Hierarchical Metamodel of Communication in the Experience of Resacralization of Spiritual Practics

.


Introduction
Having considered the historical aspect of the virtualization of the sociocultural frontier Tertius Romae (Bakumenko & Luginina, 2022), the authors solve the problem of developing a theoretical model of social communication that explains the mass dissemination of ideas. Since in the history of the socio-cultural frontier Tertius Romae there are periods of its resacralization, fixed as an increase in the mass consciousness of its positive-revival emotive load (Bakumenko & Luginina, 2022, p. 271-278), the experience of Resacralization of Spiritual Practices (RSP) is proposed to be studied as a historically developed method of management mass consciousness. RSP can be attributed to a form of conceptual advertising based on the concept of symbolic capital by P. , where spiritual practices are considered as a set of social practices associated with the production, exchange and accumulation of intangible products. This leads to an expansion of the concept of conceptual advertising.
If we limit the range of spiritual practices to religion, as Harriet  does, then the question arises: is the observed increase in religiosity a consequence of the shortage of a particular symbolic product or the result of its advertising? For example, the neo-religions Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Temple of the Jedi Order, are entirely based on selling ideas, symbols and things that would not have happened without the concept advertising that accompanies the marketing of a unique product.
RSP can be viewed in two ways. On the one hand, it is a sociocultural phenomenon that determines the growing public interest in religion . This prompts the researcher to look for the influence of religion on the content of the advertising product. But there is another side to it that reveals the richness of RSP's experience as a concept-driven public service announcement. For example, B. K. Hunnicutt observes the transformation of values in the American economy (2020). In his view, a new era is beginning in which spiritual experience becomes a staple of consumption, leading to a resurgence of virtue and a generally healthier social life . This aspect remains deficiently studied in the theory of advertising, although it is directly related to the intensive rebranding of spiritual practices. Therefore, the basic in our study is a communicative structural-functional approach. It allows considering RSP as a process inherent in non-material production in principle, i.e. not as any separate spiritual practice, but as their combination: enlightenment, propaganda/PR, advertising, etc. Propaganda (promotion) of the conceptual prototype is a defining set of practices basis.
Of note is that the practice of promoting a prototype is unique to Christian theology and anthropology. In Islam and Judaism, the sacredness of the prototype imposes a taboo on its reproduction; therefore there are no grounds for its conceptual resacralization, especially in iconic form. In Buddhism, on the contrary, reincarnation as a constant process of translating the multidimensional world of ideas into material objects imposes fundamental restrictions on the very possibility of resacralizing objects of the material world by a person, subordinating this process to karmic predestination.
The authors are aware that not only the RSP principle is culturally determined, but also the ways in which it is considered. Namely, the methodological research tools are to some extent determined by the cultural traditions of theoretical discourse . Therefore, the analysis of the cultural influence of Islam, Judaism and Buddhism on RSP, as well as the place of RSP in social communication determined by traditional cultures should be considered from inside, starting with an authentic autochthonous culture. Being in the sphere of influence of Orthodox Christianity, the authors focus on the Orthodox resacralization of spiritual practices (ORSP). Moreover, until recently, the Orthodox Resacralization of Spiritual Practices (ORSP) remained a problem area isolated from theoretical discourse, considered exclusively in theological discussions and Christian preaching discourse.
To avoid discrepancies, let us explain that by sacralization, following the German hermeneutic-phenomenological tradition (M. Heidegger, H.-G. Gadamer, etc.), we mean giving an idea, image, or a prototype a special social significance, up to their absolutization as highest value. The image in this case should be understood as an imaginary (non-material) object determined by reality, which allows the subject to navigate in reality, distinguishing between its various objects.
A prototype (or first-image) is an intangible object or a basic cultural form that has significant social value for the variable figurative perception of less significant objects of reality, as well as their creation or reconstruction in social practices. An idea is an intangible object that allows one to interpret reality in a certain way. In the Platonic understanding, an idea is a prototype that loses its ideal essence when it is embodied in an objective form. We, on the other hand, understand the idea as a way of understanding and interpreting reality, a way of subjectifying the objective reality of the world. The subjectivation of a part of reality striving for the ideal is a psychological process of sacralization of this part of reality.
Desacralization, accordingly, is the opposite process of reducing the value and social significance of an object. It can develop slowly over a long historical time or quickly, in a revolutionary way, replacing obsolete values. In any case, the ability to fix the devaluation of the sacred value speaks of desacralization.
We interpret resacralization not only as a special case of re-sacralization of an object, but also as the most common practice of transferring the formed sacred meaning from one object to another. These are similar but not homogeneous processes. Their detail is not the subject of our study.
The totality of communicative processes in society is the subject matter of the study. In it, the authors focus on the RSP mechanism, which, as an element of social communication, is the scope of consideration. We distinguish close, but not identical concepts of communicative processes and communicative relations. From a methodological point of view, this distinction is the most significant. Marshall McLuhan, using the metaphor of human extension (means of communication), defines the area / environment of their existence as medium (McLuhan, [1964. He considers the means of communication as instruments of communicative relations. Accordingly, changes in means entail changes in a certain area of social relations -namely, in communicative relations. However, the communicative processes that occupy a central place in semiotics (C. Peirce, F. de Saussure, U. Eco, Yu. Lotman, and others) and mediology (R. Debray, etc.) are not identical to communicative relations, just as they are not identical to means (technologies) of communication: means and relationships can change, but the patterns of communication processes can remain unchanged or change with a different intensity. The same communicative process, expanding, can cover more and more new communicative relations and be the determinant of the dominant trend of change in communicative relations. Returning to McLuhans terminology, the Extensions of Man is a global communication process that reflects changes in communication relations both between people (social relations) and humanity's relationship with the environment, including the development of electricity, thermonuclear reactions, space flight and the creation of artificial intelligence.
The authors emphasize that the article is predominantly theoretical. Its purpose is to substantiate the theoretical Hierarchical Metamodel of Communication of RSP for further analysis of various communication processes and relationships.

