{"title":"俄罗斯帝国“外来信仰”管理的多样性和统一性","authors":"P. Werth","doi":"10.30759/1728-9718-2022-2(75)-25-36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, which is an abridged version of the monograph’s chapter [Paul W. Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths: Toleration and the Fate of Religious Freedom in Imperial Russia (Oxford, 2014)], the author examines the history of the organization of the system of administration of “foreign confessions” — non-Orthodox religious communities in Russia in the last third of the 18th — mid 19th century. According to the author, this system, which he calls “the multi-confessional establishment”, was flexible and included significant elements of compromise. On the one hand, with the undoubted primacy of the Orthodox Church, most of the non-Orthodox confessions were granted, in one way or another, the status of state institutions. This strengthened their position, enabled their clergy to be involved in the processes of government and, at the same time, strengthened the internal unity of the Empire. On the other hand, as the imperial state apparatus developed and a tendency towards unification became more prominent, from the second half of the 19th century onwards the supreme authorities began to worry that the integration of different groups through religious institutions might threaten state cohesion. Nevertheless, until the collapse of the Russian monarchy the autocracy never succeeded in developing an alternative model for the administration of religious affairs.","PeriodicalId":37813,"journal":{"name":"Ural''skij Istoriceskij Vestnik","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DIVERSITY AND UNITY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE’S “FOREIGN FAITHS”\",\"authors\":\"P. Werth\",\"doi\":\"10.30759/1728-9718-2022-2(75)-25-36\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, which is an abridged version of the monograph’s chapter [Paul W. Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths: Toleration and the Fate of Religious Freedom in Imperial Russia (Oxford, 2014)], the author examines the history of the organization of the system of administration of “foreign confessions” — non-Orthodox religious communities in Russia in the last third of the 18th — mid 19th century. According to the author, this system, which he calls “the multi-confessional establishment”, was flexible and included significant elements of compromise. On the one hand, with the undoubted primacy of the Orthodox Church, most of the non-Orthodox confessions were granted, in one way or another, the status of state institutions. This strengthened their position, enabled their clergy to be involved in the processes of government and, at the same time, strengthened the internal unity of the Empire. On the other hand, as the imperial state apparatus developed and a tendency towards unification became more prominent, from the second half of the 19th century onwards the supreme authorities began to worry that the integration of different groups through religious institutions might threaten state cohesion. Nevertheless, until the collapse of the Russian monarchy the autocracy never succeeded in developing an alternative model for the administration of religious affairs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37813,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ural''skij Istoriceskij Vestnik\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ural''skij Istoriceskij Vestnik\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30759/1728-9718-2022-2(75)-25-36\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ural''skij Istoriceskij Vestnik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30759/1728-9718-2022-2(75)-25-36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这篇文章是专着章节[Paul W. Werth,沙皇的外国信仰:宽容和俄罗斯帝国宗教自由的命运(牛津大学,2014年)]的删节版,作者考察了18世纪最后三分之一至19世纪中期俄罗斯非东正教宗教团体“外国教派”管理系统的组织历史。据发件人说,他称之为“多教派体制”的这一制度是灵活的,并包括重要的妥协因素。一方面,由于东正教无可置疑的至高无上地位,大多数非东正教教派都以这样或那样的方式获得了国家机构的地位。这加强了他们的地位,使他们的神职人员能够参与政府的进程,同时,加强了帝国的内部团结。另一方面,随着帝国国家机器的发展,统一的趋势变得更加突出,从19世纪下半叶开始,最高当局开始担心不同群体通过宗教机构的整合可能会威胁到国家的凝聚力。然而,直到俄罗斯君主制崩溃之前,专制政体从未成功地发展出另一种管理宗教事务的模式。
DIVERSITY AND UNITY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE’S “FOREIGN FAITHS”
In this article, which is an abridged version of the monograph’s chapter [Paul W. Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths: Toleration and the Fate of Religious Freedom in Imperial Russia (Oxford, 2014)], the author examines the history of the organization of the system of administration of “foreign confessions” — non-Orthodox religious communities in Russia in the last third of the 18th — mid 19th century. According to the author, this system, which he calls “the multi-confessional establishment”, was flexible and included significant elements of compromise. On the one hand, with the undoubted primacy of the Orthodox Church, most of the non-Orthodox confessions were granted, in one way or another, the status of state institutions. This strengthened their position, enabled their clergy to be involved in the processes of government and, at the same time, strengthened the internal unity of the Empire. On the other hand, as the imperial state apparatus developed and a tendency towards unification became more prominent, from the second half of the 19th century onwards the supreme authorities began to worry that the integration of different groups through religious institutions might threaten state cohesion. Nevertheless, until the collapse of the Russian monarchy the autocracy never succeeded in developing an alternative model for the administration of religious affairs.
期刊介绍:
The Institute of History and Archaeology of the Ural Branch of RAS introduces the “Ural Historical Journal” — a quarterly magazine. Every issue contains publications on the central conceptual topic (e.g. “literary tradition”, “phenomenon of colonization”, “concept of Eurasianism”), a specific historical or regional topic, a discussion forum, information about academic publications, conferences and field research, jubilees and other important events in the life of the historians’ guild. All papers to be published in the Journal are subject to expert reviews. The editorial staff of the Journal invites research, members of academic community and educational institutions to cooperation as authors of the articles and information messages, as well as readers and subscribers to the magazine.