“Pravova derzhava”. Issue 35 (2024), pages 299–305.

DOI: 10.33663/0869-2491-2024-35-299-305

Bondaruk Tetyana
Some aspects of the Orthodox component of the state regime of Mоscovіі (XIV–XVII centuries)

Introduction. Counteraction to Russian aggression, the goal of which is the destruction of the Ukrainian state, necessitates the analysis of racism as a totalitarian ideology and practice, the foundation of which is history, culture, Orthodoxy and their refl ection in state-legal processes. The aim of the article is a consideration of the main stages of the institutional and ideological design of Moscow Orthodoxy as a component of the state regime of Muscovii.

Results. The beginnings of Moscow/Russian Orthodoxy are associated with the «sitting at the tables» of representatives of the Rurik dynasty in the eastern lands of Rus`. In the process of the formation and strengthening of Muscovii, which took place both in opposition and in cooperation with the Golden Horde, the physical presence of Kyiv metropolitans in the cathedrals of its cities became a signifi cant argument for the acquisition of an autocephalous church in the Grand Duchy of Moscow. It was established by the act of 1448, as a result of which the eastern dioceses of the former single Kyiv Metropolitanate came under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Moscow. The de jure process of establishing an independent Orthodox Church in Muscovii ended in 1589, when Patriarch of Constantinople Jeremiah II Tranos, during a long visit (stay) to Moscow, recognized its then Metropolitan Job of Moscow as its patriarch. Three stages are distinguished: the decentralization of the Kyiv metropolis due to the holding of chairs by the Kyiv metropolitans in the cities that were under the protectorate of the Golden Horde (primarily Rostov, Volodymyr na Klyazma, Moscow) (until 1448), the formation of two currents of Byzantine-Eastern Orthodoxy — Moscow Orthodoxy around the Metropolitan of Moscow and Rus`ian Orthodoxy — around the Metropolitan of Kyiv, Galicia and All Rus` (second half XIV–XVI centuries, and the Moscow Orthodox Church from 1448 to 1589 did not have offi cial recognition of its status, and received the status of patriarchy in 1588) , absorption of the Kyiv Metropolitanate by the Moscow Patriarchate (second half of the XVI — second half of the XVII century). It is claimed that the mutually benefi cial symbiosis of the state and the church caused the emergence of Muscovii as a theocratic state, the concepts of «New Israel», «Holy Russia», etc. At the beginning of the 16th century the concept of Philofey (1523– 1524) — «Moscow — the Third Rome» — appeared, which became the basis for Orthodox messianism. Aleksey Mykhailovych was already striving for the revival of the Byzantine Empire with its center in Moscow as a universal monarchy uniting all the Orthodox into a single state, and in 1686, Tsarina Sofi a joined the Holy League against Turkey and, above all else, put the fi ght for the liberation of the «persecuted Orthodox».

Conclusions. The formation and development of Moscow Orthodoxy took place in a close relationship and interdependence between the government and the church. The Byzantine principle of «symphony» — the closest cooperation between religious and secular authorities was the basis of the state regime of Muscovii. The result of such cooperation was the autocratic tradition and practice of the sacralization of the ruler, the special semi-religious status of Moscow and the emergence of the timeless ideology «Moscow — the Third Rome», which became the starting point for further ideological frameworks of the internal and foreign policy of the Russian state. In particular, it was based on the Uvarov formula «autocracy, Orthodoxy, nationality» and the key concept of the Russian national idea embodied in racism - the concept of «Rusкiy mir».

Key words: state regime, Muscovia, Moscow — the Third Rome, Orthodoxy, «Ruskiy mir».

References

1. Yevsieieva T. Rosiiskyi pravoslavnyi mesianizm yak bazovyi arkhetyp politychnoi kultury tvortsiv «svitovoi revoliutsii». Problemy istorii Ukrainy: fakty, sudzhennia, poshuky. 2007. 17. S. 115–137 [ukr.].
2. Mytsyk Yu. A. Moskovskyi patriarkhat. Entsyklopediia istorii Ukrainy: T. 7: Mi-O / Redkol.: V. A. Smolii (holova) ta in. NAN Ukrainy. Instytut istorii Ukrainy. Kyiv: Nauk. dumka, 2010. URL: http://www.history.org.ua/?termin=Moskovskyj_patriarkhat (ostannii perehliad: 08.04.2024) [ukr.].
3. Shumilo S. Hryhorii Tsambalak yak antohonist mytropolyta Fotiia Kyivskoho ta spadkoiemets kyievoruskykh literaturnykh tradytsii. Siverianskyi litopys, 2020. URL: http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/173316/10-Shumilo.pdf?sequence=1 [ukr.].
4. 1492 h. Mytropolyta Zosymy yzveshchenie o paskhaliy na osmuiu tysiachu let. Russkaia ystorycheskaia byblyoteka, yzdavaemaia Arkheohrafycheskoi komyssyei. SPb., 1880. T. VI [rus.].
5. Malinin V. Starets Yeleazarova monastyria Filofei ta yoho poslannia. Kyiv, 1901 [rus.].
6. Detalnishe dyv.: Moisieienko L. M. Vidobrazhennia mifu «Moskva — Tretii Rym v politytsi Rosii: istoriohrafi ia problemy. Humanitarnyi visnyk. Chyslo 32. Vyp. 16. S. 165–176. URL: https://er.chdtu.edu.ua/bitstream/ChSTU/1569/1/19.pdf [ukr.].
7. Pokladena hramota pro zasnuvannia Rosii patriarshestva. 1589, traven. Arkhivna kopiia vid 6 sichnia 2019 roku na Wayback Machine [rus.].
8. Haukhman M. Seansy chytannia «Novoi imperskoi istorii Pivnichnoi Yevrazii: shliakh do Tretoho Rymu». URL: https://uamoderna.com/blogy/mikhailo-gaukhman/seansy-chytannia-nii-pche-6/ [ukr.].
9. Balzhyk I. A. Vidnosyny derzhavy i tserkvy: «symfoniia vlad». Dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk Spetsialnist 12.00.01. Odesa, 2007. S. 12 [ukr.].
10. Hyrych I. Russkii mir»: vid kontseptu «Moskva — tretii Rym» do rashyzmu. URL: https://www.prostir.ua/?blogs=russkij-mir-vid-kontseptu-moskva-tretij-rym-do-rashyzmu [ukr.].
11. Hromov S. Try dzherela i 100 miloniv skladovykh rashyzmu. URL: https://localhistory.org.ua/texts/statti/tri-dzherela-i-100-milioniv-skladovykh-rashyzmu-chastina-iii-rezultati-roztinu/ [ukr.].