Semiotic hierarchy of communicative relations
One of the theorists of the relational theory of communication R. T. Craig points out the impossibility of reducing the concept of communication to one theoretical perspective (1999; 2016; 2019). In his opinion, the synthesis of various methodological approaches is always justified by pragmatic applied tasks. Considering the traditions of communication theories with the aim of constructing a common field of the theory of metacommunication, he identified two fundamentally incompatible theoretical models: the constitutive (ritual) one, which allows to construct a pragmatic metamodel of communication, and, dialectically opposite to it, the translational (information) model, which, as stated, continues to dominate the world and academic thinking .
The dichotomy of these models indicates their characteristics. The constitutive model is a procedure for the conventional determination of values. It implies dialogue and equivalence of communicants in determining meanings. The translational model is the value management procedure. It implies the presence of an actor (control center) that sets the values, and a recipient (controlled periphery) that uses the given values.
The popularity of the translational model is due not only to its theoretical advantages (integration into management theory, organizational and economic theory, political discourse theory, cybernetic information theory, etc.), but also historically developing socio-cultural prerequisites. The main socio-cultural trend that stimulates interest in the development of theoretical ideas about social communication is that communication is moving from the implicit sphere of unreflected social practices (politics, management of organizations and teams, media communication, art and artistic creativity) to social eugenics, meaningful and goaloriented activities for the design, construction and management of socio-cultural processes. The translational model of communication reveals the dependence of activity on its goals translated in communication. It is focused on management and expands the sphere of superiority of the control center over the periphery (leadership), theoretically substantiating the best ways to achieve leading positions, and ensure success in management.
The translation scheme of the communication channel "A O B", developed → → by Pierce-Saussure, in which "A" and "B" are the subjects of communication, and "O" is the object, or message (Saussure, 1995), does not fully describe the communication processes and relationships.
This was noted in 1976 by Sir Edmund Leach (2012). As an anthropologist, he analyzed communication practices and came to the conclusion that symbols, signs and signals perform different functions. Symbols, signs and signals define each other, therefore they remain non-identical. The control scheme (A O B) reduces → → symbols and signs to the definiteness of signals. Otherwise, it does not function.
Yu. M. Lotman, the founder of the Moscow-Tartu semiotic school, analyzed different types of communicative relations as regularities in the formation and development of sets of meanings (semiosis). His main works are written in Russian (Lotman, 2000). Only recently have his works been translated into Estonian and English .
Having considered communication as a process of movement and mu-tual influence of a set or sets of semiotic systems, Yu. M. Lotman came to the conclusion that the Peirce-Saussure scheme describes only a particular case of communication that is based on the observation of an exclusively "telegraphic" (machine) communicative coding procedure signs into signals (Lotman, 2000, p. 159-163). The development of a convention (A O B), in his opinion, takes place over long-term rela → → tionships of a dialogic nature, which are characterized by the obligatory presence of feedback of the type: A O B. In addition, the typology of communication is not ↔ ↔ limited to the variety of conventional relations, where "A" and "B" are different subjects. Non-conventional gift relationships are also possible, both between different subjects "A" and "B", as well as a single subject to itself in time according  (Lotman, 2000, p. 163-178;2019, pp. 49-81). An individual or a group, or society as a whole can be such a subject of auto-communication.
Based on these considerations, the translational model should be attributed to a particular case of conventional communicative relations, as a result of which a hierarchy of subordination of one subject of communication to another is established. A certain kind of convention allows the actor of communication to manipulate the ambiguity of symbols and signs, achieving their maximum identity with signals. Certainty arises in the system of values when the highest value is equally recognized by the subjects of communication. Thus, a common value matrix is formed for communicants -a metasphere of common meanings that predetermines the effectiveness of communication understood as the ability of the subjects of communication to act together, to carry out collective purposeful activities.
The hierarchy of semiotic complication of communication is traced, which makes it possible to build a hierarchical typology of semiotic connections from simple to complex.
The least complex communicative procedure is a Gift, a non-conventional model of communicative relations. This does not require mutual conditionality from the subjects of communication, but it itself generates it, including network forms. Non-conventional relations involve not only the offer of a gift, but also its acceptance (if the gift is not accepted, then it did not take place). Although gift relationships are heavily exploited in business, government, and advertising (bonuses that motivate gifts: a slogan "second pack as a gift!", free flyers and brochures, advertising newspapers, catalogs, etc.; note that the advertising message is not sold, but given to the recipient), there are very few fundamental studies of this type of communicative relationship.
Noteworthy is the repeatedly republished anthropological essay by M. Mauss in 1925 and its rethinking by F. . Professor at the Institute of Sociology University of Erlangen-Nuremberg (Germany) Frank Adloff analyzes the work of M. Mauss at a new level of theorization and comes to the conclusion that social communication is not limited to capitalist forms of exchange and accumulation. The gift is not an archaic relic. This is not a sign of archaization of communicative relations or atavism. It should be considered as the basis of complexly structured exchange relations: conventions, translations, and control.
The Convention is based on the pragmatic need for mutual understanding and building a common semiotic system for the subjects of communicative relations, which provides collective forms of activity. A Gift can happen randomly or on a case-by-case basis. As soon as it becomes a regular practice, it can be argued that the value of the Gift acquires an exchange equivalent, that is, a certain convention is developed. The presence of common value-semantic connections establishes the value priority of their preservation to ensure multiple usage if these connections determine the success of collective activity (Bakumenko, 2015;. This value generates the motivation for subordinating subjects of communication to a single center (semiotic matrix) and launches translational communication mechanisms, which, in turn, lead to the possibility of control.
As a result, the process of complication of the semiotic structure of communicative relations (progress) can be represented by the following scheme: The Gift is central to the research of G. . She identifies the Gift with the feminine principle of being. From this provision follows the original concept of a just gift economy (mother economy) as opposed to an exchange economy (father economy or paternal capitalism). The research optics of G. Vaughan is based on the opposition of male and female principles in communicative relations. She notes that without the Gift, it is impossible to reconstruct the main elements of communication: meanings and values.
