Russian Orthodoxy Resurgent is the first book to fully explore the expansive and ill-understood role that Russia's ancient Christian faith has played in the fall of Soviet Communism and in the rise of Russian nationalism today. John and Carol Garrard tell the story of how the Orthodox Church's moral weight helped defeat the 1991 coup against Gorbachev launched by Communist Party hardliners. The Soviet Union disintegrated; leaving Russians searching for a usable past. The Garrards reveal how Patriarch Aleksy II--a former KGB officer and the man behind the church's successful defeat of the coup--is reconstituting a new national idea in the church's own image. In the new Russia; the former KGB who run the country--Vladimir Putin among them--proclaim the cross; not the hammer and sickle. Meanwhile; a majority of Russians now embrace the Orthodox faith with unprecedented fervor. The Garrards trace how Aleksy orchestrated this transformation; positioning his church to inherit power once held by the Communist Party and to become the dominant ethos of the military and government. They show how the revived church under Aleksy prevented mass violence during the post-Soviet turmoil; and how Aleksy astutely linked the church with the army and melded Russian patriotism and faith. Russian Orthodoxy Resurgent argues that the West must come to grips with this complex and contradictory resurgence of the Orthodox faith; because it is the hidden force behind Russia's domestic and foreign policies today.
#625105 in Books Princeton University Press 2001-11-01Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.13 x .66 x 6.06l; .82 #File Name: 0691074623256 pages
Review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. didn't work for me...By C. KollarsI was looking for a book that would describe the Scots-Irish from beginning to end; and that might even provide some insight into a] why their culture was the way it was; b] why most other Colonists thought of them as "scum"; and c] how their culture contributed to the broader "American" culture. I was looking for something somewhat similar to James G. Leyburn's classic "The Scotch-Irish: A Social History"; but more recent than half a century ago; with additional information; and hopefully with some penetrating insights.It turned out this was most definitely NOT that book. In fact; after sampling several tens of pages at the beginning; middle; and end of the book; I gave up; not even finishing it. (I do not understand either the popularity of this book or the many very positive editorial reviews ..._I_ certainly didn't "get it".)For starters; the dates 1689-1764 in the title are neither the beginning nor the end of the Scots-Irish; nor are they the generally accepted beginning and end of the Scots-Irish mass migration to America. I assume they signify something; but I never figured out just what that was; to me those dates just seem rather arbitrary. The fact that the Scots-Irish originated on the "border" between England and Scotland and were encouraged to move as part of the unification of those two kingdoms; is occasionally alluded to but is never explicitly stated; even though that fact seems to me to be a pretty important part of the story.) It's as if an experienced academic historian dived very deeply into the Scots-Irish of a certain period; intending to produce a scholarly book; but at the last minute wrote a "popular" book instead. The result is more a line-by-line rumination on the imagined scholarly book he wished he'd written; than a book about the Scots-Irish themselves. (Or to try to express the same thought but from a very different viewpoint; non-specialist readers will get the strong impression of being "lost in the weeds".)Furthermore; this book is not very well written. Uncommon terms (for example "Old Side" and "New Side"; or "latitudinarianism") are suddenly used without definition or explanation. The logic of what caused what; or why seemingly separate subjects are treated together; is so hard to follow that I suspect that it often simply doesn't exist. And my attempt to tease out the structure by locating the "topic sentence" in each paragraph failed miserably: some "paragraphs" are about more than one thing; some are internally contradictory; and some have no cohesion at all.I was particularly intrigued by two aspects of the (long) title: why emphasize "no name" when several different perfectly clear names are in common use in various locations? and does "creation of a British atlantic world" mean that somehow the Scots-Irish contributed to a significant identity shift that encompassed both the Old and New Worlds? Both mysteries were quickly solved. At the time; the Scots-Irish themselves rejected all the names that are now commonly applied to them as misleadingly inaccurate (and even demeaning). But they never suggested a better name. So from their own internal perspective -which doen't really matter much anyway- they were the "people with no name". The neologism has absolutely nothing to do with what anyone else called them; then or now. And at the time; as events drove a shift from separate English; Scottish; Welsh; and Irish identities to a single British identity; something similar was happening in the Colonies (albeit for somewhat different reasons). The shift from "English" to "British" had very little impact on the Scots-Irish; and coversely their migration had very little impact on the shift. (Whatever impact the Scots-Irish did have on that identity shift was entirely in Ireland; and grew out of their intimate involvement in the revolutionary religious wars contested by Catholics and Protestants.)One particular topic I did find teasingly interesting; a whole topic area that was "new" to me and that seemed quite significant: Several comments that were mainly about other topics also suggested there was some sort of significant