Jennifer Johnson and Dr. Richard Jackson, Professor of Geography
As a missionary in Russia, I was always told: To be Russian is to be Orthodox. What does it mean to be Russian after seventy years of Soviet rule, when atheism was religiously enforced? Walking down the streets and passing Orthodox churches in dilapidated condition, I could not help but ask myself what had happened to the church buildings during communism and what was becoming of these buildings today. If the Soviets were so intent on atheism, then it would seem that Russian national identity should also change. But despite the way the Soviets destroyed the churches, the Orthodox Church has persisted as a symbol of Russian national identity. This paper examines how the Soviets treated these buildings during Communism, the restoration work the Orthodox Church is currently doing to the buildings and what this signifies for Russian national identity.
I chose to examine the Orthodox Churches built in Saint Petersburg because it is considered the cultural capital of Russia. A key part of my research is a rare book entitled General Illustrated Guidebook to Monasteries and Holy Places of The Russian Empire and Mt. Athos. It lists the addresses of all the Russian Orthodox Churches in St. Petersburg in 1907. I located the 1907 churches that are still standing and documented their structural integrity and the restoration work done on them, ranking them on a scale of one to five, with one being the worst and five the best. My criteria included exterior details, such as the foundation, roof, doors, windows, cemetery, gates, sidewalks, as well as interior details such as paint, floors, icons, and restoration work. I found out when and why the other churches were demolished and photographed where they once stood. I also interviewed priests and workers at these churches, asking them about the history of the church, congregational attendance, and where the Church receives money to restore the buildings that the Soviets altered and the icons that were destroyed.
At first look, one may assume that the Soviets intended to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), however my research found that the Soviets were more intent on closing, not destroying, the buildings. In an interview with Yuri Kirs, the head architect of restoration projects in the Vladimir Church Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir, he noted that the first level of the iconostasis had everything stolen from it, while the second level had been preserved. It seemed to him that the destruction of the church’s property was done by villains who could only think with their hands, not with their minds. If they had really wanted to destroy the church, they would have obliterated both tiers of the iconostasis. But since they only took icons from the lower level, it seemed that the Soviets cared about stealing the church’s valuables to sell for money.
In addition to taking valuables, the Soviets also used these buildings as storehouses, factories, and police departments, or opened them as anti-religious museums. As a result of this policy, the buildings stand today, which mean that there is a lot of emphasis on restoration and less on erecting new buildings. Since 1991, these buildings have been returned to the ROC and have undergone restoration work. This is significant, because as one worker in Kazanskii Cathedral pointed out to me, the more restoration projects a church has, the more spiritual the church is. To this worker, it seemed that Russians would give their time and money to restore a building only if they considered the building a spiritual sanctuary. Since these buildings are being restored, I concluded that the ROC is definitely important to Russian identity.
Of the 24 monasteries/churches/cathedrals/prayer houses listed in the 1907 book, five were destroyed. I never found one of the cathedrals, which leads me to conclude that it too was destroyed. Of the 18 still standing, only two remained open during the 20th century. It is interesting to note that these two cathedrals (Transfiguration and Nicolaevsky) have ties to the Russian military. It’s as if the Soviets kept these buildings open because they did not wish to void the military efforts of the Russian Empire, their progenitors.
Restoration work was excellently completed in 2 of the 3 monasteries, 5 of the 9 cathedrals, 1 of the 4 churches, and 1 of the 2 prayer houses. In monasteries and churches, the restoration work was either very well done or poorly done. Looking at individual aspects of inside restoration, the majority of buildings in all categories exhibited paint in good to excellent condition. Cathedrals had the best icons, followed by monasteries, then churches, and prayer houses. For floors, 2 out of the 3 monasteries ranked in excellent condition, while cathedrals had 5 out of 9 in excellent condition. Both churches and prayer houses didn’t have any floors in excellent condition. On the outside, the windows, roof, foundation, and doors varied from church to church, but typically most were in good condition. There was only one exception to this—the sidewalks. Two of the three monasteries exhibited sidewalks in the excellent category, while 8 of the 9 cathedrals exhibited sidewalks in the excellent category. The fact that many tourists visit monasteries and cathedrals is one likely explanation for the excellent condition of the sidewalks. Gates and cemeteries were not necessarily a standard feature of the grounds, so I did not analyze these two categories.
The money for restoration work is coming in significant amounts. Most people were hesitant to talk about this subject, but I can make two conclusions about funding. One, buildings that have ties to important events in Russian history receive the most funding, such as Smolnii Institute, which was a center for girls’ education. Today, the city government funds the restoration projects. It also attracts tourists, who pay entrance fees, which in turn add to the restoration fund. Two, buildings that do not have ties to Russian history rely on members’ contributions, such as the Church of John the Baptist, which inside it had a sign stating it needed 500,000 rubles to repair the heating system. Some buildings have the money to finish restoration work, but choose not to. One example is St. Isaac’s Cathedral, which has left intact the marks made by the invading Fascists during WWII. I think the ROC hopes that such visual reminders will invoke emotions that strengthen Russians’ loyalty to and respect for what the ROC has gone through in the 20th century.
The Soviets were very successful in closing the churches, but today these buildings have been returned to the ROC and are being restored to their former beauty. The ROC and its buildings are an important continuum of Russian national identity. Indeed, to be Russian is to be Orthodox!
Indeed, to be Russian is to be Orthodox!
of national identity Russians Indeed, to be Russian is to be Orthodox!
It was wonderfully satisfying to complete this research. Though it was hard at times to make contact with the priests, I found their insights very helpful. I also am grateful to Professor Jackson for the direction and guidance he gave me in the research. I look forward to using the skills and knowledge I acquired in this research as a graduate student at Indiana University, where I will study nationalism’s impact on religious revival in Turkmenistan, post 1991.
Things to address: importance of church building in worship
Thins I wish I had researched: just how strong is the church today, by membership, etc?
I have the dates of when 19 buildings closed: 11 were closed in the 1930s, 5 in the 1920s and 4 in the 1910s. Nathanial Davis, author of A Long Walk to Church, defined three periods of Soviet church closings: 1922, 1929-33, and 1936. Surprisingly, the closings of St. Petersburg churches are not an exact match with Davis’s three periods. The earliest period of closings in St. Petersburg predate Davis’s findings by as much as 5 years. Political geography explains this exception; St. Petersburg had been the capital of the Russian Empire, and was the focus point of the October Revolution (Suny, 53). As the Bolsheviks came to power in this city first, they would enforce some of the first closings in St. Petersburg.