C. Eisenstei (2013; 2021) searches for alternative ways of developing society based on a return to gift relationships. He exposes the claim to the superiority of the systemic complexity of human relations over their simple configurations.
However, it seems that G. Vaughan and C. Eisenstei idealize Gift relationship in search of an alternative to the existing reality. The assertion that conditional exchange relations are impossible without the Gift does not deny the effectiveness of exchange and does not exclude it from reality. Gift and exchange coexist and complement each other. If we follow, for example, the Marxist theory of alienation, then capitalism is based on gift relations: namely, on the ability of the majority to give part of the produced values to the minority, and on the ability of the minority to expropriate the values. The capitalization of a gift is an unequal exchange that creates conditions for the conversion of a gift into debt (Greber, 2011) and, as a result, a decrease in the social value of labor (Greber, 2018).
The occurrence of gift-giving can take place from time to time. As soon as it becomes regular practice, the value of gift gains exchange value, and a certain convention is formed. G. Vaughan calls this relationship "gift exchange" and contrasts it with "gift giving" (2016). We must agree that these are completely different types of relationships. Gift exchange is already built on conventions: on the establishment of a general exchange equivalent.
If we define communicative relations as a specific form of activity, then the category of communicative relations reduces the dialectical tension between different theoretical approaches to the study of communication. Modernity is characterized by the individual performing various communicative actions in an attempt to implement a certain pragmatic model of success. Leadership in management is one of the possible strategies for achieving success. Its study in management theory forms ideas about the resource of culture -cultural conventions that determine optimal management strategies . One of the conditions for these is the cultural diversity of communication relations, which makes it possible to subordinate the relationship models built on Gift, Convention and Translation to management and control. Individual researchers do not abandon attempts to subordinate different ideas about communication to some general theory, for example, based on the integrationism of Roy Harris' theory . However, as R. T. Craig notes, "integrationism is a useful but limited perspective and … its claim to exclusive validity should be rejected by communication theorists" (2019). Therefore, our hierarchical metamodel Gift Convention Translation Control indicating the subordination → → → of four types of communicative relations is just an abstract (logical) description of the conditions under which the Control model is possible.
Cultural diversity suggests that the above types of models of communicative relations (Gift, Convention, Translation, Control) do not exist in their pure form, but various combinations of them predominate. Moreover, semiotic systems as the linguistic basis of each culture exist in historical time and are dynamic. They are characterized by progress, or complication, and regression, or simplification (Lotman, 2019, p. 95-113). Therefore, communication relationships are diverse and dynamic. Their progress towards complexity is not obvious. They could become more complicated within the framework of the Socio-Centrism Trend in cultural development and simplified in cases of value domination of Person-Centrism (Bakumenko, 2019).
Since model ideas about communication structure social reality in a certain way , one should abandon the one-sidedness of ideas that fit social reality to any single template and accept that in reality various communication models are carried out, including their combinations (Gift, Convention, Translation, Control), which differ in the nature of the relationship of subjects and the complexity of the semiotic connections of objects (messages). In reality, the types of communicative relations coexist simultaneously. Therefore, both "weak" and "strong" programs for the study of communicative processes, and actornetwork analysis, revealing various types of communicative relations and their various ontologies, are fair (Feldman 2016, p. 625).

Orthodox resacralization of spiritual practices
The special feature of Orthodox Resacralization of Spiritual Practices (ORSP) is its adherence to traditionalism, that is, traditional setting of values in a system that corresponds to Christian ethical doctrine of soul salvation by way of faith and participation in spiritual practices. It is important to mention that the status of ORSP "product" is determined by its relation to the Holy Spirit: τò πνευμα ὁπου θέλει πνει̃ καὶ τὴν φωνὴν αὐτου̃ ἀκούεις ἀλλ' οὐκ οἰδας πόθεν ἐρχεται καὶ που̃ ὑπάγει οὕτως ἐστὶν πας ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ του̃ πνεύματος ('Ιωάν 3:8).
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spiri.
This requires from the author of a non-material value (icon-painter for instance) denying oneself authorship in the search of re-uniting with the Holy Spirit through spiritual feat, that is, asceticism. Christian asceticism implies selfrestriction and self-denial, as well as denying self-governance (denial of one's own will) and starting synergetic (co-practicing) action for obtaining the blessing to fulfill God's will. Therefore, the product here should be put in "inverted commas". The producer of intangible value (iconographer) does not create the new themselves, but rather participates in its creation by transforming themselves and the available means at their disposal.
The foundation of a unified tradition of ORSP was formed at a time of the First Council of Nicaea, AD 325, until the inconsistencies between the power of the Pope (Roman Catholic Church, the West) and Byzantium Pa-triarchate (Orthodox Church, the East). Great Schism, 9th century consoli-dated significant discrepancies between the Catholic and Orthodox traditions. Traditions strengthened in unchanged dogmas, canons, rules and charters, to follow them is the condition for any adept who has faith in Christ (whether he or she is a regular church goer, or is a priest).
The establishment of tradition is the result of the sacralization of spiritual practices, a return to them is a process of resacralization, the process of RSP, in general, and ORSP, in particular. One of the latest and most important for the West and East decisions was the dogma about the veneration of icons of the Second Council of Nicaea, 787. The importance of dogma was dictated by a major unacceptance and destruction of holy images which were named "idols" following the Old Testament Commandment.
The dogma of the Second Council of Nicaea Dogma contains the following formula: "Therefore, we, walking like a royal path and following the God-verbal teaching of the Holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church and the Holy Spirit living in it, with all care and discretion determine…" The definition of the dogma, therefore, is the RSP product. It appeals to the teachings of Holy Fathers, the oral tradition of the Church and the Holy Spirit; therefore, it follows tradition.
The center of ORSP product are not innovations, yet the recreation of the Holy Trinity prototype image (of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spir-it) as a matrix of similarity, since man is created similar to God (Γέν 1:26-27; Κολ 1:15; Εφ 2:10, 4:24; Ησ 43:7). The necessity of ORSP appeared as a result of human imperfection, ranging from original sin to a variety of ordinary people's misunderstandings and misconceptions.