separation between the "elite" Ulstermen and the "rank and file". Most of the elite were called "churchmen"; and they owned most of the land. The rank and file were almost universally renters; and for some reason they were excluded from full political participation in their own affairs. Unfortunately neither the situation nor how it developed was ever the central focus; and so was never described or explained in any detail.7 of 7 people found the following review helpful. A Solid-but-Timid Ethnographic StudyBy Frank BellizziGriffin begins by explaining that between 1718 and 1775; over 100;000 people migrated from the Irish province of Ulster to the American colonies. Once in America; these people typically did not take up residence in towns along the east coast. Instead; they settled in the deep woods of Pennsylvania--a colony known for its religious tolerance--and cleared land along what was then the western frontier.Although their ancestors had moved to Ireland from Scotland; they were not identified as Scottish. And though they had recently come from Ireland; neither were they Irish. They were sometimes calls Scots Irish; though they did not call themselves that. What they did call themselves was northern dissenters; a name that made sense in Ireland; but not in America. This book; The People with No Name; tells their often sad and difficult story from the end of the Glorious Revolution to the end of the Seven Years' War. Along the way; Griffin indicates how their experience both reflected and contributed to the development of what he terms "a British Atlantic world."It does not appear that Griffin anywhere specifies a thesis for his book. And; although his six chapters normally follow a chronological sequence; other than what I've already identified; Griffin does not appear to be building a case. So; this book is what might be called an ethnographic history; a description of a people group. What follows are some of the points I picked up and some of the thoughts that occurred to me as I read it.1. Throughout; Griffin highlights the status of the Ulster Presbyterians as second-class citizens in (or from) Ireland; which was itself a second-class kingdom. Once in America; they were sometimes exploited.2. I was impressed at how the development of linen production and trade was so important to the survival and relative prosperity of the Ulster Presbyterians.3. Griffin describes how that after the Glorious Revolution; Britain reinforced its dominance over Ireland; with Parliament making laws that controlled Irish trade. Some Irish leaders pushed back. For example; in Drapier's Letters; Jonathan Swift said that Britain rewarded Ireland for loyalty by giving her "the Privilege of being governed by laws to which we do not consent" (p.18). No one who grew up in the U.S. can hear such anti-British rhetoric without thinking of the American Revolution.4. Griffin mentions that the churches in Ulster began to have once- or twice-a-year regional communion gatherings; with people coming from as far away as 40 miles in order to attend. These gatherings would sometimes number as many as 4000 people. Clearly; this practice was part of the matrix for the future religious camp meetings in America.5. In Chapter Four; the author says that; eventually; the Ulster immigrants to Pennsylvania established churches and presbyteries; and mandated subscription to the Westminster Confession. Griffin's point is that; in the same way that subscription to the Confession lent stability to Presbyterians in Ulster; unsettled by the rapid improvement in their socio-economic status; the same religious move was taken in order to provide stability to immigrants to America who had since their arrival faced poverty; violence; and social chaos. This sort of sociological analysis; according to which environmental factors provide the telling clue; do not always convince me. It's not that the connection is necessarily false. But it seems far from proven in this case.So what was really good about Griffin's book? Its strongest; best aspect is that it relates the story of a significant but easily-lost people. And; the book takes into account a wide range of historical factors such as geography; agriculture; monetary policy; industry and international trade; shipping; religion; war; and class.What I didn't like so much was that the author seemed tentative and non-committal when it came to some of the questions his story naturally raises. For example; was the negative reputation of the Scots Irish deserved? Or was it an inaccurate stereotype? Also; to what extent and in what ways does the history of Ireland; and particularly Ulster; provide part of the backdrop for the American Revolution? Griffin's book teases the reader when it comes to questions like that. But the author apparently does not want to tackle them.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. A good view of the early Colonial Pennsylvania Frontier and the struggles of Irish ImmigrantsBy Ken RussellGriffin provides us with a sweeping picture of the harsh challenges faced by the largely poor Irish immigrants to Pennsylvania. Only the trials that they faced in Ireland could have led them to jump from the frying pan into the fire; as life along the Frontier West of Philadelphia in the mid 1700's was a life of subsistence just on the edge of a stable economy.While these Presbyterian settlers faced harsh living conditions; they continued to make an effort to hold to their more organized congregational religious heritage; as they managed to eventually help establish growing communities along the Pennsylvania Frontier.Griffin helps bring as much focus as possible to a people who left sparse documentation of their lives and aspirations outside scarce Church and Civil records; contributing to a better understanding of a nearly invisible; but vital part of American Colonial heritage.
