox Church in Struggle against Revolution 1905–1907), Moscow, 1984.
4. Zyrjanov P. N. 1989 “Cerkov' v period treh russkih revoljucij” (Church in Time of Three Russian Revolutions), in Russkoe pravoslavie. Vehi istorii, Moscow, 1989, p. 391.
5. Lavrov V. M., Lobanov V. V., Lobanova I. V., Mazyrin A. V. Ierarhija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi, patriarshestvo i gosudarstvo v revoljucionnuju jepohu (Hierarchy of Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarchy and State in Time of Revolution), Moscow, 2008.
6. Mitrofanov G. N. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi. 1900–1927 (History of Russian Orthodox Church. 1900–1927), Saint-Petersburg, 2002.
7. Odincov M. I. Gosudarstvo i Cerkov' v Rossii. XX vek (State and Church in Russia. XX Century), Moscow, 1994.
8. Orehanov G., ierej. Na puti k soboru. Cerkovnye reformy i pervaja russkaja revoljucija (On the Way to Council. Church Reforms and the First Russian Revolution), Moscow, 2002.
9. Platonov N. F. 1960 “Pravoslavnaja cerkov' v bor'be s revoljucionnym dvizheniem v Rossii (1900–1917 gg.)” (Orthodox Church in Struggle against Revolution Movement in Russia (1900–1917)), in Ezhegodnik Muzeja istorii religii i ateizma, Moscow, Leningrad, 1960, vol.4, pp. 103–209.
10. Pospelovskij D. V. Russkaja Pravoslavnaja Cerkov' v XX veke (Russian Orthodox Church in XX Century), Moscow, 1995.
11. Smolich I. K. Istorija Russkoj Cerkvi. 1700–1917 (History of Russian Church. 1700–1917), Moscow, 1996.
12. Titlinov B. V. Cerkov' vo vremja revoljucii (Church in Time of Revolution), Petrograd, 1924.
13. Fedorov V. A. Russkaja Pravoslavnaja Cerkov' i gosudarstvo. Sinodal'nyj period. 1700–1917 gg. (Russian Orthodox Church and State. Synodal Period. 1700–1917), Moscow, 2003.
14. Firsov S. L. Pravoslavnaja Cerkov' i gosudarstvo v poslednee desjatiletie sushhestvovanija samoderzhavija v Rossii (Orthodox Church and State in Last Decade of Autocracy in Russia), Saint-Petersburg, 1996.
15. Firsov S. L. Russkaja Cerkov' nakanune peremen (Russian Church before Changes), Moscow, 2002.
16. Florovskij G., prot. Puti russkogo bogoslovija (Ways of Russian Theology), Vil'njus, 1991.
17. Cypin V. A., prot. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi. Sinodal'nyj i novejshij periody 1700–2005 (History of Russian Orthodox Church. Synodal and Newest Period 1700–2005), Moscow, 2007.
18. Shishkin A. A. Sushhnost' i kriticheskaja ocenka «obnovlencheskogo» raskola Russkoj pravoslavnoj cerkvi (Essence and Critical ating of “Obnovlencheskij” Schism of Russian Orthodox Church), Kazan', 1970.

Moshnenko Aleksandr

Famine 1921–1922 led to the death of thousands of people. The Soviet government used this fact against the Russian Orthodox Church. On the basis of regional sources revealed the true extent of hunger in the Mari region. This event was the reason for the start of the campaign in favor of the confi scation of church property. The study described in detail the main stages of preparation, organization and implementation of this process in the Mari region. The author describes the formation and work of the regional committee for the implementation of the decree of the Central Executive Committee February 23, 1922. The author also describes the procedures canton commissions in individual parishes. The author gives a detailed description of the order of confiscation of church property in the May-June 1922. The study shows the character and content of the documents that were provided to local authorities, describes the procedure of removal of property in the parish, partially installed subsequent fate of the seized property. According to the materials of parishes revealed damage that was done separately taken the community of believers. Statistical data on the withdrawal values in the Mari region are shown in comparison with the general Soviet figures. Analyzing the response of believers to the current policy, the author comes to the conclusion that this campaign has not got wide publicity and generally calm was greeted population of the province. Such a reaction is understandable by severe plight of the population in conditions of famine of the early 1920s. Results of the study allowed the author to explain the circumstances of the campaign. It is rated as blasphemous method of helping the starving population at the expense of inalienable property of the Russian Orthodox Church

church property, Soviet power, famine of 1921–1922, decrees of the Soviet government, church-state relations, Mari Autonomous Region, cantons, famine relief, temples, Krasnokokshaysk

