суббота, 26 января 2008 г.

ИНФОРМАЦИОННЫЙ БЮЛЛЕТЕНЬ # 240

ИНФОРМАЦИОННЫЙ БЮЛЛЕТЕНЬ # 240

ЦЕНТРА ИЗУЧЕНИЯ ПРАВОСЛАВИЯ И ДРЕВНЕРУССКОЙ КУЛЬТУРЫ

КОНФЕРЕНЦИИ**СОБЫТИЯ** ПУБЛИКАЦИИ http://www.drevnerus.narod.ru

Адрес для переписки: drevnerus@mail.ru, drevnerus@narod.ru

Мы будем рады любой информации

Мы не редактируем тексты информационных сообщений.

При перепечатке ссылка на рассылку Центра изучения православия и древнерусской культуры обязательна

Распространение материалов и тиражирование бюллетеня приветствуется

Редактор бюллетеня Татьяна Чумакова

Теперь читайте и в блоге http://drevnerus.blogspot.com

******************************

26 января 2008 г.

******************************

Рождественские чтения – 2008: конференция «Наследие Византии в современном мире»

Председатель – архиепископ Новосибирский и Бердский Тихон
Сопредседатели –
Лисовой Николай Николаевич – д.и.н., ведущий науч. сотрудник Института российской истории РАН, зам.председателя Императорского Православного Палестинского общества
Назаренко Александр Васильевич – д.и.н., главный научный сотрудник Института всеобщей истории РАН, председатель научного совета РАН «Роль религии в истории»
Куратор: Розина Ольга Владимировна, к.и.н., доцент Московского государственного областного университета и Педагогической академии последипломного образования

Время проведения: 30 января, 10.00.
Место проведения: Конференц-зал гостиничного комплекса Данилова монастыря; Б. Старо-Даниловский пер. 5;
Проезд: м. «Тульская».