The media space here is not only a preaching discourse, but also all means of broadcasting the prototype image. Holy Trinity available, ranging from the Cross and Icons to means of mass media, cinema, literature and fiction, system of education, sport and political discussions Stawrowski, 2018;.
In traditional Christian theological discourse, ORSP is viewed within the framework of practical theology. These are the problems of Christian enlighten- ment and missionary work, as well as the symbolic and psycho-logical content of the Christian sacraments. Catholic pastor and theologian Ottmar Fuchs, a follower of Rolf Zerfaß, compares the sacraments of ordination and confirmation (chrismation) while developing the concept Gnadentheologie, theology of grace (2017). Adhering as well as K. Rahner (1904Rahner ( -1984 to the provisions of the Second Vatican Council, O. Fuchs understands the symbolism of confirmation as a calling to follow the apostles (2017, p. 89), which means following the shepherd, just as the apostles followed Christ. Psychologically, ordination and confirmation are equal (p. 10, 98). The grace of the Holy Spirit of the sacraments of ordination and confirmation is understood not as a reward, but as an entry into the Spirit, the Gift of the Spirit, but not peace. This is the grace (Gift) of the Holy Spirit itself, and not only communion with him, which is characteristic of the Eucharist. If symbolically ordination and confirmation mean the hierarchy of succession and are located at different levels of the hierarchy, then psychologically they are one and the same act of grace. The layman and the cleric in the Spirit are equal, as they are equal in responsibility for the Church and the world (p. 95-96, 98). As one of the most cited Orthodox priests, Proto-presbyter Aexander Schmemann notes, in these sacraments one should see not the various gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit itself, which is communicated to a person as a Gift (2012).
A. Chernyi draws attention to the fact that conservative theologians have repeatedly criticized O. Fuchs for progressive views (2019, p. 127, 129). A. Chernyi notes that O. Fuchs speaks of the need to "activate the apostolate of the laity much more mobile than the elders and bishops" (p. 129). Earlier, A. Chernyi wrote about the experience of the Catholic Church in Germany in attracting people to church ministry in the light of the renewal, initiated by the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church, in the forms of missionary work and the introduction of regular posts for lay people: catechist, social worker and youth worker (2013). It is noteworthy that A. Chernyi sees the need to update missionary practices and raises the problem of its theological substantiation (2013, p. 38), which is equivalent in the categories of rational philosophy to the theoretical foundations of positive sociocultural and pedagogical experience for unification, formalization and dissemination.
The hierarchical structure of the practice of catechesis is described in detail by the graduate and teacher of St. Philaret Institute A. Budanova (2014). An interesting study of the practice of catechesis for the Finno-Ugric peoples in the 20th century was presented by Victoria Vlasova, a researcher at the Ethnography Department of the Institute of Language, Literature and History of the Komi Scientific Center (Syktyvkar, Komi Republic, RU) (2019). On a broad empirical basis, she observes the regionalization of the Orthodox faith and the emergence of a stable ethnic ORSP around the national language under the conditions of the tough anti-religious campaign of the OGPU. The generalization of this brief overview leads to a conclusion.
The ORSP has implicitly evolved from apostolic times to the present day. The positive experience of the APIU is enshrined in theological works, church codes and canons. During this long time, a scholastic metaphysical tradition of theorizing (substantiating) positive experience has been formed and is preserved, going back to the understanding of the practice (art) of Aristotle and the objective idealism of Plato. It contrasts sharply with German classical idealism (I. Kant, G. Hegel). There is no mechanistic rigor and absolutization of theory in it. The ORSP is the most mobile at the level of catechesis and is conservative in the practice of the sacred sacraments. In conditions of the strengthening of the visual, iconic role in social communication (Alexander, Bartmanski, & Giesen, 2012) it is important to develop the concept of ORSP by means of the division between the Sacred Icons and the Secular Icons.
In his essay "Vidna li neveruyushchim 'Troitsa' Rubleva? [Does the unbeliever see Rublev's Trinity?]" I. Kish (Hagemaystser et al, 1995) addresses the text by P. Florensky called Iconostasis (Florensky, 1993) and analyses the property of a Sacred Icon to become transcendental, and represent the image not of a Saint, but of God himself. "Florensky believes that the ability to view the icon is not given to us automatically, the ability of spiritual view of the icon arises in our consciousness" (Hagemaystser et al, 1995, p. 102). Icon does not confirm "that there is such kind of perception that we could see the invisible, but provides an opportunity of this sort of experience" (p. 102). P. Florensky says that this kind of spiritual practice could be experienced not only by "great people" but by any person who is standing and reading psalms or preaching in front of the icon: "There comes a time when spiritual state of the icon observer gives him power to feel its spiritual essence", "the non-believer when looking at the icon doesn't believe, above all, that this spiritual experience that is in the icon could be accessible for his consciousness, therefore the icon for him is not visible, for him it is just a board with paints" (p. 103). According to Kish, the work by Paul Florensky answers questions related to the icon perception, understanding of the icon image structure that refers to the nature of a Sacred Icon. Main difference of the Sacred Icon and Secular Icons perception is that Secular Icons are the result of desacralization and analysis, of the whole entity being divided into meaningful chunks that refer to each other as signs in a semiotic system. A Sacred Icon, on the other hand, demands a holistic perception, concentration on the essence of the Holy Trinity of the prototype image. Dialectic and analytical methods lead to desacralization. What is possible is only the contemplative hierarchical perception of the commendable holiness and the process of opposing it to the more inferior subject to analysis and synthesis. Hierarchical perception of the commendable leads to the Sacred Icon, whereas the opposition of the inferior manifested in analysis and synthesis leads to Secular Icons.
