Filaret, like a true friend and comrade

Contents The beginning of Filaret's friendly and comradely relationship with Gabriel a) Friendly relations in the educational field b) During his time in the priesthood c) After serving in the priesthood d) In Yaroslavl e) In Orel f) In Ekaterinoslavl g) In Odessa h) In Tver Recently, in one of the issues of our diocesan bulletins 1 for the current year, a solid letter was published under the title: Letter from a father to his son about friendship. It was written by one of the venerable priests, and shows in the author a beautiful soul who longed for true friendship and true fellowship. This letter depicts the ideal of a true friend and comrade, which was presented before the mental eyes of the venerable author - and is depicted theoretically, that is, what a true friend and comrade should be. In this article of ours 2 we have the opportunity to show the implementation of this ideal in life and in practice - an implementation so complete and vital that when you mentally look at this ideal, you involuntarily revere it and are surprised by it. This ideal was realized in its entirety in the person of His Eminence Metropolitan Philaret and in his relations with his comrade and friend, His Eminence Gabriel, Archbishop of Tver and Kashinsky. For the clergy of the Tver diocese, these friendly relations of the Moscow High Hierarch, whose moral character is so exalted and pure, are all the more precious because the Right Reverend Gabriel, who deserved the true friendship of such a great saint, ruled the Tver diocese for a long time and acquired from the clergy the title of “most kind” archpastor. The numerous series of letters from Philaret to Gabriel, which began almost from the bench of the Trinity-Sergius Seminary and embraced almost the entire life of Gabriel, depicts the personality of Philaret as a true friend and comrade in its entirety, in all the greatness of his unshakable loyalty and immutability, fatherly wisdom and benevolence. On the other hand, Gabriel’s letters and actions portray Gabriel himself as a man, although loving sophistication and not always firm in friendship, but with an infantilely devoted soul. Both friends stand before us as if alive, with their own distinctive features; - one, like a loving older brother, - strong and mighty, - like a wise mentor, leader, helper and benefactor; - another, - like a younger brother, infantilely kind and loving, but not always following the straight path, stumbling and straying from it, and even headstrong, thinking of imitating his older brother, but either unsuccessfully or with danger to himself; for this he always finds help and intercession in his elder brother, although not without severe reprimands and admonitions for his mistakes. We will try to trace in detail Filaret’s friendly and comradely relations with Gabriel in all fields of the latter’s ministry. The beginning of Filaret’s friendly and comradely relationship with Gabriel It is known that Filaret was Gabriel’s peer and comrade at the Trinity-Sergius Seminary. Here they studied together the sciences of that time, one under the name of Vasily Mikhailovich Drozdov, the other under the name of Vasily Fedorovich Rozanov. Here they grew together morally and spiritually “under the wings of St. Sergius,” according to the wonderful expression of Philaret. Here they completed the course together and at the same time in 1808. It was here, under the sacred protection of St. Sergius, that they began those friendly and comradely relations that lasted until the end of their lives, and which had some kind of sublime, sacred character. a) Friendly relations in the educational field Vasily Mikhailovich Drozdov, after completing a course at the Lavra seminary, was left here as a teacher and taught various subjects there, including the Greek language and the rules of higher eloquence, until June 16, 1808, when he was called to St. Petersburg and took monasticism with the name Philaret. Vasily Fedorovich Rozanov, after completing a course at the Lavra Seminary, was a teacher in his native Kostroma Seminary until 1807 and among his students was Feodor Aleksandrovich Golubinsky, later a famous professor at the Moscow Academy, known not only throughout Russia, but also in Germany. It is not clear whether there was any correspondence between friends and comrades at this time, but it can be reliably assumed that when the fame of Filaret began to quickly spread, Vasily Fedorovich asked him to take care of his fate and transfer him, if possible, to St. Petersburg. And we see that, indeed, in 1811, the teacher of the Kostroma Seminary, Vasily Fedorovich Rozanov, was transferred to the Alexander Nevsky School. Here on October 15th, no doubt, on the advice of his friend and comrade, he took monastic vows, with the name Gabriel; Moreover, the rector of the Alexander Nevsky School himself, Archimandrite Philaret, becomes his mentor father; and on the same day, i.e., October 15, he was ordained a hierodeacon, a day later, on October 17, a hieromonk, and on October 24 he was demoted to the rank of archimandrite in the Spaso-Konevsky Monastery of the Vologda diocese, with the appointment of a teacher of philosophy and a prefect of the Vologda seminary. In all this change in the fate of Vasily Fedorovich Rozanov, one cannot help but see the powerful assistance of Philaret, because it is unthinkable to allow a modest and humble teacher of the Kostroma Seminary on his own to take such rapid steps both during his initiation and during his appointment to a new place of ministry, without someone else’s powerful help. And he could not receive this help from anyone in St. Petersburg, except Filaret. In Vologda I had to serve Gabriel for quite a long time. Until 1814 he was prefect of the seminary; in 1814, according to the determination of the commission of theological schools, in which Filaret, not yet being a member of it, already had great importance, he was appointed rector of the Vologda Seminary, and served in this rank until 1819, when he was called to worship and preach the word of God in St. Petersburg. We do not see now whether there was any correspondence between friends and comrades during this entire period of service of Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel in Vologda, although Filaret did not lose sight of his friend’s educational activities. Perhaps intensive studies at the St. Petersburg Academy and frequent trips to audit theological seminaries and schools in the St. Petersburg and Moscow districts, as well as double audits of the Moscow and St. Petersburg Academy, and other important affairs and works of Philaret left him little time for correspondence, when Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel, also busy with his position, did not call him to this correspondence; - be that as it may, only not a single letter is visible from Filaret to Vologda to Gabriel. True, in one letter, and then to Yaroslavl (letter No. 13), we find a few words on a matter related to Gabriel’s rector’s service in Vologda, namely, when Gabriel asked for guidance from His Eminence Philaret, the then Archbishop of Yaroslavl, on how to act on the occasion of the demand from him by the Vologda police chief to return the attitude of the police sent to him back in Vologda and lost to them. The Reverend Philaret gives him the following advice: “In Vologda one can answer that the attitude of the police chief would have been presented in due time if it had been required; but since this was not recognized as necessary, then you did not recognize it as necessary to take care of its storage; and therefore, behind the former crossings, you cannot find and imagine it” 3. Gabriel himself subsequently, in his letters to Innocent Borisov, our famous preacher, repeatedly expressed his love for Vologda and pointed to his literary and theological works, which he was engaged in in Vologda and to which Philaret was encouraged. Thus, when Innokenty, from among the rector of the academy, was appointed bishop of Vologda, the Right Reverend Gabriel wrote to him from Odessa: “I am flying after you, gracious archpastor, I am flying there with my thoughts, regretting that I cannot be there physically. After my tonsure in St. Petersburg, there my feat of monastic life began; Tamo, I deserved what I now have... I love this country, because I myself was loved by Tamo” 4 . In another letter, dated January 21, 1841, Eminence Gabriel, mentioning the Dogmatic Collection then undertaken by Eminence Innocent and presenting the difficulty of such a multi-volume and important publication, wrote to Innocent: “In such enterprises as yours, our nomadic life interferes with us. Having been in Vologda, I began, in Latin, a collection of all religions, with the addition of heretical errors. Having learned from experience how useful this activity is when teaching the Orthodox confession, I pulled this thread for more than three years, and reached half of my field. He presented it unprintably to His Eminence Eugene the Metropolitan of blessed memory with the Moscow hierarch and was encouraged to do so. But when they took me to St. Petersburg, hid me in the cadet corps, then transferred me to Yaroslavl, from there to Orel, and so on, my thread fell out of my hands, and now I can no longer find either the beginning or the end of it, and there are no ways” 5 . But if the Right Reverend Philaret did not write to Gabriel, this does not mean that he forgot him. No, he encouraged him to do theological work and, in general, did not lose sight of him, as we said above. In 1819, Gabriel was called to St. Petersburg for a series of priestly services and at the same time became a teacher of law in the cadet corps. He was, compared to others, still a young archimandrite and received some peculiarity over other archimandrites called to the rank of priestly service; - all this could not be accomplished without the participation of a strong hand for him in St. Petersburg, - that is, without Filaret. b) While in the priesthood Arriving in St. Petersburg and staying at the Alexander Nevsky Lavra, where premises are usually provided for archimandrites appointed to serve in the priesthood, Gabriel could have frequent personal meetings with his comrade and friend, and frequent correspondence in unexpected cases; and always found in his friend a wise adviser and a sincere well-wisher. So, for example, in March 1820, Count M.A. Miloradovich visited Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel and demanded that he preach it; O. the archimandrite did not know what to do and asked for advice from his comrade and friend; and he gave him wise and safe advice in a short note 6 . Another time, in May of the same 1820, when Filaret was already Bishop of Tver, Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel himself receives a friendly invitation from him - to be a companion of prayer for his unworthiness. “However, I do not convince,” wrote Archbishop Filaret; - for there is someone to serve with; but I only offer it if you are free and please” 7 . Once again: on October 20 of the same 1820, when Philaret was already Archbishop of Yaroslavl, Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel, who, as we said above, was a teacher of law in the cadet corps, receives a friendly invitation from Philaret to ride with him in the same carriage for the exam in the page corps 8. Five days after this, Eminence Philaret sends to Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel one book, with the following friendly note: “The enclosed book is asked to be translated into pure Russian; Will your Reverence accept this work? If the thought comes to you about this, would you like to do an experiment on two or three pages? and then we would talk in more detail about how to conduct this matter.” In the same note it is attributed. “I’m sending the cloth to the tailor. For some reason they sent her to me” 9. Was this a gift from Filaret for a cassock for his friend? c) After the service at the turn But now the time of Fr.’s stay has ended. Archimandrite Gabriel during the priestly service. He had to either return to Vologda, to his Spaso-Konevsky Monastery, or remain in St. Petersburg as a law teacher in the cadet corps - without Filaret, who was preparing to go to his new department in Yaroslavl. Father Archimandrite was frightened by this situation and asked his friend to take him with him wherever he wanted. The Lord answers him: “Attraction is not my strength; and I am not strengthened"; and at the same time makes it clear to the petitioner that he entrust this matter to the One who alone does not err in knowledge and decisions. “Perhaps He will show a better way, which neither you nor I have yet seen 10. What Filaret had in his thoughts is unknown. What is known is that Archimandrite Gabriel was carried away, as Filaret himself put it, by his friend and comrade to Yaroslavl, to become the abbot of the first-class Bogoroditsky Tolga Monastery, which is located 8 versts from Yaroslavl, and to entrust him with the management of the Yaroslavl Seminary, which was then located in this monastery. From this time on, new