Faculty of History of the Moscow State Lomonosov University and its Department of Church History conducted an international scientific conference "Christian modernism: origins, development, contradictions" at Moscow State University. For the first time in Russia, a  scientific event was devoted entirely to Christian modernism, which was considered in a  broad chronological and confessional context with the involvement of Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox material. In the proposed review, we will focus on the presentations that raised the most fundamental questions related to the topic under discussion.

The term "modernism" will not become a subject of scientific consideration, until the need for a concise and precise definition is satisfied, allowing neither narrowing nor expansion of the concept. The best definition of this term, due to Leonce le Grandmaison, is still poorly known. Modernism is a genus term that implies targeted changes in religion based on the key idea of Modernity — the idea of progress. The strongest form of church modernism is possible where the Church as an organization is presented as a) a super-value that must "adapt to" and "survive in the world", b) an authority that has the right to cancel its own fundamental decisions made in the past. 

The article traces four stages of the transformation of the principle of "non expedit" from the moment of its official introduction by Pius IX in 1868 to its tacit "abolition" by Benedict XV in 1919. The principle of "non expedit" reflects the papal policy of the transitional period, which at first was characterized by a  complete rejection of the political changes taking place on the Apennine Peninsula related to the unification of Italy under the rule of the Savoy Dynasty (March 17, 1861) and the loss of secular power by the pope after the conquest of Rome by Piedmontese troops (September 20, 1870). Initially, The Holy See hopes for an opportunity to reverse the development of events, seeking to block the participation of Italian Catholics in political processes. As state power strengthens, the Church begins to fight for the whole society, seeking to intercept the social agenda of the state and the growing mass movements of the left. At each of these stages, the principle of "non expedit" is an important tool for influencing society, which is considered either as a  categorical prohibition, as a  temporary pedagogical measure, or as a  formal moment that is not mandatory. A  new generation of Italian Catholics (Romolo Murri, Luigi Sturzo, Ernesto Buonaiuti, and others) is trying to find a  new path for the development of church policy, seeking to reconcile historical realities with stalled church-state relations. In Italy, a  favorable environment is developing for the dissemination of the ideas of Christian modernism, which makes the situation more difficult, as modernists bring the hermeneutics of crisis phenomena in church-state relations to a  new, higher epistemological level. In these circumstances, the Church of Pius X mercilessly attacks the modernists, who have become the collective image of all the progressive forces of the Catholic world. Resorting to "non expedit", the Holy See excommunicates Romolo Murri and imposes the obligation of the "anti-modern oath". However, the proclamation of universal male suffrage in 1912 forced the Church to compromise and conclude the so-called "Gentiloni Pact" between liberals and Catholics. This means a  transition to the stage of real politics, when the The Holy See, realizing the irreversibility of the changes that have taken place, begins to build new strategic scenarios, trying to actively explore the political space of the country.

The article proves that modernist Orthodox anthropology is not a systematic science of man, as the Church taught on the basis of hesychastic theology. For this reason, it cannot be called heresy. This conclusion is made based on the analysis of the works of Russian philosophers: Dmitry Merezhkovsky, Vladimir Solovyov, Nikolai Berdyaev, as well as clergy: Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky), Father Sergius (Bulgakov), Father Alexander (Schmemann) and Metropolitan Anthony (Bloom). The views of the above-mentioned persons are a  style of thinking that has a multifaceted and methodologically heterogeneous character.

A  movement aimed at modernizing both the Church itself and its relationships with society took place in the Roman Catholic Church in the late XIXth and early XXth centuries. It manifested itself in a  variety of different, but interconnected forms in the territories of European states and Poland. Polish modernism is unknown in Russia. The goal was to use historical research methods to compile a general portrait of it. The sources and scientific research of Modernism by Polish scientists are involved. The author concludes that the Polish version of Catholic modernism, the existence of which was long denied, reflected like a mirror all the forms inherent in the phenomenon of Christian modernism of the late XIXth and early XXth centuries in Catholic Europe and Orthodox Russia. 

The article is devoted to the formation of the idea of the "intelligentsia" as the leading spiritual force of Russia at  the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. The author examines the controversy about the "intelligentsia" and its tasks, which intensified in conservative and liberal circles at the turn of the 1870s and 1880s. The origin and evolution of the populist idea of the "intelligentsia" as a  secular Christian force are analyzed. The author notes the importance of the works of V.A. Ternavtsev in formulating the problem of the relationship between the "intelligentsia" and the Orthodox Church. The article shows that already at the beginning of the 20th century such a  formulation of  the question gave rise to a number of ideas about the fate of the "intelligentsia". D.S. Merezhkovsky formulated the task of the world "revolution of the spirit", in which he assigned the central role to the Russian intelligentsia. In the polemic with this view, A.A. Blok, Vyacheslav I.Ivanov, S.N. Bulgakov insisted on the transformation of the worldview and behavior of the "intelligentsia". Bulgakov voiced the idea of a special role for the "intelligentsia" within the Church.