The confessional aspect in the national policy of Alexander II

Razgovorov Sergei Vladimirovich ORCID: 0009-0000-6061-7035 Postgraduate student; Institute of Humanities; Moscow City Pedagogical University 108814, Russia, Moscow, ul. Vasily oschepkov Street, 3, sq. 115 sergraz98@gmail.com

Introduction

The national policy of the Russian Empire has received much attention in Russian historiography. The period of the second half of the 19th century, and in particular, the policy of Russification and the development of new annexed territories, aroused the greatest interest among researchers. In particular, since the beginning of the 20th century, quite a lot of research has been published on the Polish Uprising of the 1860s and the unrest in the Caucasus. The religious aspect was poorly touched upon in such studies. Monumental works on this topic began to be published much later, and they dealt with either the specifics of specific regions or a single issue. In view of this, national and confessional politics were considered separately in the research, or one obscured the other.

Soviet historiography paid great attention to the empire's policy of assimilation of the non-Russian population and economic pressure on the annexed territories. The confessional aspect was touched upon little, and there were practically no specialized monographs on this topic. As a rule, the history of the Orthodox Church or other confessions in the territory of the Russian Empire was understood in the context of culture, without focusing on a specific time period.

Since the 1990s, the number of studies devoted to religious institutions and non-believers of the Russian Empire has increased significantly. Among the most complete and detailed works is the monograph by historian V.A. Fedorov, who examines the history of the Orthodox Church in Russia from both the synodal and pre-Synodal periods. Although this work allows us to identify the main trends in the development of religious institutions, it focuses on them in an overview and does not focus on them. The Orthodox Church itself during the reign of Alexander II is considered in isolation from many social and political factors, such as religious confrontation with non-believers and foreign policy influence.

The most complete work on the history of the Orthodox Church during the reign of Alexander II can be considered the monograph of the historian and religious scholar S.V. Rimsky: "The Russian Church in the era of great Reforms." It provides a comprehensive analysis of both the crisis of the Orthodox Church and the measures taken by the Government to overcome them in this time period. The researcher places special emphasis on the position of the Orthodox Church in the western provinces, conflicts in the government during the development of church reforms, as well as on the personality of reformers, in particular, the Minister of Internal Affairs P.A. Valuev. S.V. Rimsky's monograph contains exhaustive factual and statistical material. However, it does not affect the position of the church in many other regions, as well as the interaction of the Orthodox population with non-Believers, with the exception of western provinces. It also pays rather little attention to Alexander II himself, with more emphasis on members of the government.

One of the most detailed research works on the confessional policy of the Russian Empire towards non-Believers is the monograph by historian A.K. Tikhonov "Catholics, Muslims and Jews of the Russian Empire in the last quarter of the XVIII — early XX century." In it, the author examines in detail the dynamics and interaction of the imperial government with religious minorities in the country. However, several significant factors are also omitted or underrepresented here, such as the influence of the Orthodox Church.

The works listed above allow us to consider the specifics of Alexander II's national and religious policy in one of its aspects, but omit some significant factors. The confessional aspect was an inseparable component of the national policy of the Russian Empire. The Government not only sought to establish order in troubled regions, but also to maintain religious and cultural unification, as well as enhance the authority of the Orthodox Church. This article attempts to consider these factors, as well as the national and confessional policies of the Russian Empire as part of a single whole. In view of this, the civilizational approach was chosen as the methodology. It not only allows us to identify cultural and historical features peculiar to the Russian Empire, but also representatives of other faiths culturally isolated from the majority of the population. The work also applied a systematic approach to the study, analyzing various elements of the national and confessional policy of Alexander II as part of a single whole.

A set of sources of the following types was used in the work: office documents (for example, "Note on iron Capital"), sources of personal origin ("Diary of P.A. Valuev, Minister of Internal Affairs"), journalistic sources (magazine "Spiritual Review") and others.

The chronological scope of the study is limited to the period from 1855 to 1881, that is, the years of the reign of Emperor Alexander II. The territorial framework covers the entire territory of the Russian Empire for a specified period of time. A greater emphasis in the study was placed on the western provinces of the country, as an indicative region that most fully reveals the specifics of Alexander II's national and confessional policies.

