Problem of the consciousness of Christ in russian theology: christology of St. Innokenty (Borisov) and bishop Ioann (Sokolov)

• Main Author: Artem Malyshev
• Format: Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: St. Tikhon's Orthodox University 2018-12-01
• Series: Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия I. Богословие, философия
• Subjects: Christology; psychology; bishop Ioann (Sokolov); St. Innocent (Borisov); consciousness; self-consciousness; self-perception; Russian theology
• Online Access: http://periodical.pstgu.ru/ru/pdf/article/6617
• ISSN: 1991-640X; 2409-4692

This article studies the problem of Christ’s human consciousness in the Christology of two representatives of Russian theological school, namely St. Innokenty (Borisov), archbishop of Cherson and Taurica (1800‒1857) and Ioann (Sokolov), bishop of Smolensk and Dorogobuzh (1818‒1869). Up to now, this sphere of the scholarly studies have not been a subject of special theological research, despite the fact that many scholars mention the similarity of their dogmatic approaches and specifi c features of their Christological concepts. The doctrine of Christ of the two prominent Russian hierarchs stands out noticeably against the habitual “school”, or traditional, approach primarily due to the fact that with regard to Christ they introduce previously non-employed notions and open new fi elds of study for the Christological science. This article studies one of this fi elds, namely Christ’s consciousness. It considers various shades in the use by St. Innokenty and Bishop Ioann of the term “conscioness” (Russ. сознание) as well as associated theological issues. The article also scrutinises the concept of Christ’s self-consciousness both in Bishop’s Ioann Christology and in the context of his doctrine of the consciousness of mankind, reveals the link and continuation in the approaches of St. Innokenty and Bishop Ioann with specifi c paralells in the doctrines as examples. The fi nal section of the article puts forward some hypotheses as to the reception of St. Innokenty’s and Bishop Ioann’s doctrine in the later tradition.