The Society of Christian Enlightenment: from “Heretical” Blog to Heretical Offline Community

SCE members gather in 2015.

SITES

The Society of Christian Enlightenment: From “Heretical” Blog to Heretical Offline Community

Ekaterina Grishaeva

On February 21, 2012, the feminist For two Moscow professors and Or- punk rock band Pussy Riot organized thodox believers, Il’ya and Yana Braz- a performance, Punk Prayer: Mother of nikovy, Punk Prayer was a catalyst for God, Drive Putin Away, at the Cathe- launching public debates about the dral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow. modernization of the Russian church. Participants danced and made the The Brazhnikovys organized a group sign of the cross at the ambon and called the Society of Christian Enlight- solea for less than a minute before enment (the SCE or Obshchestvo Chris- being escorted outside the building tianskogo Prosveshchenia) in 2012. Their by guards. This episode provoked aim was to create an independent forum public debate and led to the arrest for theological debates that would carry and prosecution of three group mem- forward the legacy of the religious-phil- bers. The Russian Orthodox Church osophical meetings organized between considered the performance blas- 1901 and 1903 by the writers Zinaida phemous and called for Pussy Riot’s Gippius, Dmitry Merezhkovsky, and prosecution. Some church leaders Vasily Rozanov. Most of the intellectu- even advocated severe punishment. als who joined the SCE had been active Meanwhile, a few advocates argued churchgoers in the early 2000s before be- that Pussy Riot’s Punk Prayer was lit- ginning to criticize the clericalism of the tle more than a radical yet modern Moscow Patriarchate. At SCE meetings, expression of its views. speakers raised issues they considered

32 important for the modernization of the Meanwhile, as a tiny group of intellec- © 2019 The Wheel. Russian Orthodox Church, such as the tuals, the SCE members continued to May be distributed for ordination of women and the Church’s rely on digital technologies to expand noncommercial use. www.wheeljournal.com engagement with feminism and social- the geographical outreach of their meet- ism, and elaborated an alternative theo- ings (through Skype connections), to logical discourse proudly described by communicate with each other between some of them as “heretical.” The SCE’s meetings, and to disseminate their activities illustrate how the concepts views to the wider society. of orthodoxy and heresy are evolving as new means of communication alter This article is concerned less with the the social conditions of theological dis- content of SCE beliefs than with the course. group’s relationship to various forms of communication. I approach the SCE It is important to emphasize that the as a hybrid phenomenon shaped by SCE was a group of conservative Or- social interactions offline and online thodox intellectuals: prior to 2009, communication. I analyze how digital some of them had advocated for the technologies have contributed to the engagement of the Russian Church in development of the SCE and why it be- the political domain and had support- came so important to them to organize ed monarchy. Yet their conservatism is offline meetings. First, I will show that interwoven with a postmodern way of online communication was a necessary thinking. They regard a postmodern step toward the emergence of the SCA interpretation of Orthodox tradition as as a “heretical” community. Second, I the key to recovering “true” apostolic argue that the development of the SCE Orthodoxy. Since they consider strict equally reflects the experience that dig- observance of church prescriptions to ital technologies do not meet members’ be the invention of modern society, they religious needs. Most of the SCE mem- propose to deconstruct the Church’s rit- bers were driven together by a desire uals and dogmas in order to be closer to to build an offline community that re- the non-institutionalized communes of sembled a monastery or parish, where early Christians. This conservative ap- “heretical identity” would be recog- proach formed the basis for what they nized by others. The rise of the SCE is call a “radical” interpretation of Ortho- therefore a revealing illustration of both dox tradition. the power and the limitations of online communication. Before the SCE was founded, these intellectuals developed and promoted Tradition, Individualism, and Digital their interpretations of Orthodox tra- Media dition primarily online, since there was 1 Peter Horsfield, “‘A no other public space for discussing The emergence of digital technologies Moderate Diversity radical or modern approaches to Or- has challenged and transformed re- of Books?’ The Chal- thodoxy. From 2012 to 2015, however, ligious authority, as various scholars lenge of New Media nine in-person meetings were held in to the Practice of have noted. For example, Peter Hors- Christian Theology,” Moscow and Saint Petersburg, each field points out that digital media have in Digital Religion, including between eight and fifteen changed the distribution of religious Social media and participants. These offline meetings knowledge by providing “for equal dis- Culture: Perspectives, enabled SCE members to develop their tribution and circulation of theological Practicies and Futures, “radical” interpretations of Orthodox ed. Pauline Hope ideas developed by the theologically Cheong et al. (New tradition and to build a common “he- uneducated as for the theologically ed- York: Peter Lang, retical” identity through discussion. ucated.”1 Online access to religious texts 2012), 254.