The similar articulation of the Sacred Icon and the Secular Icon should not lead us to confusion. A Sacred Icon is an icon, and its function is to show or transmit the transcendental. The image of the Sacred Icon is not the representation of the world of objects, whereas Secular Icons are icons, according to Ch. Pierce, that bear similarity with notions and meanings that are actualized by means of these signs, that is Secular Icons are in a way similar to objects. Paul Florensky writes that the icon painter is not repeating the visible "upper" world, but fixes it with paints which "reveal the invisible world" (Hagemaystser et al, 1995, p. 130).
The transmission of the imagined from the world of invisible into the visible space means that the image and form are given to the entities that didn't have any form before. In the process of icon painting an image in revealed: the form that initially belonged to this event. The name to this phenomenon is the Divine Revelation that is accessible for spiritual vision, but is not subject to analysis.
Placing the object of research beyond the capacity of analytical perception allows researchers to address communicative relations that appear among sings, people and things in Orthodox spiritual practices.
If the progress RSP as a MCA is built as a process of the semiotic structure of communication making more complex (Gift Convention Transmitting → → → Control), then the ORSP leads to, at first sight, a reduced semiotic structure limited to the perception of a unique absolute meaning of a Sacred Icon in the process of individual auto-communication. The progress has a reverse logic here: the process of ascent by means of ascetic practices that allows an adept to learn how to manage oneself forming a certain kind of information filter, through transmitting capacity of the Holy Scriptures to understanding the Old Testament convention of redemption (Έξ 20:2; Ψ 13:7; Γέν 22:1-12, 16-18) and then to the Orthodox concept of the Revelation of Holy Gifts (Εφ 4:11; Κορ А 12:28, 8-10; Ρωμ 12:6-8; Μθ 23:34). The main principle is the hierarchical perception of the higher holistic entity and denial of the opposed mundane that is subject to analysis and synthesis. The ORSP is a way of perfecting the individual and the society, the ascent from the animal-like multitude of images to one and the only, created in God's Image (Γέν 1:26-27; Κολ 1:15; Εφ 2:10, 4:24; Ησ 43:7), the process of revealing in front of God and congregation not the images, but a unique personality, one's soul. The corner stone of the Orthodox social practices is the desire of a person to be as God created, that is Godlike, and also be united in this common zest that excludes any cruel, animal like competition. To sum up, the bass of the ORSP concept is the ascent from the necessity to the notions of the gift and trust that exclude competition.
Analyzing the nature of semiotic connections Yu. Lotman distinguished two most archaic models of communicative relations in the history of mankind: "a magic one" and a "religious one" (2000, p. 372-373, 425-457). The typological division into "magical" and "religious" models is a simplified version of the existing practice; you normally get different combinations of these two practices. Lotman talks about two typological relations: a) magic system that is characterized by mutual understanding, compulsoriness, equivalence, agreement (p. 372); b) religious system that is based not on the exchange, but on "trusting" yourself. The system of communicative relations in this model is characterized by one-way relations, by lack of compulsoriness (it is voluntarily on the basis of gift), non-equivalence (there is no equivalent of exchange, you always give the most precious, therefore there is no foundation of deception or non-equivalent exchange); there is no reason for agreement either (it is always non-repayable, unconditional) (p. 373).
The differences are so fundamental that one can imagine the combination of these relations in reality only on the condition of a simultaneous use of at least two channels of communication: а) a conventional channel (magic model) that is built on agreement relations, b) non-conventional channel -that is based on the notion of gift. The difference is important, as the difference of the two channels is related to the qualitative transformation of transmitted information.
The conventional relations domineer in the channel "I" "Other" → on the condition of the guaranteed exchange "Other" "I". T → his condition is met only if "Other" is not "Alien" but "Own", that is, when a participant of the agreement is not threatening. As a result, the scheme of the full act of communication is built in the convention channel: "I Other I", in which "I" and "Other" remain equal → → subjects of the agreement, that is, they possess equal value in their relationship. This is a source of the specific quality of the transmitted information. It is equal for both subjects of communication, similar to partner relationships.
Non-conventional relations realized in the channel could be shown schematically as "I Other I → → 1 ". But "Other" in such a channel is not equal to "I", and is just a possible reason for transmitting the information from "I" to "I 1 ". The act of communication brings to restructuring of the "I", or Ego (Lotman, 2000, p. 166). The peculiar quality of the transmitted information following a non-conventional channel lies in the fact that it is valuable just for one subject of communication or it has an unequal value for different subjects.
In a situation when "Other" is God, the transcendental Absolute containing the perfect qualities of goodness that are not manifested in the "I" and the redemption of the deviations of the "I" from the absolute qualities, the auto-communication "I Other I → → 1 " transforms the "I" in a special way: "I 1 " is supposed to be a larger subject, enriched, endowed with a Gift from above, the Gift of unity with the Absolute. "I 1 " is the transcendental positing of the "I", the very possibility of increasing and transforming the "I" in the world beyond material determination.
οὕτως ἐσονται οἱ ἐσχατοι πρῶτοι καὶ οἱ πρῶτοι ἐσχατοι [So the last will be first, and the first will be last] (Ματθ. 20:16). The word of Christ as described by Matthew is closely related to the miracle of Preobrazhenie (Transfiguration: μεταμόρφωση, transfiguratio). In particular, V. Darenskiy argues that the paradigm of human transformation permeates the entire Russian philosophy of the 20th century. (Darenskiy, 2018). It reflects the specifics of the Russian mentality in which the miracle of transformation has the highest value and dominates such categories as "success", "luck", "work", or "result". In human relations, 'Preobrazhenie' is tantamount to a feat (feat + achievement + exploit + accomplishment), the accomplishment of a heroic deed beyond ordinary abilities, sometimes beyond understanding. This is a positive deviation, revealing the prospects for evolution and improvement of social norms. Note that the Russian 'preobrazhenie' is significantly different from the Greek "μεταμόρφωση" and the Latin "transfiguration": pre + obrazhenie = μετα + εικόνα = trans + imago = trans + image (guise). 'Preobrazhenie' is closer to conversion + perfection than to transfiguration. It is the act of trans-forming Secular Icons into Sacred Icon. This is a procedure for sacralizing the beauty in a person. The largest Orthodox educational Internet portal Azbuka Very [Or-thodox Christian books] offers its readers 8 interpretations of the parable retold by Matthew (Azbuka Very, 2005. The site is interesting for it is not an official tribune of the Russian Orthodox Church. This is the result of the work of the community of enthusiastic Orthodox companions. Therefore, Azbuka Very is a kind of anthropological cut of the Orthodox discourse. Azbuka Very cites the statement of the authoritative Orthodox theologian A. P. Lopukhin  about the connection of this parable with the parable of the prodigal son, as well as about the distortion of the original meaning by the postscript "for many are called, but few are chosen" in the Russian synodal translation, taken from another chapter (Ματθ. 22:14).