relations began between comrades and friends - unofficial relations, although Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel, in his service, was officially subordinate to His Eminence Philaret. as to his archpastor - but the relationship, as Filaret himself put it, is simple, for which personal fame is needed. They were all the more necessary for the Reverend Philaret because at first he himself did not foresee the opportunity to be in Yaroslavl soon 11, and then he did not manage to be at all. Therefore, the Right Reverend Philaret, establishing these relations, in his first letter to Gabriel in Yaroslavl, wrote to him: “Glory to God! You are in Yaroslavl, dear Fr. rector; and therefore I am closer to Yaroslavl. Official relations are not always sufficient; For simple relationships, personal fame is needed. This was what I lacked while you were away from Yaroslavl. As I asked at our farewell, so now I ask you to tell me everything that is fair, necessary and useful for the good of the diocese, business or persons - without being at a loss, whether in thoughts or not in thoughts, whether you say pleasant or unpleasant. Let man-pleasing go where God sends the action of flattery; our duty is to please God, and therefore sincerity and impartiality towards people” 12. Such complete trust on the part of His Eminence Philaret placed Fr. Archimandrite is very high in the eyes of all residents of Yaroslavl. This was a representative of Filaret himself, authorized by his high trust. About a year about. Archimandrite Gabriel spent his time in Yaroslavl and, to the best of his ability and studies, now helped not only his friend and comrade, but also his benefactor and patron, in fulfilling his numerous assignments in all areas of the administration of his diocese, starting from his monastery to the seminary and consistory. Now the correspondence was to intensify; and we, indeed, have several letters from the Right Reverend Philaret to Gabriel, mostly in response to letters and reports from Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel. These letters, testifying to the high trust of the saint in his friend, breathe at the same time with paternal meekness and sincere sincerity and clearly show with what amazing insight Philaret foresaw from afar all the shortcomings of the diocesan seminary administration in Yaroslavl, and what meek measures he wanted to take to correct these shortcomings. Father Archimandrite Gabriel, having arrived in Yaroslavl, “acted sacredly for the first time no other way than in place of Philaret himself”; Filaret thanks him for this work and says that it is “very useful” 13. Gabriel reported that his predecessor in the monastery, Theophylact, was dissatisfied with his activity; That’s why the monastery has fallen into disarray, and few people visit it. The Reverend Philaret writes complacently about this: “Your predecessor in the monastery, apparently, was dissatisfied with his activity, perhaps due to old age. God will help you in arranging the affairs of the monastery; and order will attract people” 14. Then the bishop himself writes about the management of schools: “It is very necessary to delve into the management of schools. I was presented with approximate estimates for this year (1821); I did not confirm it before you; demand from the board and consider” 15. One must think that Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel asked for a new governor for his monastery; the lord sent him; but it turned out that there was a treasurer in the monastery, who was older in years than the new governor; Therefore, the bishop arranged things this way: “Your governor went to you in the second week,” he wrote to Gabriel. “A novice asks him from the same place; I have already agreed to assign it to you. There is a place; The governor assures of his ability. “I have a thought: won’t it be boring for your treasurer to see a new senior?” And that’s why I’m thinking of taking him in to put him on a new path. Tell me, what do you think? 16. Then the bishop himself points out the shortcomings he notices in the seminary and consistory, and points out with all frankness and sincerity, in order to correct these shortcomings. “To this day I have had three proteges from Yaroslavl,” he wrote to Gabriel, “who all graduated from the seminary course. The first of them did not know how to read the Trisagion, and before the proverbs he himself shouted: wisdom and so on. In knowledge of the word of God, everyone is surprisingly insufficient. For God's sake, take care of the continuing course. Regarding the extreme ignorance of church services, I think it necessary to make a general instruction so that parents teach their children to read and sing in church, and that schools observe the same, as the charter requires; but I would not want to bring shame to the diocese with such an order. - Introduce in seminaries and lower schools, except for parochial ones, that all students take turns reading in church, or in churches, on the days when they attend divine services. Tell also the seminarians that, according to the unfortunate experience about which I wrote, it will be necessary for each of them, not excluding those who have completed the full course, to be tested in reading, singing and church rules; let them know and prepare.” Regarding the consistory, the bishop wrote: “The consistory does not provide reports on amounts, nor statements on unresolved cases. Remind her of this and tell her that if I seem impatient in such cases, then the memory of the activity and serviceability of the Tver Consistory and its office leads me into this temptation. I would insult the Yaroslavl diocese if I allowed the idea that things should be worse there.” Such important instructions were given by Eminence Philaret to his confidant. But here is a not very important instruction: “At your leisure, look at the sacristy of the bishop’s house, except for the sealed one, and tell me what you think. We are now making a new one, complete and uniform; we'll kill a lot of money; won't it be condemned? But there was nothing whole and pure here, especially the priestly and deacon’s robes.” “Enough for the first time. “The Lord and His grace be with you and with those entrusted to you” 17. Soon 18, Eminence Philaret received a second report from his confidant, and gives his answers to this report. Father Archimandrite asked whether it was possible to give salaries to teachers in advance, and for his part pointed out the honesty of the teachers and that it was safe to pay them. It should be noted that the salary was paid in thirds, and, moreover, the salary was very meager; and therefore many teachers were in dire need. The Bishop answers: “Distributing salaries to teachers in advance, even if it was not dangerous, should not be, because it is neither legal nor useful for them. I remember, and you, of course, know, experiences of this long ago in the Trinity Lavra. It is necessary to convince the teachers themselves that it is better for them to live on the past than on future salaries, and for this purpose at least constrain themselves for a while. If it is difficult for them to wait for the end of a third of the year, you can give them for every two months, and in need, for a month, only always what they have earned.” O. Archimandrite pointed out the malfunction of the receipt books and the absence of recipients’ receipts in them. The Bishop writes to him: “Put the income books in order as much as possible. It is very necessary to ensure that, when issuing amounts, at the same time, receipts are certainly given in the book.” Reporting on seminary affairs, Fr. the archimandrite wanted to keep silent about some omissions out of fear, NE VERITAS ODIUM PARIT 19. The Bishop did not like this very much. “Even if I officially instructed you to inspect the seminary and report,” he wrote to him on March 17, 1821, “and if the discovery of omissions threatened the perpetrators with trial; and then you would have to describe everything in good conscience, as you found it. But I didn’t want to disturb anyone, but to find out the state of affairs simply and correct it, if God helps, quietly; and despite all this, you did not want to write to me the pure truth. God have mercy, if, out of fear of NE VERITAS ODIUM PARIT, you make a rule for yourself not to write to me any unpleasant truth! Then your letters will not bring any benefit, but will only be a temptation to me. I advise you to act better according to another saying, namely: Lord, who dwells in Your dwelling? “Don’t flatter with your tongue.” Father Archimandrite wanted the drunken deacon, who was probably in the Tolga monastery under penance, to be transferred to another monastery. The Bishop answers: “You want the drunken deacon to be transferred to another monastery. But is another monastery really a link? There are no such monasteries in the diocese. And why would I bother to translate it? If he gets drunk and staggers, report it to me; then I will have a reason to send him to a monastery far from the city.” Father Archimandrite reported about a monk of his monastery whose nose hurt, and asked the bishop for advice on what to do. The Bishop answered: “In my opinion, one should act modestly with a monk whose nose hurts, but not ignore him. It would be good to call a trustworthy doctor and ask him to maintain philanthropic silence in what is offered to him. Then call the monk and tell him that to avert doubts, if he does not want to undergo the shame of an open examination on a formal presentation, he must allow himself to be examined secretly. If nothing bad is revealed, thank God; if it is revealed, it will depend on knowledge of the qualities of the monk and on advice with the doctor to place him under the care of a doctor in the monastery, with excommunication from the brethren, or to order him to ask for worship, where he decides, and somewhere along the way to undergo treatment in peace.” This is how the great saint dealt with the matter wisely and philanthropically. Father Archimandrite had premises in both the monastery and the seminary; but wanted to live in the city in a courtyard, and asked permission from the bishop. The Bishop answered: “You have a monastery; you have a seminary; and you are neither here nor there, but on the street, between secular houses! It seems to me that it is neither useful nor decent. If the seminar rooms need to be fixed, then fixed. Are they cold? Now on to summer. Not great? And I don’t expect this objection. Will the courtyard be empty? – There is no problem, especially in the summer; and if you like, arrange it in such a way that it suits both the owners and the residents, and let in an honest guest. This is how I see the matter; if I see indirectly, expose me; I am ready to submit to you. Your sincere brother and servant." His Eminence Philaret became Archbishop of Yaroslavl at the time when the St. Petersburg Academy had just begun to publish the magazine “Christian Reading,” and he really wanted the Yaroslavl diocese to subscribe to this magazine as much as possible. For this purpose, he gave a special proposal to the consistory; but the consistory, apparently, did not care about this at all. The month of March 1821 was already ending, and the consistory was still silent. “Inquire, dear Father Rector,” Filaret wrote to Gabriel, “what the consistory is doing at my suggestion about publishing the “Christian Reading,” and favor this matter; and notify me” 20. In the same letter the saint instructs Fr. the rector should also inquire in the consistory about one divorce case. Soon after this letter, the saint writes to Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel received a new letter, in which he touchingly describes the death of Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, Mikhail. “The Bishop performed his proskomedia and offered himself to God forever. His death is honest. His usual meekness had recently shone through most of all in him. For the past few days, St. has been communing daily. secrets The last 24 hours have been hard physically; however, even this suffering was silent. 24 days of the past month 21 after Vespers, when in the house church they sang it: now have you let your servant go, he has given up the spirit. I saw him in the easiest and most difficult hours of his illness; in these last ones one could especially feel at the limit of eternity. He was mourned earnestly and buried splendidly. The death of Jodaia and Josiah comes to mind. Pray, dear brother! It’s not the diocese, but the hierarchy that is becoming an orphan.” Then, depicting the difficult state of church government at that time - when Count Arakcheev and Novgorod Archimandrite Photius rebelled against the then chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Prince A. N. Golitsyn, and Philaret himself and the catechism he compiled were suspected of non-Orthodoxy - the saint continues: “A few days before the death of the bishop, one 22 saw a dream: a huge pillar with a crown above collapsed with thunder. Lord, Lord! The building is already dilapidated; The storms are intensifying from hour to hour, and at this time the pillar on which the vault itself lay is being destroyed! What should we expect? 