1. Архиепископ Новосибирский и Бердский Тихон. Приветственное слово
2. Назаренко Александр Васильевич, д.и.н., главный научный сотрудник Института всеобщей истории РАН, председатель научного совета РАН «Роль религии в истории» -
«Византийская политическая доктрина о христианской империи и Древняя Русь»
3. Реснянский Сергей Иванович, д.и.н., профессор, академик РАЕН, зав. кафедрой культурологии Московского государственного университета сервиса –
«Византийская модель «священства» и «царства» в истории России (к историографии проблемы)»
4. Ульянов Олег Германович, к.и.н., зав. Сектором церковной археологии Центрального музея древнерусской культуры и искусства имени преп. Андрея Рублева -
«О времени возникновения инаугурационного миропомазания в Византии, на Западе и в Древней Руси».
5. Леньшин Роман Юрьевич, председатель правления АНО «Народный Собор», член Союза Журналистов России -
«Наследие Рима».
6. Рудаков Александр Борисович, философ, публицист, член Союза журналистов –
«Образ Константина Великого как идеал политического лидера православной традиции»
7. Чурсанов Сергей Анатольевич, к.богословия, доцент ПСТГУ –«Учение Великих Каппадокийцев о Пресвятой Троице в современной православной богословской антропологии»
8. Гладышева Стела Геннадьевна, к.ф.н., доцент МИРЭА –
«О понимании обожения на Востоке и Западе»
9. Балытников Вадим Владимирович, к.ю.н., зам. руководителя Управления социально-политических исследований ВЦИОМ –
«Религия и политика в мировоззренческом противостоянии императора Константа II Погоната и святых Мартина Исповедника и Максима Исповедника».
10. Бибиков Михаил Вадимович, д.и.н., руководитель центра истории восточно-христианской культуры Института всеобщей истории РАН –
«Византийское наследие и современная культурная антропология»
11. Меньшиков Александр Владимирович,аспирант кафедры истории и организации архивного дела Историко-архивного института РГГУ,ведущий специалист Главархива г. Москвы –
«Византийское наследие и судьба России в трудах К.Н.Леонтьева»
12. Ужанков Александр Николаевич, д.ф.н., профессор, проректор по научной работе Литературного института им. А. М. Горького –«Когда ум зашел за разум?(византийские святоотеческие традиции в древнерусской словесности)»
13. Турилов Анатолий Аркадьевич, к.и.н., Институт славяноведения РАН –
«Южнославянские переводы с греческого XIV-XV вв. и корпус переводных текстов на Руси»
14. Юхименко Елена Михайловна, д.и.н., ГИМ –
«Церковные древности как аргумент в полемике вокруг старых и новых обрядов (ХVIII-ХIХ вв.)
15. Конявская Елена Леонидовна, д.ф.н., академик РАЕН, профессор Университета Российской академии образования -«Византийская живопись и живописцы в «Паломнике» Антония Новгородского»
16. свящ. Стефан Ванеян, доцент МГУ, зав. кафедрой теории и истории христианского искусства ПСТГУ –
«Современные проблемы изучения византийского искусства»
17. Квливидзе Нина Валериевна, к.искусствоведения, доцент кафедры всеобщей истории искусств РГГУ -
«Иконография Софии Премудрости Божией в византийском и поствизантийском искусстве»
18. Константинова Алла Константиновна, член Союза писателей Ленинградской области и Санкт-Петербурга -
«Божий промысел о России. Цареградская икона Божией Матери. Тайна русского богоизбрания»
19. Розина Ольга Владимировна, к.и.н., доцент Московского государственного областного университета и Педагогической Академии последипломного образования –
«Никея – город Вселенских соборов: краткая история и современное состояние» (мультимедийный фильм)
20. Лисовой Николай Николаевич, д.и.н., ведущий науч. сотрудник Института российской истории РАН, зам.председателя Императорского Православного Палестинского общества -
«Великий русский византинист Ф.И.Успенский и Императорское Православное Палестинское Общество (к 80-летию со дня кончины)»
21. Зубов Дмитрий Васильевич, к.э.н., директор центра «История Афона» -
«Реконструкция актового собрания монастыря св. Пантелеимона на Афоне (Руссика)»
22. Белов Алексей Викторович, к.и.н., доцент Московского государственного областного университета –
«Византийский город: общее и особенное»
23. Гувакова Елена Витальевна, мнс, отдел ДРЖ ГИМ –«Продолжение поствизантийской традиции в крестьянской иконе ХIХ в. (по материалам экспедиции в Рыбинский район Ростовской области)»
24. свящ. Николай Киселев, настоятель храма Знамения Иконы Божией Матери в Захарьине (г. Москва) –
«Похвала Божией Матери в устах преподобного Иосифа Песнопевца»
25. Окара Андрей Николаевич, к.ю.н., Центр восточноевропейских исследований –
«Имеет ли политический и цивилизационный шанс поствизантийское Содружество Наций? (Восточнохристианский мир с точки зрения теории модернизации)»

Информация: Меньшиков Александр Владимирович, ведущий специалист Главархива Москвы, аспирант кафедры истории и организации архивного дела Историко-архивного института РГГУ – «История Византии в сети Интернет»
========================


XVI Международные Рождественские образовательные чтения

«ПРАВОСЛАВНЫЕ ЦЕННОСТИ И СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ»

(Москва, 27 января – 2 февраля 2008 г.)

Институт философии Российской академии наук

Синодальная Богословская комиссия Русской Православной Церкви

СЕМИНАР

Проблема человеческой свободы в философском и богословском дискурсах

ИФ РАН, 29 января 2008 г., вторник, 11:00–18:00, круглый зал (комн. 215)

ул. Волхонка, 14

Сопредседатели:

Абдсусалам Абдулкеримович Гусейнов, академик РАН, директор ИФ РАН

Вячеслав Семенович Степин, академик РАН, председатель секции философии, социологии, психологии и права Президиума РАН

Митрополит Минский и Слуцкий Филарет, Патриарший Экзарх всея Беларуси, Председатель Синодальной Богословской комиссии


11:00 Вступительное слово: академик А.А. Гусейнов

Вступительное слово: академик В.С. Степин

Вступительное слово: митрополит Филарет.

