Renovationist Schism in the Russian Orthodox Church



In the article, the author examines such a phenomenon in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church of the twentieth century as renovationism. A brief historyof the formation of this movement and its relationship with the Soviet government is described.

Keywords: renovationism, Russian Orthodox Church, Soviet power, Renovationists, NEP.

It was precisely with the aim of dismembering the Church that the Soviet government supported the Renovationists. In the pre-revolutionary years, the continuity of ideas between some Renovationists and representatives of the pre-revolutionary «church intelligentsia was clearly visible between the renovations movement and the church. At that time, a new political regime was established in the country, and more and more transformations were carried out. Priest A. I. Vvedensky led the church reform movement of the «renovations church», which resulted in a schism within the Russian Orthodox Church. A. I. Vvedensky did not support and did not agree with the leadership of Patriarch Tikhon, which is why he decided to take the step of creating a new church movement.

Renovationism participated in various pre-revolutionary social and political communities with the participation of clergy, in particular the «Group of 32" of the priests of the 1905 revolution and the «League of Democratic Clergy and Laity», founded in March 1917.

Renovationists have inherited two types of care: first, it was a concern for liturgical reform and spiritual regeneration, in the context or even, as a contribution to the current social transformation into a just society. Secondly, there was a concern about voicing the case of ordinary «white» parish clergy and seeking to exercise their rights. Clearly, these two problems could be intertwined. The League of Democratic Clergy and Laity dominated as did the «white» clergy, and workedа on a program of political, social, and economic reforms that would include transferring the gospel directly to issues of social justice. But while securing the rights of the White clergy as a special «class» became the main concern of the renovations group «Living Church», it was quickly noticed that they were compromising the goals of other members of the renovations movement. Renovationists replaced crosses on graves with red stars, hung slogans in their churches and offices: «The Renovationist church is a form of collectivization of the national spirit on the basis of religion», «In different ways, but we are moving towards the same goal — to the Kingdom of God — socialism on earth». Perhaps it is symptomatic that leading figures of the Living Church group, such as V. D. Krasnitskyий and S. V. Kalinovskii, were associated with extreme right-wing radicals before the revolution.

Different Renovationists used different goals and methods, but nevertheless смогли succeeded in cooperating to gain power in the church.

The Soviet political and social system and the unique ideological climate kept them together at this stage of consolidation.

The early years of NEP undoubtedly played a role. The dialectical understanding of social evolution showed that the new socialist state should have been welcomed, as the embodiment of the Christian idea, but it was combined with the more statist and even nationalisticй situationейdescribed by the Smenovekhovites. In these ambiguous circumstances, the movement that had seemed successful, reconciled itself to the» newой» reality of Yu and the movement of M to the triumphant but» new " symphony of Church and State. This situation could attract both «right-wing» and «left-wing «radicals».

Then, under these conditions, the Renovationists were able to make a church coup in May 1922. They managed to get the tacit support of the GPU of the NKVD of the RSFSR under the chairmanship of M. I. Kalinin. On May 16, 1922, it was announced that a new «Supreme Church Administration» (VTSU) was created, which included only supporters of renovationism [1].

The Soviet authorities pursued more than one goal. First, the general social strategy that made up the NEP could justify the kind of ecclesiastical policy that was now being pursued. Under the NEP, Soviet society was represented as consisting of three main groups or classes: the proletariat, the peasantry, and the «new bourgeoisie» of «Nepmans» and kulaks. Of these groups, only the first two was considered permanent. Those in the third group eventually turned out to be redundant in relation to the requirements and now enjoyed the status of «inappropriate and barely tolerable intruders». Trotsky called the new policy of the church (from the spring of 1922) «ecclesiastical NEP», and in the end, religion had no place under socialism. At the moment, it was possible to make concessions to religious believers, выступавшим who opposed the pre-revolutionary «feudal» church system. The Government could, at the moment, make concessions to Protestant denominations, and itо could also condone the emergence of» Protestants " in the Orthodox Church. It was necessary to reconcile to some extent those who still clung to the customs of the Church, in order to ensure the ultimate survival of the Sovietй systemы.

Nevertheless, the Soviet authorities did not want to legalize the patriarchal Church, the persecution of Church servants continued in the country, and bishops who were appointed by the patriarch were arrested everywhere. Despite the current situation, the Renovationists still enjoyed the support of the state. In May 1923, the Local Council legally decided to close the monasteries, legalized the white episcopate, approved second marriage for the clergy, and Patriarch Tikhon was deprived of his dignity and monasticism. Seeing no way out of this situation, Patriarch Tikhon cooperates with the authorities, thereby saving the Church. Thanks to this tactic, the patriarch was able to free himself from custody and return to his duties. Patriarch Tikhon's statement about the apolitical nature of the church and the recognition of Soviet power deprived the Renovationists of their main means of achieving the goal. Despite all this, the majority of the laity did not agree with the position of the schismatic, remaining faithful to their beliefs. Believers were severely restricted in their rights. Religious rites were allowed to be held in strictly designated places. The Government guaranteed freedom only for anti-religious propaganda, which was enshrined in the USSR Constitution of 1924.

References:

1. Беликова Н. Ю. Развитие обновленческого движения в Русской православной церкви в 20-е гг. XX в. на юге России / Н. Ю. Беликова // Известия высших учебных заведений. Северо-Кавказский регион. Общественные науки. — 2004. — № 3(127). — С. 32–35.
2. Варакин С. А. Проблема взаимоотношения советской власти и Церкви в 1920–1930-е гг.: современная историография / С. А. Варакин // Вестник НГТУ им. Р. Е. Алексеева. Серия: Управление в социальных системах. Коммуникативные технологии. — 2016. — № 1. — С. 38–48.
3. Дроздова М. А. Советское государство и церковь в 1917–1927 гг. (по материалам Северо — Запада России): автореферат диссертации на соискание ученой степени канд. ист. наук. СПб., 2009. — 25 с.
4. Захарова Л. Б. Обновленческий раскол 1920-х гг. в Русской православной церкви / Л. Б. Захарова // Известия высших учебных заведений. Поволжский регион. Гуманитарные науки. — 2013. — № 1(25). — С. 52–58.
5. Леонтьева, Т. Г. Н. А. Кривова. Власть и церковь в 1922–1925 гг. Политбюро и ГПУ в борьбе за церковные ценности и политическое подчинение духовенства. М.: АИРО-ХХ. 1997. 247 с. Тир. 1000 / Т. Г. Леонтьева //. — 2000. — № 3. — С. 190–193.
6. Мазырин, А. В. Святой Патриарх Тихон и обновленческий раскол: совместимость несовместимого / А. В. Мазырин // Христианское чтение. — 2018. — № 3. — С. 275–283.
7. Шкаревский М. В. Обновленческое движение в Русской православной церкви ХХ В. СПб: Нестор, 1999. 100 с