The task of this article is to clarify the appropriateness and adequacy of peace-making (confessional) rhetoric in the situation of the war of aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, in particular, the meaningful correspondence of the concept of «peace» in its application or reading by the bearers of different worldview paradigms. The «russkii mir» cannot be translated either as «Russian peace» or as «Russian world». This is because the scope and content of these concepts are different. Rus (Kyiv`s Rus) (...) — a thousand-year-old princely state with its center in Kyiv, where the ancestors of modern Ukrainians lived, baptized by Prince Volodymyr in 988. Rus is not Russia. But Muscovy adopted the name Russia to derive its historiography from Rus. «Russkii mir» actually refutes the axiological principles laid down by ancient Rus’s civilization (freedom, dignity, partnership, co-creation, mutual responsibility). «Russkii mir» destroys peace in global or any local images, trying to grab the territory it decided to own. «Russkii mir» encroaches on world domination and therefore tries to impose its rules of the game on the world, which would reshape the world structure according to the wishes of the Russian dictators. For this, «russkii mir» uses any means and institutions as a tool: the army, weapons of mass destruction, atrocities, terror, lies, propaganda, the church and peace-making rhetoric. The goal is not to restore peace, but to establish the world domination of the Russian Empire in any of its variants (Muscovy, Russian Empire, Soviet Union, Russian Federation or Orthodox Civilization). Russian Orthodox Church plays a leading role in this — it uses religious rhetoric to formu- late a worldview model of the «russkii mir», consolidates the Russian population for a war of aggression, and justifies the atrocities of the Russian military with the sacred mission of restoring the Holy Rus’. Russian Orthodox Church justifies the «civilizing mission» of the Russian troops, actually calls to protect «our Common Russian Fatherland» by killing Ukrainians on the territo- ry of Ukraine. False messianism, manichaeism, paternalism, hatred of the civilized world that lives by democratic standards and respects the dignity and freedom of the individual, Russian arrogance, conceit, supremacy and egomania — this is what Russian Orthodoxy promotes with its religious rhetoric. Therefore, if we hear calls for «peace» from the bearer of the «russkii mir»’s worldview, it actually means a demand to come to terms with all their whims, to give up one’s own identity, one’s own world, one’s own life, if they do not fit into the concept of «russkii mir». (shrink)

The article proposes to deepen and expand the classical methodological approaches formulated at the beginning of the 21st century within the framework of academic religious studies. Based on the methodological works of the founder of modern Ukrainian religious studies, Prof. Kolodnyi, who first clearly defined the principles of the scientific study of religion, in particular objectivity, historicism, worldview neutrality, pluralism, etc., the authors justify the need for contextualization as one of the main methodological approaches in the study of current religious (...) processes. They insist on rethinking not only the universality and effectiveness of some methodological principles in new circumstances — the Russian-Ukrainian war, but also on the actualization of new ones, critically rethinking their neglect in the pre-war period. It is proved that in the hierar- chy of religious principles, the principle of contextuality becomes a particularly sought-after re- ality of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Even the concepts that researchers use describing a new religious situation must be contextualized. The authors remind about those contextual dangers for the life world of Ukraine that exist in its religious segment, highlighting external and internal factors that cannot be ignored when analyzing the contemporary religious situation in Ukraine and in the world. Analyzing the current reality, the authors conclude that contextuality as a methodological approach in religious studies should consider: 1) The event context — Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine — as a condition for the manifestation of religion, which determines its functional and substantive features; 2) Features, depth and intensity of research’s contextual inclusion/exclusion. Tragic changes in the context of the life of Ukrainians — linguistic, cultural, informational, religious, etc. necessarily correct expert neutrality, objectivity, non-involvement. According to the authors, the war situation liberates from an unbiased, out-of-contextual analysis. The admis- sibility of such contextualization is a matter of debate. (shrink)

The author responds to the article by L. Fylypovych "Does Contemporary Ukrainian Religious Studies have a Strategy for Survival and Development?", where she gives her recommendations for overcoming the crisis in humanities in general and in religious studies in particular.

. In her article the author analyzes the way in which academic scholars combine professional competence and social activity. Academic Studies of Religious is a strategic branch of the humanities, that the practical consequences of theoretical achievements contribute to the establishment of mutual understanding in the multiconfessional and polyscriptive social context. Ukrainian academic scholars jf religious are at the same time scholars as theoreticians and citizens of modern Ukraine. Therefore, they often continue their professional scientific and cognitive activities in the (...) educational and public sector. It is ascertained that, as guided by the principle of scientific prudence and at the same time civic engagement, contemporary Ukrainian academic religious scholars influence social reality as a means of public activity. While staying with theoretical scholars, but at the same time being active citizens included in the epicenter of the reality of modern Ukraine, Ukrainian academic religious scholars seek not only to reason and express themselves, but also to act responsibly both before the scientific community and before the civil community in order to achieve positive practical consequences of their professional achievements. It is proposed to classify the social activities of academic religious scholars according to the criteria a) collective-individuality - UAR and individual action; b) target orientation - different target groups and levels from local to international; c) the sphere of social existence - education and action in different directions; d) qualitative characteristics: whether the use of professional knowledge in public activities or professional activities in favor of the community. Religious professional competence contributes to responsible public activity, creates conditions for positive influence on the development of inter-confessional relations in a multiconfessional modern Ukraine, the formation of a developed civil society in which religious actors are effective and influential actors, rather than "hostages of processes" or "factors for account". Therefore, Ukrainian academic religious scholars and their professional activities in its subject and educational orientation, and their social activities, based on their professional competence, are included in the contemporary social and civil processes involved in such. (shrink)