Framing of Abortion and Church-State Relations in Russian Orthodox Online Portals

Abstract

Over the past two decades, clerics in the Russian Orthodox Church have found a new outlet for morality policy discussions: news portals, blogs, and other sites that comprise a virtual public sphere of Russian Orthodox online media. One prominent issue discussed herein is abortion in Russia, a subject that has spawned debates about possible regulation and prevention measures. This article analyzes statements regarding abortion made by clerics and others serving in the Russian Orthodox Church via Russian Orthodox online portals. Using typologies for framing strategies established through research of morality policy and church-state relations in Russia, this analysis will show that rational-instrumental frames were employed more frequently than religiously based or procedural arguments, and frames expressing affinity and disillusionment with the state were utilized more often than those evoking church-state symphony or anti-government disestablishment. In addition, it will shed light on framing strategies between online portals with varying degrees of proximity to the Moscow Patriarchate.

Russian Orthodox framing of abortion in online journalism on religion

“…A prior analysis of clerics and others serving in the ROC via Russian Orthodox online news portals (Hill, 2021) employed a morality frame typology based on Mucciaroni (2011) and adapted to the Russian case. The results showed that rational-instrumental frames dominated; however, unlike Mucciaroni’s (2011) findings, procedural frames lagged behind religious arguments by a significant margin.…”

“…The results showed that rational-instrumental frames dominated; however, unlike Mucciaroni’s (2011) findings, procedural frames lagged behind religious arguments by a significant margin. In addition, four procedural sub-frames based on Stoeckl’s (2018) models of church-state relations were identified: ‘symphony’ frames promoting church-state partnerships, ‘affinity’ frames expressing approval of state initiatives, ‘disillusionment’ frames expressing frustration with the state’s performance, and ‘disestablishment’ frames portraying the state as opposed to or threatening the general population’s well-being (Hill, 2021: 6, 7).…”

“…In the Russian Orthodox online portals, disillusionment frames were used most frequently, followed by affinity frames; symphony frames were a distant third, and disestablishment frames expressing open hostility to the state were rarely employed (Hill, 2021). Nonetheless, the overall dearth of procedural frames compared to shares found in previous morality policy studies in the West indicates that the case of ROC speakers and attitudes thereof toward the Russian state merits further exploration.…”

“…This article analyzes argumentation by clerics and others 2 serving in the ROC in articles on the Web sites of popular newspapers, with the goal of determining which morality frames (Hill, 2021; Mucciaroni, 2011) are employed: religious, rational-instrumental, and/or procedural. Procedural frames are evaluated further to determine whether frames describing church-state relations are used, from least to most critical of the state: symphony, affinity, disillusionment, and disestablishment (Hill, 2021; Stoeckl, 2018).…”

“…This article analyzes argumentation by clerics and others 2 serving in the ROC in articles on the Web sites of popular newspapers, with the goal of determining which morality frames (Hill, 2021; Mucciaroni, 2011) are employed: religious, rational-instrumental, and/or procedural. Procedural frames are evaluated further to determine whether frames describing church-state relations are used, from least to most critical of the state: symphony, affinity, disillusionment, and disestablishment (Hill, 2021; Stoeckl, 2018). These results are then cross-referenced by article genre (building on Lövheim and Lundby (2013) and Lundby et al’s (2018) studies) in order to establish what frames ROC actors are more likely to use in article types where they have greater editorial agency.…”