Meanwhile, this postscript is one of the oldest. This is evidenced by St. Gregory Dvoeslov (p. 540-604) Pope Gregorius PP. I (p. 590-604), known for compiling the Latin text of the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts (adopted in 680) (Azbuka Very, 2005. The inscription indicates that the measure of both the first and the last is the Kingdom of Heaven -unaltered and irredeemable "denarius".
Construct ORSP is built upon the denials of "magic" communicative relations, on excluding them from spiritual practices transforming culture on religious grounds. It has no mystical value regarding the inconsistency of a human, but strives to achieve higher goals relying on positive existentialism, opportunity of selfdevelopment, constructing the way of ascent of a human to higher values on the basis of spiritual experience.
A major difference of ORSP method from all the other RSP methods is the primacy of ontological unity on the basis of accepting the presence of unchanged eternal values and principles, -that is, traditionalism. For this reason, fluctuation of socio-cultural tendencies (periodic strengthening of Socio-Centrism, Person-Centrism or the state of their ambivalence) that take place in mass culture (Bakumenko, 2021, p. 163-65), ORSP takes from the point of view of Teo-Centrism. This allows viewing a person (or a personality) or a social group as an object of spiritual development by means of external powers; they are seen as the object of godlike transformations. Therefore, here is its essence: if the Socio-Centrism Trend of cultural development is domineering, instead in the center of ORSP you cherish a person, a necessity to protect its inner sacred world from violence and society in general; if Person-Centrism Trend prevails -then ORSP transmits the value of collective unity, of sinful nature of an individual to non-passing value of the cultural heritage. ORSP is especially powerful in conditions of values' ambivalence, Socio-Centrism and Person-Centrism, which is the third possible alternative of betweenthe-values continuum with two major extreme points.
The example of the last point is an unprecedented growth of the number of Orthodox Churches in Russia in 1990. Against the background of values' instability, a rapid decline of economy and level of lifestyle around the country, major temples and churches destroyed during the Soviet times were restored, new ones were built, including churches, crosses, monasteries that were expanding and restored. The number of Theological Seminaries also increased; Sunday church schools opened. Optional courses with a focus on Orthodox and Christian Studies were introduced in schools; a new program Introduction to Orthodox Culture was introduced.
Moreover, with the ascent of Socio-Centrism Trend in the Russian society of the end of the 1990s, priorities of RSP for the ROC were shifted into the personal area, the main points about this social conception were acknowledged by the Council of Bishops in the year 2000.
The central part and one of the main statements are occupied by the image of Church, "ἥτις ἐστὶν τò σωμα αὐτου̃ τò πλήρωμα του̃ τὰ πάντα ἐν πασιν πληρουμένου" [which is His Body, the fullness of Him that Fills all in all] ( 1:23), that everyone "is Εφ invited to come into": I.1. The Church is an Assembly of believers in Christ, to which everyone is called by Him to enter. In it, "all that is in heaven and on earth" must be united in Christ, for he is the Head of "the Church, which is His Body, the fullness of him who fills all in all" ( 1: 22-23). In the Church, the deification of creation is accomplished Εφ by the action of the Holy Spirit, and God's original plan for the world and man is fulfilled (Osnovy… I.1).
What we pay attention to is that the social and center-orientated concept of patriotism in the way that the Russian Orthodox Christians under-stand it, is coded as love of a Christian towards his closest: II. 3. Christian patriotism is simultaneously manifested in relation to the nation as an ethnic community and as a community of citizens of the state. An Orthodox Christian is called to love his homeland, which has a territorial dimension, and his blood brothers living all over the world. Such love is one of the ways to fulfill God's Under the conditions of Socio-Centrism Trend or Person-Centrism Trend, theocentric position of the ROC is an alternative to the dominant trend, and under conditions of socio-cultural ambivalence, is the most stable and the only credible interpretation of reality.
As the Form of Conceptual Advertising and PR, Orthodox Resacralization of Spiritual Practices is focused exclusively on a strong strategy that involves changing the value orientations of a person and society in accordance with a stable Orthodox Christian-anthropological concept.

Research perspectives and discussion
A classic of PR and mass propaganda E. Bernays in the first half of the 20 th century emphasized repeatedly that the essence of advertising is not in reporting news, but in creating them, not in informing the public, but in managing and manipulating it (2011; 2019). The sustainability of modern brands is due to the consistent translation of the value system. The company's capital level and annual income largely depend on consumer confidence in the conceptual image, and not on the number of goods and services produced. This does not mean that goods and services are not needed, but production will become unprofitable if the consumer loses confidence in the manufacturing company.
The manufacturer of a conceptual promotional product faces the difficult task of transcending cultural diversity and uniting a diverse consumer in the desire to purchase the advertised product in the absence of a shortage or even a pragmatic need for it. The dilemma essentially boils down to choosing a "weak" or "strong" strategy. The typology in this case corresponds to the ontological grounds for distinguishing between "strong" and "weak" programs for the study of processes. A weak strategy implies the orientation of the concept of an advertising product to the prevailing cultural stereotypes of perception of values and patterns of consumption. A strong strategy is to form a new consumption pattern based on the consumer's reassessment of the culturally conditioned value-semantic matrix that exists in his mind. On the one hand, it is possible to subordinate the advertising product to ongoing processes: such a strategy can be considered traditional; it is based on preliminary monitoring of demand. On the other hand, under conditions of concentration in one control center of many communication channels, it becomes possible for an advertising product to form a new processartificial demand.
