Search

The death of Russian dissident Alexey Navalny in a far-northern colony after three years of imprisonment was declared a martyrdom by the Russian opposition, reflecting the sentiments of a part of Russian society. This unexpected reference to martyr narrative by a largely secular and anti-clerical opposition has set a significant precedent when religious discourse is instrumentalized not only by official propaganda but also by its critics. The authors posit that the construction of a martyr narrative is deeply political, being a part of contemporary ideological war. This article argues that Alexey Navalny's death and its subsequent sacralization by opposition figures represent a significant moment in contemporary Russian politics. By adopting religious narratives and symbols, the opposition not only mobilizes support but also challenges the regime's monopoly on ideological and religious discourse. However, this strategic use of martyrdom carries inherent contradictions, reflecting the opposition's ambivalent relationship with religion and the Russian Orthodox Church. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Ukrainian parliament's 2024 law banning the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP) marks a significant conceptual and strategic recalibration of the Russian Orthodox Church's (ROC) geopolitical culture. The framework of the "Russian world" project, which asserted a shared civilizational identity between Russia and its Orthodox neighbors, is increasingly untenable amidst the war with Ukraine and splits in the Orthodox world. In response, the ROC has pivoted towards global outreach, notably expanding into Africa. This move aligns with Russia's broader geopolitical strategy, which frames Russia as a defender of multipolarity and traditional values against Western influence. However, the ROC's attempt to adopt a global stance and reimagine itself as a universal church, rather than a pillar of the "Russian civilization", faces ideological and geopolitical challenges, as explored in the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bylye Gody is the property of Cherkas Global University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article is dedicated to theoretical and practical aspects of how the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) implements is social projects working with foreign labor migrants on the territory of the Russian Federation. The role of the Church is evaluated simultaneously through analyzing the practice of implementing projects for sociocultural adaptation of migrants, which take place under the aegis and with the participation of ecclesiastical institutions. The main research problem of the article is to fund out whether church bodies are ready to work with labor migrants and to evaluate their effectiveness. The study relies on analyzing church-state agreements and ecclesiastical documents on migration and related issues. This made possible defining the legal boundaries for the activities of Orthodox religious associations working in the field of sociocultural adaptation of foreign labor migrants. Critical documentary analysis contributed into characterizing the official position of the Church and the positions of Orthodox activists and representatives of intelligentsia. To identify conflicting opinions the research implied analysis of two opposite positions on the issue of migration: nationalists, who intend to make Orthodoxy the property of the Russian ethnic nation, and supporters of unlimited proselytism. Our vision of grassroots social work with migrants resulted from a qualitative analysis of network data related to social projects of the Orthodox community, as well as from participant observation done by one of the authors who took part in one of such projects. The study concludes that the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church in the sphere of sociocultural adaptation of foreign labor migrants should be evaluated as insufficiently effective to become stimulating both for strengthening the Orthodox community and for increasing its social capital.

The article introduces a new document of the GPU Secret Department on the instigating the Renovationist split in the Russian Orthodox Church. This is the postal telegram No. 24968s of May 29, 1922, signed by the Head of the Secret Operative Directorate of the GPU V. R. Menzhinsky, and by the Head of the Secret Department of the GPU T. P. Samsonov. This telegram is part of a set of directives issued by the GPU, which initiated and regulated the church schism in 1922. Earlier, the researchers at Orthodox Svyato-Tikhonovsky University of Humanities published two directives of the GPU Secret Department, sent out from Moscow in the summer and fall of 1922. The documents describes the specific role that the GPU played in the beginning of the campaign to instigate split in spring-summer of 1922. In particular, the telegram deals with the actions of the GPU at the very beginning of the campaign. The document shows that by this time, the leadership of the GPU had already developed two main strategies, which they then adhered to steadily during the campaign: complete secrecy and strict control over the actions of the renewed clergy. The publication also describes specific measures taken by the GPU in Siberia immediately after receiving the Circular of May 29, 1922: the establishment of the renovationist Siberian church department ("Sibtserkov’") and the trials of the Tomsk Vicar and Barnaul Archbishop Victor (Bogoyavlensky) and the Irkutsk and Verkholensk Archbishop Anatoly (Kamensky).

Kalach caves dug out in a chalk relic in the town of Kalach, Voronezh region, is an underinvestigated historical and cultural heritage site. The archive materials found in the funds of RSHA, together with evidence of local people, provide insight into the final period of the cult dungeon functioning in the late XIX – early XX centuries. At that time the rural community of Kalach made an attempt to establish there an official orthodox cave monastery. On the 11th of August, 1885, residents of Kalach authorized peasants Ivan Serjakov, Matvey Bezugly and Gavriil Lebedinsky to solicit different authorities for a monastery foundation. The community also allocated 1300 roubles and 36 dessiatines of land area for the monastery arrangement. The rural community request was examined in Voronezh Ecclesiastical Consistory, Voronezh Provincial Government, Voronezh Provincial Peasant Council and in the Second (Peasant) Senate Department. The attempt was not successful, it encountered resistance of authorities. Meanwhile the cave diggers managed to accommodate the caves and arrange regular divine service by the local secular clergy. Functioning of the caves as a sacred locus for the rural community was interrupted by revolution events of early XX century. At present Kalach caves are put on Russian cultural heritage register.

The article analyzes the ideas of the Orthodox clergy about cemeteries related to their management, profitability, improvement, assessments of the state of this space, determined by the location of the cemetery in system of values, symbolic meanings and normative emotional models. The study revealed a contradiction between the appearance of the vast majority of urban and rural cemeteries and the idea of the clergy about the "proper" in this area. It was considered what was included in the concept of an “ideal cemetery” and what obstacles prevented the realization of this ideal: an inefficient administrative system, a lack of funds and enthusiasm from both the clergy and parishioners, especially in rural areas, as well as conflicting ideas about the attitude towards cemeteries in church ideology and in traditional folk culture, which was characterized by fear of the “unclean place” and the desire to avoid the dead, which was not typical for the clergy, better educated and professionally accustomed to the spectacle of ordinary death. In addition, the measures of the clergy to introduce the “correct order” of the organization of the cemetery space were studied: criticism of the inaction of the clergy, attempts to influence the priests through religious and value motivation and practical recommendations for bringing the appearance of the cemeteries in line with the “proper”; coupled with this, preaching to the people with various ways of argumentation and forms of emotional impact, including appealing to the idea of Christian virtue and duty, respect for dead ancestors and “kinship feeling”, arousing fear of possible punishment from above for neglecting the “holy place”, awakening national-confessional competitiveness.