Research.

The religious aspect has always played a huge role in the daily life and politics of the Russian Empire. Orthodoxy was the cultural foundation of the country. It was an integral part of Count Uvarov's theory of official nationality, a pillar of autocracy, and a reflection of Russia's cultural identity and uniqueness on the world stage. It was declared that it was Orthodoxy that should occupy a dominant position relative to other faiths ^{[7, p. 43]}.

However, this did not mean that other religions in the country were persecuted or belittled. The principle of religious tolerance was declared in the Russian Empire. Successful military campaigns and peaceful colonization of new territories led not only to the annexation of new lands, but also to the peoples inhabiting them. In order to avoid conflicts and integrate non-Believers into the structure of the state, the government allowed them to preserve their religious and cultural identity. However, some restrictions were imposed on them, such as the inability to hold certain government positions.

And if the situation was much simpler in the case of interaction with small nations whose beliefs had not received significant territorial distribution, significant problems arose with representatives of world religions.

One of the most unstable regions of the Russian Empire under the rule of Alexander II were the western provinces. Mostly different branches of Christianity were represented there: Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Protestantism, whose relationships throughout history were antagonistic. Religious confrontation naturally led to social unrest, which repeatedly flowed into full-scale uprisings.

As already mentioned, religion was of key importance in people's social life, and it was often to it that the participants in the conflict appealed. Over time, in the western provinces, an associative series developed in society, where Catholics were identified with Poles, and Orthodox with Russians. Accordingly, any social conflicts somehow had the imprint of religious intolerance. Attacks on the Orthodox clergy have become more frequent, expressed both in the form of public humiliations and church pogroms. Attempts to appeal to the courts were often unsuccessful, since the Catholic clergy enjoyed the patronage of the local aristocracy.

The Imperial government received information about such precedents, and therefore sought to weaken the influence of gentile aristocrats in the region. It was decided to do this by strengthening the positions of the Orthodox Church. This step can be attributed to the unification of its association with the Uniates, which began under Nicholas I. The Orthodox Church has received a large influx of flock and expanded its influence in the region. In addition, the government exploited the unpopularity of the Catholic aristocracy among the peasants. For them, the image of the landowner and oppressor was also often associated with Catholics in general.

Social and religious tensions were not unique to western provinces. The situation in the Caucasus and Central Asia was also unstable, especially given the prolonged military clashes that had taken place. Due to the harsh climatic conditions, the complex clan structure of local society and cultural differentiation, the government could not form a regional administration in the same way as in other regions.

A certain amount of political flexibility was required to ensure order. The Government was primarily interested in establishing the position of the Orthodox Church in Muslim regions. It was presented here earlier, but it was going through a long crisis. To remedy the situation, by the time of Alexander II's reign, the construction of new churches had significantly accelerated ^{[13, p. 112]}. As in the case of the western regions, the government was guided not so much by the desire to achieve religious unification as by the inadmissibility of leaving Gentiles without control.

The foreign policy factor also remained problematic. Russia, being the heir of Byzantium as the largest center of Orthodoxy, has fully concentrated in its hands the levers of pressure over the church within the country. This led to the establishment of the dominance of secular power over spiritual power and ensuring full control over the internal affairs of the church. In the case of Islam and Catholicism, these centers were located abroad. And the representatives of these faiths were directly dependent on the orders and administrative decisions of the Vatican and the Ottoman Empire. Empires.

Therefore, the government has set itself the task of removing the Gentiles from the direct subordination of foreign religious centers. Specialized agencies and presences have been established for this purpose. Their task was to form charters, conduct attestations of future clergymen, and admit trustworthy clergy members to service.

This idea has gained support with the growth of social unrest in problem regions. During the Polish Uprising of 1863, the authorities received information that Catholic priests played a significant role in agitating and supporting the rebels. Against this background, initiatives to combat Roman influence in the western regions began to appear more and more frequently at the top.