Both strong and weak advertising and PR strategies are linked to RSP. Conceptual advertising is distinguished by the complex production of the image of the advertised product (brand, image of a company or politician, social or political program, etc.) in order to attract the attention of the consumer, gain his trust and create a demand precedent for the advertised product. To implement the control function of advertising , the integrity of the created image is extremely important, which is achieved through the subordination of advertising policy to a conceptual idea. A key indicator of the performance of conceptual advertising is the level of consumer confidence  in the conceptual image. Although the conceptual image remains the ideal model, it is the image that determines the consumer's attitude. The consumer purchasing the advertised product is included in the communication relationship with the conceptual image. A person can communicate with noodles or corn flakes only in exceptional cases, and the conceptual image of a company, politician or product is an image of an interlocutor broadcasting a certain system of values. It is he who can be trusted or not. By purchasing a product, the consumer trusts the manufacturer, dressed in a conceptual prototype, i.e. his image.
For example, "The Big Four (Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft) successfully competes with the leading powers for the redistribution of human capital resources, succeeding in the intellectual sphere, establishing not only their own corporate culture, but also actively participating in the formation of a new supranational (global?) cultural identity" (Bakumenko & Luginina, 2022, p. 281). The extent to which the declared value system of the corporation corresponds to its real goals is a matter for a separate study. It is important for us to emphasize the dependence of the leading positions of large corporations in the distribution of resources on the resacralization of spiritual practices: the higher the position in the mass consciousness of the ideas and values of a corporation, the greater its profit and influence .
In the media industry, influence becomes a resource for manipulating mass consciousness for both economic and political purposes, giving rise to fake news. Recently, this topic has become the subject of a separate area of interdisciplinary research around the world . In geopolitical battles, communications are used as weapons of mass destruction . Is it time to measure ideas and values in TNT equivalent?
It is quite obvious that the latest information and communication technologies, including RSP as a MCA, become dual-use technologies in post-truth conditions. The problem is drawing the line between their creative and destructive potential in relation to cultural richness and diversity of communicative relations. The main result of the study in this aspect is the statement that it is the variety of models of communicative relations that is the resource of management and control. The possibility of control remains only an exceptional situation, when the degree of harmonious development of other models of communication relations (Gift, Convention, Translation) creates sufficient conditions for their subordination in the Control model.
The theoretical considerations expressed regarding the aspect of the transformation of the product of conceptual advertising and PR in the context of the growth of non-material production, require further development and criticism. This aspect opens up new horizons for theoretical and empirical research.
We have given an example of a RSP to substantiate the theoretical metamodel of complication/simplification of semiosis, which in communication can be implemented both in the progression of complication (Gift Convention Translation → → → Control) and in the progression of simplification of the semiotic links involved (Control Translation Convention Gift). In the first case, there is an ascent → → → from sensation to comprehension by the subject. In the second case, the process is turned to sensation. The proposed metamodel makes it possible to observe strong and weak RSP strategies as an MCA. ORSP is characterized by a simplification of the semiotic conditioning of communication and is a strong RSP strategy due to theocentrism.
Whether the proposed theoretical model is universal, remains to be discussed. It probably has its limits, which are determined not only by cultural differences, but also by the strategies of social eugenics. ORSP is one example of such a strategy. But it coexists in historical interconnection with other strategies that change social reality. Therefore, it is likely that its creative potential is to some extent due to the existing variety of communicative relations.
It is no coincidence that G. Vaughan and C. Eisenstein refer to the concept of a gift. After all, they are trying to offer alternative projects in opposition to the capitalist neo-liberal social eugenics. At the very least, their concepts demonstrate possible alternatives.
C. Eisenstein questions the very principle of progress as a complication, seeing more mysticism than rationality in technological power (2013). The idea of a turning point in civilization  echoes Der Untergang des Abendlandes of O. Spengler (1918-1922: the West inherits not the best part of the greatness of Ancient Rome (Spengler); modern civilization is like the Tower of Babel (Eisenstein). But is oversimplification (McChesney & Pickard, 2017) a panacea? A number of researchers consider the examples of totalitarian regimes of the early 20th century to be the result of a total simplification of social relations . Are modern calls for the simplification of social relations an advertisement for the totalitarian culture of transnational corporations? K. Schwab articulated the goals, objectives and consequences of the Fourth Industrial Revolution quite clearly (2017). Transnational corporations are interested in simplifying management mechanisms, but this leads to the ousting of a person from physical and intellectual labor, entails a massive forcing people out from the system of distribution of resources and material wealth.
G. Vaughn rightly sees the feminine principle in the gift-giving relationship (2016). The basis of her concept on observations of the matriarchy of the North and South (Vaughn, 2018). Of course, matriarchy has become the cradle of humanity.
But is Maternal Economy an obstacle to the complication of communication that leads to Paternal Economy? How can gift giving interfere with gift exchange?
ORSP is built on the simplification of communicative relations, but nevertheless it is a patriarchy.
M. Mazzucato observes how with the transformation of the economy of value production into the economy of value extraction, the economic theory serving the interests of capital is also being transformed (2020). Capitalism has created a consumer society and has itself transformed from a value-producing economic mechanism into a value-consuming economic mechanism. Consequently, Maternal Economy (Gift Giving Economy) has already lost out to value-consuming capitalism.
Our contention is that gift-giving and gift-exchange actually co-exist: they follow each other, they are not mutually exclusive. If further research establishes the universality of the proposed metamodel for analyzing the complication/simplification of cognitive structures of communication and perception of reality, then it can also be proposed to describe the process of sustainable development of society (anthropogenesis), regardless of cultural characteristics. But so far this is just a guess.
Further comparison of ORSP with RSP of the leading world religions and their regional configurations is promising. The question arises if the described ORSP model is unique or if other religions follow it too. Perhaps it is valid for Abrahamic religions, but it cannot fully describe the communicative relations of "materialistic" religions (Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism) , paganism and neo-paganism (Galovič, 2021;.
