Заботясь о душах подданных: Религиозная политика в России первой четверти XIX века по Елена Вишленкова (review)

543 Ab Imperio, 2/2005 Archimandrite Pavel STEFANOV Елена Вишленкова. Заботясь о душах подданных: Религиозная политика в России первой четвер- ти XIX века. Саратов: Издатель- ство Саратовского университета, 2002. 444 с. Библиографический список, указатель имен. ISBN: 5-292-03001-5. Elena Vishlenkova lectures at Kazan University, where she holds the chair of pre-20th century Russian history. Her two previous monographs deal with the relationships between official religious policy and public opinion in the tsarist empire (published in 1997) and with theological education in Russia in 18001825 (1998). In the book reviewed here, Taking Care of the Souls of the Subjects: Religious Policy in Russia during the First Quarter of the 19th Century,Vishlenkova elaborates and builds upon her previous research. The author sees this policy as “a unique phenomenon in native and world history” and “a global ecumenical experiment” (P. 3) aimed at societal homogenization via the multifaceted (including religious) integration of the peoples that were absorbed into the empire during its expansion in the late 18th century. Hitherto repressive measures against religious dissidents and exceedingly severe control of the Orthodox Church led to spiritual stagnation and extremism. The Russian establishment learned the bitter lessons of the French Revolution, in which deism , secularism, and anticlericalism triumphed. Freemasonry dominated the Russian religious, political, and cultural scene in the early 19th century . But while in France it sought to destroy the ancien regime, in absolutist Russia its overt aim was to preserve, strengthen, and unify the vast empire of the tsar. Other significant factors influencing developments were the Russo-French War (1805-1813) and the anti-Catholic policy of the Holy Alliance. They provoked restrictive measures toward Roman Catholics and Jews in Russia, who were considered a sort of “fifth column,” a subversive force. The changed attitudes toward denominations in Russia were reflected in attempts to establish new institutions and principles of statereligion relations. Several projects in this vein were not approved because of the ever-changing government orientation. Modernization of the church presupposed and demanded reform in theological education. In this sphere, results were more palpable. Events taking place in Russian religious policy then were closely bound up with the prevalent culture of the times, characterized by attempts at social harmony, aristocratic populism, sentimentalism, mysticism, and, oddly omitted by the author, the ideals of Romanticism 544 Рецензии/Reviews (P. 6). In this context, mysticism means a complex, if not heterogeneous , mixture of Pietism, Hassidism , Hesychasm (more correctly, Neo-Hesychasm), and occultism. It should be stressed that the main component of early 19th century Russian mysticism was formed by Masonic ideas. Chapter I has a historiographical and theoretical thrust. Vishlenkova correctly considers the vast amount of preserved sources not in superfluous detail but as a unified “grand narrative .” She reviews first the sources in published collections of documents and monographs, then the vast amounts of documents in Russian and foreign archives, some of which are coded or unfinished. Especially important are the documents that the author has unearthed in the State Archive of Tatarstan (Pp. 20-21). Her sources also include sermons, articles in periodicals, and personal documents. Interpretative documents are divided into three categories : prime (initial), secondary, and successive.Vishlenkova also divides the reign of Tsar Alexander I into two parts – from 1801 until 1814, when the ideology of enlightened absolutism was predominant, and from 1814 until 1825, when the social utopia of the “all-Christian state” based on ecumenism and mysticism prevailed. Then she makes a sweeping historiographical survey of both secular and ecclesiastical studies on the topic, which she considers in many cases one-sided and positivist. Alexander’s era is currently in vogue and it is reconstructed as a model to be copied or rejected by scholars and politicians alike. Vishlenkova focuses on church-state relations and the national question in Russia. In Chapter II, attention is paid to the particulars of the “Christianecumenical ” program, which was met with a strong critique from the opposing ideological sides in post-war Russia: both from the left-wing circles, which found it too superficial, and from the hard line Orthodox, the Rosicrucians, and the Ultramontanists, who insisted upon a return to conservative values. The reactionaries triumphed in 1824, while the liberals organized the unsuccessful Decembrist rebellion in 1825. Chapter III considers the opposing tendencies within the state to create a confessional system of religious...