The Wheel 19 | Fall 2019 33 makes it easier for individuals to inter- viding unrestricted access to religious 2 Mia Lövheim, pret religious ideas on their own, lead- knowledge and by strengthening net- “New Media, Reli- gion, and Gender: ing to a democratization of religion and works of Orthodox Internet users. Young Swedish making visible the plurality of vernacu- Female Bloggers,” in lar religious beliefs.2 To make sense of Before the SCE: “Radical” Interpreta- Religion Across Media: how the Internet enables an expanding tions of Orthodoxy Online From Early Antiquity variety of religious positions, Stewart M. to Late Modernity, ed. Knut Lundby (New Hoover and Nabil Echchaibi describe it Before the Russian state’s first attempts York: Peter Lang, as a liminal “third space,” where formal to establish control over the digital 2013), 153–68. Stefan structures of religious knowledge and sphere in 2011, the Russophone seg- Gelfgren, “Why practice are revised and transformed re- ment of the Internet—sometimes called Does the Archbishop flexively by religious users.3 As a result Runet—was a place for free debate on Not Tweet? How So- cial Media Challenge of the interactive character of the online political, social, and cultural issues. Its Church Authorities,” environment, religious authority tends communication culture resembled the Nordicom Review 36 to shift from institutions to diverse in- late Soviet tradition of dissidence and (2015): 109–23. ternet users, who project themselves “kitchen table discussions,” forms of and their opinions into the online mar- debate which were accessible to only a 3 Stewart M. Hoover 5 and Nabil Echchaibi, ket of religions. small number of people. Despite hier- “Media Theory and archs’ criticisms of secular online cul- the ‘Third Spaces of It is important to place the online visi- ture, Orthodox believers used Runet as Digital Religion’” bility of personal religious positions in a space for open debates on theological (Boulder, Colorado: a broader context. Modern social trans- topics and problems such as the rap- Center for Media, Religion, and Cul- formations such as enhanced reflexiv- prochement between the Russian Or- ture, 2014). https:// ity (that is, individuals’ increasingly thodox Church and the Russian state.6 www.researchgate. active shaping of their own identities) As some Orthodox bloggers expressed net/publication and a general crisis of institutions have in their posts, online discussions be- /287644204_The_ contributed to more individualized in- came an outlet due to the lack of open Third_Spaces_of_ 4 Digital_Religion. terpretation of religious traditions. A debate inside the Church and in the sec- person may now choose, from among a ular public sphere. 4 See Anthony variety of religious ideas and practices, Giddens, Modernity the ones that seem most suitable for his Most of the future SCE members were and Self-Identity: Self or her lifestyle, discarding those that and Society in the Late active Runet users and were recognized Modern Age (Cam- are burdensome. From this perspec- as online religious experts. In com- bridge: Polity Press, tive, digital media provide religious parison with print media, the Internet 1991), and Zygmunt people with the resources to rethink opened new perspectives for them to Bauman, Liquid Mo- their own religious views and make develop their “radical” interpretations dernity (Cambridge: individualistic approaches to religion Polity Press, 2000). of Orthodoxy. It provided them with more visible in the public sphere. quick and cheap ways of disseminating 5 Tine Roesen, Vera their religious-philosophical and liter- Zvereva, “Social Net- Following these theoretical premises, I ary works outside institutional control. work Sites on the Ru- analyze how the emergence of the SCE Having a keen knowledge of Orthodox net: Exploring Social has been shaped by a combination of Communication,” tradition, they sought to enlighten their in Digital Russia: The online and offline factors. Before the audience. The various digital communi- Language, Culture and Society’s formation, its members were cation platforms helped them to create Politics of New Media searching for an interpretation of Or- and maintain heretical networks. Communication, ed. thodox tradition that fit better with Michael S. Gorham, their philosophy and lifestyle. Frustra- Ingunn Lunde, and In the early 2000s, Il’ya Braznikov Martin Paulsen (New tion with offline social interactions led launched the website pravaya.ru, an inde- York: Routledge, them to move online. The Internet fur- pendent forum for Orthodox analysis of 2014), 72–87. thered their theological search by pro- political, cultural issues, and Orthodoxy, 34 today. SCE members Vladimir Goly- Il’ya Braznikov at an shev, Il’ia Morozov, and Igor’ Bek- SCE gathering. shaev—who also maintains the website Во Едину От Суббот, dedicated to Or- thodox theology—have gained popu- © 2019 The Wheel. larity as LiveJournal bloggers. Other May be distributed for SCE members work as journalists or noncommercial use. www.wheeljournal.com editors-in-chief in secular and religious media and are invited as speakers by media outlets.