Below is published a letter from the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) to Metropolitan Eleuthery of Lithuania and Vilna (Bogoyavlensky). The letter, written most likely in the second half of July or early August 1929, is an answer to the question about the situation in the Russian Church, as well as about the attitude of the hierarchy to the compromise course of Metropolitan Sergius. First of all, the Lithuanian hierarch was interested in the position of three authoritative archpastors. These were the Patriarchal Locum Tenens Metropolitan Peter (Polyansky), Metropolitan Kirill (Smirnov) and Archbishop Seraphim (Samoilovich). All these archpastors, now canonized, to one degree or another condemned the policy of compromises with the God-fighting authorities. However, the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens tried to smooth out the real situation. Thus, he presented Metropolitan Peter as his supporter rather than his opponent, referring primarily to the dubious testimony of Bishop Vasily (Belyaev). At the same time, Metropolitan Sergius considered his rights equal to the rights of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens. Metropolitan Sergius explained his disagreement with the compromises of Metropolitan Kirill and Archbishop Seraphim with personal motives or ignorance. According to the Deputy Locum Tenens, resistance to his compromise course is insignificant and is gradually fading. The introductory article and notes provide comments on the statements of Metropolitan Sergius.

The article is devoted to the problem of the conversion of non-believers of the Russian Empire to the Orthodox faith in the second half of the XIX century. These gentiles had to resist their society in particular, their families, or break social ties. Based on journalistic sources, the author reconstructs the activities of Maria Kosminichna Kabanova and Ekaterina Vasilyevna Melkova, who show examples of individual missionary service of women carried out in the 1870s-1890s in the Orenburg and Samara dioceses, respectively. The article highlights the ways in which missionaries carried out their activities and examines the features of their interaction with the structure of the Orthodox Missionary Society. Basing on the example of the missionaries’ service it is noted how important it was for the Russian Orthodox Church to organize shelters for the newly converted orthodox people so that they could safely establish in their faith. Because of this, the emphasis is put on the fact that the shelters created by the missionaries were not an artificial phenomenon, but arose in response to an existing need. M. K. Kabanova and E. V. Melkova indicated with the help of their service, which occurred at the same time, certain changes which took place in the society because of the Great Reforms. It is seen both through the tendency of the people to acquire the desire to serve the Church and the mission and through the newly opened possibility to change their social status of women.

The article examines the main directions, forms and methods of missionary activity of the Tobolsk-Tyumen diocese among the indigenous population of the North of Western Siberia in 1990 – 2010. The research was based on publications in the diocesan periodical press, the works of the Tobolsk Theological Seminary, field materials of the authors. The article examines the state of Orthodoxy among the indigenous population by the early 1990s, the specifics of the organization and implementation of the diocesan mission in the territories of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug (KhMAO) and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug (YANAO). It is shown that in the post-Soviet period, in the conditions of changing relations between the state and the Russian Orthodox Church, the restoration of its missionary activity and the expansion of the Orthodox space in the historically nurtured territories gradually took place. It is concluded that educational, apologetic, informational forms of work were the most common in the missionary activity of the Tobolsk–Tyumen diocese in the North of Western Siberia in 1990 - 2010. The fulfillment of socially significant functions by the diocese contributed to the expansion of the Orthodox presence in the territory. In the 1990s, the missionary activity of the diocese among the indigenous population of the North was limited due to insufficient material and financial situation, lack of personnel and premises for religious rites, parish work. In the 2000s, in the context of establishing stable ties with government administrations of various levels, missionary activity acquired a large-scale character. The article notes that the practice of the Orthodox mission has led to the development of recommendations for the organization of missionary work among the indigenous population, and the specifics of the activities associated with the remoteness and inaccessibility of the northern territories – to the emergence of new forms of missionary expedition.

The publication is dedicated to the reaction of the student of the Leningrad Theological Seminary, priest Vasily Zavodchikov (1924–2008) to the renunciation of religion and the Church, announced in December 1959, the Orthodox theologian, former professor of the Leningrad theological schools and former archpriest Alexander Alexandrovich Osipov (1911–1967). In December 1959, priest Vasily Zavodchikov wrote and sent an «Open Letter» to A. A. Osipov, in which he tried to explain that Osipov’s public departure from the Church was not only a betrayal of Orthodoxy, but also his deep moral error. The letter, emotional in form and not entirely literary, should be considered as an important historical and socio-psychological document that allows us to better understand the era of the «Khrushchev Thaw”, which became a time of new persecution for the Church. In addition, this publication presents materials regarding the renegadeness of A. A. Osipov, compiled by Father Vasily in 1999, and now also a historical document that allows us to evaluate the psychology of perception of what happened in 1959 by a clergyman who survived the times of the atheism and assessed Soviet atheism from the point of view of new, «post-Soviet» realities.

The publication introduces documents characterising the Vatican’s perception of religious processes in the occupied territories of the USSR that took place in 1941-1942. The main of them – “Memorandum on the Religious Situation in Russia” - was drawn up in the General Curia of the Society of Jesus (Jesuit Order) and sent to the Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs in May 1942. It presents a sketch of the information available to the Vatican about religious sentiments in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union. On the basis of this information, it is concluded that the anti-religious policy of the Soviet authorities had collapsed and that since the turn of the 1930s and 1940s there had been a religious revival in the USSR, witnessed by Catholic chaplains who had entered its territory at the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War. From the point of view of the author of the note, this provides a unique chance for the unfolding of a Catholic mission in Soviet Russia. The author puts forward specific proposals necessary, in his opinion, for the deployment of this mission. In particular, he proposes the creation of a special body to supervise missionary activity, as well as the involvement of lay people in mission.

Within their article, the authors consider the influence of church-religious and secular charity in the ethno-confessional environment of the Urals under the ongoing conditions of the First World War. Through their research, they have shown that there was clear interaction between the government and society in this regard, and that cooperation by representatives of ethno-confessional groups of the Urals were instrumental in helping the front, the needy, and the victims of the war. The institutional forms and social practices characterizing church-religious and secular charity in the Urals are considered from the perspective of the actor themselves, revealing the role of both collective and individual participants. The contribution of ethno-confessional public organizations of the Urals to the development of charity is also clearly shown; its main directions are characterized. The role of the Orthodox Church structures and congregations, Muslim and other ethno-confessional communities, women's associations, and individuals in wartime charitable activities is further considered as well. While the specificity of church-religious charity in the ethno-confessional environment is revealed, this charity included: material assistance, moral support to those in need, as well as measures aimed at solving social issues and maintaining stability in society. The authors, through their research, they have shown that through conditions of war, that the functions of previously existing charitable organizations expanded and that new ethno-confessional structures of charitable character appeared which responded to the challenges of the emergency period. The authors conclude that the ethno-confessional charitable organizations regularly interacted with local governments, public and state institutions, interactions which increased the effectiveness of their activities in the region during the period of the war.