23. The saint could write this way only to his sincere friend. In the same letter he thanks Fr. archimandrite for the attention paid by this latter to the case of one sexton, who avoided the monastery under the pretext of illness, and asks for similar attention in the future - and then adds: “Do not be afraid that I will use your power of attorney for evil to violate the peace between you and your comrades 24. I want to know the state of affairs in order, with God’s help, to help correct them, and not in order to humiliate or quarrel people.” And again: “Don’t be angry with me because I gave you a lot of things to do with the resolution at the presentation with the report. For God's sake, try to bring order to this chaos. I couldn’t imagine that in Yaroslavl they could do this thing in such a senseless way.” Depicting the sad state of the Yaroslavl consistory, the saint wrote to Fr. Archimandrite: “I am deafened by complaints about robbery. By the way, I hear these complaints in the Synod itself. Tell the consistorists, do they really not hear the cry that is heard from their places to St. Petersburg and to the Synod? Today I happened to read from the prophet Jeremiah, by the way, XXI, 11-14, XXIII, 1-3 25. Ask them to read these passages for me. We need to take care of them so as not to be subjected to this terrible judgment” 26. In a letter dated April 7, the saint, among other things, wrote: “During Holy Week they told me that you were not healthy; May the Lord strengthen you for the common good and to help my weakness. Why not write out “Christian Reading” to the account of monasteries and churches, with a note in the inventory of monasteries and churches? But in other dioceses the clergy pays a lot to their own account. What a misfortune is it that the Yaroslavl diocese is last in everything? “The plan of the seminary,” the saint continued, “to show me with your assumptions is desirable for me, if not difficult for you. “I would be glad to praise the order of worship in your seminary; Pray that I will soon find a place for you. But the deprivation of the elder 27 now, I am afraid, may not be a new reason for delay.” Father Archimandrite Gabriel, among other things, asked the bishop what to do with the pilgrims who come to the monastery in large numbers in the summer to venerate the miraculous icon of the Mother of God, and spend the night in the monastery in all places. The Bishop answered: “I don’t know what to do with those spending the night in the monastery during the holiday, especially since I don’t see your place. It seems that this must be tolerated with the following restrictions: first, so that no one spends the night in cells with the brethren, second, so that those spending the night spend the night in one or several rooms, and in the summer, if they want, on the porch, but do not scatter alone; third, that the monastery watchman should remain vigil.” Father Archimandrite Gabriel asked permission to use a certain amount for monastery repairs without a special report to the bishop; The bishop answered this like this: “I allowed everyone to make repairs up to three hundred rubles without reporting; and what’s more, it seems, it won’t be a burden to write a few lines, not because I’m stingy with trust, but just in case of an unforeseen case in a diocese where people want to sue in the criminal chamber for eight rubles” 28. In the month of April, Fr. the archimandrite sent an inventory of the sacristy to the bishop so that he would provide him with information about it; but the bishop was not very pleased with the inventory of the sacristy, and says in his letter dated April 18 that in St. Petersburg he himself built a fairly good sacristy, namely: one bishop’s vestments, four priestly and five deacon’s vestments, all of the same brocade, and five sensible surplices for the choristers. “Money was lost,” the bishop wrote, “I think more than six thousand rubles. I don’t know whether you will approve of this or whether they will scold us. It seems we are not very luxurious yet. My neighbor makes one bishop's vestment that costs three thousand rubles. But I admit, I don’t like to see clergy in church in torn and stained clothes, such as we had until now” 29. Meanwhile, Moscow Metropolitan Seraphim (Glagolevsky) was transferred to the place of the deceased St. Petersburg Metropolitan Michael, and the Moscow See was left without an archpastor. Everyone's eyes were turned to Archbishop Philaret of Yaroslavl, and on June 3, 1821, according to the Highest Decree at the report of the Holy Synod, he was granted the Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna and the Holy Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, Holy Archimandrite. But while this determination was finally made, there were different rumors in Yaroslavl about the transfer of Filaret: some said that he was being transferred to Tiflis, to the exarch of Georgia; others - that to Moscow. These rumors were not without some basis, because after the death of the Exarch of Georgia, Theophylact Rusanov, in the spring of 1821, the Holy Synod considered the appointment of Philaret in the place of Theophylact, the Exarch of Georgia. It is not for nothing that Filaret himself wrote on May 16, 1821 to the rector of the Nizhny Novgorod Seminary, Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel (Gorodkov), later Archbishop of Ryazan: “If you are telling the truth that among the curious there are those so undiscerning who share their curiosity between Georgia and Yaroslavl, then you could tell them that Yaroslavl, in comparison with Georgia, does not at all deserve curiosity, and some of the Yaroslavskys with inner conviction and willingly admit this, Abundantly Do not be curious about your affairs, for you will deceive many of their opinions (Sir.3) 30. Philaret’s friend and comrade, Gabriel, the rector of the Yaroslavl Seminary, listened to such talk, and he wrote about them to the Eminence Philaret, telling him his predictions about his rise. His Eminence Filaret himself, in his humility, did not pay much attention to such predictions and considered them a temptation for himself. “Do not tempt me with any predictions,” he wrote to Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel. 31 His Eminence Philaret was especially disturbed by his rapid transitions from one diocese to another, with many cases in each, and also by the fact that in St. Petersburg he was not treated entirely favorably. He saw himself as if on a small boat in a stormy sea. In this sense, he wrote the following in the same letter to his friend and comrade: “How long between storms? We must hurry to the pier. I wrote about my dismissal for the review of the diocese. But this will not be resolved soon; but don’t preach about it” 32. These last words indicate that the venerable himself. Filaret did not think at all about his elevation and was entirely preoccupied with the many things that awaited him in Yaroslavl. How many such cases there were in the Yaroslavl diocese can be seen from the words of that letter from Gabriel to the High Venerable. Philaret, in which Gabriel wrote that he became ill from some work at the seminary and monastery. Very Reverend Filaret responded to this letter with the following words: “If you, brother, are sick from one monastery and seminary, then I should have died long ago from the entire Yaroslavl diocese.” “For God’s sake, work hard, but do not be upset; whatever God helps you do is enough; If only evil would not take root from our negligence” 33, writes the tireless worker to his friend, begging him not to stop working, and then goes into a detailed consideration of various seminary and monastic affairs presented to him from Yaroslavl. A new economist was asked to join the Yaroslavl Seminary, and Gabriel did not know what to do: should he accept him or not? The Lord decides the matter this way: “If the steward asks, then it’s your job to tell me whether he’s fit or not; and if he’s not suitable, then it’s your job to introduce someone else. Take care of this; I’m glad, but I don’t know anyone” 34. Gabriel wrote that money had not been sent for the construction of a house for the Tolga school - without checking thoroughly, whether this money had not been sent to the Tolga monastery for return to the seminary. Vladyka answered: “I hear about the house of the Tolga School with pleasure. Usually, when deciding to open a school, the commission of theological schools also assigns money. Find out more accurately whether they are in Tolgsky to return to the seminary. If not: it should be deducted when sending it to the commission. Now there is nothing more to do than to present to me that in the correction of last year’s report entrusted to me under your supervision, this confusion crept in, and that therefore it is necessary to ask for the return of this money from the commission of theological schools, since it is not allowed to transfer extraneous amounts from higher schools to lower ones.” With this letter, Met. Filaret sent his friend a sermon delivered at the burial of the deceased Metropolitan Michael by the rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Fr. Archimandrite Gregory (Postnikov), later Archbishop of Tver and Metropolitan of St. Petersburg. “On the death of the saint, I am sending you a sermon about. Gregory. Read it and at your leisure tell me your opinion” 35. Despite the fact that these rumors about the movement of high-tech. Philaret from Yaroslavl to one or another higher department was getting closer and closer to his realization, he was more and more diligently involved in the affairs of the Yaroslavl diocese and delved into them, according to his characteristic accuracy and precision, even to the smallest detail. So, for example, Fr. Rector Gabriel, who himself, together with his friend and comrade, listened to the teaching of science in Latin at the Lavra Seminary, wanted to strengthen the teaching of this language at the Yaroslavl Seminary. His Eminence Philaret approved this desire of Fr. rector and wrote to him in response: “We need to try hard about the Latin language. Professors of literature and philosophy must be encouraged to do this. We need to occupy ourselves with writings in Latin.” The question of the seminary's economy remained unresolved. It is clear that Fr. Rector Gabriel did not find the priest fit for this position, who himself asked to become an economist, as we saw from the previous letter, but wanted to assign this position either to one of the young mentors of the seminary, or to the cathedral archpriest, A. Sokolov. The Bishop did not approve of such assumptions about. rector, but insisted on finding a special priest to fill this position and answered Fr. to the rector in the following terms: “I expect an answer from you about the economic position. Did you talk to the priest or priests? Without this I will not solve the matter. It is harmful for a professor, especially a young one, to be diverted to an economic position. Archpriest Sokolov already has a lot to do, as I wrote to you before” 36. The rector of the Tolgsky monastery, Fr. Rector Gabriel asked the bishop what portion of the income to give to the abbot of the Tolgsky monastery. The Bishop answered: “The governors in the laurels, it seems, receive against three hieromonks. But in a monastery, it’s quite against two, especially if the viceroy doesn’t keep his order. Only one viceroy, the archimandrite, does not hold a position in the laurels, but the treasurers, the hieromonks, do.” The bishop continued to take care of the dissemination of “Christian Reading” and that the books of this magazine were promptly and accurately sent to those churches and monasteries of the Yaroslavl diocese that subscribed to this magazine: “I spoke about “Christian Reading” and will talk again so that it will be more correct.” – To what details and particulars did the concerns of the eminent extend? Filaret about the affairs that occupied Fr. in Yaroslavl. Archimandrite Gabriel, both in the seminary and in the schools, is evidenced by the following words of the same letter: “It seems there is nothing new to do about the singing students. They may belong to schools, but not out of necessary dependence, as you can see from my resolution. - I require information about the minister. I’ll try to do it your way.” It is known that Gabriel loved the singers very much and took care of them; he wanted to do something new for them, but what exactly was unknown. High-sp. Filaret even tried to satisfy the curiosity of his friend and comrade regarding how his successor at the Vologda Seminary spoke about his activities in Vologda, and whether he wrote something about this to Filaret: “What to do with Vologda? The rector for translation did not write to me. Therefore, I don’t know whether it will be useful to write to him. Apparently, you will be greatly exalted. Would you like to write to him that I, having not heard about the Vologda Seminary, am asking you about it, is there peace there, and do they remember you? And indeed, I would