After a series of diplomatic conflicts, the Russian Empire cut ties with the Vatican for a long time. From now on, the Catholic clergy had to report directly to the imperial center. Moreover, information is known about the preparation of the union, which was supposed to gradually transfer Catholics to the bosom of Orthodoxy. The project, however, was never implemented. Among other reasons, the founders of the union feared that the union would be purely nominal. Catholics would have preserved their cultural and religious identity, which the union was directed against ^{[8, p. 12]}.

Even though the project did not take place, the government has repeatedly raised the issue of the need to weaken the position of Catholics in the region, including in the religious sphere. The ministers saw in the policy of Russification not only the establishment of strict control over the rebellious population, but also a religious confrontation with the West as a whole. In the opinion of public figures of the era, it was important for the Gentiles to accept the Russian identity and move away from the influence of foreign powers ^{[3, p. 428]}.

The conflict was fueled by unia projects from the West, where Catholicism was supposed to occupy a dominant position. One of the most prominent proponents of this idea was Prince Gagarin. He saw unification with Rome as a way for Russia to avoid the growth of revolutionary sentiments and increase the authority of the church. The government, although pursuing similar goals, could not put Catholicism above Orthodoxy. Not to mention the principled position of the Orthodox clergy and the public in opposing the Catholic West.

Against this background, the desire of the Papal See to establish its influence in Russia became more and more apparent. Back in the 1940s, Pius IX expressed concern that worthy Orthodox people had broken away from the tutelage of Rome, and called for unification. The Pope repeated his appeals many times, but the Orthodox Church remained adamant ^{[15, p. 93]}. The clergy pointed out that the Roman See wants the unification of churches solely on the positions of subordination of Orthodoxy to the Vatican.

It is worth noting that at that time, the conflict with Rome was not only in the Russian Empire. Many Catholic monasteries have also been closed in many European countries. The Jesuit Order was particularly badly affected ^{[20, p. 169]}. He was seen as an instrument of papal control. States became increasingly secular and independent of the influence of the clergy. Thus, the weakening of the influence of spiritual power from the outside was not a unique phenomenon within the Russian Empire, but a general process of secularization. Religion itself turned into a tool in the hands of the rulers, but not the pope.

The government of the Russian Empire received numerous reports about the preparation of Poles for new uprisings, where Catholic clergy, including from abroad, provided all possible assistance. In one of the memos to the emperor, it was emphasized that the Poles themselves were to blame for their hardships. Religious humiliation would not have occurred if it had not been for their destructive line of behavior ^[11].

Attempts at rapprochement between representatives of the two faiths were often thwarted by both the Gentiles and the Orthodox population. An example of this is the dynamics of mixed marriages with Catholics. This practice became widespread under Nicholas I. However, even then, with the direct support of the Pope, the Catholic clergy took this practice with hostility. The priests argued that in this way Russia sets itself the goal of culturally destroying Catholics and the Polish people identified with them ^{[7, p. 163]}. However, after the uprising of 1863, the government began to fear that children raised in mixed marriages would adopt Catholic values rather than Orthodox ones. Thus, the rejection of such alliances became mutual, as well as the prospect of a rapprochement between the two peoples.

The Governor-General of Vilna, M.N. Muravyov, spoke particularly vividly in the direction of repressive policies against the Catholic population. He argued that the territories of the western provinces originally belonged to the Russians, and therefore they should be freed from the influence of the alien population ^{[9, p. 184]}. With the accession of Alexander II to the throne, expectations grew among the public about the restoration of the authority of the Orthodox Church in the country. Coupled with this religious upsurge, the idea of "spreading out" was presented as a new round of religious struggle and a step towards cultural independence.

Another feature of the confessional policy of the Russian Empire of this period is evident here: due to the fact that the Orthodox Church was under the control of a secular institution, its affairs were often handled by persons unrelated to the priesthood. However, many of them were genuinely concerned about the problems of spirituality and morality, and their name was associated with the protection of the Orthodox faith. This is most clearly seen in the complementary work of D.A. Kropotov, devoted to the political activities of M.N. Muravyov. From the very first pages, the author paints the official not just as a defender of the Russian population, but of the Orthodox faith itself against attacks by gentiles ^{[17, p. 2]}.