The article discusses the outstanding Russian missionary, “Apostle of Kamchatka” Metropolitan Nestor (Anisimov) and his church ministry in Novosibirsk diocese (1956–1958) and Kirovgrad doicese (1959–1962) in the period of persecution of the Russian Orthodox Church under Khrushchev. The work focuses both on the Metropolitan Nestor’s active work to preserve parish communities and churches in Siberia and Ukraine and his relations with the authorized representatives of Governmental Council for Russian Orthodox Church Affairs under the USSR Council of Ministers. The author restores the unknown details of Metropolitan Nestor’s ministry in Harbin, including the circumstances of his meeting with USSR Marshall R. Y. Malinovsky, based on documents from personal files of the hierarch (Fund “Council for Religious Affairs under the USSR Council of Ministers”. State Archive of Russian Federation. Stock P-6991. L. 7. Dos. 83). Furthermore, the author analyses Metropolitan Nestor’s relationships with Patriarch Alexis I, on the one hand, and with V. A. Kuroedov — Chairman of the Governmental Council for Russian Orthodox Church Affairs, on the other hand. Soviet authorities reacted negatively to the activity of Metropolitan Nestor during the period of Khrushchev’s anti-religious campaign. The elderly hierarch was perceived by authorities solely as “a disguised enemy of Soviet power” and “a hardened monarchist”. These circumstances entailed negative consequences for the metropolitan’s future ministry in Novosibirsk diocese, from where he was removed. In addition, Metropolitan Nestor was subject of harassment in the Soviet press in the later period of his career — during the governance of Kirovgrad diocese. Unfortunately, the campaign of metropolitan’s discrediting, organized by the Governmental Council for Russian Orthodox Church Affairs both at the regional and national level, led to the deterioration of his health and largely hastened his death.

The article represents a part of the collective effort aimed to compile the biography of Metropolitan Nestor (Anisimov), which is being prepared on the basis of materials collected for the canonization of the saint. The period of His Eminence’s ministry at the Novosibirsk cathedra (July, 1956 — September, 1958) followed six months after his return from imprisonment in a correctional labor camp. On the one hand, the archpastoral activity of Metropolitan Nestor, a well-known missionary and Orthodox ascetic, theologian and educator, defender of repressed priests returning from prison, attracted numerous believers to churches, but on the other hand, it also caused discontent of the authorities. The studied materials fill in the missing pages of the archbishop’s biography and make it possible to exclude doubtful (or inaccurate) information about his ministry and moral appearance, which did not allow the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints to make a positive decision at the first hearing of the case on the possible canonization of Metropolitan Nestor in 2003. Based on new documents, the work was carried out taking into account the chronology of events, materials from published biographies of the hierarch and other sources, including biographies of the clergy and laity of the Novosibirsk diocese, which reflected the problems of the period under study. The materials from the archive of the Novosibirsk Metropolia (decrees, reports, correspondence of Metropolitan Nestor) have the greatest value for this study, which made it possible to analyze the conflicts that took place in the diocese and form a holistic view on diocesan life. An important result of the study of Metropolitan Nestor’s ministry in the Novosibirsk diocese is also the identification of features of the anti-church confrontation during the Khrushchev persecution, expressed in the destructive activities of the so-called “groups of Soviet believers”; their methods and details of provocations, as well as a general picture of the disorder that affected the fate of the Orthodox clergy are revealed. This work can serve as a basis for further research on the history of the Russian Orthodox Church in the twentieth century, including biographies of New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia during the repressions of the 1950s.

Introduction. The article considers the problem of overcoming the consequences of globalization in the context of informatization of society using the example of interaction between the state and the Russian Orthodox Church in the information sphere. The following methods were used in the study: system analysis, philosophical analysis, interpretation, comparison and synthesis. Theoretical analysis. The State and the Church, as active users of the information resources and technologies available today, have a significant impact on their development. Many hierarchs and laypeople, adhering to “protective” views, represented by an established political course, continue to participate in the media sphere. The participation of the Church and the state makes it possible to maintain political stability in the country. It is pointed out that, on the one hand, the spiritual and moral crisis of modern society is caused by informatization as one of the conditions for its development, but on the other hand, informatization permeates all areas of life and activity, both of the Church and the state, to such extent that neglecting its resources is impossible today. Conclusion. The characteristic features of the Church and the state which, with the help of information resources and technologies, are trying to resist the negative consequences of globalization and Westernization, are highlighted and described. The ways of solving these problems are outlined. It is emphasized that the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church and the state authorities are interested in consolidating eff orts aimed at resolving the numerous social contradictions that exist in the information space today.

This article is devoted to the review of the research and teaching activities of Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor Alexey Vladimirovich Sushko. By means of the analysis of the latest historiography, conducted in the vision of the problematic and biographical methods, the research provides the author’s analytical assessment of the contribution of this major academic specialist to the development of modern Russian historical science and higher education.

The article reviews the written sources of two large archives of the Chelyabinsk region, reflecting the activities of Orthodox parishes of large industrial settlements of the mining and processing Southern Urals during the years of revolutionary upheavals and the formation of Soviet power. The composition, features of the content, and information saturation of documents are revealed. Despite the limited information contained in the sources of the period under study, the documents described allow us to draw up an overall picture of the activities of Orthodox parishes.

