Review Essay Religion and Nationalism in Modern Russia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
the soviet and post-soviet review 44 (2017) 343-356 brill.com/spsr Review Essay ⸪ Religion and Nationalism in Modern Russia; Or the Uses and Abuses of Edinoverie James M. White1 Senior Research Fellow, Laboratory for the Study of Primary Sources, Ural Federal University, Prospekt Lenina 51, Ekaterinburg, 620083, Russian Federation, +447812991378 [email protected] Alexander S. Palkin Senior Research Fellow, Laboratory for Studies in Archaeography and Laboratory for the Study of Primary Sources, Ural Federal Univerity, Prospekt Lenina 51, Ekaterinburg, 620083, Russian Federation, +447812991378 [email protected] Simon (Shleev), Edinoverie v svoem vnutrennem razvitii (Moscow: Medium, 2004), 480 pp. Nina Pavlovna Zimina, Put’ na Golgofu (Moscow: Pravoslavnyi Sviato-Tikhonovskii gumanitarnyi universitet, 2005), 2 vols. 1 James White is a senior research fellow at the Laboratory for the Study of Primary Sources at the Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg. Alexander Palkin is a senior research fellow at the Laboratory for Studies in Archaeography and the Laboratory for the Study of Primary Sources at the Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg. The completion of this article was sup- ported by the grant of the Russian Federation for attracting leading scholars to Russian edu- cational establishments of higher professional education, scientific institutions of the state academies of science, and the state academic centres of the Russian Federation (Labora- tory for the Study of Primary Sources, Ural Federal University). Agreement no. 14. A12.31.0004 from 26.06.2013. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2017 | doi 10.1163/18763324-20171249Downloaded from Brill.com09/27/2021 06:19:21PM via free access <UN> 344 White and Palkin Radislav Viacheslavovich Kaurkin and Olga Anatol’evna Pavlova, Edinoverie v Rossii: ot zarozhdeniia idei do nachala XX veka (St Petersburg: Aleteiia, 2011), 198 pp. Kirill Mikhailovich Tovbin, Postreligiia i ee stanovlenie v russkom staroobriadchestve. (Moscow: Ethnosotsium, 2014), 484 pp. Abstract The Orthodox Church in post-Soviet Russia is currently tackling numerous issues. Some of these are modern, like the institution’s relationship with nationalism, while others are centuries-old, like the Old Believer schism. Some have argued that there is one potential solution to both problems: the restoration of edinoverie, a uniate move- ment founded in 1800 to bring the Old Believers into the Church. In this article, we consider all of the most recent works on this subject to demonstrate how a particular historical narrative has been sanctified by ecclesiastic writers to justify edinoverie’s revival. At the same time, its legacy is being utilised by a few nationalist or neo- traditionalist figures to restore a distinctively Russian character to Orthodoxy that can inoculate the country against irreligiosity and globalisation. Finally, we consider the failure to offer a convincing scholarly alternative to these narratives, a problem which is only now being rectified by young Russian academics. Keywords Russian Orthodox Church – Old Belief – edinoverie – Russian nationalism The meteoric restoration of the Russian Orthodox Church following the col- lapse of the Soviet Union has propelled it into a position of considerable social, political, and cultural influence. The Church’s attitude to vexed issues both modern and historical has been put under an intense spotlight: for instance, how should it consider and react to human rights, secularity, and the state?2 No less important are its contemporary relations to Russian nationalism, a prob- lematic issue for an institution that is simultaneously a national church and 2 For two of the best accounts of this situation in English, see Z. Knox, Russian Society and the Orthodox Church: Religion in Russia after Communism (London and New York: Routledge, 2005); K. Stoeckl, The Russian Orthodox Church and Human Rights (London: Routledge, 2014). the soviet and post-sovietDownloaded review from 44 Brill.com09/27/2021 (2017) 343-356 06:19:21PM via free access <UN> Religion and Nationalism 345 part of ecumenical Orthodoxy,3 and to Old Belief, a movement, or set of move- ments, that broke away from the Church in the mid-seventeenth century.4 These problems have provoked responses from the very highest levels of both the clergy and laity. Patriarch Kirill himself has spent much of the last 16 years seeking some kind of rapprochement between the Church and Old Belief. Meanwhile, Aleksandr Dugin, a prominent right-wing neo-Eurasian political theorist,5 has suggested that the two problems mentioned above are interconnected: by bringing the Old Believers back into the Church, Russian Orthodoxy may be able to assimilate