The SCE members acknowledge that online discussions have affected their religious views. Andrey Vorokh, a SCE 6 Mikhail Suslov, member, has credited the Internet with “Holy Fools in the advancing his knowledge about Ortho- Digital Age: Strat- doxy by providing opportunities to dis- egies of Self-Po- cuss spiritual topics with other believers sitioning in the Russian-Language through email and on blogs. Eventually, Orthodox Blogo- he began to publish his ideas on Ortho- sphere,” Demokrati- dox websites such as pravaya.ru. He was zatsiya 25.1 (Winter subsequently invited to participate in 2017): 62–84. See the where “free and radical positions could SCE meetings. From Il’ya Braznikov’s analysis of Father An- drei Kuraev’s online 7 be voiced at an expert level.” Together point of view, online visibility was one activities in Hanna with political analysis, it publishes phil- of the core criteria for choosing SCE Stähle, “Between Ho- osophical and theological critiques on participants. He and Yana Brazniko- mophobia and Gay eschatology, Orthodox mysticism (both va did not personally know all partic- Lobby: the Russian modern and postmodern), Christianity ipants in advance, but invited them Orthodox Church and Its Relationship and socialism, liberation theology, the because they followed their blogs and to Homosexuality in Russian state and monarchy, the mod- had online conversations. The Internet Online Discussions,” ernization of Orthodoxy, feminism, and thus facilitated the consolidation of SCE Digital Icons 14 (2015): other issues. At one point, pravaya.ru col- participants by linking these alternative 49–71. laborated with the Moscow Patriarchate, Orthodox intellectuals into a network. 7 Il’ya Braznikov, but in 2009 the site became known for its Bagdasarov has acknowledged that “Когда Утопия critique of Metropolitan Kirill as a candi- online discussions about Orthodoxy Воплощается,”Pra- date for Patriarch. Braznikov mentioned stimulated him to search for a new vaya.ru, January that during this period, some priests style, “free from the usual etiquette and 26, 2014, http:// 8 www.pravaya.ru/ published anonymously on the website, pious forms of writing.” He has also look/23349. as these views could not be voiced in of- described online communication as a ficial church media. sort of mystical experience: in a disem- 8 Written Inter- bodied online environment where ev- view with Roman Roman Bagdasarov, an SCE member, erything is text, the Scripture becomes Bagdasarov, July 10, 2019. served as an online expert on Ortho- an interlocutor in an interpersonal dia- doxy, having studied Orthodox sym- logue. Vorokh has reflected on his- ex 9 Andrey Vorokh, bols and having been an editorial board perience of religious debates on Runet “Оцифрованная member of the traditionalist journal in his essay “Digitalized Faith and Hurt вера и Волшебная гора. His incentive for going Feelings.”9 He concludes that absent оскорбленные чувства,” Gefter. online was to develop his own mission- the legitimizing authority of a pastor, ru, May 19, 2017, ary strategy where he could explain Internet users feel that their own reli- http://gefter.ru/ how Orthodoxy met the demands of gious dispositions have become distinct archive/22215.

The Wheel 19 | Fall 2019 35 © 2019 The Wheel. from the “collective experience of the face communication was essential as it May be distributed for Church.” Radically different interpre- allowed interlocutors to “get together noncommercial use. tations of Orthodox tradition might ap- in an intimate circle of like-minded www.wheeljournal.com pear on equal footing with the canonical people and have such a close, intimate theological narrative of the Church. By conversation, where you, in fact, will changing how the Orthodox message is be understood, where you hope to be communicated, the Internet is leading understood.”10 She viewed online and to a new experience of Orthodox tradi- offline communication as antithetical. tion. According to Braznikova, one cannot be oneself on a blog, because a blog- To sum up, discussions on Runet were ger must adapt to the preferences, indispensable in paving the way for the opinions, and intellectual level of the SCE’s offline meetings. The Internet audience. From her perspective, of- linked like-minded Orthodox intellec- fline meetings enabled SCE members tuals through far-reaching interactions. to have meaningful personal interac- It provided them with a stimulating tions that would have been impossible environment where “radical” interpre- online. tations of Orthodox tradition could be developed outside institutional control. Meeting in person, SCE members Nevertheless, despite the importance of were able to elaborate a common “he- online media, it soon became apparent retical” identity. It is worth mention- that the group had certain needs that ing that their positive interpretation could only be met offline. of heresy was initially shaped online, in 2010, by Vladimir Golyshev, before Longing for Face-to-Face Talks in the being taken up by the SCE during Digital Era offline debates. On his LiveJournal blog, Golyshev described heresy as a When I interviewed Yana Braznikova tool that might improve Christianity. in October 2016, she stated that for For him, a heretic was “a true Chris- some users—certain residents of Mos- tian” who, following Christian pre- cow, for example—the online envi- cepts, denounced Russian Orthodox 10 Interview with Yana Braznikova, ronment did not seem to broaden the Church clergy—whose way of life October 6, 2016, mobility of their ideas but actually to contravened Christian principles— Moscow. restrict it. She maintained that face-to- and broke away from the Church. As