The article focuses on a court case of the Erivan Uezd of the mid-19th century, involving a Molokan woman Lukeriya Korsakova. The lawsuit "Case of Lukeriya Korsakova's settlement among the Molokans of the Erivan Uezd, March 7, 1847–May 21, 1848" was initiated as a result of the woman's transition from Orthodoxy to the Molokan sectarianism, what was punishable by exile. The trial lasted from 1844 to 1848, and the case passed through several instances. The authors try to reconstruct the details and specifics of the case of the defendant Lukeriya Korsakova on the basis of archival documents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the beginning of Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine, numerous articles have been written about the reasons why the Moscow Patriarchate supports it and how the church is legitimising the aggression. The usual ideational suspects were named, i.e. russkiy mir, 'Holy Rus' and 'Moscow, the Third Rome'. In this paper I draw attention to an important yet overlooked concept which allows the church's leadership to present their support for the war as a noble act. I analyse how the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church understands justice in relation to politics, especially the international order and foreign relations. The goal of the paper is to reconstruct the justice narrative of the Moscow Patriarchate – its content, the context in which it appears and its role. The findings are based on interpretative discourse analysis of a sample of 403 documents retrieved from the official websites of the Moscow Patriarchate (2000–2023). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and all Rus, has correctly been seen as a staunch supporter of the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. However, explicit statements of support for the war are rare in his public sermons and speeches, and it is worth exploring the mechanisms of his support in some detail. The article presents an analysis of all the patriarch's sermons and speeches between February 2022 and February 2023 and shows how the patriarch uses references to history to nurture a worldview that makes the war both legitimate and necessary. Using Duncan Bell's notion of a mythscape, the author argues that Kirill infuses secular history with divine meaning in order to give indirect divine legitimation for the war in Ukraine. He further relates this to Stoeckl's contention that the Russian Orthodox Church's promotion of so-called traditional values functions as civil religion for today's Russia and suggests that Kirill's use of history nurtures this civil religion further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How effective was Soviet secularization and what is its long-term legacy? This paper investigates the lasting effects of Khrushchev's Virgin Lands Campaign (1950s) on the current level of Orthodox religiosity in eastern Russia using an original district (raion)-level dataset that combines historical and contemporary evidence. By employing various matching techniques and an instrumental variable approach, I identify significant effects of the Virgin Lands cultivation on diminishing the role of religion even 60 years later. Moreover, I demonstrate that the resettlement of Communist Youth League (Komsomol) members and the destruction of traditional social relations may have worked as key mechanisms that contributed to the legacy effects. This study offers one of the first micro-level empirical investigations into the impact of Communism-driven secularization, and contributes to the emerging inquiry into the historical legacy of communism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

That Putin's regime has been able to put the memory of the Great Patriotic War (GPW) to political use is hardly news to any observer of Russia. What is often overlooked, however, is that the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) has contributed to the instrumentalization of this memory by the Kremlin. In this article, I aim to bridge this gap. Drawing on an analysis of the ROC's commemorative activities, I reconstruct the specific, martyrological, interpretation of the GPW that it is forging. With sin, atonement, and glory as its central concepts, this interpretation invests the suffering and losses of the GPW with patriotic sense. Thus, it turns the politically problematic traumatic memory of the GPW into a politically useful one. Simultaneously, it is consistent with the triumphant cult of the GPW advanced by the Kremlin. It also perfectly suits the statist historical narrative focused on the continuity of Russia's past, which is crucial for the ideology of Putin's regime. Furthermore, this interpretation does not contradict the Soviet memory of the GPW that the regime relies on. Finally, in combining Orthodox Christianity with militarism, the martyrological interpretation of the GPW is highly suitable for the regime's political business of the day, which is waging its war against Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bylye Gody is the property of Cherkas Global University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Since the beginning of Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine, numerous articles have been written about the reasons why the Moscow Patriarchate supports it and how the church is legitimising the aggression. The usual ideational suspects were named, i.e. russkiy mir, 'Holy Rus' and 'Moscow, the Third Rome'. In this paper I draw attention to an important yet overlooked concept which allows the church's leadership to present their support for the war as a noble act. I analyse how the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church understands justice in relation to politics, especially the international order and foreign relations. The goal of the paper is to reconstruct the justice narrative of the Moscow Patriarchate – its content, the context in which it appears and its role. The findings are based on interpretative discourse analysis of a sample of 403 documents retrieved from the official websites of the Moscow Patriarchate (2000–2023). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The sequence and escalation of Russian–Ukrainian political and military conflicts since 2014, culminating in Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, have reopened interest in and debates on just war theory and practice in general and specifically in historic and modern Eastern Orthodox cultures and Orthodox-majority states. These debates have significant repercussions in areas like church–state and church–military relations in these cultures; ecclesial involvement in these conflicts has varied from war-justification rhetoric (in the case of the Russian Orthodox Church) to reiterations of the inherited traditions of ecclesial pacifism/condemnation of all violence (the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, a number of Orthodox Churches, clerical and theological networks, etc.). The Russian ecclesial involvements in the justification of war/military necessity and formulation of just war narratives have triggered divisions and antagonisms in the Eastern Orthodoxy. The development and course of the ecclesial conflicts involving Russian and Ukrainian Orthodox churches and parishes (and other Orthodox ecclesiastic bodies) will show whether Orthodox religious actors may begin to play a more significant role in the articulation and application of newly emerging trends in areas like the theology of just peace, just peace-making and Christian realism, Orthodox social ethics and the dynamic praxis of just peace-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of the religious life of Orthodox believers in Russia in the 20s – 30s of the 20th century (both in the general context and with regional characteristics) mainly examine various aspects of church-state relations, since this area is provided with the largest number of sources. However, informal communities of believers, such as brotherhoods and secret monastic communities often had more opportunities than parishes to continue religious life during this period. It became especially evident at a time when many churches and monasteries were already closed. In these communities, joint prayer was preserved, the sacraments were performed, the Holy Scriptures were read, sermons were heard, and spiritual conversations also took place. Therefore, for the history of the Russian Orthodox Church of the 20th century, the introduction into scientific circulation of materials devoted to such associations, despite the source study and historiographical problems, seems quite important. The article provides an overview of both Soviet and foreign, including emigrant, as well as post-Soviet historiography of the religious life of Orthodox believers in Russia in the 1920–30s: its methodology, main provisions, and possible periodization. The author traces the trend from the use of an extremely poor source base, and as a consequence — simplification in interpretations, to the emergence of an increasingly comprehensive analysis based on an ever-expanding complex of archival materials and other types of sources, although still far from complete. Particular attention is paid to research devoted specifically to Orthodox brotherhoods. The Alexander Nevsky Brotherhood (in Petrograd-Leningrad) and the Brotherhood of Bishop Makary (Opotsky), which operated in several cities in the northwest Russia, are examined in more detail, as the largest number of materials published for this region at the beginning of 2024 consider these brotherhoods. The sequence of introduction into scientific circulation of various types of sources related to the life and activities of these brotherhoods is traced, and a range of problems that remain relevant today is outlined.