Часть 1

1. Доклад:

А.А. Столяров, доктор философских наук, ведущий научный сотрудник ИФ РАН

«Философская проблема человеческой свободы в Античности и раннем Средневековье»

Выступления: А.Р. Фокин, К.В. Карпов

Дискуссия.

2. Доклад:

А.К. Судаков, доктор философских наук, и.о. ведущего научного сотрудника ИФ РАН

«Разум как свобода в этическом идеализме Канта и Фихте»

Выступления: С.С. Пименов, А.Н. Лазарева

Дискуссия.

14:00–15:00 Перерыв на обед



Часть 2

3. Доклад: игумен Дионисий (Шленов), кандидат богословия, преподаватель МДА

«К вопросу о свободе воли у преп. Максима Исповедника»

Выступления: В.В. Петров, П.Б. Михайлов

Дискуссия.

4. Доклад: священник Владимир Шмалий, кандидат богословия, секретарь Синодальной Богословской комиссии, проректор МДА по научной работе

«Проблема свободы в современном православном богословии»

Выступления: В.К. Шохин, А.И. Кырлежев

Дискуссия.

Заключительное слово: В.К. Шохин

Участники дискуссии:

Гусейнов А.А.

Васильев В.В.

Гаджикурбанов А.Г.

Громов М.Н.

Козырев А.П.

Литвинова Л.В.

Межуев В.М.

диакон Михаил Желтов

Резвых П.В.

Скворцов А.А.

Смирнов Д.В.

Юдин А.В.

Юдин Б.Г.

и другие.
=========================
Published by H-Ideas@h-net.msu.edu (January 2008)

R. Murray Thomas. _Religion in Schools: Controversies around the
World_. Westport and London: Praeger, 2006. vii + 234 pp.
Illustrations, notes, bibliography, index. $49.95 (cloth), ISBN
0-275-99061-3.

Reviewed for H-Ideas by Pamela Slotte, Centre of Excellence in Global
Governance Research, University of Helsinki


The Multifaceted Question about the Place and Role of Religion in an
Educational Setting


Schools are not merely educational institutions; they are political
battlegrounds. They perform an actual and a symbolic task in religious
and nonreligious attempts to gain terrain, or retain it, on a larger
national and international political arena. This is an impression one
is left with after reading R. Murray Thomas's book _Religion in
Schools_. One of the author's outspoken intentions is to show how
particular conflicts about the place of religion in public and private
schools relate to wider patterns of past and present societal concerns
and tensions. Thomas focuses on twelve countries in his
study--Australia, China, England, France, India, Italy, Japan,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Thailand, and the United States.
Central and Latin America, as well as the African continent and
countries in the eastern and most northern part of Europe, have no
representatives among the countries studied. Still, the perspective is
broad. It covers many of the world's religious and nonreligious
beliefs, and comprises such topics as the display of religious symbols
in public schools, compulsory religious instruction, the place of
religion in the teaching of other subjects (like biology), obligatory
participation in religious activities in schools, and state
supervision of private school curricula. The survey clearly shows the
variety of issues that come to the fore when focus is put on religion
in an educational setting.

