PARTICIPATION OF TAMBOV CLERGY IN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION AND STATE DUMA ACTIVITY OF 1–4 CONVOCATIONS (1906–1917)

2018 ◽  
pp. 171-180
Author(s):  
Viktor LISYUNIN
Keyword(s):  
Poor People ◽  
Parliamentary Election ◽  
General Strategy ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Council ◽  
Election Process ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Voice ◽  
The Church

The analysis of participation of Orthodox clergy in the election process and State Duma activity of 1–4 convocations (1906–1917), and also attitude of the Russian Orthodox Church to carried out state reforms are presented. On a reasonable basis it is proved that general strategy of participation of clergy in parliamentary activities was planned at Tambov clergy congress in January of 1905 and it was resolved into following statements: peaceful progress, reforms without violence, preservation of dominating role of Orthodox Church with simultaneous liberation from state patronage, economic protection of poor people and laboring classes, development of education in Orthodox direction. The clergy had certain expectations towards activity of State Duma of 1 and 2 convocations, while during 3 and 4 convocations the voice of Tambov Eparchy representatives was unnoticed. Two deputies from Tambov clergy, priests P.F. Vozdvizhenskiy and M.F. Lachinov supported the authorities. Their inactivity is explained as the political inertia, and also it stood for objective reasons: village priest could not leave his parish for a long time. Among deputies there were representatives of Tambov clergy: metropolite of St. Petersburg and Ladoga Vladimir (Bogoyavlenskiy), synodical curator of missionary fellowships of the Tambov Eparchy I.G. Ayvazov, editor of the journal “The Voice of the Church” A.M. Spasskiy, former lecturer of Tambov Seminary. The evaluation is given to complicated relations between the church and the state, the result of which was the change of the Holy Synod body due to the initiative of chief procurator V.N. Lvov and Local Council of 1917–1918, in the work of which representatives of the Tambov Eparchy took part actively.

scholarly journals Protocol of the Penza Diocesan Congress of the Clergy and Laity

2020 ◽  
pp. 149-180
Author(s):  
Радомир (Роман) Владимирович Булдаков
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
The Political ◽  
General Tendency ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Church Organization ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Council ◽  
Political Events ◽  
The Church

В настоящей публикации представлен ранее нигде не публиковавшийся Протокол Пензенского епархиального съезда духовенства и мирян, который проходил с 25 апреля по 1 мая 1917 г. Он отражает общее настроение рядового духовенства и мирян Русской Православной Церкви начала XX в. на примере конкретной епархии. Пензенский Съезд проходил одновременно с аналогичными Съездами многих других епархиальных центров, чьи постановления получили своё развитие на Всероссийском Съезде духовенства и мирян в Москве и далее на Поместном Соборе Православной Российской Церкви 1917- 1918 гг. Вопросы, рассматриваемые участниками Пензенского Съезда, касались как общецерковных проблем, так и внутренних дел самой епархии; часть постановлений вошла в состав решений Поместного Собора. Количество вопросов, поднятых на Съезде, превышает два десятка и относится к самым разным сферам церковно-государственных и церковно-общественных отношений, а также к внутренним преобразованиям самой Церкви, одновременно олицетворяя общую тенденцию к Её обновлению и являясь следствием этих перемен. Но среди них важнейшими, по мнению делегатов Съезда, считались вопросы об отношении к происходящим в стране политическим событиям и о поэтапной реформе церковной организации, начиная с прихода и заканчивая уровнем Поместной Российской Церкви. This publication presents the previously unpublished Protocol of the Penza Diocesan Congress of the Clergy and Laity, which took place from April 25 to May 1, 1917. It reflects the general mood of ordinary clergy and laity of the Russian Orthodox Church at the beginning of the 20th century by the example of a specific diocese. The Penza Congress was held simultaneously with similar Congresses of many other diocesan centers, whose resolutions were developed at the AllRussian Congress of Clergy and Laity in Moscow and further at the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1917-1918. The issues considered by the participants of the Penza Congress concerned both general church problems and the internal affairs of the diocese itself; some of the decisions were included in the decisions of the Local Council. The number of issues raised at the Congress exceeds two dozen and relates to the most diverse spheres of church-state and church-social relations, as well as to the internal transformations of the Church itself, at the same time embodying the general tendency towards Her renewal and being a consequence of these changes. But among them the most important, in the opinion of the Congress delegates, were the questions about the attitude to the political events taking place in the country and about the gradual reform of church organization, from the parish level to the level of the Local Russian Church.