1. Pokrovskij N. N., Petrov S. G. (eds.) Arhivy Kremlja. Politbjuro i Cerkov'. 1922–1925 gg. (Archives of Kremlin. Politburo and Church. 1922–1925), Moscow, 1997, vol. 1.
2. 5 let stroitel'stva MAO (5 Years of Building MAO). Krasnokokshajsk, 1926.
3. Ivanov A. A. 2000 “Golod 1921–1922 gg. i konfiskacija cerkovnyh cennostej v Marijskoj avtonomnoj oblasti” (Hunger 1921–1922 and Confiscation of Church Values in Marijskaja Autonome Region) // Hristianizacija narodov Srednego Povolzh'ja i ee istoricheskoe znachenie: Materialy regional'noj nauchnoj konferencii. Joshkar-Ola, 23–24 nojabrja, 2000, Joshkar-Ola, 2001, pp. 163–164.
4. Kozlov F. N. Golod 1921–1922 gg. i iz’jatie cerkovnyh cennostej (Hunger of 1921–1922 and Removal of Church Values), in http://pravmisl.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=264/ (Date: 17.07.2014)).
5. Kozlov F. N. 2012 “Golod 1921–1922 godov v chuvashskom i marijskom krajah v kontekste gosudarstvenno-cerkovnyh otnoshenij” (Hunger 1921–1922 in Chuvashskij and Marijskij Regions in Context of State-Church Relations), in PolitBook, 2012, vol. 2, pp. 142 –156.
6. Poljakov V. A. Golod v Povolzh'e, 1919–1925: Proishozhdenie, osobennosti, posledstvija (Hunger in Povolzh’e, 1919–1925: Origins, Features, Consequences), Volgograd, 2007.

Starikova Elena

In the interwar period the Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Belgrade was one the most prominent centers for acquiring higher theological knowledge for Russian immigrants. More then 200 Russian immigrants studied at the Faculty of Orthodox Theology. Occasionally they were in the majority within the whole student population. Based on the material of the Archive of the Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Belgrade (minutes of the Faculty Council meetings, students’ files) this paper will present several aspects of the experience of Russian immigrants at the Faculty of Orthodox Theology. It will analyze variation in their number, the quality of the students’ life and the diffi culties they encountered. Special attention will be given to the first generation of Russian graduated students. Based on the students’ files of Nikolaj Nikolajevič Afanasjev, Nikolaj Mihajlovič Zernov, Leonid Georgijevič Ivanov, Konstantin Eduardovič Kern and Mihail Borisovič Maksimovič, the paper will provide information on the conditions of their studying in Belgrade. The forth-mention information affirm that Russian students achieved excellent risults despite economic hardship. It is not hard to notice their eff ort to maintain spiritual bond with the lost homeland forming student circles and studying History of the Russian Orthodox Church. In the appendix of the paper you will fi nd information about 69 graduated Russian students, as well as the marks of three Rissian students from the first generation of the graduated Russian students at the Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Belgrade (Afanasjev, Kern and Maksimovič).

