scholarly journals Ruská pravoslavná církev a ochrana křesťanů jako směr zahraniční politiky

2021 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-38
Author(s):  
Maria Avanesova
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The State ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Church

The Russian Orthodox Church has become a significant actor in Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union. This text is dedicated to its role in Russiaʼs foreign policy, specifically to the topic of the Russian interest in problems and protection of Christians, which is one of the most essential parts of the cooperation between the state and the Church. Analyzing primary sources (state and Church documents), the author shows when and under what circumstances this topic became relevant to both actors, what role the Russian Orthodox Church played in this regard and how the topic of protecting Christians is used by the Russian regime today. The study shows that the interest in protection of Christians did not arise simultaneously on both sides and that it is connected mainly with situations where a threat for Christians is posed by unfriendly actors.

scholarly journals Stalin's Hollow Cross-the Russian Orthodox Church as a Tool of Soviet Foreign Policy

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
Jordan Hupka
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
World War ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Soviet Government ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Second World ◽  
The Church

It has been said that the Second World War saved the Russian Orthodox Church from extermination. Ever since the Revolution of 1917, the religious peoples of Russia were constantly persecuted by Soviet ideologists and politicians. Prior to Operation Barbarossa, in 1941, it seemed that the days of the Russian Orthodox Church, the largest religious institution in the Soviet Union, were numbered. However, the unique climate of the Second World War forced the Soviet government to end its war against the church. The Kremlin soon saw the Church as a useful tool to help aid in the re- occupation of Eastern Europe.

scholarly journals The concept of "religious cult": scientific and legal aspects

2006 ◽  
pp. 73-79
Author(s):  
Olena V. Katunina
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
The State ◽  
Communist Regime ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Religious Cult ◽  
Set Up

During the Second World War, two new government bodies were established in the Soviet Union to deal with religious communities: on September 14, 1943, the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church was formed, and on May 19, 1944, the Council for Religious Cults. Their formation was linked to the liberalization of Stalin's policy on the church, which supported the state in its fight against fascism. The creation of two independent structures was also due to the fact that the communist regime paid special attention to cooperation with the leadership of the Orthodox Church, whose leaders not only raised funds for the needs of the front, but also were leaders of Stalin's political line, both within the state and in the its borders. In order to coordinate these activities more effectively, a Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church was set up, headed by intelligence officers. In recent years, a large number of ground works have been published, which analyze the issues of interaction between the Orthodox Church and the state during the years of Soviet power. N.Hordienko, Yu.Katunin, M.Korzun, V.Paschenko, D.Pospelovsky, V.Tsipin and many other Ukrainian and foreign authors dealt with these issues.

scholarly journals Soviet documentary film on the events of the Church from 1945-1988

2019 ◽  
pp. 236-249
Author(s):  
Вячеслав Александрович Гончаренко
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Documentary Film ◽  
Semantic Content ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Religious Literature ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Soviet State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Church

В статье рассматриваются особенности советского документального кино о жизни и деятельности Русской Православной Церкви в советском государстве. Кинематограф является важным элементом идеологии и пропаганды, поэтому советское государство уделяло особое внимание смысловому содержанию выходящих на экран кинокартин. Несмотря на атеистическую идеологию и массу антирелигиозной литературы и кинопродукции, в СССР начиная с 1945 года были сняты фильмы с нейтральным или даже с позитивным отношением к Церкви, которые рассказывают о её существовании и деятельности. В начале статьи автор размышляет о месте и значении кинематографа в жизни общества и государства. Далее рассматривает и анализирует документальные фильмы, которые касаются жизни и деятельности Русской Православной Церкви. The article deals with the peculiarities of the Soviet documentary cinema about the life and activity of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Soviet state. Cinematography is an important element of ideology and propaganda, that is why the Soviet state paid special attention to the semantic content of the released films. Despite the atheistic ideology and the mass of anti-religious literature and films, from 1945 onwards, the Soviet Union made films, which presented the existence and work of the Church in a neutral or even positive light. At the beginning of the article the author reflects on the place and importance of cinematography in the life of society and the state. The author then examines and analyses documentaries which deal with the life and activities of the Russian Orthodox Church.