scholarly journals Preparations for 1917–18 Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in Kostroma eparchy

2019 ◽  
pp. 44-48
Author(s):  
Dmitriy V. Kashin (Therapont)
Keyword(s):  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Electoral Process ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Council ◽  
The Church

The article deals with the events of the summer of 1917 related to the elections of members of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church from Kostroma eparchy. Information is given about the election procedures stipulated by "Regulations on Convening the Local Council of All Russia Orthodox Church" on three levels – parish, deanery and diocesan. Basing on publications of the church press, the course of the diocesan electoral meeting in August 1917 is reconstructed: the preliminary meeting of the participants and making the list of candidates (August 8), elections of members of the Local Council and their deputies (August 9). We inform about the number of votes cast for certain candidates and the constructive and democratic nature of the electoral process. The author emphasises that negative reviews do not reflect the actual circumstances and can be explained by subjective factors. A list of members of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church (1917-1918) from Kostroma eparchy is given.

scholarly journals Patriarch Kirill and Ukraine

2013 ◽  
pp. 181-186
Author(s):  
Anatolii M. Kolodnyi
Keyword(s):  
Modern Technology ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Election Campaign ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Second Person ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Council ◽  
The Church

Without some special sensations in Moscow, the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church elected some three years ago Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad. Of the 702 delegates of the Local Council, 508 voted for him, and the entire Ukrainian delegation, which was about 27% of the voters, was considered by him. Contributed to the coming to power in the Church of this, as it is called in Moscow, "ecclesiastical tobacco-vodka billionaire" acquired authority as a second person of the ROC, support of Russian power and controversy in the camp of opponents. In the days of Patriarchal localization, Cyril managed to propyate himself in various forms and at different ends of the Moscow Church, to use television and radio for this purpose. The election campaign was conducted according to all the rules of modern technology.

scholarly journals Problems of Misionarity in the Works and Decisions of the Local Council of 1917-1918

2020 ◽  
pp. 226-242
Author(s):  
Сергей Александрович Пименов
Keyword(s):  
Past Century ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Detailed Consideration ◽  
Local Council ◽  
Church Mission ◽  
The Past ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Church

Поместный Собор 1917-1918 гг., имеет для истории Русской Православной Церкви огромное значение, т. к. несмотря на прошедший век, отделяющий нас от событий той эпохи, его роль не до конца осмыслена и оценена. Его наследие нуждается в серьезном и вдумчивом исследовании, а многие из идей, высказанных тогда, были бы полезны и востребованы сегодня. Одна из основных проблем, которая была поставлена на повестке заседания Поместного собора 1917-1918 гг. - это Миссионерская деятельность Церкви. Начиная с XVIII в. этот вопрос стаял в России краеугольным камнем, т. к. в церковной миссии ощущался явный упадок. Это было связано, прежде всего, с тем, что Церковная миссия не имела централизованной организации, с помощью которой бы данная деятельность носила бы не эпизодический, а регулярный характер. Целью данной статьи является подробное рассмотрение миссионерской проблематики в работах и решениях Поместного Собора 1917-1918 гг. В ходе исследования автор выделяет проблемы Православной Миссии в России в нач. XX в., проводит анализ основных документов и постановлений Собора, относящихся к данной тематике, и ставит вопрос об их жизнеспособности на сегодняшний день. The local Council of 1917-1918 is of great importance for the history of the Russian Orthodox Church. Despite the past century separating us from the events of that era, its role is not fully understood and appreciated. His legacy needs serious and thoughtful research, and many of the ideas expressed then would be useful today. One of the main problems that was put on the agenda of the meeting of the local Council of 1917-1918 is the Missionary activity of the Church. Since the XVIII century this question had bacame the cornerstone in Russia because the Church’s mission became noticeable decline. This was due to, first of all, the fact that the Church mission did not have a centralized organization, with the help of which this activity would be not episodic, but regular. The aim of this article is a detailed consideration of missionary issues in the works and decisions of the local Council of 1917-1918. In the course of the study, the author highlights the problems of the Orthodox Mission in Russia in the early XX century, analyzes the main documents and resolutions of the Council relating to this topic, and raises the question of their viability today.

scholarly journals ALGORITHM FOR PROCLAIMING AUTOCEPHALY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-17
Author(s):  
Andrii Kobetiak
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Churches ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Church Life ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Church Organizations ◽  
The Church ◽  
Current Stage

