In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • The Moscow Council (1917–1918): The Creation of the Conciliar Institutions of the Russian Orthodox Church by Hyacinthe Destivelle
  • Dennis J. Dunn
The Moscow Council (1917–1918): The Creation of the Conciliar Institutions of the Russian Orthodox Church. By Hyacinthe Destivelle, O.P. Edited by Michael Plekon and Vitaly Permiakov. Translated by Jerry Ryan. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. 2015. Pp. xviii, 447. $36.00 paperback. ISBN 978-0-268-0217-2.)

The local Council of Moscow of 1917–18 was a pivotal event in the history of the modern Russian Orthodox Church. The last council had taken place in 1667, when Tsar Alexis attenuated the reform movement that Patriarch Nikon had initiated. Peter the Great went further and replaced the patriarch with the Holy Synod, which was headed by a layman who reported directly to the government. That arrangement prevailed until Tsar Nicholas II abdicated in February 1917. The provisional government that succeeded Nicholas allowed religions to organize and manage their own affairs, and, in response, the Russian Orthodox Church convened the local Council of Moscow.

The purpose of the council was to elect a new patriarch and to launch a reform agenda once again, particularly in the light of historical changes related to modernization. The council was particularly interested in exploring more deeply the notion of sobornost’—that organic sense of conciliarity that tied together bishops, clergy, and laity in a unique relationship of love and service where each had its role, its special charism from God, and worked and sacrificed willingly to improve the community. However, council members never reached agreement on a definition of conciliarity. Some argued that it meant more lay involvement and more democratic procedure in the church, and others claimed that it related to defining functions for different groups that remained subordinate to bishops and a patriarch. The council [End Page 181] delved into a wide variety of topics, including church administration, missionary activity, liturgy, preaching, monasticism, schools, local churches, and parochial life. Many of the issues discussed by the council were critical for church reform and renewal, including the role of the laity, the place of women, the church’s role in society, ecumenical relations, and church unity. Unfortunately, the Bolshevik Revolution cut short the council’s work, but the challenges continued to be explored by a brilliant group of emigré Russian theologians and philosophers in interwar Paris, and their work and the original efforts of the Moscow Council are now being studied and used by the Russian Orthodox Church in the postcommunist era to move forward with a reform agenda.

Hyacinthe Destivelle, O.P., an official at the Oriental Section of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, has done an invaluable service for the Russian Orthodox Church and for the whole idea of Christian unity. His book, which is based on the council documents and was originally published in French, is a brilliant and insightful analysis of the Moscow Council and its many fascinating ideas and challenges. It is not only a fair and balanced treatment of Russian Orthodoxy’s determination to make Christ’s enduring message of love and justice relevant to a people experiencing radical changes in society but also an incredibly rich presentation of original source documents, including the publication for the first time in Western languages of The Definitions and Decrees of the Sacred Council of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Statute of the Local Council of the Orthodox Church of All Russia. Destivelle identifies many of the successes of the council (such as parish administration) and also points out a central problem that the council intended to confront—namely, separation of church and state—but never quite managed to address.

Dennis J. Dunn
Texas State University
...

pdf

Share