Book contents
- Frontmatter
- PART I THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE
- PART II THE RUSSIAN CHURCH
- 11 Russian piety and Orthodox culture 1380–1589
- 12 Art and liturgy in Russia: Rublev and his successors
- 13 Eastern Orthodoxy in Russia and Ukraine in the age of the Counter-Reformation
- 14 The Russian Orthodox Church in imperial Russia 1721–1917
- 15 Russian piety and culture from Peter the Great to 1917
- PART III EASTERN CHRISTIANITIES
- PART IV THE MODERN WORLD
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
14 - The Russian Orthodox Church in imperial Russia 1721–1917
from PART II - THE RUSSIAN CHURCH
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2008
- Frontmatter
- PART I THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE
- PART II THE RUSSIAN CHURCH
- 11 Russian piety and Orthodox culture 1380–1589
- 12 Art and liturgy in Russia: Rublev and his successors
- 13 Eastern Orthodoxy in Russia and Ukraine in the age of the Counter-Reformation
- 14 The Russian Orthodox Church in imperial Russia 1721–1917
- 15 Russian piety and culture from Peter the Great to 1917
- PART III EASTERN CHRISTIANITIES
- PART IV THE MODERN WORLD
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
Under pressure of revolutionary upheaval, the system of Russian ecclesiastical government established by Peter I in 1721 was swiftly dismantled in 1917. On 5 August the Provisional Government abolished the holy synod. Ten days later, an all-Russian church council gathered in Moscow in the hope of securing strong leadership in troubled times. Having determined to restore the patriarchate before the Bolshevik seizure of power, the delegates drew lots on 5 November to appoint Metropolitan Tikhon (Bellavin) from an elected shortlist of three to an office last held in 1700. Though circumstances forced Tikhon into crisis management rather than strategic direction, there was plenty of practical significance for the council to discuss: the synod had not only retained jurisdiction over marriage and divorce, but also continued to manage its own consistory courts, ecclesiastical schools, and the censorship of religious books. Yet few churchmen were satisfied by mere administrative autonomy. Many believed that by forcibly separating the secular sphere from the sacred, Peter had perverted the very nature of the church, reducing it to what Florovskii later described as a period of ‘Babylonian captivity’, in which Russia’s ‘ecclesiastical consciousness’ was forced to develop under ‘the dual inhibition of administrative decree and inner fear’. Anxious to explain rather than condemn, recent historians have modified many traditional stereotypes on the basis of unprecedented archival access. But now that new evidence has shown how misleading it is to dismiss the Russian Church as ‘static, corrupt and intellectually barren’, it is all the more important, and in some ways more difficult, to understand why a far from monolithic institution found it so hard to respond to the spiritual needs of its flock.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge History of Christianity , pp. 325 - 347Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006
References
- 2
- Cited by