The article analyzes the process of system formation of the structure of Ecumenical Orthodoxy at the current stage. Church life is a dynamic process. The Church is constantly moving forward and has to respond to social demands and problems. It is determined that the institution of autocephaly went through a difficult path of formation, however, even today there is no clear regulated mechanism for the acquisition of autocephalous status by the new Local Church. It has been proven that a number of national churches, such as Montenegro, Macedonia and Belarus, have been defending their own church independence for a long time. However, due to external political-ecclesiastical pressure and the lack of an algorithm for the autocephalization process, they cannot acquire an independent status. In addition, it has been established that such "daughter" churches as Macedonian and Ukrainian are much older than their own kyriarchal patriarchates (Serbian and Moscow). The study found that an obvious violation of canonical rules is the presence of two jurisdictions (two canonical bishops) in the same territory. It has been proven that such a situation exists in a number of countries, such as the United States, where a number of churches in the diaspora of different jurisdictions operate in parallel. A similar situation has already formed in Ukraine. Two significant church organizations operate simultaneously. It has been proven that due to the pressure and reluctance of the mother churches to release the subsidiary churches from the field of influence and their own canonical territory, a similar situation could potentially occur in Montenegro, Macedonia and Belarus. As in Ukraine, some of the parishes will move to the newly created autocephalous church, for example, the Belarusian one, and some will remain loyal to the Russian Orthodox Church. However, it has been established that the coexistence of different mutually recognized Local Churches on the same territory contradicts a number of canons and traditions of the Orthodox Church. The article proves that the Conciliar fullness of the church does not justify such a status of churches, however, in general, the phenomenon of parallel jurisdictions is justified by the time and public demand of the population of different countries, as well as by the political situation. The Grand Council of Crete has not found a compromise solution for an authorized resolving of the problem of the diaspora and "parallel jurisdictions". The article establishes that institutional disputes between Local Churches related to borders and "canonical territory" and the proclamation of new Local Churches in autocephaly status can be resolved only by a conciliar way and with the participation of all Orthodox hierarchs. Existing approaches to solving the "temporary" problem of "parallel jurisdictions" have led to the incorporation of existing non-canonical entities into recognized churches. It has been proved that only the autocephalous system is a unanimously accepted version of the existence of Ecumenical Orthodoxy. Thuse, the striving of a number of national churches for their recognition and independence is just. Therefore, further scientific explorations of autocephalous topics and the canonical work of the holy fathers will complement the study.

Return of the Moscow Theological Academy to the walls of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra in 1948

2019 ◽  
pp. 78-103
Author(s):  
Алексей Константинович Светозарский
Keyword(s):  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Historic Buildings ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Spiritual Education ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Long Time ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Church ◽  
The Trinity

В настоящей статье читатель узнает об истории возобновления богословской и духовной жизни Московской духовной академии в стенах Троице-Сергиевой Лавры. Постепенно, шаг за шагом в ведение Церкви были переданы исторические здания Московской духовной академии. Во многом благодаря дипломатическому таланту Святейшего Патриарха Алексия, многочисленные письма с просьбами и ходатайствами в Совет по делам Русской Православной Церкви, возглавляемый Г. Г. Карповым, были удовлетворены. Однако это далось не просто. После встречи трёх иерархов нашей Церкви - митрополитов Сергия (Страгородского), Алексия (Симанского) и Николая (Ярушевича) - с главой правительства СССР И. В. Сталиным начался процесс воссоздания системы духовного образования. Но довольствоваться помещениями Новодевичьего монастыря из-за возрастающего количества студентов долго не получилось. Со временем сложилась благоприятная обстановка для возвращения Московской духовной академии в келью преподобного Сергия. Сложностям процесса передачи исторических зданий и посвящена данная статья. In this article the reader will learn about the history of the resumption of theological and spiritual life of the Moscow Theological Academy within the walls of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. Gradually, step by step, the historic buildings of the Moscow Theological Academy were handed over to the Church. Largely due to the diplomatic talent of His Holiness Patriarch Alexis, numerous letters of request and petition to the Council on the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, headed by G. G. Karpov, were granted. However, this was not easy. After three hierarchs of our Church - Metropolitans Sergii (Stragorodskii), Alexii (Simanskii) and Nikolai (Yarushevich) - met with the head of the USSR government, Stalin, the process of recreating the system of spiritual education began. But it was not possible to be content with the premises of Novodevichy monastery due to the increasing number of students for a long time. Eventually, the conditions were favourable for the return of the Moscow Theological Academy to the cell of the Venerable Sergius. The complexities of the process of transferring the historic buildings are the subject of this article.

scholarly journals Question of the Composition of the Local Council in the 1906 Predsobornoe Prisutstvie

