Housing in Social Practices of The Religious Communities: Experience of Migration and Interaction in the (Sub)Urban Environment

Abstract

The concept of housing could be helpful to understand the interaction and, at the same time, a fusion of theological and social dimensions in the everyday religious practices. The idea of housing as embodiment of living space in the religious context could be extrapolated from the “house of God”, the house of prayer that represents the place of religious rituals, collective and individual religious experience. This space is appropriated (in term of Michel de Certeau) by the religious groups for the conversation with the God, as well as for the communication with the parishioners, for religious practices and for (re)socialization. These practices as tactics (de Certeau) constitute not only the sacred space of common religious experience, but also the social space of interaction, where social diakonia, understood as a faith-based social and mental support for vulnerable groups, appears as one of the main tools for building the dialogue with the marginalized groups. The case study of the Latgale suburb (district) of Rīga (historical Moskauer Vorstadt) demonstrates the historical deeply rooted coexistence between different religious communities (Russian Orthodox, Old Believers, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, adherents of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Jews) that have common social experience and traumas. The multifaceted religious landscape of this suburb that includes not only sacred buildings but also relatively constant housing areas, still determines the special character of the local social milieu. However, the social, ethnic, and religious composition of the district’s inhabitants has changed during the second part of the 20th century due to Sovietisation, the “local” suburb dwellers maintained the specific genius loci that determines more openness and empathy to the newcomer with different migration backgrounds. Examples of the Roman Catholic, Old Believers’ and Armenian communities demonstrate the different levels of practicing “mental housing” comprised of religious ethos, social charity, and intercommunity dialogue.