There were also opponents of the repressive approach. One of the leading initiators of the church reforms under Alexander II, Minister of Internal Affairs P.A. Valuev, advocated the solution of the national question through peaceful coexistence with the Gentiles ^{[19, p. 243]}. In his view, it was possible to achieve peace in problematic regions by increasing the authority of the Orthodox Church in order to make it more attractive to representatives of other faiths. He emphasized the impossibility of resolving spiritual differences through material pressure ^{[5, p. 126]}.

The position of Emperor Alexander II himself on issues of confessional politics and attitudes towards Gentiles changed gradually depending on the situation in the country and his personal views. In the early stages of his reign, one can trace a tolerant attitude towards the subjects of the empire. However, at the same time, the emperor's intransigence to social unrest on the territory of the state was clearly declared, and that the position of a particular religion in the country depended on the actions of the gentiles themselves.

So, in his speech delivered shortly after his accession to the throne, Alexander II called on Poles to come to their senses and accept that from now on the destinies of Catholics and Orthodox are united, and that their well-being depends on their own prudence.

Alexander II's tolerant attitude towards other faiths was indirectly confirmed by his approving resolutions on proposals for a peaceful settlement of conflicts in troubled regions. Thus, he approved a note attached by the Minister of Internal Affairs, P.A. Valuev, which stated the need to resolve social conflicts solely through the principle of mutual respect and religious tolerance ^[12].

However, it also seems that the confessional aspect of domestic politics was viewed by the emperor solely from a utilitarian perspective. Being an Orthodox believer, he, like many other European rulers of that era, viewed the church as an instrument of control. At the same time, he was aware of the need to maintain this instrument in proper condition. It is known that when the emperor received the book "Description of Rural Clergy" by Priest John Bellustin, depicting the extremely sad state of the clergy, he ordered the government to familiarize itself with this book as a basis for future reforms in the Orthodox Church. This was especially revealing, given the harsh criticism directed directly at the authorities and the higher clergy ^{[2, p. 9]}. Despite the fact that many conservative-minded people from the emperor's entourage called Bellustin's book itself sedition and lies. In one way or another, the emperor ordered audits and inspections to check the well-functioning mechanism of power. If the pressure tool is not working well enough, it should be reformed, even taking into account this kind of criticism.

The thesis that Alexander II viewed religious institutions more as a tool may cause disagreement, but this point of view is supported by several factors. Firstly, the nature of the reform of the Orthodox Church as a key element of cultural pressure on the population, including non-believers. Where the clergy tried to gain greater freedom, for example, when establishing Orthodox brotherhoods in western provinces with their own charters, the state sought to stop the free development of the church. None of the decisions of the clergy should have taken place without the strict control of the secular authorities. Secondly, prominent religious figures were poorly involved in the development of reforms. Often, everything was done solely through consultations, while the changes themselves were developed by secular officials. It was important not so much to develop religious thought and philosophy as to enhance the very authority of the church. Thirdly, restrictions on other faiths were often explained by the government precisely by the negative influence on the minds of the population and the introduction of alien and dangerous ideas of freethinking.

Against the background of crises and social processes within the Russian Empire, the attitude of the government of Alexander II towards the Gentiles was also changing. Allowances or restrictions were introduced depending on the incoming calls, but the main course was taken precisely to improve the state of the Orthodox Church. The only question remained that the measures themselves eventually proved to be insufficient or half-hearted.

The government's fears of the spread of alien ideas and culture can be most clearly traced to Alexander II's policy towards Jews. The Jewish issue has been quite acute since the annexation of the western territories to the Russian Empire. First of all, the state was afraid of the influence of Jews on both the economy and the religious life of the region.

The high efficiency of labor and the conduct of usurious activities in the Jewish community caused certain economic problems. The local population suffered from this, unable to compete with the consolidated Jewish labor. Moreover, they began to see this as a threat to the conversion of the local population to Judaism. That is why certain repressive measures were imposed on freedom of movement, which were lifted only when Jews separated from the community ^{[20, p. 203]}.

