English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article analyzes the public desire to adjust the state-religion relations at the turn of the 21st century. It has been provoked by the fact that Russia is still looking for its own model of relations alongside with the development of traditional religiosity. The aim of the study is to identify the forms of social and political practices aimed at changing the state-religion relations existing in the past. The study reflects the results of the periodical press analysis. Lots of periodicals covered social and political discussions of the issue: draft laws and research works within historical, neo-institutional, and comparative approaches. The author identifies significant institutional changes that triggered social and political practices related to SRR at the turn of the 21st century. Special federal and regional agencies responsible for religious policy appeared within the governmental system. The creation of the Interfaith Council of Russia as well as the adoption and publication by the leading religious organizations of their social and political doctrines also fell within the tendency. Social and political practices were unfolding within the two main trends: (1) Russia is a secular country, and the state should consider secularism as a strategy of its religious policy; (2) the crisis typical of the period triggered the search for additional resources and governmental mechanisms. There were disagreements in the public opinion. Some people were actively trying to save and protect the former relations that meant the exclusion of the state from the religious sphere regulation (separation SRR model). Others were proponents of the new cooperation SRR model, but its content was interpreted in different ways. The crisis contributed much to social and political practices which approached the traditional religions problem as one of the options for finding mechanisms to restore control over the country and solve social and spiritual problems. The traditional religions problem became a social and political one. This fact stirred the religious world up and in fact split it apart. The State Duma was one of the bodies involved in state-religion relations. At the turn of the 21st century, its Committee on Public and Religious Organizations was actively promoting the idea of traditional religions. Those who supported the idea to include the concept “traditional religion” into the political and legal frameworks were trying to implement it in their lawmaking practice. They came out with several bills. The most debatable of them were the ones named after their authors (Shandybin’s bill, Chuyev’s bill, Glazyev’s bill, etc.). There were also drafts of the Religious Policy Concept. The study describes unsuccessful attempts (by bills and SRR concept drafts) to turn traditional religiosity into a normative element of Russian social and political frameworks. It was a big challenge for the state and the public.

Social and Political Practices of Adjusting the State-Religious Relations in Russia at the Turn of the 21st Century