The author conducts a descriptive analysis of the relationship between
religion and school, the focus of which is fourfold. One aim is
decipher the different types of conflicts about religion in schools. A
further aim is to identify similarities and differences between these
conflicts, as well as to inquire into why this is the case. To
understand why a particular form of conflict arises, the author
proposes an interpretative framework. Here, he is guided by the
hypotheses that "_[t]raditions and critical events from the past have
contributed to the present status of a belief constituency and thereby
affect that constituency's exercise of power during confrontations
over religion in schools_" (emphasis in original, p. 15). Thomas
understands a belief constituency as "a collection of people who
subscribe to the same cluster of convictions" (p. 15). He later shows
this with his study of the different positions that the Roman Catholic
Church holds in today's France, Italy, and Spain despite its
traditionally dominant position. Accordingly, he indicates that it is
beneficial to concentrate on the following four issues when studying a
conflict: "1. the nature of belief constituencies, 2. the influence of
cultural tradition, 3. events that significantly threaten and/or
change tradition, and 4. the exercise of power by the main belief
constituencies engaged in confrontations over religion in schools" (p.
15). Lastly, Thomas inquires into the ways in which people have sought
to resolve the conflicts and how well they seemingly succeeded in this
task.

As a result, each of the chapters dedicated to a country survey
address these issues. Thomas elaborates on the facts behind the
particular controversies related to the relationship between religion
and school, and discusses the ways in which these conflicts are
finally resolved. The book provides an overview of the historical,
religious, social, and political developments of the country leading
up to each controversy. Furthermore, Thomas presents the different
parties involved in the conflicts and their ideological attachments,
and offers an assessment of the level of their authority and power.

Despite the vast and diverse area that the book covers, this study has
a clear, logical outline that helps to keep the threads together.
Three chapters that introduce the theme and describe the
interpretative framework with which the controversies will be
approached precede the chapters dedicated to country surveys.
Similarly, the book concludes with a chapter that rounds out the
discussion of the country surveys and proposes answers to initial
research questions. Writing in a clear and easy reading style, Thomas
has the general public in mind as potential readers and goes to great
lengths to explain central terms and concepts to the uninitiated. A
question is, of course, what kind of previous knowledge one can expect
from future readers. For example, to attempt to give an overview of
all world religions and other belief systems on less than six pages is
ambitious. It illustrates the pedagogical concerns of the author.
However, such concise explanations may also lead the reader astray at
times, being, as they are, schematic. Moreover, if such overviews had
been accompanied by more references, which sometimes are lacking or
amount to a single Internet source, the book would have provided
interested readers with suggestions as to where further information
can be found.

Despite Thomas's outspoken goal to keep chapters short to increase the
ease of reading, he could have elaborated certain perspectives in more
detail to enhance the understanding of the issues at hand. The author
does not claim to have exhausted the analytical tools with the help of
which the empirical material can be approached. Nevertheless, a more
extensive elaboration on, for example, the topic of secularization
could have been useful in clarifying various issues. Thomas approaches
the topic in a somewhat one-dimensional manner. He takes statistical
data showing a noticeable decline in participation in traditional
religious activities, like Sunday services, among European populations
as evidence for a fading religiosity. In the author's analysis, such a
stand is then linked to a display of certain scepticism toward Holy
Scriptures as sources of knowledge. In sociological studies, this is
often identified as the feature of "rationalization" entailed in
secularization; religious explanations of human life increasingly give
way to scientific ones. However, theorists also critically point out
that the trend is not always clear, as people may actually reconcile
religious and rational-scientific discourses.[1] For certain country
surveys, like India and France, the author furthermore identifies
secularism as an imperative characterization of the state, from which
specific understandings regarding the relationship between religion
and school can be deduced.

However, various current studies in sociology of religion tell a more
differentiated story. They show that European countries are
experiencing profound changes in their religious landscapes. While
Western societies have lived through a phase of secularization, value
fragmentation, and individualization, they are also experiencing what
has been termed a re-sacralization or re-enchantment where "the
religious" takes on new forms. In addition, the steady immigration
from other parts of the world vitalizes the landscape.[2] Thus, a
decline in attendance in traditional forms of worship, or the turning
to established religious denominations only for the rites of passage,
does not rule out religiosity as a phenomenon of the past with little
influence on the ways of life of today's people. Yet, what one finds
is that the traditional religious language is at times considered
obsolete; people do not feel at home articulating themselves in it for
various reasons.