Faculty of Orthodox Theology University of Belgrade, Russian immigrants-students, Serbia-Russia spiritual relation, Nikolaj Nikolajevič Afanasjev, Konstantin Eduardovič Kern, Mihail Borisovič Maksimovič, Russian student circle St. Joh

Puzovich Vladislav

The article deals with ecclesiastical polemics 1920–1930-ies, namely the prosecution of the Deputy Locum Tenens Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) in the pursuit of innovative ways as they pushed against him by the representatives of the «right» Church opposition. Discuss the content of these charges and their validity. With this purpose, analyses Church and political activities of Metropolitan Sergius, his attitude towards the reforms in the Church and to the Renovationist schism, nature allowed them to compromise with atheistic power. It turns out that part of reformism Metropolitan Sergius was originally close to the Renovationists, until ready to recognize «the white bishops», but after 1923 he transferred to this plan on a conservative position. At the same time, the Declaration of political solidarity with the Soviet government by the Deputy after 1927 was clearly resemble statements of the Renovationists. Like them, he began to practice the application of favor with the Kremlin Church leaders «canonical prohibitions», though softer. Made by Metropolitan Sergius and the secret cooperation of the hierarchy with the OGPU-NKVD, but tried to act in the Church the interests of the Church, as he understood them, unlike the Renovationists who would deliberately to help the godless authorities to destroy the Church from within. In General, Metropolitan Sergius was characterized by concern for the preservation of primarily external organizational forms of existence of the Church, which was achieved not without damage to its inner freedom and loyalty to the ideal of Church truth. This was the resemblance of sergianstvo Renovationism, but this similarity was not full.

Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate, Church-state relations, Renovationism, the Church’s opposition, the new martyrs and Confessors of Russia