Yana Braznikova and Vladimir Golyshev at an SCE gathering. 36 Golyshev put it, “I even want to call is the bearer of neither ministry, nor 11 Vladimir Golyshev, my heresy KHRISTOSLOVIE”—that asceticism, nor righteousness.”13 “ХРИСТОСЛОВИЕ: is, Christianity.11 In a similar vein, SCE ‘лексус’ глазами апостолов,” person- member Roman Zaitsev presented According to SCE members, the al LiveJournal site, heresy as a kind of holy foolishness, a church hierarchy asserts ideological December 9, 2010, way out from the unctuous orthodoxy control over believers by imposing https://golishev.live journal.com/1532082. of the institutional Church to a more strict frames of Orthodox thinking html. direct encounter with Christ. The kind and lifestyle. Those believers who of radical break from institutional risk questioning it can find them- 12 Roman Zait- rules that characterizes both heretic selves expelled from the Church. sev quoted in and holy fool entails a loss of “spiri- Yana Brazhnikova argues that the “Православная Анархия,” transcript tual comfort,” Zaitsev argued, but it is monopolization of the sacraments fa- of the fourth meeting the only path to finding the God who cilitates the control of the hierarchy, of the SCE, Pravaya. has been forgotten by the Church: as the Church presents confession ru, November 30, “What seem like heretical views ap- and communion as necessary precon- 2012, http://www. pear to me, I come out of confines ditions for theosis, but requires that pravaya.ru/exper iments/22920. that the Church has built for me, and one follow certain rules—defined suddenly . . . there is God all around. by the hierarchy—before receiving 13 Vladimir Goly- And God is in me, and tears flow.”12 them.14 It thus creates a situation of shev quoted in The concept of heresy thus articulates dependency or even submission of “Православная Анархия,” transcript a common identity of the SCE mem- the laity to hierarchy. As Arthur Aris- of the fourth meeting bers as those unafraid to criticize the takisyan puts it, the hierarchy seeks of the SCE, Pravaya. Russian hierarchy and to develop rad- to control believers’ relationship with ru, November 30, ical theological interpretations for ex- Christ.15 2012, http://www. pressing spiritual experience. pravaya.ru/experi ments/22920. As a way to escape from hierarchi- The “heretical” identity elaborated cal control over one’s relation with 14 Yana Braz- during the SCE’s offline meetings Christ, the SCE members strive to de- nikova quoted consists of two core discourses: first, velop a theological approach where a in “Богословие Освобождения an anticlerical critique of the Rus- church’s spiritual guidance is worth- Вместо Духовных sian hierarchy, and second, the con- less. First, the SCE members posit Скреп, Часть I,” struction of a theology without the that theology is not a set of inherited transcript of the Church. dogmas but something that necessar- eighth meeting of ily springs from a personal encounter the SCE, Pravaya. ru, August 21, 2014, In making their anticlerical critique, with God. To that end, Golyshev pro- http://pravaya.ru/exper- the SCE members—most of them for- poses that in one’s spiritual life one iments/23499. mer churchgoers—frequently refer should follow the heart first and fore- to their traumatic experiences in par- most—for example, by comprehend- 15 Arthur Aris- ishes or monasteries. By comparing ing the Gospel through the passages takisyan quoted in “Богословие the Russian Orthodox Church with a to which the heart reacts. Dmitry После Pussy Riot,” theater, a simulacrum, or a Potemkin Akhtyrsky develops this emotional transcript of the first village, the SCE members emphasize approach further: “As Jesus appeals meeting of the SCE, that it is preoccupied with its own above all to the ‘inner human,’ to his Pravaya.ru, June 12, 2012, http://www. material well-being and political in- primordial sense of truth, freedom, pravaya.ru/experi fluence but empty inside: “There are and love, then our ‘inner human’ ments/22706. no saints in [the Church]. . . . There is must be the unique criterion for eval- no spirit of Christian love in a parish. uating certain texts.”16 Golyshev sug- 16 Dmitry Akhtyrsky, In a monastery, there is no example gests that all Christians should write “Все—Боги,” Pra- vaya.ru, January 30, of asceticism, purity, disinterested their own Gospels, since no two peo- 2013, http://pravaya.ru/ ministry. All this is absent; the church ple’s experience of mystically meet- look/23382.