scholarly journals SOCIO-CULTURAL INTERACTION FORMS OF CHURCH AND STATE ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 60-64
Author(s):  
Evguenia Alexandrovna Belyaeva ◽  
Elena Aleksandrovna Venidiktova ◽  
Dilbar Valievna Shamsutdinova
Keyword(s):  
Church And State ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The State ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Cultural Interaction ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Teachers And Students ◽  
The Church

Purpose: the aim of the undertaken study is to consider the dynamics of the church-state relationship in the context of Russian new cultural tendencies at the turn of the century. Methodology: Thus, The methodological basis of the research was formed by philosophical analysis of the church-state relationship, historicism and comparison principles. The following tasks were being solved: defining the interaction ways between the religious organizations and the state on the modern stage of the Russian society development; pointing out the prospects of consolidation of both the сhurch and the state around the democratic civil society fostering program in XXI century; revealing the need to promote respectful attitude towards human values as an integral part of spiritual culture. Result: The authors achieved the following results within the study: A wider notions of church and state were introduced demonstrating the similarity of some of their functions: offering moral guidance for social well-being; historic doctrinal models “caesaropapism”, “papocaesarism” and “symphony(concordance) of powers” were identified and characterized alongside with their secular counterparts - separation and cooperation models of church-state relationship. In conclusion of the article the urgent need for the transition of church-state relationship from political to social and cultural spheres was justified. Applications: This research can be used for the universities, teachers, and students. Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of Socio-Cultural Interaction Forms of Church and State on the Example of the Russian Orthodox Church is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.

scholarly journals The Relations between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Soviet State in Central Asia in the 1940s - Mid 1960s (Illustrated by the Example of the Tashkent Deanery)

2020 ◽  
pp. 52-56
Author(s):  
Yu.N. Tsyryapkina
Keyword(s):  
Central Asia ◽  
The State ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Soviet State ◽  
Property Relations ◽  
Central Asian ◽  
The Church

In this article the author examines state-church relations in Central Asia in the 1940s - mid 1960s illustrated by the example of the Tashkent Deanery during the period of the development of the Russian Orthodox Church under the patronage of the institute of state commissioners for the Russian Orthodox Church. On the basis of an analysis of unpublished archival sources, the author describes the process of reconstruction of parishes on the territory of the Tashkent and Central Asian dioceses, analyzes the economic and property relations between the state and the church, and the financial activities of the Orthodox parishes of the Tashkent deanery. The author focuses on issues related to the staff of Orthodox priests assigned to parishes, their level of education. The author briefly touches on the problem of Catholics and representatives of the Armenian Gregorian Church, who were not allowed to establish houses of prayer. The article provides statistics of the rituals requested in Tashkent in the context of the Assumption Cathedral and the Alexander Nevsky Church. The author comes to the conclusion that the demand for Orthodox rituals in the churches of Tashkent was associated with the high proportion of the Russian population living in the capital.

scholarly journals Między Kijowem a Konstantynopolem Relacje Kościoła ukraińskiego z Patriarchatem Ekumenicznym (X–XXI w.)

2019 ◽  
pp. 67-95
Author(s):  
Konrad Kuczara
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
World War ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Second World

Relations between the Ukrainian Church and Constantinople were difficult. This goes back as far as 988, when the Christianisation of the Rus created a strong alliance between Kiev and the Byzantine Empire. There were times when Constantinople had no influence over the Kiev Metropolis. During the Mongolian invasion in 1240, the Ukranian region was broken up and Kiev lost its power. The headquarters of the Kiev Metropolis were first moved to Wlodzimierz nad Klazma in 1299 and then to Moscow in1325. In 1458 the Metropolis of Kiev was divided into two; Kiev and Moscow, but Kiev still remained under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Since that time, the orthodox hierarchs of Moscow no longer adhered to the title Bishop of Kiev and the whole of Rus and in 1588 the Patriarchate of Moscow was founded. In 1596 when  the Union of Brest was formed,  the orthodox church of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth was not liquidated. Instead it was formally revived in 1620 and in 1632 it was officially recognized by king Wladyslaw Waza. In 1686 the Metropolis of Kiev which until that time was under the Patriarchate of Constantinople was handed over to the jurisdiction of Moscow. It was tsarist diplomats that bribed the Ottoman Sultan of the time to force the Patriarchate to issue a decree giving Moscow jurisdiction over the Metropolis of Kiev. In the beginning of the 19th century, Kiev lost its Metropolitan status and became a regular diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church. Only in the beginning of the 20thcentury, during the time of the Ukrainian revolution were efforts made to create an independent Church of Ukraine. In 1919 the autocephaly was announced, but the Patriarchate of Constantinople did not recognize it. . The structure of this Church was soon to be liquidated and it was restored again after the second world war at the time when Hitler occupied the Ukraine. In 1992, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, when Ukraine gained its independence, the Metropolitan of Kiev requested that the Orthodox Church of Ukraine becomes autocephalous but his request was rejected by the Patriarchate of Moscow. Until 2018 the Patriarchate of Kiev and the autocephalous Church remained unrecognized and thus considered schismatic. In 2018 the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople looked  into the matter and on 5thJanuary 2019, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine received it’s tomos of autocephaly from Constantinople. The Patriarchate of Moscow opposed the decision of Constantinople and as a result refused to perform a common Eucharist with the new Church of Ukraine and with the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