The article examines the relationships between the two local Orthodox Churches — Russian and Antiochian — in the last quarter of the 20th century, on the basis of the documents from the State Archive of the Russian Federation introduced in the academic circulation for the first time. For decades, since the visit of Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and All Russia to the Antiochian Patriarchate in 1945, friendly and fraternal relations have been maintained and developed between the Churches. In the 1980s they have also been developing in a spirit of friendship and mutual understanding at the level of heads of the Churches, in the process of joint work of representatives of the Patriarchates in various international Christian organizations, theological and peacemaking conferences, as well as at the level of the activities of the representative offices of both Churches. Personal relations were formed between Patriarch Pimen of Moscow and Patriarch Ignatius IV of Antioch and All the East elected in 1979. The Antioch Patriarch visited the Russian Orthodox Church on official visits and personally participated in the celebrations in Moscow dedicated to the millennium of the Christianization of Rus’. Patriarch Ignatius’ support of the Moscow Patriarchate’s efforts to resolve the situation in Ukraine in the late 1980s was of great importance for inter-church relations. In the 1980s, the external church activity of the Russian Orthodox Church was headed by Metropolitan Filaret of Minsk and Belorussia who became Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate in 1981. Under him, attention to the problem of personnel for the external work of the Moscow Patriarchate intensified. The Moscow Theological Academy suggested postgraduate training for church diplomats and clerics, who after their studies were sent to serve abroad. The Metropolitan paid great attention to relations with the Antiochian Church, making numerous visits to Syria and Lebanon during this decade. The article emphasizes that the preservation of friendly relations between the Churches was facilitated by interstate relations. The Syrian government, officially positioning its political path as a path of socialist orientation, needed help of the USSR. Confronting the Western powers in the Middle East, the Soviet Union, for its part, regarded Syria led by President Hafez al-Assad as an ally. The main task of developing bilateral relations fell to the representation of the Moscow Patriarchate in Damascus, the Beirut metochion and the representation of the Antioch Church in Moscow, whose rector for many years was Archimandrite (and since 1988 Bishop) Nifon (Saikali), a friend of Russia and the Russian Church. The representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate in the Antioch Church had to carry out their mission in a difficult political situation, especially in the territory of Lebanon, where the Beirut metochion was repeatedly subjected to shelling and armed attacks during these years. On the basis of such unique sources as reports of representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church to the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, the article analyzes the eventful representative and pastoral activities of the Russian Orthodox Church in Syria and Lebanon, and also examines the forms of interaction and mutual assistance between representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church, clergy of the Antiochian Church, employees of the Soviet Embassy, and members of the Russian community. The celebration of the millennium of Christening of Rus’ in the Antioch Church was the decade’s final event. Despite the ongoing hostilities, it was held in Damascus and Beirut with the participation of Patriarch Ignatius IV of Antioch and the clergy of the Antioch Church, Metropolitan Filaret, the Head of the Department for External Church Relations, as well as clergy of various Christian communities, Soviet diplomats, and representatives of the Syrian and Lebanese authorities.

The religious life of Orthodox believers under the conditions of persecution in the 20th century, especially from the mid-20s to the first half of the 40s, has not been sufficiently studied. Many communities, including brotherhoods, were forced to go underground due to the repressive policies of civil authorities. This is associated with a number of problems in providing this topic with archival sources. The article examines the life of the Orthodox brotherhood founded in 1924 by Bishop Makarii (Opotskii), which existed in several cities in northwestern Russia until 1942. The source base was not only materials from state and departmental but also private archives, as well as the results of field research. The article is based on the principles of historicism, comprehensiveness and scientific objectivity; methods of the micro-historical direction are used: historical-genetic, comparative; oral history method – interviews. The study showed that the brotherhood was able to survive all the waves of persecution of the 1920s and 1930s. In the 1920s, it showed noticeable resistance to Cherepovets renovationism and carried out legal activities within the framework of what was permitted by the civil authorities. The main activity was education. In 1937 it became illegal. The principles thanks to which the brotherhood managed to maintain its functionality were identified: concern for the presence of leaders, maximum maintenance of communication regardless of location, mutual trust between members of the community. Thanks to this, the brotherhood was able to practice such forms of religious life as common worship, regular participation in the sacraments, reading of the Holy Scriptures, sermons and spiritual conversations. It seems promising to compare the brotherhood of Bishop Makarii (Opotskii) with one or more similar communities operating in the same period or on the same territory.

The study of the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the life of Russian society is an urgent task for Russian historical science. The solution of this problem requires a comprehensive objective study of the missionary activities of Orthodox monasteries in the second half of the XIX – early XX centuries. The contradiction between the insufficient knowledge of the missionary activity of women’s monasteries and the need to study it in order to obtain a holistic view and an objective assessment of this activity has become a research problem. The purpose of the article is to analyze the participation of women’s monasteries in the missionary activities of the church among groups of the Russian population of different confessions in the second half of the XIX – early XX centuries. The novelty of the article lies in the fact that the evolution of the establishment of nunneries is investigated; the main directions and forms of their work are characterized; factors that influenced the work of monasteries in the church mission are identified; the results of their missionary activities are analyzed. For the first time, summary statistics on women’s missionary monasteries are presented. The study was conducted on the basis of a systematic approach using the principles of objectivity and historicism, historical-genetic and historical-comparative methods. The author concludes to the conclusion that the activities of women’s monasteries contributed to the expansion of the church mission through the use of various forms of work with the population. Social and charitable activities were of great importance. The advantage of nunneries is the use of forms of work that are attractive to the population. This not only contributed to the solution of missionary tasks but also ensured the cultural and civilizational development of the population, influenced its religious and moral state. The results of the research can be used in the content of the academic disciplines “History of Russia”, “History of traditional religions of Russia”, in studies on the church mission, the history of Russian Orthodox female monasticism. The prospects of the research are to study the missionary activities of “non-native” nunneries, co-religionist nunneries, and women’s missionary communities.

The article provides a detailed description of archival historical sources about the life, economic activity and daily life of the monasteries of the Nizhny Novgorod diocese in the XVIII century. The relevance of the study is to expand the understanding of the information potential of insufficiently studied archival funds on this issue. The theoretical basis of the research is a combination of an institutional approach, the principle of consistency and a comparative historical method. This methodological set made it possible, by identifying and processing the sources, to establish that the transformations in the church structure radically changed the nature and types of historical sources containing information about the administration, economy and internal life of monasteries.