like to know what they will write to you about this.” On July 3, 1821, as we said above, Filaret was appointed primate of the Moscow department. Having received such a high appointment, His Eminence Filaret at the same time took care of the fate of his friend. It was inconvenient to leave him in Yaroslavl, and it was also not possible to drag him to Moscow. Meanwhile, at that time, with the death of such an important person in the church hierarchy as the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, the transfer of almost all archpastors should have taken place, and in any case one bishop's place should have been opened in some third-class department. At that time, such a place opened in the Oryol diocese, and here it is. Filaret tried at the Synod to have Fr. Archimandrite of the Yaroslavl first-class Tolga Monastery Gabriel. When this matter was settled according to the wishes and petition of Filaret, he wrote to Yaroslavl: “Glory to the all-merciful God for everything! I did not notify you, beloved Fr. Archimandrite, about my fate, awaiting your permission. Due to my lack of faith, I denied mine; but, despite this, she comprehended me. Pray for me, beloved brother, so that I will not be excluded. Now I am consoled by the fact that you will not remain where you are carried away by me. The Sovereign Emperor most mercifully approved the synodal appointment of you as Bishop of Oryol. I only know this verbally, but it is undeniable. May the Lord bless your election! – I don’t have time and don’t need to write anymore. If it pleases God to do what He has done, I’ll see you in Moscow.” Having received official information about the movement of the Eminence. Philaret to the Moscow Department, Fr. the rector, Archimandrite Gabriel, as the first-present member of the Yaroslavl consistory, together with other members on behalf of the entire diocese, greeted his friend and comrade with this high appointment, asking himself, all members of the consistory, the entire seminary and the entire diocese for blessings and peace. The Bishop accepted this greeting with his characteristic favor and responded with the following message addressed to Fr. Archimandrite Gabriel. “I am writing this in the hope that this letter will find you in Yaroslavl. “I thank you from the bottom of my heart for letting me go in peace.” I say this to you and to the consistory co-workers who wrote with you. May God bless you all and your entire flock with peace! About my successor 37 I rejoice with you who remain in the diocese. She will receive abundant consolation from him." 38 This letter should have found Gabriel still in Yaroslavl, because, although his appointment as Bishop of Oryol took place, he could not leave Yaroslavl before September to complete his affairs, both at the monastery and at the seminary. Having completed the surrender, Gabriel hurried to Moscow. “Tolgsky (Archimandrite Gabriel) has just arrived,” her archpastor wrote from Moscow to the governor of the Sergius Lavra, Athanasius, on September 1st. On September 18, 1821, 39, Archimandrite Gabriel was ordained Bishop of Oryol - in Moscow, in the large Assumption Cathedral. The newly ordained Bishop of Orlovsky left Moscow between September 29 and October 3 (see Moscow Ved. 1821, October 5, No. 80). At his new place of service, he faced many worries and troubles, which required the necessary help from his friend and comrade of Lavra. And we see that this friend and comrade willingly and always helps him with friendly sincerity and fatherly care. The bishop's department was located in Sevsk, and in 1821, under Gabriel's predecessor, Jonah Pavinsky, it was intended to be moved to Orel, where Jonah began to build a stone bishop's house, leaving the previous house in the city of Sevsk unoccupied. Meanwhile, Jonah was transferred to Tver in 1821 on July 17, and the bishop's house in Orel remained unfinished and was generally not built economically and did not provide a convenient premises for the diocesan bishop. Rev. Gabriel had to finish building this house and make some amenities in it for his premises. Metropolitan Philaret spoke about this Oryol house like this: “Your house, they say, has windows like doors, and doors like gates. Apparently, the predecessor, being not small, also loved large sizes; but this is not farming.” 40 To complete the house and various amenities, a special amount was required, which Rev. Gabriel intended to ask the Holy Synod. He wrote about this intention to his friend and comrade, and Philaret answered him: “When you present the amount for finishing the house, write about it to His Eminence the Metropolitan 41; If you write to me, I will write from my side. It needs to be on time." 42 The Holy Synod respected the request of Gabriel and the petition of Philaret: the amount was released, but not enough. Then Gabriel intended to give away the old stone bishop's house for a religious school, which was housed in a wooden building, and wanted to ask for money for this stone house to complete the construction of his new house. He informed Metropolitan Philaret about this intention. Wanting to help his friend, Filaret gives him advice with such completeness that it seems that he dictates his very petitions to the Holy Synod. “Giving a stone house to a school if you don’t need it is a good deed,” he wrote to him; “But asking for money in payment is unseemly. Is it really possible to imagine that instead of a wooden one, which won’t last long, you give away a stone one; but instead, you will arrange for yourself in a new house what you will lose in the old one, and for this you will demand some increase to the allotted amount with the explanation that the school will still benefit from receiving the house, and you, due to the poverty associated with the new arrangement, cannot make concessions without receiving some allowance in its place.” At the end of the letter, the Eminence added: “This is my thought, and your will” 43. Almost a year later, on January 7, 1823, Filaret wrote to Gabriel about the same house: “I thought that your house was completely finished; but they say no. They gave you a job. For this reason you are called the builder of fences.” In addition to worries and troubles around the house, Rev. Gabriel was also concerned about the improvement of the seminary and schools. Metropolitan. Filaret wrote to him on January 27, 1821: “Your new rector, they say, is complaining, but what to do?” He will seek humility: he will find consolation” 44. In the same letter, Philaret asks Gabriel to return part of the translation, catechetical teachings of St. our father Cyril of Jerusalem, which, as rumors reached Philaret, was taken by the Rev. Gabriel when he set off from Yaroslavl to Orel. “Look,” Filaret wrote to his friend, “and if you find anything, send it back. They are in a hurry with this matter: “I delivered the beginning of the translation from Cyril of Jerusalem to His Eminence of Yaroslavl” 45, wrote Filaret on March 6, 1822. To understand Philaret’s special concern for the speedy translation of the catechetical teachings of Cyril of Jerusalem, one must remember that in his opinion on the teaching of catechetical teachings in all churches on Sundays and holidays, presented to the Holy Synod on August 15, 1820, Filaret wrote the following: “The instruction of the Orthodox people in the Christian faith and good morals is seen as subject to to this day, the following shortcomings: 1) Most of the people, such as peasants and the lower class of urban residents, do not teach their children the catechism. 2) The teachings read during services from printed books are sometimes incomprehensible to the needs of the listeners in terms of content and therefore are often read without much attention or success. 3) Sermons of their own composition by the parish clergy are not spoken quite often, without observing order in time and subjects, and also for the most part without regard to the needs of the listeners and to the degree of their understanding. Consequences from this: 1) Those who desire Christian instruction do not find where to receive it. 2) Those who are indifferent to it are not attracted or excited, so that some of those listening to the divine service leave the church at the beginning of the teaching. 3) Gross ignorance leads to gross vices. 4) The schismatics, even in their own ignorance, take advantage of the ignorance of the Orthodox to seduce them into schism. – Due to these circumstances, it seems not useless to, without delay, while waiting until a catechism for the people is compiled, at the proposal of the Holy Synod, to strengthen instruction in the Christian faith and good morals, especially for the common people, to use the following, or orders similar to the following: 1) In parish churches, where it is most necessary due to the condition of the parishioners, and where there are capable parish priests, to introduce teaching catechism. 2) This teaching should not be before the liturgy, as has been the case until now, but at the liturgy, during the ordinary time of the sermon, so that the teaching would be more convenient for listeners. 3) Designate all Sundays for teaching, except for the great holidays that occur on them, so that the teaching continues uninterruptedly, and so that those who wish to know when they can hear it; other holidays should be left for sermons at the discretion of the clergy. 4) Use ten to twenty minutes for teaching each time, with supervision so that, especially at the beginning, you do not tire the listeners with long teaching; As their taste and zeal for listening increases, more time can be spent on teaching. 5) Teaching should be in the form of sermons or conversations in which catechetical truths would be presented in order with their main arguments and necessary explanations, with all possible application of thoughts, feelings and language to the level of understanding and to the state of the listeners, with only such caution that nothing low, rude or ridiculous is mixed into the simplicity. 6) It is desirable that teaching plans be drawn up in advance and reviewed by the diocesan bishops, or some people knowledgeable in this matter on their behalf. 7) This time we can recommend as a manual and guide for teachers: the Orthodox Confession of Peter Mogila, the Catechism of Demetrius of Rostov, Tikhon of Voronezh - 0 true Christianity, and from the ancients - the Catechetical Teachings of Cyril of Jerusalem, which at this time it would be useful to translate again and, after printing, distribute among the parish clergy" 46. In those cases when the Eminence Gabriel, out of love and respect for the talents of his friend, crossed the boundaries of his zeal, the Eminence Philaret stopped this jealousy beyond reason with his wise considerations. For example, when in 1823 Philaret’s catechism was published and introduced into theological schools, the Right Reverend Gabriel ordered that the catechism be interpreted in Greek with the goal that children would simultaneously learn both the dogmas of the faith and the Greek language, and he wrote about this to Philaret. The Moscow saint answered: “I would not be able to interpret the Catechism in Greek. And I noticed, not even in minors, that a foreign language delays the flow of concepts. It seems to me that the teaching of faith should turn a school into a church, and mixing language teaching with this turns a church into a children’s school.” And at the end of the letter he adds again: “But I think so, and maybe you are doing better.” The Right Reverend Gabriel was dissatisfied with his seminary and especially with the rector, Archimandrite Ambrose, and wrote to Philaret about this. On January 7, 1823, Filaret first briefly answered him: “The morals of your seminary, apparently, require strong measures,” and then he tried to rid the seminary of the rector as soon as possible 47, and a week later (Jan. 16) the rector’s place was free, and Gabriel was left to manage it himself as he wanted, in a more decent and convenient way. “If the inspector takes the rector’s position,” the Moscow saint wrote to him, “the inspector’s office can be entrusted to a professor at that time, if necessary.” For the Reverend Gabriel, active and well-intentioned people were all the more needed in the seminary because it was necessary to build a new building for the seminary and schools. The Moscow saint advised him to make an effort during construction to form a construction committee of reliable people who know the economy. “In Tula they got confused in this matter” 48. A similar confusion was allowed, as one might think, during the construction of some schools in the Oryol diocese, because on March 6, 1822, Vysokopr. Filaret wrote to Gabriel: “Do not ignore Kabanov’s complaint. It is necessary to destroy the old dens of robbers. The housekeeper cannot be present on this matter. If the inspector did not report, then he too can be eliminated, and a commission of three reliable persons can be formed for the investigation. However, if the inspector can be admitted to the staff, then it is better to expel the rebels from the school. One leniency can take