1. Pokrovskij N. N., Petrov S. G. (eds.) Arhivy Kremlja. Politbjuro i Cerkov'. 1922–1925 gg. (Archives of Kremlin. Politburo and Church. 1922–1925), Moscow, 1997.
2. Venger A. Rim i Moskva: 1900–1950 (Rome and Moscow: 1900–1950), Moscow, 2000.
3. Zhuravskij A. V. Vo imja pravdy i dostoinstva Cerkvi: Zhizneopisanie i trudy svjashhennomuchenika Kirilla Kazanskogo v kontekste istoricheskih sobytij i cerkovnyh razdelenij XX veka (In Name of Truth and Dignity of the Church: Life and Works of St. Martyr Kirill of Kazan’ in Context of Historical Events and Church Splits of XX Century), Moscow, 2004.
4. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi: Ot vosstanovlenija Patriarshestva do nashih dnej, 1917–1970 (History of Russian Orthodox Church: From Renewal of Patriarchy till Our Days, 1917–1970), Saint-Petersburg, 1997.
5. Kosik O. V. 2000 “Iz istorii Vladimirskoj eparhii (1917–1923 gg.)” (From History of Vladimirskaya Diocese (1917–1923)), in Bogoslovskij sbornik, 2000, vol. 6, pp. 26–75.
6. Kosik O. V. Istinnyj voin Hristov: Kniga o svjashhennomuchenike episkope Damaskine (Cedrike) (True Warrior of Christ: Book about St. Martyr Bishop Damaskin (Cedrik)), Moscow, 2009.
7. Kostrjukov A. A. 2010 “Novye svedenija o zhizni i dejatel'nosti mitropolita Sergija (Stragorodskogo) v 1920–1930-e gg. (po materialam arhiva protoiereja Stefana Ljashevskogo)” (New Information of Life and Activity of Metropolitan Sergij (Stragorodskij) in 1920–1930-s Years (according to Materials of the Archive of Archpriest Stefan Ljashevskij)), in Materialy XX Ezhegodnoj Bogoslovskoj konferencii PSTGU, Moscow, 2010, vol. 1, pp. 312–316.
8. Mazyrin A., svjashh. 2012 “Podvig pervosvjatitel'skogo sluzhenija Patriarshego Mestobljustitelja svjashhennomuchenika Petra, mitropolita Krutickogo” (Feats of Service as First Hierarch of Patriarch Deputy St. Martyr Petr, Metropolitan of Kruticy), in Vorob’ev V., prot. (ed.) Kifa — Patriarshij Mestobljustitel' svjashhennomuchenik Petr, mitropolit Krutickij (1862–1937), Moscow, 2012, pp. 343–714.
9. Mazyrin A. (ed.) 2006 “Otvety episkopa Viktora (Ostrovidova) na pjatnadcat' voprosov OGPU” (Answers of Bishop Viktor (Ostrovidov) for Fifteen Questions of OGPU), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija II: Istorija. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi, 2006, vol. 3/20, pp. 136–147.
10. Mazyrin A. (ed.) 2007 “Poslanie brat'ev-arhiepiskopov Pahomija i Averkija (Kedrovyh) ob otnoshenii k politike mitropolita Sergija (Stragorodskogo)” (Letter of Brothers-Archbishops Pahomij and Averkij (Kedrovy) about Attitude to Politics of Metropolitan Sergij (Stragorodskij)), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija II: Istorija. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi, 2007, vol. 4/25, pp. 137–168.
11. Petrova T. V. 2009 “Poslednee sledstvennoe delo arhiepiskopa Feodora (Pozdeevskogo)” (The Last Case of Archbishop Feodor (Pozdeevskij)), in Danilovskij blagovestnik, 2009, vol. 17, pp. 34–79.
12. Safonov D. V. «Zaveshhatel'noe poslanie» Patriarha Tihona i «Deklaracija» Zamestitelja Patriarshego Mestobljustitelja mitropolita Sergija (“Testament Letter” of Patriarch Tikhon and “Declaration” of Patriarch Deputy Metrolopitan Sergij), in http://www.pravoslavie.ru/archiv/patrtikhon-zaveschanie3.htm.
13. Mazyrin A. (ed.) 2002 “«Sov. sekretno. Srochno. Lichno. Tov. Tuchkovu»: Donesenija iz Leningrada v Moskvu, 1927–1928 gody” (Top Secret. Urgent. Personally. To Comrade Tuchkov: Reports from Leningrad to Moscow, 1927–1928), in Bogoslovskij sbornik, 2002, vol. 10, pp. 362–385.
14. Firsov S. L. Vremja v sud'be: Svjatejshij Sergij, Patriarh Moskovskij i vseja Rusi: K voprosu o genezise «sergianstva» v russkoj cerkovnoj tradicii XX veka (Time in Destiny: His Holiness Sergij, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia: To Question of Genesis of “Sergianstvo” in Russian Church Tradition of XX Century), Saint-Petersburg, 1999.
15. Hondzinskij P. 2014 “«Pravoslavnoe uchenie o spasenii» arhimandrita Sergija (Stragorodskogo) i ego kritika svjashhennoispovednikom Viktorom (Ostrovidovym) i arhiepiskopom Serafimom (Sobolevym)” (“Orthodox Doctrine of Salvation” of Archimandrite Sergij (Stragorodskij) and Its Critic by Hl Martyr Viktor (Ostrovidov) and Archbishop Serafim (Sobolev)), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija II: Istorija. Istorija Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi, 2014, vol. 2/57, pp. 98–113.
16. Krivosheeva N. A., Mazyrin A. V. (eds.) “«Jeto est' skorb' dlja Cerkvi, no ne smert' ee…»: Iz materialov sledstvennogo dela svjashhennomuchenika mitropolita Kirilla Kazanskogo (1930)” (“This Is Grief for the Church, but not Its Death”), in Bogoslovskij sbornik, 2001, vol. 8, pp. 326–351.
17. Mazyrin A. (ed.) 2002 “«Ja idu tol'ko za Hristom…»: Mitropolit Iosif (Petrovyh), 1930 god” (“I Follow Only Christ…”: Metropolitan Iofif (Petrovyh)), in Bogoslovskij sbornik, 2002, vol. 9, pp. 376–424.