Bearing in mind that secularism is a multivocal concept, it is thus
useful to identify different aspects of the phenomenon when trying to
find out in which ways we are witnessing secularization (and
re-sacralization) and what will be its anticipated consequences for
the relationship between religion and school. A distinction can, for
example, be made among a societal differentiation, where religion
comes to occupy a specific space alongside economics, politics, etc.;
a marginalization entailing a loss of influence and authority of
institutionalized religion; and a decline of religious beliefs and
practices--or at least a privatization of religion.[3] What is more,
these different trends do not necessarily occur simultaneously, nor do
they rely on each other. While the influence on part of
institutionalized religion in the public sphere and its school
buildings may have diminished, the same may, in more or less organized
form, continue to prosper in the personal lives of its followers (as
the author's study of China shows), and vice versa.

Clearly, there will be diverse answers to questions related to the
relationship between religion and school, depending on what the
religious, social, and political reality looks like in the
above-mentioned respects. At least, one can imagine that the place of
religion in schools, and, for example, the preferable type of
religious instruction, is viewed differently on the part of religious
institutions with a clearly authoritative place in society than on the
part of individuals who display religious attachments but live in a
society with a variety of religious and other traditions. If the
country surveys at some point had been jointly mirrored against a set
of distinctions, this would have drawn together Thomas's comments on
the issue of secularization. It would have visualized the
multifacetedness of what in current research and public debates is
summarized under the headings of secularism and secularization.

Besides the core facts about different world religions and
nonreligious belief systems provided in chapter 2, some additional
general elaboration on different elements and functions of a religious
or other life view and its relation to life as a whole would have been
appreciated. Thomas mentions such elements but does not elaborate in
any detail. A person surely comes to integrate a variety of aspects in
her/his personality as s/he is socialized into today's societies.
While a religious narrative may play a central part in this
socialization, the individual history with its experiences will still
influence the understanding of the collectively sustained life
patterns. In addition, as Thomas points out, the multiple sources of
information increasingly available to people (while not to everyone)
in a densely interconnected world offer previously unheard of
possibilities for acquiring new perspectives and insights.

As a result, one has to recognize, for example, the varied roles
sacred texts can and do play in the lives of present-day believers,
not the least since established religious institutions in many places
have lost some of their previous authority. Their relationship to the
population varies. People may be simultaneously religious and secular
(depending, of course, on the meaning of these terms). As Thomas also
shows, religious believers can be among those who defend the school as
a secular space, as well as among those who want to challenge this
understanding by increasing the influence of religion over that
sphere. The survey of India, for example, depicts popular resistance
against reinforced influence of the major religious tradition in the
ambit of school instruction. Representatives of all faiths criticized
the measures taken.

The role of religious sources is also a topic that the author
continuously returns to in his discussion of what amounts to
"knowledge" about the world, and where the perspectives of empirical
science and religion quite obviously do not entirely coincide. Yet, in
what sense do religious articulations address human life? What is
their sense and meaning? Believers answer these questions differently.
Yet, this does not mean that some of them would necessarily be less
_sincere_ in their attachment to their faith and its textual sources.
This issue was raised above with reference to sociological studies
that critically explore rationalization as a feature of societal
secularization.

The question of the ontological and epistemological status of
religious utterances is, of course, a much-debated issue within the
field of philosophy of religion.[4] However, even a shorter remark
summarizing different positions could have deepened the understanding
of Thomas's categorizations of believers into (depending on the
particular case) traditionalist, conservative, fundamentalist, and
liberal ones. It would have additionally clarified the diverse
commitments to national and international law, so-called democratic
values, as well as a religious belief with its sources, all of which
the author point out as important when these groups of believers
position themselves in decisions concerning education and the role of
religion in, for example, natural sciences. The last is the issue at
stake in the controversies Thomas examines in the surveys of the
United States and Australia. Such an elaboration would also have
contributed to the understanding of the information that Thomas
appreciatively provides at the end of the book. There, he maps out the
different sources on which actors draw when they position themselves
in the particular conflicts about the place and role of religion in
schools. While that overview asserts that national and international
law, as well as empirical scientific data, generally forms
cornerstones for a position opposite to one based on religious
doctrine or tradition, Thomas simultaneously argues that different
perspectives and sources can fuse for those engaged in a controversy.
For example, in the Thai controversy over private Islamic schools,
so-called pondoks, defenders of these religious schools, sought
comfort in both religious doctrine and an international legal
discourse promoting religious rights.