The proposed review of the monograph by D. V. Pavlov, dedicated to the study of the life path of Metropolitan Guriy (Egorov), compares different approaches to writing biographies of church figures of the 20th century. A conclusion is made about the optimal combination of scientific and journalistic methods of D. V. Pavlov when presenting the material. This format of elaborating historical descriptions allows both to interest the reader and to fully enable subsequent researchers to use the obtained scientific results. The review provides a brief plan for constructing the monograph, and also shows the volume of archival information resources used by the author and scattered across different parts of the territory of the former Soviet Union. Two interesting problems raised by D. V. Pavlov are examined. First is the consolidation of dioceses in the post-war period, associated with a shortage of bishops, and second, the author’s attempt to determine the type of bishop to which Metropolitan Guriy (Egorov) belonged. Special attention is paid to activities of the author of the monograph to promote his work in the scientific and public sphere, both on the basis of personal communication with readers and using modern information technologies. The awards that this work, published in 2021, has already received are listed.

The article relates the history of restoration of Smolensk Dormition Cathedral, which is an outstanding monument of Russian history and culture. The restoration process coincided with the period of Khrushchev’s persecution of the Russian Orthodox Church (1959–1964). The author focuses on the archpastoral activities of Bishop of Smolensk and Dorogobuzh Innokenty (Sokal), who governed Smolensk diocese in 1959–1964. He continued the restoration of Smolensk Dormition Cathedral which was initiated by his predecessor Bishop Mikhail (Chub). Repair and restoration work in the cathedral took place under the control of the economic department of the Moscow Patriarchate, Governmental Council for the Russian Orthodox Church Affairs under the USSR Council of Ministers and local authorities. However, the work was financed exclusively by the Smolensk diocese and Smolensk Dormition Cathedral. The author describes in details the results of large-scale repair and restoration work. These efforts made it possible to restore the historical appearance of the majestic church monument despite the opposition from the authorized official of the Governmental Council for the Russian Orthodox Church affairs and local authorities. The articles also analyzes the reasons behind the failed attempts of the authorities to close Smolensk Dormition Cathedral, which after the restoration was completed has become a destination for foreign tourists and the largest parish of the Smolensk Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church.

The article is devoted to the study of the history of the struggle of the Orthodox in Kazakhstan for the objects of worship in the 1920-1940s during the period of renewal schism in the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). The methodological basis of the work is the civilizational approach, the principle of historicism, the authors use a complex of general scientific and special historical methods of research. As sources, the normative documents on state-church relations and the materials of the business of local authorities and management were used. Documents from the regional archives of the Republic of Kazakhstan are analyzed. The task of the study is to study and identify the regional features of the renewal movement in Kazakhstan in the first decades of Soviet power and the position of ordinary believers in the years of the split. The Orthodox confession was one of the numerous in the republic, occupying the second place after Islam. The schismatic movement in the Russian Orthodox Church reached the regions of Kazakhstan and manifested itself in the confrontation between the "tihonovists" and the "renewalists". This struggle was most acute in the cities of Kazakhstan, where the church clergy switched to the side of the Renovationists. In the provinces and districts of the republic, the renewal did not find wide support among the Orthodox population. Most of the common people remained loyal to the ideas of Patriarch Tikhon. Archival sources testify to the political component of the schism and the formal support of the "renewalists" by local Soviet authorities in the 1920s. But in the 1930s, the anti-religious policy of the Soviet state led to the closure of religious sites, regardless of the communities' affiliation with any particular direction of the Renovationist schism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The escalation of ecclesial and religio-political conflicts since Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has further complicated the convoluted ecclesial situation in Ukraine and has been addressed in a series of sermons, formal statements and documents issued by senior Russian and Ukrainian ecclesiastical figures. Their ideological and theological rhetoric demonstrates the active participation of senior Russian Orthodox clerics in the justification of the Russian military effort which represents some radical ruptures in Eastern Orthodox ecclesial involvement in war-making and mobilisation. The Moscow Patriarchate's war-legitimisation stances and policies have major repercussions for the current debates on and reconceptions of the Christian just-war tradition in the frameworks of just peace, peacebuilding and reconciliation, as well as the potential key role of Christian religious actors in these processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 1921, the See of Saint Mark has been the sole canonical Eastern Orthodox Church serving the African continent. Alexandria allows presbyters from other Orthodox jurisdictions to serve immigrants of their nations, but under local Alexandrian jurisdictions. This practice of not having other Orthodox jurisdictional dioceses or bishops in Africa has helped eliminate the so-called 'diaspora problem' (Holy and Great Council 2016) in Africa. That was until December 2021, when the Patriarchate of Moscow created two dioceses in Africa, after Alexandria supported the 2019 autocephaly of Ukraine awarded by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Was this invasion done for ecclesiastical reasons or state politics? What caused Alexandrian clerics to leave their mother Church? Did the Moscow–Ukrainian war, schism and autocephaly cause this? Using textual and oral evidence, this study unveils the Russian state using their inherent religious-state model as the reason for Moscow's invasion of Alexandria, and the Alexandrian clerics having joined Moscow because of administrative challenges of their dioceses, long before the Ukrainian autocephaly and war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The construction of the Russian state has been closely linked with the development of the autocephalous Russian Orthodox Church. Russian identity is deeply rooted in Orthodoxy: Russian literature, music, architecture and philosophy all bear a strong religious mark. The birth of the Russian state is also tied to the concept of Moscow as the Third Rome. Over time, the head of the Russian state has been invested with this mission to preserve orthodoxy embodied in Russian statehood. The attempts of the state to politicise religious institutions or to use religious teachings for political gains are not a new phenomenon and are certainly apparent to Russian Orthodoxy, including in the context of the conflict in Ukraine. The disturbing absence of distance displayed by the Church authorities towards the use of force has isolated the Patriarch, but has also triggered discontent within the ranks of the clergy. Dissonant voices have spoken regardless of the pressure exerted to silence them. In the complex history of State—Church relations, the symphony between the temporal and spiritual powers has fluctuated from complete subjugation of the Church under the authority of the State to a more autonomous and independent Church. On the margins of this volatile relationship, Orthodox believers and movements have always emerged to challenge both. This article pays tribute to the long tradition of dissonant Russian Orthodox voices and attempts to demonstrate the continuity of this tradition in the context of the conflict in Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The translations of the Divine Liturgy into the languages of the indigenous peoples of the Russian Empire were created by Russian missionaries, primarily in the nineteenth century. Their objective was to prevent a mass exodus from Orthodoxy to Islam or paganism and offer the local population a more comprehensive understanding of Christianity. The article expounds on this phenomenon within the context of the ongoing debate regarding the translation of the liturgy into Russian and other languages. The article encompass the translation of sacred texts into the Komi language by St. Stephen of Perm and addresses the circumstances in the early nineteenth century when emperors issued decrees mandating the translation of the liturgy. A pivotal moment emerged with the missionary principles of the orientalist N. I. Ilminsky in Kazan, advocating for the translation of texts into the vernacular. Ilminsky proposed using solely the Cyrillic alphabet and resorting to borrowings from Church Slavonic when necessary. Slavicism within Christian terminology has been researched in liturgical texts in Abkhazian, Altaic, Buryat, Chuvash, Yakut, Karelian, Komi, Mari, Tatar, and Udmurt. The article also discusses the translation into Komi, highlighting the rivalries among translators in that context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal for Religion in Education / Religionspädagogische Beiträge is the property of Arbeitsgemeinschaft Katholische Religionspadagogik & Katechetik (AKRK) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 988, under the leadership of Kinyaz Viladimer, Russians accepted Christianity through the Patriarchate of Constantinople and entered a new phase in their history. With Christianity, the Russians were introduced to writing and, most importantly, to religious texts. At the same time, this religious conversion also led to the acceptance of the belief of chosenness, which had spread to Christianity from Judaism. Nestor, a Russian priest who lived in the 12th century, wrote in his work that although Russians were the last community to accept Christianity, they would undertake important missions in the future. He also attributed a mission to the Russian society by referring to the biblical passage that the feet will be the head and the head will be the feet. However, in the mentioned centuries, the Eastern Roman Empire was still the center of Orthodoxy. For this reason, the Russian Orthodox Church would remain for many years as a Metropolitanate under the Patriarchate of Constantinople. However, the increasing Ottoman pressure on Constantinople from the 1400s onwards created several historical opportunities for the Russians. In particular, the Byzantine agreement with the Pope of Rome in Florence in 1439 mobilized the Russian Church. Using this agreement as a pretext, Moscow severed its relations with Constantinople. In 1453, the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople, the center of the Orthodox world, opened a new page in Russian Theo-politics. Russian priests believed that Nestor's prophecy had been fulfilled and Moscow developed the concept of the Third Rome. Appearing in the 16th century, the Moscow-Third Rome concept soon became the ideological basis for the formation of the Moscow kingdom. In this article, the concept of Moscow Third Rome, which is one of the important turning points in Russian history, is analyzed through an analytical method. The background of the concept, the conditions that led to its emergence, its historical development and its reflections on the present day are emphasized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the issues of creation, functioning, and main directions of activities of parish guardianships of the Tobolsk Diocese in the second third of the 19th — early 20th centuries. The study is based on materials from federal and regional archives, as well as the “Tobolsk Diocesan Gazette.” It is noted that the organization of guardianships was part of the church reforms during the reign of Alexander II aimed at revitalizing parish life. The conclusion is drawn that the guardianships did not live up to the expectations placed on them. Despite their quantitative growth, parishioners preferred to allocate funds for decorating churches rather than improving the clergy’s standard of living. Even in the most affluent parishes, expenses did not focus on enhancing the priests' material well-being. The alienation of the clergy and laity, dissatisfaction of diocesan authorities with the possible loss of control over church revenues and expenditures, and priests’ fears that guardians might try to isolate them from parish affairs were reasons for this phenomenon. Nevertheless, the work of the guardianships prompted parishioners to rethink their rights regarding parish self-government and had a positive impact in this regard.

