Церковная старина в современной России

At the same time I revealed a number of positive tendencies. They concern those establishments of culture where the management takes up the initiative in relations with the religious organizations. In this case the church life is harmoniously enters museum activity. I can mention the Tretiakov State Gallery (Moscow), the museum of the Moscow Kremlin, Pavlovsk memorial museum-estate (Leningrad region), memorial museum-estate of Kizhi (Karelia). Here it is necessary to note the existence of an insignificant layer of the intelligent orthodox clergy who are capable of responsible behavior towards cultural heritage. Unfortunately, the sanction of conflicts depends on the personal relations and not on the social legal mechanisms.

Chapter 11 is devoted to religious aspects of the problem. The chapter characterizes today's theological thought in Moscow patriarchy, analyses social concept of Russian Orthodox church-2000 and estimates the theological innovations in the field of icon painting and church art. The reasons of such theological mutation are connected to the process of acculturation. Special attention is paid to the process of myth-making in modern Church mentality, to the occurrence pseudo-relics (Alexander Svirsky, etc.) and pseudo-miracles (Holy Fire of Great Saturday in Jerusalem, etc.). These phenomena play a great role in the transformation and re-interpretation of cultural heritage. The idea of contradiction between traditional Christian values and modern fundamentalism values is emphasized. The basic conclusion is as follows today the religious organizations fail to maintain efficiently transferred culture monuments, despite previous historical tradition.

Present research allows us to reveal the specificity of the modern Orthodox Church fundamentalism in Russia. According to the conclusions of Chicago Fundamentalism Projects (1995) this phenomenon consists of the aspiration to overcome the secularization by means of totalitarian system construction using modern social and technical progress. This movement usually opposes the society, state and hierarchy. But in Russia fundamentalism is headed by the hierarchy, supported by political elite and is in tune with the mentality of significant part of society. The use of cultural heritage plays the predominating role in Russian Orthodox Church fundamentalism, and its characteristic mark is the rejection of pluralism in the field of interpretation of historical tradition.

The conclusion sums up the research and forms the possible recommendations directed on the formation of civil stability and creation of effective system of protection of monuments and sites. In conditions of inevitable globalization, the cultural heritage of each nation will get special value as main marker, capable to reveal the unique spirit of a nation. The international system of monitoring of monuments and sites transferred to the religious organizations, could become positive factor of preservation of cultural heritage in Russia. This question should enter into sphere of the attention of UNESCO, ICOMOS, pAce and «International Religious Freedom Report» of State Department of the USA: the religious-motivated violence exist side by side with the religious-motivated transformation of cultural heritage and restriction of free access to monuments and sites, that menaces the religious freedom and human rights.

The individual research project «The transfer of historical monuments to the Moscow patriarchy in Russia 1990–2005. Problems of the preservation of cultural heritage in condition of orthodox fundamentalism and the prospects of their resolution in the framework of civil society» was carried out with support of John D. and Catherine T. Macarthur foundation. I highly appreciate the foundation’s support of my research and thank all people who contributed to my investigation and publishing this book.

Иллюстрации

Одно Преображение – две культуры – так это евангельское событие видели в XVI и XIX вв.

Трудная судьба Владимирского образа Божией Матери. XI–XX вв.

Сбережение «благородных руин» некогда было православной традицией. Крест XIX в. на месте фундамента Спасской церкви XII в. в Старой Ладоге

«Пустые споры между людьми поврежденного ума… которые думают, будто благочестие служит для прибытка» (1 Тим. 6:5). На месте разрушенного храма 1670 г. монастырская братия построила доходный дом 1907 г. Богоявленский монастырь в Москве (начало XX в.)

Дом Передольского (1900 г.) до (1980-е гг.) и после (1994 г.) передачи его Новгородской епархии

Воронка от «культурного взрыва». Пикет членов Общества любителей древности «на костях» дома Передольского. 2001 u.

Фотография Петра Гайдукова

Союзник Новгородской епархии – ООО «Инжстрой» уже «отметилось» на церковных памятниках. Церковь Св. мч. Мины в Старой Руссе (XV в.) и останки ее прихожан после «реставрации». 2005 г.

«Памятник Передольскому» в подарок новгородцам. Заказчик – епархия, подрядчик – ООО «Инжстрой». 2006 г.