scholarly journals Polityka władz państwowych wobec wyboru i działalności metropolity Makarego, zwierzchnika Polskiego Autokefalicznego Kościoła Prawosławnego

2015 ◽  
pp. 72-84
Author(s):  
Stefan Dudra
Keyword(s):  
Government Policy ◽  
The State ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Close Cooperation ◽  
Post War ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Church ◽  
Selection Of

Government policy towards the election and activity of Metropolitan Macarius (Oksijuk) In post-war Poland, the state authorities aimed at taking control of the religious life of the individual Churches and religious organizations. Surveillance efforts were made to maintain, among others, by appropriate selection of the superior of the Church and diocesan bishops. The election of Macarius (Oksijuk), Archbishop of the Russian Orthodox Church for the position of Metropolitan in July 1951 years should be understood in this context. The hierarch was also to give a guarantee of loyalty, implement his policy in line with the vision of communist authorities and ensure close cooperation with the Patriarchate of Moscow. Unrealized demands of the state authorities (emerging Russification trends, the lack of wider support in missionary activity among the Greek Catholics) contributed to undertake a process of dismissing Macarius from managing the Orthodox Church. Polityka władz państwowych wobec wyboru i działalności metropolity Makarego, zwierzchnika Polskiego Autokefalicznego Kościoła PrawosławnegoPowojenna polityka państwa wobec Polskiego Autokefalicznego Kościoła Prawosławnego zmierzała do ograniczenia jego roli tylko do zadań religijnych, jednocześnie przy objęciu pozostałej działalności całkowitą kontrolą. Nadzór starano się utrzymywać m.in. poprzez odpowiedni dobór zwierzchnika Kościoła. Jednym z elementów polityki był wybór na stanowisko metropolity w 1951 roku Makarego (Oksijuka), arcybiskupa Rosyjskiego Kościoła Prawosławnego. Po odsunięciu w 1948 roku od zarządzania Kościołem metropolity Dionizego władze wyznaniowe dążyły do obsadzenia tronu metropolitalnego przez hierarchę, który miałby realizować politykę kościelną zgodną z linią polityczną władz. Pomimo zrealizowania założonych celów metropolita Makary okazał się hierarchą, który nie spełnił oczekiwań władz (m.in. w zakresie polityki wobec grekokatolików), co wpłynęło na podjęcie decyzji o usunięciu go z zajmowanego stanowiska.

The Anti-Religious Campaign in the Soviet Union

1955 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. S. Timasheff
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
National Council ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Soviet Government ◽  
Religious Policy ◽  
Movie Theaters ◽  
The Soviet Union

During the years 1939–45, a spectacular change occurred in the anti-religious policy of the Soviet government. The pattern of direct persecution was discarded and replaced by a more subtle pattern of ostentatious compromise in combination with indirect pressure. The compromise was publicly demonstrated at the meeting of the National Council of the Russian Orthodox Church (January-February 1945) convoked, by permission of the Soviet government, to elect a new Patriarch in place of the deceased Sergius. The Council was attended by a number of high dignitaries of the non-Russian Orthodox Churches; many of them were flown to the Council in Soviet bombers. At the end of the Council, a gala reception was organized for its members by G. Karpov, the chairman of the Council for the Affairs of the Orthodox Church; during that reception two choirs could be heard, the Patriarch's choir and the Moscow Philharmonic choir sponsored by the Soviet government. The enthroning of the new Patriarch Alexei was filmed and the film displayed in all the movie theaters of the Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document