After the collapse of Communism, a major overhaul of the systems of religious governance took place in Bulgaria and Russia. Policies of liberalisation were pursued in both states which created conditions for the revival of religion and growth of religious diversity. This research article analyses the state approaches and policy orientations characterising the governance of religious diversity in Russia and Bulgaria in the post-Communist years as well as challenges to the fulfilment of religious freedom and religious equality. Using the lens of religious nationalism, it demonstrates that religious nationalistic tendencies are significant in both states when it comes to the governance of religious diversity. Furthermore, the analysis suggests that such tendencies are inscribed in a contradiction between constitutionally-established principles and nationalism-tainted practices when it comes to the treatment of some minority religions or/and groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 26 May 2011, the Russian People's World Council issued a document entitled The Basic Values: The Fundaments of National Unity. The document, prepared by the Synodal Department for Church–Society Cooperation, provided a catalogue of 17 traditional values whose general framework was constituted by a combination of freedom, unity, patriotism, family, and devotion. At that time, the Moscow Patriarchate considered religious faith to be the foundation of traditional values and it continues to do so. The defence and promotion of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values were also central in the Russian National Security Strategy (2015); this was the case in the updated version of this document as well, put out in July 2021. Furthermore, they have been the core of the Moscow Patriarchate's participation in the Council of Europe and of Patriarch Kirill's speeches about the war in Ukraine. Finally, on 9 November 2022, The Foundations Of State Policy For The Preservation Of Spiritual And Moral Values was approved. This framework permits us to understand the strict interplay between the Church and the State in the Russian Federation and to see why it is important to refer to the concept of post-secularism when talking about the role of religion in post-Soviet Russia. Proceeding from the Abstract, the present paper aims to analyse this interplay in a specific sector of visual culture: the cinema and television industries. Manuel Castells highlighted the relevance of cultural values in the age of information and the connection between the values and social mobilization that follows it. He pointed out that the Internet has become a way to render this connection predominant, inevitably leading to the development of social movements and networks that have a religious basis. This is unquestionably true; surveys conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (OJSC «VCIOM») and by Nevafilm Research confirm that a high percentage of Russians watch films not only at the cinema or on television (especially the older generations) but also on the Internet (as far as the younger generations are concerned). The importance of this market is also confirmed by the success of the cinema and TV distributor Orthodox Encyclopaedia (2005); in the words of the philosopher Sergei Kravets, who, commenting on it during an interview published in 2006 by the website Sedmits.ru, declared that the expression "orthodox cinema" can be understood as a way to express Russian culture. He asserts that "the fact that today Orthodox films have begun to appear on the central TV channels testifies that Russian film producers and viewers have apparently begun to be aware of themselves as Orthodox, to feel that they are bearers of a special Orthodox culture. [..]". At the same time, consideration should be given to the importance of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Minister of Culture's condemnation of films such as Matilda or Monastery. In addition, it is important to consider that, according to a survey conducted in 2022 by the Levada Center, Russian people consider television the most reliable source of information (54%). The long-term implications of this tendency may have very important effects, not only in terms of its objectives but also in terms of the consideration that, after the beginning of the war, many Western film distributors withdrew their licenses from Russia. This paper will analyse "the effect of religion on the institutional system, the regulatory environment of the media and the public sphere" by studying the features of films and TV programs distributed by Orthodox Encyclopaedia, their relations with traditional values promoted both by the Kremlin and the Church, how these have contributed to strengthening the interplay between the Minister of Culture and the Moscow Patriarchate, and the impact this process has had on Russian society and Russia's relations with the European and Western World in the 2005–2022 period. A list of the films and TV programs being discussed will be provided, and then statements about the project and reviews of the serials and films will be analysed. The analysis will be conducted mainly through the official sites of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Kremlin and by browsing the Integrum database. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vladimir Putin has taken up a religious discourse around the "Russkiy Mir" that defends the existence of a supposed identity-based, cultural and political unity in the post-Soviet space. By cultivating internal and external co-operation with the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), the Russian state presented itself as a guarantor and defender of traditional spiritual values. This article argues that while the sharing of religious values in the post-Soviet space is important, they are not a sufficient condition to enable a union around “Russkiy Mir” given that 1) the “spirituality” that the Church and political elites advocate does not reflect individual religiosity, but rather cultural proximity; 2) the relationship between the ROC and the national churches has shown signs of conflict; and 3) the concept of “Russkiy Mir” has come very close to the concept of “Holy Rus”, a project of transnational society that advocates a new way of making sense of identity in the Soviet space, where Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would form its core, and which has acquired irredentist meanings.