The remark about a fusion of perspectives is an important point pushed
by Thomas, and it underlines the meaningfulness of the conflict
perspective chosen. Looking at concrete conflicts, the entanglement of
perspectives becomes apparent in a way that an abstract analysis of
the relationship between religion and school may fail to recognize.
Solutions worked out a priori in the abstract may thus in reality fall
short of their goal. In line with this, Thomas also concludes that one
cannot discern definite trends of conflict resolution. Still, in
general, conflicts are at least temporarily resolved. If not, there is
a stalemate.

Based on the country surveys conducted, Thomas further identifies four
general trends of the relationship between religion and schools. He
labels them "secular, religious, alternating and unchanging" (p. 199).
The trends reveal different emphases regarding the direct involvement
of religion: decreasing or increasing involvement, periodically
shifting policies, or stable ones. Hence, a conclusion that can be
drawn, having read the book, is that what it comes down to in the end
when religion is on the educational agenda is a choice between
different possible models for making room for religion in schools, or
more generally resolving a conflict. One model is chosen over another
for some reasons and for some purposes. We are dealing with policy
decisions. As Thomas shows, belief constituencies may play a role to a
greater or lesser extent, depending on their authoritative position in
the concrete society, as well as their present worldwide influence--as
the cases of Pakistan and Thailand show.

The book makes a strong case for the argument that a sensible analysis
of controversies over the place of religion in schools should show
awareness for the background against which a decision to adopt certain
measures is intelligible and for which it is an expression. This, of
course, does not do away with the need to evaluate possible fallacies
in the chosen way for resolving a conflict, or the original order that
gave rise to the conflict in the first place. The author concludes
that critical events often trigger such a need to reassess earlier
positions. As already noted, he also points out the different
positions represented in the analyzed controversies. The adopted
measures are not uncritically accepted, and negotiations are at time
carried out on quite unequal terms.

Likewise, history tells us that the controversies are seldom
permanently resolved. Instead, the potential conflict between religion
and school lingers under the surface more or less enduringly.
According to Thomas, this is particularly the case in societies where
no belief constituency holds a clearly dominant position. Overall, a
hypothesis is that conflicts arise in societies with more than one
religious or nonreligious belief constituency, for the reason that
there will then exist several distinct ways of envisaging the values
and ideas that should inform the school reality. Lastly, Thomas
stipulates that controversies concerning the relationship between
religion and school will increase in Europe and North America, while
nonreligious parties to such controversies in other societies will
most likely lose in influence.

Irrespective of the different issues that are addressed in the book,
and others that could have been added to the discussed ones, the fact
that the presence of religion in schools is a recurrent issue on the
agenda around the world shows that it is not a matter to be taken
lightly. Rather, it strongly engages people. The book _Religion in
Schools _ offers an informative exposé of this ongoing and intense
discussion.

Notes

[1]. See, for example, David Herbert, _Religion and Civil Society:
Rethinking Public Religion in the Contemporary World_ (Aldershot and
Burlington: Ashgate, 2003), 29-59, esp. 40-42.

[2]. See, for example, Richard K. Fenn, "Editorial Commentary:
Religion and the Secular; the Sacred and the Profane: The Scope of the
Argument," in _The Blackwell Companion to Sociology of Religion_, ed.
Richard K. Fenn (Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2003), 3-22; Paul
Heelas, "Introduction: On Differentiation and Dedifferentiation," in
_Religion, Modernity and Postmodernity_, ed. Paul Heelas (Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers, 1998), 1-18; and Danièle Hervieu-Léger,
"Individualism, the Validation of Faith, and the Social Nature of
Religion in Modernity," in _ Blackwell Companion to Sociology of
Religion_, 161-175.