2021 ◽  
pp. 144-155
Author(s):  
Владислав Иванович Пшибышевский
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Controversial Issue ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Council ◽  
The Church

Целью исследования является анализ дискуссий первого предсоборного органа - Предсоборного Присутствия 1906 г. по вопросу о составе Поместного Собора, состоявшегося в 1917/18 гг. Этот вопрос был одним из главных в ходе дискуссий о желательных преобразованиях в жизни Церкви. Естественно, что участниками Всероссийского Священного Собора должны были стать лучшие представители всех уровней. Решения по столь неоднозначному вопросу были приняты не вдруг. Данное исследование привело к выводу, что участники Присутствия разошлись между собой при обсуждении состава Собора: одним он представлялся чисто епископским, а решения его следовало просто сообщить всей Церкви; другие же, которых в исследуемое время было большинство, писали о том, что такое величественное событие, как Поместный Собор Российской Православной Церкви, должно представлять все уровни общества, дабы принятые на нём решения не были односторонними и затрагивали все проблемные стороны жизни Церкви. Итоги работы Присутствия подвигли Святейший Синод официально, за подписью императора опубликовать расширенное и дополненное Положение о составе Собора. Оно было отредактировано Предсоборным Советом в 1917 г. но в своей основе явилось основополагающим для формулировок Положения 1917 г., регламентирующего созыв и деятельность Поместного Собора 1917/18 гг. The article is devoted to a subject that is still full of secrets and unexpected facts. The problem of the composition of the expected Local Council was one of the main ones at the beginning of the 20th century in discussions about desirable reform in the life of the Church, the apogee of which was to be the All-Russian Holy Council. Naturally, the participants of the proposed Council were to be the best representatives of all levels. The decision on such a controversial issue was not taken suddenly. The purpose of the study is to analyze the discussions of the first pre-conciliar - Predsobornoe Prisutstvie of 1906 on the composition of the long-awaited Local Council. This study led to the conclusion that the participants of the Prisutstviya differed during the discussion of the composition of the Cathedral, for some it was presented as purely episcopal, the decisions of such a Council should only be communicated to the entire Church. Others, who were in the majority at the time under study, wrote about what a majestic event like the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church must represent all levels of society, so that the decisions taken there, are not one-sided and would address all the troubled aspects of the Church’s life. The results of the Prisutstviya work inspired the Holy Synod, with the Emperor’s signature, to publish an expanded and amended Statute on the composition of the Council, which will be edited by the Pre-Conciliar Council in 1917, but in its basis will be fundamental for the wording of the Regulation of 1917, regulating the convening and activity of the Local Council hundred years ago.

scholarly journals Minister of Confessions A.V. Kartashev and confessional policy of the Provisional Government

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 843-885
Author(s):  
Andrey N. Egorov
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Party ◽  
Church And State ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Local Council ◽  
Short Period ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Church

The article considers the views of A. Kartashev, an outstanding theologian, Minister of Confessions of the Provisional Government, on relationship between church and state in Russia and the measures he proposed in order to reform them. What Kartashev advocated was not the complete separation of church and state, but rather such a “growing distance” between them which would give the Russian Orthodox Church independence and would allow the state to be secular rather than unilaterally confessional. During the short period when the Ministry of Religious Confessions was working, Anton Kartashev tried to be less involved into church administration, defended the interests of the religious department in the government, and supported a number of proposals from the Local Council. Kartashev began to implement the legal registration of the multi-confessional state system and consistently defended the interests of the Orthodox Church in other ministries and government departments. He gradually moved away from the doctrinal guidelines of the Provisional Government on the separation of church and state and became inclined to strengthen the influence of the church in the life of society, seeing its activities as a guarantee of the spiritual salvation of Russia. This approach did not coincide with the ideas about the role of the church in the life of society which had developed in liberal and socialist circles of that time and led to a discrepancy between the declarations of the Provisional Government and the activities it carried out in the church sphere. The article considers the reasons why Kartashev was able to pursue his line of confessional policy. The most important of these reasons was that neither the Provisional Government nor the Constitutional Democratic Party or the Socialist Revolutionary Party considered the problems of church-state relations a priority. They treated such problems in the context of general problems of the democratic transformation of Russia and attributed the right to solve them to the Constituent Assembly. It is emphasized that in the tense atmosphere of 1917 neither the Provisional Government nor the Russian Orthodox Church wanted to conflict with each other. In this situation, the compromise policy of Anton Kartashev suited both sides and softened the negative attitude of the church circles towards the activities of the Provisional Government.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document