The Origins and Ecclesiological Development of Sobornost in Russian Religious Philosophy

<title>Abstract</title> <p> Studies of modern Russian identity have largely been dominated by discussions of Eurasianism. As a result, the philosophical and religious dimensions of Russian intellectual history have often remained in the background. Reducing Slavophilism to a debate on modernization, however, fails to capture its broader intellectual and conceptual significance. Rather than viewing it merely as a response to modernity, Slavophilism may be more fruitfully understood as a stage in the process through which Russian culture sought to define its own historical and spiritual identity. Against this background, the present study examines the concept of <italic>sobornost</italic> (соборность) from the perspective of philosophy of religion, focusing on its historical origins and its subsequent ecclesiological development. To this end, the article first investigates the emergence of <italic>sobornost</italic> as a term and its reinterpretation by Slavophile thinkers, before analysing its development within Russian religious philosophy as an ecclesiological and philosophical concept. From the perspective of the history of religions, <italic>sobornost</italic> emerged as the Slavonic rendering of the Greek term <italic>katholikos</italic> (καθολικός) in the translation of the Nicene Creed. Initially functioning as a translational equivalent, the term was transformed by Slavophile thinkers into one of the key concepts of modern Russian religious thought. In this process, it became closely associated with debates concerning the East–West ecclesiastical divide, the problem of authority, and critiques of Western rationalism and legalism. Through the contributions of Aleksei Khomyakov and Ivan Kireevsky, <italic>sobornost</italic> acquired a distinct philosophical content and came to express an ideal of free, organic, and spiritual unity in opposition to Western individualism. This theological and philosophical background later provided an important intellectual foundation for conceptions of the Russian mission, Orthodox universality, and various forms of theopolitical interpretation that emerged in subsequent periods. </p>