SCE members gather in 2015.

ing Christ can be expressed through Offline SCE meetings enabled its the same words; he understands lit- participants to elaborate a new, com- erature as one way of finding Christ. mon Christian and, on the whole, non-Orthodox identity. Their success Second, SCE members put forward in this regard has been related to two theological arguments against the interrelated factors. First, supported sacraments of baptism, confession, by others of like mind, the SCE par- and the Eucharist as they have been ticipants share their traumatic expe- established by the hierarchy—not riences of parishes and monasteries by Christ, since these sacraments in a close, intimate circle, by criticiz- were not precisely described in the ing the Russian hierarchs. From this Gospels. According to the SCE, the perspective, the offline meetings can hierarchy consciously exaggerates be viewed as a means of overcoming the importance of these sacraments trauma, facilitating the SCE’s consol- in order to keep parishioners in fear idation. Second, face-to-face discus- and to control them. Aristakisyan sions in this close circle serve as an and Bagdasarov describe the Eucha- equivalent to rituals in church and rist as a repetition of the Last Supper, can be viewed as an attempt to create when the disciples broke bread with an offline religious community that Christ and communed with each oth- provides an alternative to “traumat- er. Some SCE members consider their ic” Orthodox parish life, and where offline meetings to be a Eucharist, its members can feel free to express where they share food with fellow their “radical” views. Christians as at the Last Supper, and if there is no bread and wine, chips These arguments demonstrate how and beer can be used for this “Eucha- the SCE has come to depend on of- rist” instead. From this perspective, fline gatherings. Nonetheless, even face-to-face interactions served as an its offline meetings are still entangled equivalent of rituals in church. with Internet technologies. In order

38 to expand the geographical reach of modern” way. They used the Inter- The author would its “heretical” ideology, the group’s net as a mean for developing and like to thank SCE meetings have included Skype par- disseminating their “radical” inter- members Il’ya and Yana Braznikovy, ticipants. Beyond Moscow, Saint pretations. Pussy Riot’s 2012 Punk Andrey Vorokh, Il’ya Petersburg, Rostov, and Yekaterin- Prayer was a turning point. Il’ya and Morozov, Vladimir burg, there have even been associate Yana Braznikovy interpreted this Golyshev, and Roman members in Berlin and New York. To performance and the ensuing reac- Bagdasarov for sharing their ideas, cover an even wider audience, Braz- tion as a sign that debates about the memories, and time. nikov posts transcripts and videos of modernization of the ROC in offline This work was sup- meetings on Pravaya.ru, LiveJournal, public spaces were, in fact, possi- ported by the Russian and Facebook. From this perspective, ble. Following the creation of the Foundation for Basic the Internet is the same for them as SCE, offline meetings came to be of Research. the cathedral doors were for Luther. special importance for its members since they recognized the internet could not fully satisfy their religious needs. Face-to-face interactions have The SCE can be understood as the ef- functioned as a substitute for ritu- fort of a tiny group of outcast Ortho- als in church—something that was dox intellectuals to come back from not possible in the disembodied on- the “digital exile” to physical reality. line environment. Besides intellec- Before the society’s formation, these tual exchange, offline meetings in intellectuals were active primarily a close, expert circle have enabled online, as offline public space was SCE members to be recognized by seldom available for discussing Or- like-minded believers and to shape a thodox tradition in a “radical and common “heretical” identity.

Ekaterina Grishaeva holds a PhD in Philosophy from Ural Fed- eral University, Ekaterinburg, Russia. Her thesis was a historical and philosophical analysis of the Neopatristic Synthesis, and in particular the concept of personhood in the writing of Vladimir Lossky. She works as an assistant professor at the Department of Philosophy of Ural Federal University. Her fields of research include the sociology of religion and Orthodox Christianity in cyberspace.

The Wheel 19 | Fall 2019 39