Sobornost (conciliarity) as treated by professors of universities and theological academies - participants of the All-Russian Local Council of 1917-1918

The article is dedicated to the study of the concept of “sobornost” (conciliarity) as treated by professors of universities and theological academies who participated in the 1917-1918 All-Russian Local Council. The focus is on the discussion of the meaning of this term held at the Department for Higher Church Administration in September-October 1917. Analysis is made of the arguments and sources of the professors’ perspectives on conciliarity during the discussions as presented in the minutes of the Council Department. The conclusion emphasizes that this discussion served as a means for the intellectual elite to define their role in the new political context. Conciliarity turned out to be closely linked to the issue of restoring the patriarchate and the structure of higher church administration, as well as the role of laypeople. All the speakers shared the opinion that conciliarity was an attribute of the Church, a principle of its life, and a characteristic of the unity of all believers within it. While advocating for greater involvement of clergy and laity in church affairs, all the speakers, except for A. I. Pokrovsky, recognized a special status of the higher clergy in decisionmaking. However, not all of them supported the restoration of patriarchate, which was seen by many of them as a threat to conciliarity and deprivation of rights of bishops in the first place rather than laypeople. Achieving conciliarity was not a demand of the authorities. Conciliarity became a concept that justified the desire for unity among believers: laypeople, clergy, and bishops in the fall of 1917 when the Council was convened. Under these circumstances, scholars were the ones who verbalized and justified the expectations of the church community.