Old Belief’s unbroken link to a truly na- tional past, one that has not yet been tainted by either secular modernity or westernisation. Or, in his words, ‘the Old Believers do not talk about the West, about the sons of lawlessness, about apostasy from Russian holiness and Rus- sian rituals, which are the most correct, if only because all remaining nations have fallen under the yoke of other Christian faiths and foreigners while we have not, because everyone else has compromised with the West while we have not.’6 It is interesting that both Kirill and Dugin have hit upon the same solution to their distinct problems: the revival of edinoverie. To put it briefly, edinoverie (‘united faith’) was an arrangement forged in 1800 that allowed converts from Old Belief to use the ritual compact whose prohibi- tion in the mid-seventeenth century had caused the schism in the first place. This settlement was codified into law via the so-called ‘Rules of Metropolitan Platon’, a collection of conditions created by Metropolitan Platon (Levshin) of Moscow on the basis of a petition by Muscovite Old Believers. Between 1800 3 For a historical perspective, see J. Strickland, The Making of Holy Russia: The Orthodox Church and Russian Nationalism Before the Revolution (New York: Holy Trinity Publications, 2013). 4 R.O. Crummey, Old Believers in a Changing World (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2011). 5 In terms of Dugin’s influence, Andreas Umland has noted ‘a rather close link between Dugin and the Presidential Administration official Ivan Demidov’: numerous high-ranking officials also belong to Dugin’s International Eurasian Movement. See A. Umland: ‘Alexander Dugin and Moscow’s New Right Radical Intellectual Circles at the Start of Putin’s Third Presidential Term 2012–2013: The Anti-Orange Committee, the Izborsk Club and the Florian Geyer Club in Their Political Context,’ in Europolity, 10 (2) (2016): 26–27. For more on Dugin and his place on the Russian right, see A. Shekhovtsov and A. Umland, ‘Is Aleksandr Dugin a Traditionalist? “Neo-Eurasianism” and Perennial Philosophy,’ Russian Review 68 (2009): 662–78; M. Laruelle, In the Name of the Nation: Nationalism and Politics in Contemporary Russia (New York: Pal- grave Macmillan, 2010). 6 A. Dugin, ‘Sovershennaia pravota: staroobriadchestvo i russkaia natsional’naia ideia’, Arcto. ru, 13 March 1998, http://www.arcto.ru/article/1468. Last accessed: 08.04.2016. the soviet and post-soviet review 44 (2017) 343-356Downloaded from Brill.com09/27/2021 06:19:21PM via free access <UN> 346 White and Palkin and the early twentieth century, edinoverie’s position between official Or- thodoxy and Old Belief was contested from every possible direction, includ- ing from within the settlement itself. Uncertainty, indecision, and suspicion were predominant in the minds of Orthodox churchmen, while Old Believer polemicists evinced hostility and contempt. The edinovertsy themselves were continually dissatisfied with the provisions given by Metropolitan Platon and routinely petitioned for either their amendment or abolition. Unsurprisingly, edinoverie remained, in the words of one recent historian, ‘a marginal and con- troversial phenomenon’: by the time of the Russian Revolution, it consisted of no more than 300 parishes.7 In the Soviet period, it was almost completely wiped out.8 Thus, far from solving the perennial problem of the schism, edinov- erie barely scratched the surface. Since 2000, Patriarch Kirill has overseen the revival of edinoverie, sponsor- ing the establishment of new parishes (there are now 24) and backing research into the movement: he personally opened an impressive study centre in Mos- cow in 2009.9 This, combined with the interest that edinoverie has garnered from figures like Dugin, means that it is beginning to assume a degree of ideo- logical importance. Kirill sees edinoverie as ‘a real and active bridge between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Old Believer concords’,10 while Dugin conceives it as the means of ‘an internal, conservative church revolution’ through which Russians can defend ‘the Church, Orthodoxy, the state, and the nation from the real Antichrist, who is manifested fully in non-Orthodox her- esies and especially in the satanic West.’11 7 I. Paert, Old Believers, Religious Dissent and Gender in Russia, 1760–1850 (Manchester: Man- chester University Press, 2003), 60–61. 8 Nonetheless, the 1971 Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church repealed the seventeenth-century anathemas against the old rites: this has largely defused one of the most enduring controversies surrounding edinoverie and has paved the way for its modern reincarnation. See ‘Deianie osviashchennogo pomestnogo sobora Russkoi pra- voslavnoi tserkvi. Ob otmene kliatv na starye obriady i na priderzhivaiushchikhsia ikh,’ Zhurnal Moskovskoi