The state sought to maintain a neutral policy of deterrence against Jews, but towards the end of Alexander II's reign, the government was clearly concerned about the spread of opposition circles among them. An 1878 report from the Ministry of the Interior mentioned not only the increased risk of Judaism spreading throughout the country, but also the growth of the revolutionary movement among Jews ^[10]. Therefore, new restrictive measures were still being introduced. The government of Alexander II preferred to solve problems as they came, considering them temporary challenges against the background of improving the position of the Orthodox Church.

A special attitude has developed towards Protestants. This was due to the heterogeneity of this religious trend. The government of the Russian Empire under Alexander II was quite tolerant of the Lutheran and Anglican Churches, but considered others to be "intolerant", such as Baptists and Stundists.

The same utilitarian approach was applied to "tolerant" Protestant movements. The state did not interfere in the affairs of the Protestant Church, but sharply suppressed any attempts to convert from Orthodoxy to another denomination. Also, in the public opinion of that time, concerns were expressed about the spread of this trend in principle. Protestantism, according to publicists, posed a direct threat to Orthodox culture, directly contradicting it. In particular, publicists especially often criticized the ideas of individualism and the rejection of any kind of power, including secular ^{[18, p. 357]}.

The government of the Russian Empire naturally tried to restrain the expansion of the flock of non-religious denominations and the ideas they spread. A striking example of such measures is the set of restrictions imposed on Catholics after the Polish Uprising of 1863. For example, church services were supposed to be conducted in Russian. Thus, the state sought to fully control the information field in the region.

The paradox of the situation was that even under Nicholas I, the holding of services in Catholic churches in Russian was prohibited ^{[4, p. 35]}. The government was just afraid of the spread of Catholic propaganda and ideas among the Orthodox population. This inconsistency in policy was offset by the introduction of new restrictive measures and increased control over the church. This once again demonstrates Alexander II's inert and straightforward approach to religious and national politics.

Another problem in the national policy of the Russian Empire among the Gentiles was the dependence of the latter on foreign religious centers. The state, having severed relations with the Papal see and taken control of the affairs of the Gentiles, tried to impose a system of government that was alien to the local population. For the latter, the break with Rome was perceived as a usurpation of power and the imposition of Orthodoxy. Indeed, for Catholics, this religion was mainly associated with the Russian population, which directly took control of the affairs of their church.

In the face of harassment and police control, Polish Catholics united to carry out common activities. In particular, special fraternities have become widespread, the formation of which was also fought by the government. Moreover, the central government also saw a threat in the processions of Catholics, seeing in this missionary activity ^{[9, p. 415]}. Thus, the government's concerns about foreign influence on social unrest in the country were more than justified. The government's control was most strongly strengthened precisely against the background of external or internal political clashes.

As in the case of Catholics, the attitude towards Russian Muslims became more complicated on the eve of the war with Turkey in 1877-1878. The Emperor was informed that provocateurs were active in territories with a Muslim population, calling on the people to fight against the tsarist government. They claimed that their ultimate goal was to achieve the independence of the Caucasus and Crimea.

An important problem was the conversion of Muslims to Orthodoxy solely for the purpose of moving up the social ladder. This dynamic was especially pronounced among Muslim Tatars, who continued to practice the old religion, referring to the transition formally ^{[21, p. 244]}. According to the Interior Ministry's reports, many mullahs were engaged in agitation and claimed that the state had introduced leniency when converting from one faith to another. Now, according to them, there was no need to contact government agencies, which undermined public order and created confusion in society.

But it is worth noting that the administration itself was very inert about the issue of faith change, not paying enough attention to it. Many baptized Muslims did not know Russian, and the attitude towards them in society was disparaging from both Muslims and Orthodox Christians. For the time being, the state could not develop decent tools to control this practice, which was used by the provocateurs. Accustomed to responding only to existing challenges, without taking proactive control measures, the Government still acted extremely sluggishly.