[3]. Distinctions are made in several different ways to identify what
secularization entails. See, for example, Fenn, "Editorial
Commentary," esp. 3-5; Herbert, _Religion and Civil Society; and Talal
Asad, _Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity_
(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003).

[4]. See, for example, Eberhard Herrmann, _Scientific Theory and
Religious Belief: An Essay on the Rationality of Views of Life_
(Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1995); and Ulf Zackariasson, _Forces by Which We
Live: Religion and Religious Experience from the Perspective of a
Pragmatic Philosophical Anthropology_ (Stockholm: Almqvist och Wiksell
International, 2002).


Copyright (c) 2007 by H-Net, all rights reserved. H-Net permits the
redistribution and reprinting of this work for nonprofit, educational
purposes, with full and accurate attribution to the author, web
location, date of publication, originating list, and H-Net: Humanities &
Social Sciences Online. For other uses contact the Reviews editorial
staff: hbooks@mail.h-net.msu.edu.
=====================

"Между прошлым и будущим" в Государственном Литературном музее

c 24 декабря 2007 по 15 апреля 2008 Москва
24 декабря 16.00 "Между прошлым и будущим" - Традиционная культура русских крестьян-старообрядцев. Мы всегда мечтаем заглянуть непосредственно в прошлое своей страны - её культуры, истории, вероисповедания. И в России, слава богу, есть ещё такие островки, где время как будто бы остановилось, и прошлое сохраняется в своей первозданности и неприкосновенности. Эти островки отеческой старины дожили до наших дней благодаря людям, которые старались сберечь самое ценное нашей истории, и в виде традиций передать последующим поколениям.

Церковный раскол середины XVII в., основанный на желании хранить старину в чистоте веры и на убеждении, что остальные от нее отклонились, создал ни на что не похожий социо-культурный феномен под названием старообрядчество. В процессе исторического развития, как известно, и сам раскол "расщепился" на десятки толков и согласов.

Несмотря на гонения со стороны официальных властей XVII-ХХ вв. старообрядцы в разных уголках России стремились любой ценой сохранить веру предков. Для этого они избрали особый путь развития культурных и хозяйственных традиций, ориентирующийся на сознательную консервацию сложившегося уклада в обрядах, бытовой жизни, хозяйственной деятельности. Благодаря этому старообрядчество сумело сберечь до наших дней, уходящие в глубь веков, тысячи старинных кириллических книг, отголоски древнего литургического пения, отрасли местных народных ремёсел и фольклор.

Археографическая лаборатория исторического факультета МГУ представила на выставке уникальные экспонаты из своих фондов, которые собирались более чем 40 лет в процессе исследовательских работ в старообрядческих поселениях Брянской, Московской, Нижегородской, Ульяновской областей, Краснодарского и Пермского краёв, республик Российской Федерации Татарстан и Удмуртия, Гомельской области Белоруссии, Одесской области Украины, Приднестровской Молдавской Республики.

Выставка позволяет увидеть подлинные книги и вещи, пришедшие из глубокого прошлого. Ценность их в том, что они до сих пор выполняют своё первоначальное назначение в домах староверов. Посетитель получит полное, разностороннее представление о нравах, обычаях, духовном творчестве староверов, о предметах их обрядовой практики, конфессиональной одежде, о повседневном быте и ремёслах различных ветвей старообрядчества.
www.museum.ru/N32875


»» Государственный Литературный музей
Адрес: город Москва, ул. Петровка, 28
Проезд: От ст. м. "Пушкинская", "Чеховская", "Тверская", тролл. 3, 31, 15, 13, 69
Телефоны: (495) 623-4175, 621-38 57, 625-12 26
EMail: silvercentury@mtu-net.ru, litmuz@orc.ru