place so that, if the crime is not revealed very sharply, then the perpetrators, having been morally punished, are released to another rank without a stain” 49. The quick removal of the rector Ambrose made a grave impression on the seminary mentors, especially on the young ones who had recently graduated from the academy and considered themselves learned people, while Gabriel himself was not at the academy. They cast sidelong glances at him and were proud of their learning. Gabriel wrote about this to the saint of Moscow, and he answered him with the following letter: “Bear with sidelong glances thrown unfairly, without answering with sidelong glances, but simply. Don't be afraid; - these are not arrows. To avoid sidelong glances, one should not fall into people-pleasing and encourage ambitious people.” The Most Reverend Gabriel fell into cowardice from these views and wanted to ask for peace, although he was no more than 43 years old. The Moscow saint answered him: “It is not your turn to think about repose before me. Do it with God until there is still day.” Then, continuing to admonish him about how bishops should act in relation to educational institutions, Filaret wrote: “If bishops allow scientists to be proud and take liberties, they will not be justified. We swore in the bishop's oath to take care of the schools. It is necessary to curb the ignorance of insane people - only with truth and moderation, and not with anger; for the anger of a man does not bring about the righteousness of God.” Complaining about the heads and mentors of the seminary, His Eminence Gabriel at the same time praised the students of the seminary and called the seminary his boarding school and said that his boarding school would surpass even the Moscow Academy. The Moscow saint took such praise as nothing more than a joke, and, no doubt, answered him not without a smile: “If your boarding school surpasses the academy, I will not envy, but will rejoice and ask you for the academy’s help.” The Reverend Gabriel, despite the positive advice of his friend and comrade to form a construction committee for the construction of the seminary, did not form this committee, but drew up preliminary construction rules himself and sent them to the academic board. In these rules he wrote a lot of unnecessary and inconvenient things, but he left out a lot of what was necessary and asked for salaries for some members. The academic board, for its part, went beyond the limits and, without the consent of its bishop, made an order its authority, recommending that it be fulfilled - the board - the rules. Both rules were presented to Saint Philaret of Moscow. This is what he wrote on this occasion to the Reverend Gabriel, in response to his question what he thought about these rules: “What do I think about your and academic building rules,” I wrote on them. Forgive me that my words are as careless as my writing. You will see the truth, as far as I understand it, in them, and if they are not smooth, do not be angry. You wrote a lot and gave the opportunity to the academic board for its part to go abroad, which it should not have done, especially without the consent of its bishop, which is not visible from the instructions. since it recommends, you can act on its recommendation as much as circumstances allow, and either form a committee according to your definition, omitting from the preliminary rules what is unnecessary and inconvenient, and putting in what is necessary, or submit a draft of your order to the Holy Synod on the commission of theological schools” 50. “If some members of the committee do not have a salary, like monks,” Filaret added at the end of his letter, “then you can assign them a salary, but no more than two people who will be constantly with materials and work” 51 . Meanwhile, the Eminence Philaret took care of establishing the obedience of the inspector and mentors to the Eminence Gabriel at the Orlovskaya Seminary. He arranged it so that the inspector of the seminary, about whom Gabriel wrote to Philaret in order to transfer him somewhere, so that he would not become proud again, was sent to the rector in another place without the archimandrite, and the rector and archimandrite Jerome from the inspectors of the Bethany Seminary, which was always as close to the Moscow archpastors as the Moscow Academy, was sent to Orel. Hieronymus Nesterovsky was a 1st year master at the Moscow Academy. After serving for four years as a professor at the Bethany Seminary, he was appointed in 1822 as inspector of this seminary, and in 1823 he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite and appointed rector of the Oryol Seminary. The notes of his contemporaries contain the following story about him: “When he was an inspector of the Bethany Seminary, Filaret once came to the Lavra, in the middle of school hours, but not for exams. After spending three days in the monastery, he made it known that today he intended to be in Bethany, and ordered everyone to be in their place and do their job. It was about 11 o'clock in the afternoon. Filaret has arrived. Straight to the seminary. Straight to the upper division class. At this time, the inspector, Hieromonk Jerome, taught church history. Filaret entered the hall. Jerome ran up to him for his blessing and, immediately turning away from him, sat down in the professor’s chair. Pupils stand at their desks. Jerome waved his hand at them and said: “Sit down”! The disciples don't dare. Jerome repeats: “Sit down, don’t be timid; This is the sower! (pointing to Filaret, who is standing in the middle of the hall, looking at the stage). The disciples, however, do not dare to sit down. Filaret, with a gentle and soft smile and a slight bow of his head, made it clear that he agreed for the students to sit down. We sat down. Meanwhile, Filaret, having no place to sit, went to the side and sat down on an empty bench behind an empty sledge, waiting to see what would happen. Jerome, sitting importantly in an armchair and having in front of him a small table on which lay a closed book, spoke loudly (without waiting for an order): “Ecclesiastical history is, based on solid evidence, raised from private narratives to general considerations and directed towards active instruction, the origin of the Church of God on earth and the changes that followed in its external and internal state, its continuous existence under the special Providence of preservation from the beginning of the world and until now." This is the beginning of the Introduction to Church History - the work of Philaret, a classic book. The closed book on the table contained this very story. Jerome then read this entire Introduction by heart, very considerable, literally and solemnly. Having finished reading, he stood up importantly, prayed to God and ran up to Philaret for a blessing. Filaret, with a smile mixed with pleasure (for this was his story) and disdain (for this was slavery, senselessness, flattery and hypocrisy), blessed Jerome and then sent him a book with the inscription: “For his timid teaching of lectures.” Another contemporary writes about Jerome: “This Jerome was a humble man and more capable of praying for the human race than of helping it in any way. I lived with him in peace and I can only say that people with negative-good qualities are not useless in societies” 52. From these testimonies of contemporaries, one cannot help but see in the character of Jerome some oddities that almost reached the point of extravagance. But Philaret, bribed by Jerome’s flattery and philanthropy, appreciated in him only the firmness of his teaching, although he subsequently apologized to Gabriel for his mistake, as we will see below. Now, sending Jerome to the Oryol Seminary, he wrote to Gabriel: “I do not advise him to be proud, not only again, but even for the first time. I ask you to accept him favorably and to instruct and guide him in a fatherly manner, so that he will be fit for service. He served us diligently and behaved modestly.” The Most Reverend Gabriel recommended someone from his diocese to be an archimandrite, but such a person who had not shown merit and required testing in character - and naively wrote that this would not be remembered. The Bishop answered this: “Who has not shown merit and requires testing in character, how can he be recommended to archimandry? They won’t remember, you say; but you will be remembered poorly when we put in their places those who are undeserving and untested.” In August 1823, Sovereign Emperor Alexander Pavlovich arrived in Moscow and on August 25 was met by His Eminence Philaret in the Assumption Cathedral. “We received the great and good Guest, by the grace of God, and saw him off safely,” he wrote to his friend and comrade. “He prayed a lot with us! The memory of this visit will delight me for a long time.” The Emperor had to go past Orel and Sevsk; Therefore, the Right Reverend Gabriel asked Philaret for advice on how to receive the great and good Guest. The Moscow saint answered: “If my advice is not late, act simply, without worrying too much and without haste, but calmly do what is due, relying on the will of God and the king’s heart. In your speech, do not praise the Emperor, but say something useful and truthful - and even then a little. Maybe I did it poorly, but as best I could and in good conscience; and therefore I am sending you my speech” 53. His Eminence Gabriel, indeed, gave speeches welcoming the Sovereign Emperor both in Orel and in Sevsk. In the spring of 1824, Eminence Gabriel, in his letter to Eminence Philaret, among other things, wrote that he wanted to apply to Kyiv. The Moscow saint responds to this: “In Kyiv, maybe they’ll fire you; but they are unlikely to decide without reporting to the Emperor. Wouldn’t it be better to postpone until another summer?” In the same letter, Philaret informs Gabriel about the death of the Right Reverend Theophylact (Shiryaev), Bishop of Tambov, who died on May 20, 1824, in the following terms: “You helped me mourn the Right Reverend Simeon 54, and now help me mourn the Right Reverend Theophylact. He served, dined, slept, woke up, confessed, died. I can hardly believe it; but one cannot help but believe: they write from there to the Right Reverend Vicar 55. May those who die in the Lord be blessed! Shouldn’t we also say what follows these words from the Seer of Mysteries: woe to those who live on earth!” At the beginning of 1824, the Right Reverend Gabriel had considerable grief: his bishop’s house burned down in Sevsk. The Moscow saint writes about this: “That the Sevsky house burned down. - the grief is not very great. The costs of its maintenance have ceased; and what was it to you? You see how easy someone else's misfortune is. Yours is probably not so easy. But what to do? The earth will burn, as will the works on it. Teach me to do things that do not burn up and are not consumed, but follow and lead to a fireproof dwelling” 56 . In the summer of 1825, Bishop Gabriel had the opportunity to personally meet the then rector of the St. Petersburg Academy, Fr. Archimandrite Innokenty Borisov, who was a native of Orlovsky, studied at the Sevsk Seminary and on his way from St. Petersburg visited it and was, it seems, its auditor. In any case, he found it not in brilliant condition, which should have been expected with such a rector as Jerome was. This was the first time Gabriel met Innocent. After Innokenty’s departure for St. Petersburg, Gabriel wrote to him in October 1825: “Although our acquaintance is not so pleasant, this acquaintance is my acquisition, the most precious of all. I began to love and honor you from the moment I saw you, and I will not stop unless you reject me - which, however, I do not expect. May my hope not be in vain, I ask you.” Then the Right Reverend Gabriel describes the state of his seminary in the following terms: “After your Reverend’s departure from Sevsk, the appearance of the seminary began to improve. Firstly, they are quiet in the church; entered the field of teaching with prayer; my departure to Oryol followed on Saturday; Seminary officials escorted me outside of my local property. One o. Archimandrite Jer. 57 didn’t go out, which is very excusable for him, but it’s hard for me out of pity for him. Only where the general suffers, there should not be pain about the particular. The Lord gave him consolation in a different way, but it seems that he will not exact his sorrow from us. Let's calm down and help our fellow man from all sides. I asked the Bishop to mercifully cover up his omissions, as if I would have been pardoned. I couldn’t help but touch upon your Reverence in the letter, praising you with such a devoted heart.” In the same letter, Eminence Gabriel asked Innocent for permission to print those two speeches that he spoke in Orel and Sevsk, at the meeting of the Sovereign Emperor Alexander Pavlovich. “The Sevsky residents,” he writes to Innocent, “urge me to provide them with the speech that I had the good fortune to now deliver to the Sovereign Emperor. The case is important for them and all of us, and not my objection. Why is it not possible, Father, having examined it, allow