The original hierarchical typology of communication relations pro-posed by the authors is based on existing observations. We are to discuss the most controversial issue of subject-object relations in the communication of people and things further.
The productive value of the R. T. Craig interdisciplinary method should be emphasized. Based on practical experience, within the framework of ORSP, the authors consider a mental process that is identical to the procedural aspect of activity, aimed at changing the subject of activity itself. This aspect of activity is identical to the auto-communication of an individual or society with itself. Autocommunication is characterized by a special configuration of subject-object relations, in which things can take part along with people. In non-conventional communication channels, the "inanimate" subject takes part in communication, influencing the transformation of a person. Similar opinions are expressed by M. McLuhan, justifying the thesis that the means of communication have an impact on the broadcast content .
Defining the essence of cinema, G. Deleuze concludes that cinema affects the construction of meaningful units and communication operations (1989). On the empirical basis of the sociology of science, B. Latour comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to equalize words and things in subject-object relations (2005). Yu. Lotman explains the isomorphism of animate and inanimate "thinking structures" through the semiotics of the functioning of intelligence: in order to manifest their properties, as for "absolutely normal human intelligence", a work of art requires an interlocutor. The differences between "animate" and "inanimate" semiotic objects consist in the fact that in human interactions "the function of information transmission prevails in texts of a communicative nature", and in human interactions with cultural heritage "the ability to generate new messages comes forward" (Lotman, 2000, p. 152).
The provisions of Latour are not fundamentally new, from the standpoint of the semiotic tradition. It should be recognized that conventional and non-conventional communication channels are not only a way to distinguish between "animate" and "inanimate" objects, but they also characterize two types of relations in communication. Since the interlocutor can be not only a thing, an object, but also an intangible product of conceptual advertising, intangible objects can and should be studied within the framework of communication relations.
B The key termstranslation, interpretation, and reconstruction -diverge in describing society. If interpretation and reconstruction are a consequence of social relations, then translation is their cause. Changing causality is the heuristic advantage of the Actor-Network Theory (ANT). M. Castells agrees that network structures have always played a role in the development of society, and recently their role has been increasing (2000). B. Latour once again emphasizes that theoretical ideas about reality are homogeneous with cosmogonic projections, which are not identical to the cosmos, but only reflect the anthropocentrism of the theory (2021). B. Latour sees in reality a source of translation of phenomena into a social plane and calls "back to things", to overcome the rigid border between immanent and transcendent (1983; 2005; 2021). B. Latour points to the role of the Christian recoding (translation) of the pagan category of the native-neighbor into the participatory-neighbor (equally chosen by God) (2021). New communion is mediated by the 'Good News' , the New Testament, the timeless and extradimensional eschaton, the human limit. New human limits required the translation (recoding) of sacred categories (Vashcheva 2018). And such a reassembly of sociality, according to Latour, never stopped. Consequently, the re-sacralization of spiritual practices is an essential feature of anthropogenesis. It characterizes the evolution of human consciousness and self-consciousness. But the ascent to perfection still requires a stable ideal, on the basis of which new experiences are mediated . R. T. Craig's statement that different models of social communication lead to different ideas about reality (1999) does not contradict the network configuration of social relations, but indicates that these relations can develop on different grounds. Our contention is that the resacralization of these various foundations follows a single principle, the universality of which must be tested. This principle (principle of complication/simplification) has limits of relevance relative to the presented Hierarchical Metamodel of Communication. Hierarchical connections of various models of communicative relations are possible only in the circumstances of their simultaneous functioning. Therefore, the prolonged dominance of one of the models to the detriment of the others does not lead to the progress of the dominant model, but to a regression of communicative relations as a whole. Monitoring and purposefully limiting the dominance of one of the models to the detriment of the others seems to be a promising way to determine the line between the creative and destructive potential of social eugenics through advertising and PR.

Conclusion
Re-Sacralizing Spiritual Practices as a Method of Conceptual Advertising (RSP as a MCA) forms a field of rivalry for the transformation of a person. The days of reckless and implicit social eugenics are over. But how unpredictable and varied are the methods of its implementation?
We suggest that increasing the ability of humanity to collectively produce values implies intellectual progress -the evolution of consciousness. But there are not many ways to improve. Perhaps the Resacralization of spiritual practices as a method of conceptual advertising is the only way. Then it should be studied in more detail.
We come to the conclusion that modern social communication is multifaceted. Communicative relations can either become more complex in terms of expanding and complicating the semiotic connections of communicants, or they can be simplified, obeying a single dominant idea.
From the point of view of the practical application of the proposed RSP as a PR and advertising technology, both strong and weak strategies can be used to achieve the desired result. But it should be born in mind that the simplification of semiotic connections in communicative relations, the approximation of the symbol and sign to signal certainty, increases the risk of depreciation and desacralization of the dominant meaning. The most dangerous tendency to simplify semiotic connections in communicative relations is the stigmatization of the Other. Due to the ambivalence of the symbol, stigma contains the threat of uncontrolled scaling up to deprivation and destruction of the stigma actor.
The most significant theoretical value of the work is the proposed hierarchical metamodel of communicative relations. It allows us to observe the processes of complication and simplification of semiotic connections in social communication.
However, discovering the origins of the hierarchical metamodel of communication in Christian ideology and psychology, we are inclined to assume with caution that on other cultural grounds (Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, Confucianism, Taoism, etc.), communication models can be interconnected differently. It is interesting to combine the efforts of representatives of different cultures to criticize and improve the proposed hierarchical metamodel. The scope of the proposed theoretical metamodel goes beyond the theory of PR and advertising. It is applicable, from our point of view, to the analysis of communicative relations between people of different cultures in various areas of communication, as well as to the analysis of communicative processes. Hierarchically, one can analyze the relationship between the theater stage and the public, the ruling political center and the periphery, the media and the public, etc. A possible collaboration of scientists from different directions from different cultural auras suggests in the future the development of an optimal metamodel of intercultural communication or the justification of its impossibility under certain conditions.