Mazyrin Aleksandr, priest

The renewing dissenting movement which arose in Russian Church in the 20th, unexpectedly was supported by Eastern Patriarchates — Constantinople and Jerusalem. Pursuing the political and economic interests, Eastern Patriarchs established the relations with renewal “Sacred Synod”, thereby putting canonical Russian Orthodox Church in an ambiguous position. Moscow Patriarchy sought to prevent further adventures of dissenters at the level of inter-church relationships in any way. Attempts to convince Eastern Patriarchs of illegality of renewal hierarchy and perniciousness of all forms of communication with them were made. For that purpose priests from the entourage of Perm bishop Pavlin (Kroshechkin) started a dangerous correspondence with Russian abbot Serafim (Kuznetsov) who lived in Jerusalem and had close relationships with Jerusalem patriarch Damian. The correspondence had been lasted since 1927 till 1931 but had no essential results. Abbot Serafim who took the side of Tychonoff clergy was not able to change the policy of patriarch Damian, continuing contacts with “obnovlents”.

Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchy, Eastern Patriarchs, renewal movement, Sacred Synod, bishop, priests, correspondence, Jerusalem, policy

Marchenko Aleksei, archpriest

Researches the problem of falsification of investigations by the NKVD during the «Great Terror» without the involvement of those arrested. Dominates the view, according to which the investigative and prosecutorial decisions were fabricated by means of tortures and cruel treatment to prisoners. At the same time, there is reason to suppose that along with this practice a huge mass of people was condemned without a call in for questioning, without a confrontation, etc. Investigative materials were falsifi ed as well as signatures of people of under investigation; solutions of «triples» were passing absentia. Facts that would directly confi rm such a hypothesis can be found in the fi rst place among the memories of the victims of mass repression. In general, there are two major factors that pushed the Bolsheviks leadership to the complete destruction of the Church and religion. First is that the Church and the faithful were perceived by the party leadership as a potential «fifth column», which destruction was of their direct task. The second factor was purely ideological — the Bolsheviks sincerely believed in socialism as an ideal social structure of society. So, religion didn’t fit into their model of an ideal socialist society. Tactic of continuous strangulation in 1920–1930 didn’t produce expected results. Thus decisive actions were accepted. The Church became one of main objects of the terror during mass political reprisals 1937– 1938 .Guilt of the clergy was very obvious for the NKVD. For the NKVD priest who didn’t waive of his rank, publicly acknowledged their hostility to Soviet power. Their guilt didn’t require evidence, requires only compliance with formalities.

mass repression, the investigating fraud, falsification, torture, the NKVD, the repression of the clergy, the memories of the victims of mass repression, extrajudicial powers, The Orthodox Church, Soviet society, class struggle