The article relates to the history of Smolensk Dormition Cathedral, an outstanding monument of the 17th–18th centuries, which played a pivotal role in the ecclesiastical life of Smolensk diocese (Russian Orthodox Church) in the second half of the 20th century. The author focuses on the archpastor activities of Mikhail (Chub), the Bishop of Smolensk and Dorogobuzh, who governed Smolensk diocese at the dawn of Khrushchev’s initial phase of the persecution of Russian Orthodox Church (1955–1959). Large-scale restoration of outstanding church monuments of Smolensk region was initiated by Bishop Mikhail. First of all it included Smolensk Dormition Cathedral, which required huge financial expenses and painstaking joint work of the church and state institutions. The author’s detailed description of the Cathedral repair and restoration process is based on documents both from church and state archives. Also the study analyses relations between Bishop Mikhail and Patriarch Alexis I, on one hand, and the official of the Council for the Russian Orthodox Church Affairs in Smolensk region, representatives of the USSR Ministry of Culture, and the economic department of the Moscow Patriarchate, on the other hand. The process of the Smolensk Cathedral restoration occurred on the backdrop of rapidly deteriorating church-state relations during the rule of N. S. Khrushchev. Nevertheless, Bishop Mikhail was able to carry out large-scale restoration plans despite the tension between church and state, and also despite opposition from the authorized official of the Governmental Council for the Russian Orthodox Church Affairs and local authorities. Unfortunately, the bishop’s activities carried negative consequences for his future ministry.

The article considers the process of conversion of the future superior of the Belogorsky St. Nicholas Missionary Monastery in the Perm diocese, Monk Martyr Varlaam (Konoplev) from the Old Believers into Orthodoxy in the second half of the 19th century. The author draws attention to the Archimandrite Varlaam’s extraordinary life path, which he went in the period before reunion with the Church of Christ. The historical information that describes his ambitions in the quest for the Truth indicates the personality’s spiritual profundity of this remarkable monk missionary. Being a well-read person in Scriptures and a contender for the pseudo-episcopal chair in the “Austrian” (Belokrinitskaya) Hierarchy, after a long search for the only true Church Father Varlaam made a decision to leave the schism and join the Orthodox Church, and became later a Superior of the missionary monastery. In order to detect the main factors that contributed Father Varlaam’s conversion to Orthodoxy, the author for the first time, based on autobiographical and historical data analyzes in detail the life path, religious experience, the influence of the environment and different circumstances that have contributed to a change in attitudes of the former Old Believer. The significance of the activity of Orthodox missionaries in overcoming the schism is emphasized. The author concludes that the conversion from the Old Believer to Orthodoxy on the example of Father Varlaam could be attributed to several factors, which one can divide into three groups depending on the source of the action: on the side of the Old Believer-schismatic — it is a genuine desire to find a salutary path, and active research of historical context of the problem of schism and fairness in finding answers to the key dogmatic questions of the Christian faith; on the side of Orthodox missionaries and Church — it is clarification concerning the truths of Faith with pastoral love and attention to Old Believers-interlocutors, giving them the opportunity to attend the Orthodox worship; and finally, from the side of the God — it is support by God’s grace in response to prayer requests for pointing out the paths to salvation.

The article analyzes the reasons for the growing interest in holy places, primarily Palestine, associated with Russia’s state policy, based on published sources. It also examines the forms and methods of educational work. In 1894, the Vyatka department of the Imperial Orthodox Palestinian Society was established in the Vyatka province to disseminate information about the Holy Land and support Russia’s activities in the Middle East. The department raised funds for the society’s work in the Holy Land and organized lectures on the history and activities of the society. Significant results were achieved through this educational work, including an increase in the number of members in the Vyatka department, particularly at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and a growing interest in the Holy Land. Additionally, in the second half of the 19th century, some representatives of secular and spiritual society in the Vyatka province visited Orthodox holy sites, primarily the Holy Land and Mount Athos, and left memoirs about their pilgrimage experiences. Thus, the remote Vyatka province became spiritually closer to the Holy Land in the second half of the 19th century.

Drug addiction is a complex spiritual, political, medical, social and legal problem. Trying to solve it, the state is developed an anti-drug policy that includes a possibility for religious organizations to participate in the prevention of non-medical drug use and the rehabilitation of drug addicts. In 2012 the Church approved a document “On the participation of the Russian Orthodox Church in the rehabilitation of drug addicts” and actively developing social work. The Decree of the President of the Russian Federation "On the Approval of the Strategy of the State Anti-Drug Policy of the Russian Federation for the period until 2030" calls on religious organizations to develop a position that will enrich the anti-drug ideology according to "traditional values" . This calls the Church the task of developing a theological argument about the dangers of drug use. In this regard, it seems relevant to analyze the theoretical and practical developments of the ROC in this area. The author of the article asks the questions: What are the legal and theological grounds for the ROC's approach to the problem of drug addiction? What anthropological ideas are used to describe the phenomenon of drug addiction? The first part of the article presents a systematization of theoretical ideas related to the topic of drug addiction, reflected in the church regulations of the ROC. The second part presents an analysis of the opinions of clergy and lay practitioners. The author comes to the conclusion that by developing its own approach, the Church remains in the field of the political, medical, legal aspects of the problem, which leads to the ideologization of the language in which the Church speaks about the problem.