it to be published together with the previous one, spoken in Orel, based on their connection with each other. If you would like to add something, please post for your favor. If a formal attitude towards censorship is needed, I will do it, I just want it so that time is not lost” 58 . At the end of 1825, extraordinary events took place: the death of the Sovereign Emperor Alexander Pavlovich and the accession to the throne of Nikolai Pavlovich. The wise and cautious saint of Moscow only briefly notifies his friend about this. He wrote to him: “We have experienced a lot in a few days. We lost a lot in the late Emperor. Thank God that, according to the news, we hope to gain a lot in the new Sovereign. May God help him! Sovereign Emperor Alexander Pavlovich died in Taganrog on November 19, 1825, and since his body had to be transported past Orel, His Eminence Gabriel asked the saint of Moscow to send him a draft of the Moscow ceremony to greet the body of the deceased Emperor. The Bishop answered: “Now it is true that the body of the deceased Sovereign will pass by you; – at your request, I am sending a draft ceremony for the local district town. The Moscow ceremony is great for you and is not yet over due to a lack of certain information.” The Most Reverend Gabriel thanked his patron for his instructions. The Bishop humbly answered: “What you call my instructions, I truly do not know. It may be that I preach to others without being the key myself. Forgive me" 59. The Most Reverend Philaret begins one of his letters like this: “I am unapologetically guilty before your Eminence when I realize how long it has been since I wrote to you. Now weaknesses, now deeds, now accursed procrastination - the fault of most of the long-lasting offenses, imperceptibly took away time. I thank you earnestly for several memories of me, accompanied by good wishes. May the Lord reward you with good blessings, and the latter greater than the first. Thank you for the advice - take care of your health. My strength is better now, but my eyes often get bored and become dull. And I don’t know whether, due to current circumstances, it is better to be in health or infirmity, so that I can cede the burden to those who can better bear it.” After these lines, the saint of Moscow wrote to Gabriel about the rector of the Oryol seminary, Jerome: “I really regret the adventures in your seminary and am amazed 60. I advised the rector during my vacation, and then through someone else I ordered how to ask for your leadership for everything. And from St. Petersburg, according to the rules of the Right Reverend Gregory 61, I know that someone noticed would not have been sent to an important position. It’s so hard to understand what can come out of a Novgorodian.” “They are preparing a new turning point for schools; May God grant you the best!” The matter of theological schools was very close to the heart of the Moscow saint, because he took a major part in their initial organization. The turning point was that the schools were separated from the seminaries, which could lead to a more correct development of college education. “Have you heard the adventure with my catechism? – the Moscow saint further writes. “Vladyka 62 again writes to me that no one doubts his Orthodoxy, below is the minister himself, who stands up for the supposedly exiled Slavic language. And yet the Minister of Education (Shishkov) complicates the matter approved by the Synod and the Sovereign himself. Tell me at your leisure what you think about this case, which is little clear to me." 63 It is unknown whether His Eminence Gabriel said anything on this occasion. Archimandrite Jerome, recommended by Philaret and appointed rector of the Oryol Seminary, was later transferred to Vyatka to the position of rector of the seminary. “With Jerome,” the Moscow saint wrote to Gabriel, “the truth was accomplished. And I am somewhat ashamed that I recommended him, believing the evidence. However, the evidence about him here was generally good; I alone suspected him of stupidity and did not believe my suspicions against the concurring testimony of people who knew him closely and for a long time. Guilty" 64. The time for the coronation of the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich was approaching; everyone was impatiently waiting for her, but no one knew for sure about her time. His Grace Gabriel wanted to send an icon from his diocese as a greeting to the Emperor, and he asked Philaret for advice and news about the time of the coronation. The Moscow saint wrote to him on June 30, 1826: “The coronation was moving away, but now, they say, it is approaching more than promised. Isn't it the end of July? However, this is still fortune-telling” 65. However, at the beginning of August it became reliably known that it would take place on August 22. Therefore, the Most Reverend Philaret wrote to Gabriel on August 5: “Now I can tell you, Your Eminence Bishop, that it will not be superfluous if you send an archimandrite or archpriest with an icon from your diocese to congratulate the Sovereign Emperor on the coronation. By the 17th or 18th day of this month it won’t be too late” 66. For performing the coronation, Archbishop Filaret was elevated to the rank of metropolitan. There is no doubt that His Eminence Philaret, both before and during the coronation, had a lot of troubles and labors ahead of him, both in Moscow and in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra; but we saw that even at this time he did not abandon the advice and instructions of his friend and comrade, the Right Reverend Gabriel. And then, even after the coronation, Metropolitan Philaret continued, due to his disposition towards him, to admonish and instruct him in important cases of diocesan administration. But it can be noted that now the Reverend Gabriel, encouraged by the favor of the new great luminary, the Reverend Innocent, no longer listened to these instructions and advice with such humility as before, but entered into disputes with his patron and friend. This can be seen from the following letter from the Metropolitan, dated January 7, 1827: “Getting to respond to your Eminence with a long message on a short page, I received from you today an even shorter one on a long page. I earnestly thank you for not forgetting my unworthiness in your prayers. I pray for you too, that the Lord may bless you this new summer to walk in renewal of life and strength, to spread renewal of life among the children of the church entrusted to you, while they are still old men. - Forgive me, brother, if one of my letters brought you grief. Perhaps I judge too impudently, in many ways I myself am more worthy of condemnation than others. But I think that it is useful for us to see the unpleasant side of our deeds in order to carry them out: for this reason I dealt with you, hoping that you would not be angry. If you want to pay me in kind, I extend my hand to accept this payment. You tell the truth that it is necessary for the bishop’s subordinates that his affairs be in proper form before the Holy Synod. But that is why I told you about caution in decisions, which is the true means for the Synod to take a good look at your affairs and, for its part, increase the power of your action on your subordinates. If you prefer the old order of schools, then I don’t understand you. We studied together at the Lavra. What's enviable there? The whole wisdom was to write poetry by November 18, 1967. Theology was taught to us by an immature teacher (may he rest in heaven!), at least with diligence. How were we taught philosophy? What can we say about the historical sciences? This shortcoming is more sensitive to me than to you, when I, who had not studied, was forced to teach church history. Was subordination more enviable than the one you complain about, even before Plato? There is nothing to spread. Those who are older than us in teaching and in the bishopric admit that it was worse in the old schools. I will say one thing to prove my opinion about subordination: Plato was called the director of the Moscow Academy, and always complained about its insubordination. The abuses of those involved in management must be corrected in an orderly manner, and not by crying out, because crying is not the boss’s job. It seems to me that we,” I’m copying your expression, “have no regard for anything in relation to schools; unless someone makes for himself horns of iron and says: with these horns I will destroy the seminary. For example, you say. Let's see what the example shows you. They say that the inspector is looking for witnesses to your words. Firstly, this may be what the snitches say, and digging up this household rubbish is not worth the trouble. Secondly, you yourself say that the inspector is crazy. Thirdly, no matter what they say around the corner, the tables are standing the way you ordered them to be. Where is the insubordination?... The bishop is not allowed to know about the structure of the seminary? What was he waiting for? Isn’t it written in the charter that no journal of the seminary board worth his attention (and he can, if he wants, consider every last letter worthy of his attention) passed by him? Have you decided to attract thunder? Empty. They agreed to your representation because it was an ordinary matter, and they just didn’t want to upset you when they didn’t say that you had the right to enter into the matter and dispose of it without any representation. I will also say my word to you: enough for debate. Nothing moves you north or west. Build and create visible and invisible churches of the living God in the world! Is it possible to be curious about what NOCTURNAE LUCUBRATIONES is? What the student of rhetoric Musatov arbitrarily took from the cauldron of porridge is a certificate for the student, teacher and priest Musatov, in which SUMMUM JUS is SUMMA INIURIA. Again I argued a lot. Peace be with your spirit; I ask you for peace for myself too” 68. The Right Reverend Gabriel had relatives; his sister, with her married daughter and her children, lived with him in Orel, Odessa, and then in Tver; He brought these relatives closer to himself and listened to their advice. In addition, out of the kindness of his heart, he had the weakness of becoming attached to his cell attendants and his house secretaries, who abused his trust. This attachment to cell attendants and secretaries especially intensified in him in his old age, in Odessa and Tver 69; but, apparently, it was noticeable in Orel too. As a result of this, abuses occurred in the management of diocesan affairs, rumors of which reached the Holy Synod. Without a doubt, Filaret defended his friend at the Synod as much as possible. But the rumors were so urgent that the Holy Synod instructed the Exarch of Georgia, Jonah 70, who was leaving from the Synod, to inquire about the management of the Right Reverend Gabriel. The Exarch was surprised by these orders, and the Holy Synod was not slow to let Gabriel know about this. Then the Right Reverend Gabriel turned to the Metropolitan of Moscow with a letter dated January 19, 1827, in which he complained about the conditional syllogisms of the Holy Synod, as he called the remarks of the Holy Synod. The Metropolitan of Moscow answers him on April 7, 1827. “I wish you generosity, patience and logic, consistent with the logic of St. Synod,” he wrote to his friend and comrade. “I do not know the conditional syllogisms that were sent to you from the Holy Synod; but don’t be angry, I won’t rush to accuse him of incorrectly drawing the consequences. The Reverend Jonah, traveling from the Synod, expressed surprise at your syllogisms. How do you want me to disbelieve the majority of voices and stick to one voice - the judge in my case? The proverb tells someone who is called drunk by three people to go to bed. And whose decision several people have recognized as sinful, he must watch over his affairs. Here is my opinion and, if you wish, advice.” Further, pointing to the main reason for complaints against his friend and comrade, the Moscow saint writes: “See if there are any seeds of misfortune closer. It is written: defeat a man's household. This word has come true more than once for bishops when they surround themselves very closely with relatives and accept their advice and petitions without caution. Have ears to hear and hear!” After this reproach, very clear and strong, the saint draws attention to another weak trait in the character of the Right Reverend Gabriel - his excessive involvement with singers: “Are you still involved with singers? I wish you would get bored and stop already. Let the regent tune the choir, and the bishop spread the spirit of harmony in the church, so that it will all be one spiritual choir and organ of God.” “Forgive my insolence,” Metropolitan Philaret ends his letter, “and pray for my weakness. Maybe you can guess why I am bold with you, without having boldness towards myself” 71. The Reverend Gabriel, apparently, was offended by his friend and patron and wrote to him in response to his letter that he was listening to the words spoken about him from lying lips. Then the Moscow