For the same reason, the government has taken the same restrictive measures against Muslims as with Catholics. Considering repressive measures of total control to be effective enough in one situation, they were applied in all other cases, regardless of territorial and cultural characteristics. Russian Russian government sought to increase the influence of the Orthodox Church and Russian culture, Muslim services were to be conducted in Russian, and local clergy were to be tested for loyalty to the central government. It was declared that the emperor should be called the “true” sovereign, introducing a religious aspect into his image ^{[20, p. 187]}.

The problem of religious influence from outside also affected the eastern provinces of the Russian Empire, in particular, the Buddhist population. As in the case of the Vatican and the Ottoman Empire, the government sought to limit Buddhist contacts with Tibet and Mongolia as much as possible. This process began in the last years of the reign of Nicholas I, but was naturally continued by Alexander II ^{[6, p. 105]}. As in the case of Catholics, the government established direct control over the affairs of the Buddhists from St. Petersburg, and the direct management was carried out by local governors-general. At the same time, the number of Buddhist priests was also limited, as in the case of other faiths, the authorities were afraid of spreading and popularizing the ideas of another religion.

It is worth noting that in some cases the inertia of the government of the Russian Empire was not so pronounced. To confirm this, we can cite the example of the approval of the Catholic see in Tiraspol. Even under Nicholas I, the Pope insisted on the establishment of a Latin department in Saratov, with the aim of "caring for local Christians." In fact, the government suspected that the Roman See was planning to spread its influence in a region where the Catholic faith was virtually unrepresented. According to reports received by the emperor, the ministers saw in the appearance of Catholic dioceses in the central territories of the country solely an attempt to undermine Russian interests and the transition of the population to the bosom of Catholicism ^{[14, p. 127]}.

The government of Alexander II made a decision that should have satisfied both sides: the transfer of the bishop's residence from Saratov to Tiraspol. This would significantly hinder the missionary activities of Catholics in the region and their alleged subversive activities. Thus, the government did not infringe on the rights of non-believers, but at the same time ensured social peace. It follows from this that the strict control over Catholics, widespread in the western provinces, was primarily justified by national policy and an attempt to prevent future riots. At the same time, the attitude towards Catholics was somewhat milder in other regions.

Gradually, the government tried to establish the same secular controls over religious institutions of non-believers as in the case of the Orthodox Church. For example, after the Polish Uprising of 1863, many Catholic monasteries were closed. This decision was attributed to the fact that many of them became a springboard for organizing riots ^{[4, p. 30]}. After the liquidation of most of them, the remaining ones were transferred to government maintenance and under direct control from St. Petersburg.

This further reinforced the government's attempt to make religious institutions of other faiths an exceptionally obedient management tool. However, in this case, there was a contradiction related to the very cultural foundations of the empire. It was most pronounced in the western regions. While simultaneously declaring the idea of a primordial confrontation between Catholics and Orthodox Christians, the state could not achieve submission on the part of the former. Accordingly, it would be impossible to achieve the Government's goal of establishing order in the region and ending conflicts. Not to mention that it was contrary to the principle of religious tolerance.

The attempt to bring the Gentiles to submission and ensure peaceful coexistence with the Orthodox population was also expressed in spiritual education. For example, Catholic elementary schools since 1863 were organized according to the Russian model and had to be subordinated to secular administration. While maintaining the basic education program, Orthodox chanting was also introduced in some educational institutions. The training was supposed to be conducted in Russian.

It was believed that religion was the key factor in personality formation. Accordingly, it was beneficial for the government that Orthodox education spread in an unstable region. As a result, by the end of Alexander II's reign, the Catholic clergy was in deep crisis. There were extremely few theological graduates from the academies.

New textbooks on the law of God in Russian were written out. It openly declared that the followers of the Roman Catholic faith were obliged to serve their emperor and pray primarily for him. This was how obedience to the central government was declared through the prism of religious education. Moreover, the chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, D.A. Tolstoy, also took the initiative to hold additional church services for students in Russian ^{[9, p. 283]}. This was done precisely to consolidate the Russian element in the western provinces.

The situation in the regions with Muslim populations was somewhat different. The religious activities of the muftis were strictly regulated. However, restrictive measures were often taken solely for the certification and training of religious figures. Russian russians, however, Orenburg Governor-General N.A. Kryzhanovsky, advocated that the mullahs also have to take exams for knowledge of the Russian language and keep metric books in Russian.