1. Beglov A. V poiskah «bezgreshnyh katakomb». Cerkovnoe podpol'e v SSSR (In Search of “Innocent Catacombs”. Church Undeground in USSR), Moscow, 2008.
2. 2008 “Vypiska iz protokola № 51 zasedanija Politbjuro CK VKP(b)” (Extract from Protocol 51 of Sitting of Politburo of Central Committee of VKP (b)), in Junge M., Bordjugov G., Binner R. Vertikal' bol'shogo terrora. Istorija operacii po prikazu NKVD №00447, Moscow, 2008, p. 57.
3. Golovkova L. Osobennosti prochtenija sledstvennyh del v svete kanonizacii novomuchenikov i ispovednikov Rossijskih (Features of Reading Cases in Light of Canonization of New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia), in http://pk-semya.ru/articles/l-golovkova-osobennostiprochteniya-sledstvennykh-del/.
4. Gorbachev M. S. Oktjabr' i perestrojka: revoljucija prodolzhaetsja (October and Perestrojka: Revolution Continues), Moscow, 1987.
5. Efimova I. A. 1991 “Nichego ne zabyvaetsja” (Nothing Is Forgotten), in Gurvich L. M. (ed.) …Imet' silu pomnit': Rasskazy teh, kto proshel ad repressij, Moscow, 1991, pp. 290–300.
6. Kazancev A. P. 2000 “Agent mirovoj burzhuazii” (Agent of World Bourgeoisie), in Kazancev A. P. V zagone, Verhnjaja Pyshma, 2000, pp. 78–83.
7. Kirillova T. A. 1999 “Nezabytoe” (Not Forgotten), in I. V. Dobrovol'skij. (ed.) GULAG: ego stroiteli, obitateli i geroi. (Raskulachivanie i gonenie na Pravoslavnuju Cerkov' popolnjali lagerja GULAGa, Frankfurt-am-Main, Moscow, 1999, pp. 355– 356.
8. Kudinov Ju. P. 1994 “Zagovorshhiki” (Conspirators), in Kirillova V. M. (ed.) Kniga pamjati: posvjashhaetsja tagil'chanam — zhertvam repressij 1917–1980-h godov, Nizhnetagil, Ekaterinburg, 1994, pp. 184–187.
9. Stepanov A. F. 2010 “«Bol'shoj terror»: 1937–1938 gg.: problemy izuchenija” (Big Terror: 1937–1938): Problems of Study, in Problemy istorii massovyh politicheskih repressij v SSSR. K 70-letiju Vsesojuznoj perepisi naselenija 1939 goda: materialy VI Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferencii, Krasnodar, 2010, pp. 98–111.
10. Tarasova O. 2005 “Delo ob utoplennom kolese” (Case of Sunken Wheel), in Politicheskie repressii v Stavropole-na-Volge v 1920–1950-e gody: Chtoby pomnili… Tol'jatti, 2005, pp. 204–207.
11. Hlevnjuk O. V. Hozjain. Stalin i utverzhdenie stalinskoj diktatury (Master. Stalin and Consolidation of Stalin Dictatorship), Moscow, 2010.
12. Hrushhev N. S. 1989 “O kul'te lichnosti i ego posledstvijah” (About Person Cult and Its Consequences), in Izvestija CK KPSS, 1989, vol. 3, pp. 128–170.
13. Shkarovskij M. V. Russkaja Pravoslavnaja Cerkov' v XX veke (Russian Orthodox Church in XX Century), Moscow, 2010.

Shchelkunov Anton

After violent anti-religious persecution of the Russian Church began to emerge in the period of the great Patriotic war. With the renewal of Church life was closely connected with the revival in the “Northern capital” liquidated by the Soviet authorities in 1928 spiritual education. The merit of recreation on the banks of the Neva theological school belongs, first of all, the Metropolitan of Leningrad and Novgorod Grigoriy (Chukov) — former rector of the Petrograd Theological Institute. The Lord has implemented a succession of new theological school with the old, destroyed in the 1920s, retaining many of the best of the old traditions revived in Theological schools. It was he who made the discovery in 1945, in the “Northern capital” Theological-pastoral courses. on September 28, the Leningrad Executive Committee took the decision to transfer courses part of the building of the former Petrograd Theological Seminary, and on November 22, 1945, a solemn opening of a new Spiritual school. General management courses belonged to the Metropolitan Grigoriy, who wrote a special provision about them, developed curriculum, picked up the teaching staff . Head of courses, taught 6 people, and studied 24 pupil, was Archpriest Nikolay Lomakin. July 1, 1946, the Holy Synod decided on the organization of the Leningrad Theological Academy and the transformation of the Theological-pastoral courses “Northern capital” in Seminary, which soon began to work successfully. In the theological schools of the city on the Neva Metropolitan Grigoriy sought to attract the best surviving after the repression of the Church staff that he largely succeeded. And significant role in the revival of the Academy and Seminary played pop experience Theological-pastoral courses.

Russian Orthodox Church, the Leningrad Theological-pastoral courses, theological schools, Metropolitan Grigoriy (Chukov).

Shkarovskii Mikhail

For the first time ever the letters of the first locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, the Hieromartyr Metropolitan Cyril (Smirnov), written in the last years of his life, to the Confessor Iraida Tikhova are published on the base of the handwritten originals from the archive fund of the Hieromartyr Archbishop Seraphim (Samoilovich), stored in the Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox University of Humanities.

The Russian Orthodox Church, the persecution against the Church, the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, the “right” Church opposition, the epistolary heritage.

Vorob'ev Vladimir, archpriest