saint answers him: “I don’t know what reason your Eminence has to think that I am listening to the words spoken about you from lying lips. I hardly hear about you, except the Holy Synod; and in any case, for many reasons I willingly listen to what is for you, and not what is against you.” Further, Metropolitan Philaret points to two cases that were examined in the Holy Synod - one is the case of Miloradovich, and the other is the case of priest Poselsky. About the first case, the Metropolitan wrote: “You complained to me about the Miloradovich case; I have not read or heard of this matter; but those who judged it, together and separately do not speak for you. What should I do here? And now, as before, I think and fraternally tell you that it is better for us to trust the judgment of the Holy Synod about us, rather than our judgment about ourselves.” “How the case of priest Poselsky was considered,” Metropolitan Philaret further wrote, “I cannot tell you, because one should not talk behind the doors of a public place about what is happening in that place not with open doors. But I will tell you my opinion that one or two of your resolutions, imposed against the defendant at the wrong time, or stronger than the case required, take away from you part of the power of attorney belonging to your rank, cover up part of the guilt of the guilty, and the one who knows the need not to disgrace the boss in front of his subordinates is prevented from defending your decision - although it is true that it was not made against the truth. Send this file quickly; I’m curious to see the outcome, maybe not with idle curiosity.” The Orlovskaya seminary continued to be in turmoil, and the share of this turmoil fell on His Eminence Gabriel himself. Thus, he did not remove from his post the steward of the seminary, who was noticed by the audit to be in disorder, and allowed the rector of the seminary to leave the seminary for two or more weeks during school hours without a thorough order for the rector’s position. The seminary inspector reported this to both the seminary and academic boards, and the latter dismissed the seminary economist from his post. The Reverend Gabriel complained about such a report from the inspector and about such a decision of the academic board to the metropolitan, and called the inspector crazy, and the academic board itself unhealthy. Filaret writes to him: “I don’t know whether your inspector is sick; I don’t know whether the academic board is healthy if it secretly dismissed a person who was appointed not by him, but by the higher authorities. But consider the following: When you still have the same steward at the seminary, whose unrest was discovered by the former audit, (note that the steward is determined by the diocesan bishop), and therefore it is also probable that you hear about his current unrest - when the rector, during school hours, leaves the seminary for two or more weeks without a thorough order about the rector's position - when about this incident, which cannot be hidden, like a needle, the inspector writes to the seminary and academic board - when it is noticeable that there is already outside surveillance of the seminary, which can have further consequences - then, if the authorities take care as much about the welfare of the place as about protecting it from more difficult consequences that could affect you, - judge, - I repeat, - whether you need to be angry or complain, or whether you really need to delve more closely into the state of the seminary and take care of its true improvement." “Be wise like a serpent and goals like a dove - this rule is given to us for all occasions in life, and in difficult ones it is not enough.” This is how the saint of Moscow ended his letter. Above this letter, the Right Reverend Gabriel wrote in his own hand: “November 14th. Grant me, Lord, patience” 72)! This letter greatly upset the Reverend Gabriel, and he complained and cried out against the Metropolitan, and, it seems, wrote to his newly elected benefactor, Innocent, whom the Metropolitan did not like; He wrote about this to the Moscow archpastor, and this latter soon writes a new letter to his friend and comrade. “Please don’t cry out at me, Your Eminence Vladyka. My words will not break your bones; If I tell the truth, accept and use it, and if I’m not telling the truth, forgive me, and that’s the end of the matter. And what I have the boldness to tell you, perhaps you can imagine the reason for it, and you will not reject it. “If you don’t have annoyance with Miloradovich, why talk about how he lives with his wife, and what his secretary did; That's not the point. Every one will bear his burden. “What I noticed about Poselsky in your resolutions, I don’t remember now, and therefore I will not argue with you further about this. And the fact that I wish to see his case sooner is not against you; I just repeat that I cannot repeat to you beyond the threshold what was said in the council chamber, even if it was me. “But so that you understand my idea about caution in decisions, let me remind you of yesterday’s example. – How to identify a teacher as a priest where there is no place; and when the place opened up, drive him away? How to leave him without a letter, God knows how long? How can a teacher be sent to a village to take the place of a student, and this one be preferred for the city? How to listen to the petitions of the clerk in the determination of the priest - his relative? The clerk had to stare his request for this in his eyes. Why finally preach myself to the Liveni parishioners so that they trust their archpastor, that is, me? - Beloved Archpastor! Whether we acquire a power of attorney or not, by deed; and it is not trustworthy to demand it by resolutions. People would rather laugh than be created when they hear this resolution.” “The inspector is obviously not in his right mind; it was removed. But judge for yourself how you can leave the seminary for two weeks during school hours to work with a crazy inspector. You prefer the old order in schools; Has it ever happened that the rector left during school hours for such a reason as the consecration of a church for two whole weeks? Is there no one other than the rector to do this? “Now you have given a reason to write a law and put new bonds on the bishops so that they do not dare to unnecessarily release students during school hours; and then you will complain that your hands are tied; who is to blame"? These newly introduced facts, together with the previous ones, clearly proved that the Right Reverend Gabriel himself was largely to blame, both in the management of the diocese and in the management of the seminary, and that it was a sin for him to cry out to the metropolitan. To somewhat soften his denunciations, the Metropolitan also wrote: “I argue with you on many points, and I don’t want to give in to you on points; you start using them, but I have been using them for a long time. When I’m not even able to write with glasses, then you will have peace from my letters, but meanwhile, have patience and remember the word that the essence of a friend’s ulcers is more reliable than the free kiss of an enemy” 73 . Didn’t the wise Saint of Moscow see through Innocent’s flattering relationship with Gabriel and point out this relationship in his last words?.. After this letter, the saint of Moscow did not receive any news from Gabriel for a long time and wondered if his friend and comrade was angry with him for his long-windedness; but it turned out that the letter sent from Gabriel was on the way for 17 days. However, the letter consisted of only three lines. “I rejoiced at this,” writes Filaret to the Right Reverend Gabriel in response to this letter, “despite its three-line brevity, because the temptation came to interpret your silence as a punishment for my verbosity in front of you. Now I see that even if you are angry, you are not completely angry. But if I deserve punishment, then punish me according to the law: an eye for an eye, reproaching my imprudence for my advice about prudence. That would be great. And if this is again a lot of verbiage on my part, and the proposed type of punishment for it is not pleasing to you, then forgive me and do not deprive me of sometimes three-line letters, testifying that the union of love between us is not interrupted, which I sincerely wish.” 74 In 1828, an audit was appointed at the Oryol Seminary. The auditor found some shortcomings in the seminary, which depended on the Most Reverend Gabriel himself, and probably demanded some explanations from him. Gabriel did not like this, and in the month of May he complained to the saint of Moscow, who was then in St. Petersburg, and pointed out the actions of the auditor as actions that weakened the power of the local bishop in the eyes of his subordinates. The Metropolitan answered him on May 8 of the same year, 1828: “Don’t you see that the auditor repeatedly tells the seminary board not to do anything without the bishop. The auditor demands, without a doubt, what the school regulations require, and what is observed everywhere where there is order. Who told you not to demand this first or to remain silent about non-fulfillment? What makes us still afraid of contradiction? Command legally and demand execution, and it will be done.” The case about the Oryol Seminary was brought to the Holy Synod, it was heard there and caused surprise among the members of the Synod, including the Moscow saint. “How you allowed the rector to be willful, and sometimes forced him to obey inappropriately, for example, by sending him for investigation during school hours, as if in the whole diocese there was no one to do this except this man, still new in business and busy with his own.” In the Holy Synod, after considering the case about the seminary - and, no doubt, Metropolitan Philaret was able to expose Gabriel as “a person who made a mistake in a complicated matter,” they thought about transferring the Oryol bishop, who ruled a third-class diocese, to a second-class or another third-class diocese. Notifying him of these assumptions, the Moscow saint wrote to him: “If the reasoning (of the Holy Synod about elevating you to a second-class diocese) comes into play, then you will have the testimony of the Holy Synod in your favor. And if you are transferred, you will have a good opportunity, when you take up a new place, to take up the task with attention and with caution against the difficulties experienced in the previous place. Let’s not forget the proverb: live forever, learn forever.” This is how Saint Philaret of Moscow guided and fatherly admonished his comrade and friend when he was Bishop of Oryol. Philaret’s letters breathe sincere affection for Gabriel, fatherly concern for his correct activities both in diocesan administration and especially in seminary affairs, and at the same time one can see powerful intercession for him in the Holy Synod. And in the Right Reverend Gabriel such traits began to appear that seemed to indicate his cooling towards his benefactor and patron. On May 22, 1828, Eminence Gabriel was transferred to the see of the Ekaterinoslav diocese. In Ekaterinoslavl, the Right Reverend Gabriel served as a hierarch for almost nine years until May 9, 1837. Welcoming him with this move, Metropolitan Philaret wrote to him: “I congratulate your Eminence on the new throne. May your new ministry be in grace and peace.” And then, as before, throughout the entire period of Right Reverend Gabriel’s administration of this diocese, the Moscow saint did not abandon his friend with his friendly, or rather, fatherly instructions and his intercession. Apparently, the Right Reverend Gabriel was dissatisfied with this transfer and at first complained to Metropolitan Philaret that he was transferred from north to south, that the cathedral in Yekaterinoslavl was not very good, that in the bishop’s house the economic orders of his predecessor were unsuccessful. In response to these complaints, the Moscow saint wrote to him on September 17, 1828: “What kind of trouble,” he answers the first point of the complaint, “that they moved from a cold country to a warm one? This seems to be better than the other way around." And again: “You don’t want to go south, but it’s hard for me to travel to the north. So now they call; and we have had snow more than once; I catch a cold every day and even begin to feel unwell. Who will please us? Let us try to live not as we want, but as God commands.” The Reverend Gabriel complained that the cathedral was not magnificent. And, indeed, the cathedral required restructuring, and the matter was already discussed in the Holy Synod. The Moscow saint writes to this: “Build a new one, and become known as the builder of fences. The matter of building a cathedral is in progress.” Regarding Gabriel’s complaint about the poor management of the housekeeping in the bishop’s house by his predecessors, the Moscow saint wrote: “In the house of the predecessor 75 of your predecessor 76 it is clear that he managed it poorly. This is already visible in the Holy Synod according to the proposal of your predecessor. This will give strength to your idea of ​​this, if you find it necessary to do so.” Obviously, the Moscow High Hierarch did not really insist on a new presentation to the Holy Synod on the part of the Right Reverend Gabriel, especially since Gabriel himself left the management of the bishop's house in Orel in not very brilliant condition. In the same letter, Metropolitan Philaret writes: “I hear that the predecessor of the current Oryol bishop 77 left the local economy not in the most favorable condition. How can you even spend your salary on something other than a salary? 