In the case of the Caucasus, the tsarist government wanted to present itself as the protector and protector of the local population. Thus, the administration did not try to interfere in local trade ^{[1, p. 30]}. Although it was limited geographically, it significantly revitalized the economic life of the region. This, in turn, contributed to the growth of trust in the central government. A. S. Griboyedov spoke about the possible rapprochement of the Muslim and Orthodox populations on similar principles even earlier. Thus, it can be recognized that national and religious policy in the Caucasus under Alexander II was more flexible, while maintaining the principle of religious tolerance.

The situation was much more complicated in the territories of Central Asia with a predominantly nomadic population divided into clans. The idea of a single central government was alien to this region, but the cornerstone of the national idea of the Russian Empire was autocracy ^{[16, p. 42]}. In order to overcome this problem, it was necessary to reduce the influence of spiritual leaders to a minimum. Reports from 1867 mentioned that the administration of the region was fully carried out by the secular administration, while the mullahs had lost their former authority.

The establishment of strict control over other faiths took place against the background of discussions about the situation of the Orthodox Church. By that time, she was going through a deep crisis caused by a protracted conflict between secular and spiritual authorities. Against the background of the weakening of Orthodox theology and the transformation of the clergy into an inert class, the churchmen felt threatened by the Gentiles. The latter not only refused to accept a culture alien to them, but also provoked public unrest.

The society itself was unstable in matters of religious intolerance and hostility. Many Orthodox figures pointed out the inevitability of hostility between the Orthodox and other faiths. This mainly concerned Catholics, with whom conflicts were particularly relevant during the reign of Alexander II, given the Polish unrest in the western provinces. The clergy claimed the unity of their rivals, while the Orthodox world was fragmented, which was facilitated by a low level of spirituality ^{[3, p. 421]}. The clergy, experiencing a prolonged crisis due to the influence of secular rule, could not do without its support, but at the same time sought independence. And unfortunately, such a paradox could not be solved by the reformers, who were only indirectly connected with the affairs of the clergy.

The very idea of the national policy of the Russian Empire through religious identity suffered a setback because of this. Without having the same consolidation as Western Catholic fraternities or such a strong attachment to traditions as Muslims, the Orthodox Church as an instrument of pressure on society was losing its effectiveness, which provoked new unrest. The state has not been able to fully cope with this. Repression and increased police control over non-believers only led to their greater cohesion, which subsequently resulted in long-term negative consequences.

Conclusion

An attempt to establish secular control over the rituals and activities of non-believers sooner or later had to run into a contradiction: religion was inseparable from people's everyday life. Thus, by introducing the Russian language into worship and restricting the activities of Catholic priests who were disloyal to the government, the government turned the same secular population against itself. On the other hand, the Orthodox Church itself experienced prolonged stagnation precisely because of the interference of secular institutions in the internal affairs of the clergy. Therefore, she could not become the very factor that would not only restrain discontent among the Gentiles, but would also become attractive to the entire population of the empire.

The process of gradual secularization and stagnation of religious thought was not unique to Russia in the second half of the 19th century, but religious institutions were much more important for it. The Russian Empire was a multinational state, and many faiths were allowed to freely perform their rituals here. However, if Gentile provocateurs tried to use religion as a tool of social unrest, repression ensued. The government of Alexander II, if at first it tried to achieve peaceful coexistence through compromises, later became disillusioned with this approach and tried to suppress the influence of the Gentiles with harsh repressive measures.

In general, the national administration of the Russian Empire, under the prism of confessional policy, was primarily focused on ending any external contacts between Gentiles and representatives of their denomination, as well as establishing strict control over their rituals. The figure of the emperor should have been dominant for Catholics and Muslims alike, as the government tried to consolidate the importance of the ruler's figure not only from a secular, but also from a religious point of view. However, this contradicted the fundamentals of these religious systems, which could be used by foreign provocateurs. Thus, in order to establish political stability in the country, the state has only exacerbated the tension.