78 In Ekaterinoslavl, His Eminence Gabriel, by order of the Highest, was to begin the construction of the Cathedral of the Transfiguration on the spot where it was founded by Empress Catherine II of blessed memory; He began this construction in 1830, and Metropolitan Philaret helped him a lot with his petition in the Holy Synod, when sending money for the construction of this cathedral. “The matter of building a cathedral is in progress,” he wrote to His Eminence Gabriel in his first letter to Yekaterinoslavl, dated September 17, 1828. “I reminded you about money for your cathedral,” he wrote another time (in a letter dated April 5, 1832). There was a slowdown in the Ministry of Finance, but now the appropriation has been completed. I asked you to hurry up with the rest of the executive correspondence. So I fulfilled your instructions to the best of my ability.” 79 The metropolitan's letters, containing admonitions and instructions, apparently upset the Right Reverend Gabriel, and he sometimes did not write to his friend and patron for a long time, and then he himself reproached the saint for why he did not write to him. To one of these letters, the Metropolitan answers him like this: “Your Eminence considered my silence to be six months, and as a penance to me, be silent for six months. I accept the penance and, in order to fulfill it with obedience, I want to know how long the penance is assigned, and whether so that I continue to remain silent and do not dare to say that I, idle talk or not, am still your Eminence’s most humble servant.”80 Meanwhile, in 1830 and 1831, terrible cholera devastated many regions of Russia and claimed many victims. The Right Reverend Gabriel wrote in 1830 to the High Hierarch of Moscow that the disease was already in his area, and asked for instructions on how to act. The Metropolitan answered: “With you the disease is in the same region, and with me in the same city; and she pushed a little into my house, but the housekeeper did not let her in without a doctor. And sometimes I felt myself on the threshold of illness, but the Lord is still patient. However, do not reproach cholera with the name of evil. She respects what is good. In total, up to a hundred priests went to thirty cholera hospitals, or about this number, every day, and for six weeks the cholera did not touch any of them. But she does not like either excessive insolence or excessive timidity, especially intemperance; Consequently, teach caution, abstinence, and trust in God’s providence” 81. In April 1832, Metropolitan Philaret notified His Eminence Gabriel that Archimandrite Anastasy (Lavrov) had been appointed to him as rector of the seminary, “approved,” as Metropolitan Philaret wrote in his letter, “by his former bishops. I wish that he pleases you, and that you guide him to further improvement.” But this appointment was again unsuccessful 82. The newly arrived rector introduced new rules in the seminary, about which the Right Reverend Gabriel wrote to Philaret; - but Gabriel himself mentioned in his letter that these orders were established without his knowledge, and he does not know whether they will be for the better. The Metropolitan replies: “Why is the order in the seminary changing with the new rector, and you don’t know if it’s for the better?” Any change in the seminaries created according to Philaret’s plan and project, without a doubt, could not please him, especially since the bishop himself writes that he does not know whether this change is for the better. “No change in the seminary should be put into effect,” Filaret wrote to the Right Reverend Gabriel, “before you consider whether it is for the better. I don’t understand,” Filaret added, “why some bishops put themselves aside from the seminary. The bishop has both the right and the duty to lead his seminary; just one should not act against the charter, just as in a consistory against the law. It seemed to me useful to say this in response to your news, so that there would be no unnecessary misunderstanding” 83. In 1833, Bishop Gabriel preached a sermon on repentance and, with the permission of the Moscow Committee of Spiritual Censorship, published it. In St. Petersburg they saw that this sermon was very long and did not correspond to the spirit and character of church preaching; and it seems that they reproached Filaret for the fact that the Moscow Censorship Committee so carelessly allows such sermons to be published. The Metropolitan read the sermon and in his letter to Gabriel he took it apart, as they say, piece by piece. In this letter, he uses, among other things, the following expressions: “Even if I am not an apostle to others, I am also to you. If I don't tell you the truth, who will?... What kind of sermon is 70 pages long? Who could listen to her? And if these are several sermons, then why deceive the Orthodox people and call them one? Then, at the end of the analysis of the sermon, the Metropolitan turns from a strict critic into a meek and friendly exhorter. “Let us think, beloved brother, whether it is clear, whether we are teaching usefully, whether we are leading subordinate teachers on the path, or whether we are leading them astray if, following the example of the bishop, they begin to play with the word of Holy Scripture as they please. Let us humble our thoughts, reduce our confidence in ourselves, and test our work before it goes to the people. I advise this to you as to myself, and to myself as to you. I will be very glad if you answer me with equally frank advice and not with anger. If you are angry, this will not prevent me from being sincerely loving you.”84 In 1834, Bishop Gabriel asked the Metropolitan for an economist for his seminary from Moscow; The saint answered: “I don’t hope to find an economist for your seminary in Moscow. Those living in Moscow for the most part become passionate about it and are reluctant to go to other dioceses. If some adventurer volunteers, it would be a sin to give you such a one.” 85 In 1834, in the fall, the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich, together with the Sovereign Heir, Tsarevich Alexander Nikolaevich, visited Moscow and the Sergius Lavra; Metropolitan Philaret had the good fortune to meet him in both places, and wrote to Gabriel about this. In November of the same 1834, the Right Reverend Gabriel, on the birthday of His Eminence Metropolitan Philaret, who celebrated this day on December 1, sent him a greeting in verse. The Metropolitan, having read the poems, probably smiled at this idea of ​​his Lavra comrade and friend, but did not answer him. But when this friend himself reminded him of this letter and at the same time asked him for advice and guidance on what he should do, how to receive the Emperor, who was expected for the consecration of the new cathedral in Yekaterinoslavl, then the bishop wrote to him: “Didn’t I really answer you also to that letter in which you became a poet? If so, then you see how little I am capable of even borrowing pyitic animation. I used to be ashamed to write, read and listen to Lavra poetry: this is the memory Lavra poetry left in me 86 ; From this it is not difficult for you to conclude how unworthy I am to be the subject of poetry, with which I know so little how to deal.” “Your question of what to do in the event of a visit from the Distinguished Guest is truly worthy of reflection: you don’t know when the Lord will come to your home. I think you saw what to do according to order when you were in St. Petersburg. I can add what not to do, namely: not to write poetry and not to consume anything refined for which I had a taste, but passed away” 87. On December 1, 1835, on the day of his birth celebrated by Filaret, and on January 1, 1836, Gabriel wrote congratulatory letters to the Moscow Metropolitan and asked him some questions. The Metropolitan not only answers the questions asked of him, but also adds something of his own. “You ask,” he writes, “do you really not deserve attention to the works of those entrusted to you?” Eminence Gabriel, obviously, understood his idea in the Holy Synod about rewards for members of the consistory. The Metropolitan answered: “Let me ask each other: did the Holy Synod give you a reason for such a question? It happens to every boss that not every idea is satisfied. In your consistory, as far as I remember, there were matters that could previously interfere with the success of the performances. Now it seems there are fewer obstacles and the show can be more successful.” The second question was whether it is necessary to translate some edifying books from Russian into Greek for the Greeks? – The saint answered: “For the Greeks, is it necessary to translate Russian into Greek, or is it better to accustom them to Russian so that they become more Russified? Consider this issue carefully, based on your local knowledge; and if the Greeks absolutely need Greek, then submit to the Holy Synod the translations you mention for publication.” The Right Reverend Gabriel also wrote that he wished to donate to the Moscow Academy the Pentateuch of Moses in Hebrew, written on parchment in 1142 after the Nativity of Christ and presented to him by the Karaite Jews in Evpatoria, and asked Philaret’s opinion about this. The saint answered: “If you would like to donate a Jewish manuscript to the Moscow Academy, it will honor you as its benefactor for this remarkable gift.” When the manuscript was presented, the Metropolitan wrote to Gabriel: “The commission of theological schools also thanks you for the Pentateuch; and I, God willing, am going to go and see your magnificent gift to our academy.” Having resolved the questions of His Eminence Gabriel, the Metropolitan further writes to him: “Now let’s talk beyond the answer. “Do you hear that your rector 88 has been transferred? I hear from somewhere that he really wanted a transfer, being hampered by the predominant influence of secular people in the seminary. And they say he is a good man. So, you need to pay attention to whether you have lost a good man because you dissatisfiedly supported him; and isn’t the influence harmful to the place, from which even the boss was forced to flee.” The subsequent life of the rector showed that the saint of Moscow had not entirely correct information about him. “It would be much better for the inspector of the seminary to be chosen from among the clergy. Now, perhaps, secular feasting and dancing professors will instill in their students a taste for the secular. In saying this, I am not judging, for one cannot judge from afar, by guesswork; but I give wine to the wise to reflect and discern what is good and what could be better.” “Aren’t you ashamed,” the saint further writes, “to send cases of those entering the Orthodox confession to the manager of affairs of foreign confessions? How can you not guess? Please keep in mind that the code of laws does not prohibit going back to the laws from which it is abbreviated, and that this is especially necessary in relation to church administration, which the code of laws concerns only in part” 89. In the same spring of 1836, the Right Reverend Gabriel became depressed about something and expressed to the Metropolitan his desire to retire to the west of his days, and at the same time reproachfully pointed out that the former rector had allegedly informed him, the Metropolitan, about the seminary and complained about him. The Metropolitan responds to this letter: “What kind of melancholy has come to your Eminence to talk about the West? Graze in the east and rest at noon... - Your former rector did not report anything to me, for I never corresponded with him. What I heard, I heard not from him, but from someone more worthy of trust.” Having repelled any suspicion regarding the acceptance of false reports to the seminary and complaints against Gabriel himself, the Metropolitan then with a friendly reproach says to him: “Why are you informing your inspector about me? I speak to you brotherly and from you I can get a refutation of my words. Why would Kutuzov 90 write to me objections to my letters to you? Would you be happy if I showed your letter to Anastasia? 91 The Right Reverend Gabriel wanted to have good monks and wanted to sign them out of the Moscow monasteries. The Bishop answered him: “Monks cannot be written out like goods; it is necessary to start them, and this is done with the attention of management.” The dancing and feasting professors thereby committed some pranks, and looking at them, the seminarians also committed pranks; His Eminence Gabriel asked the Bishop: who should stop these pranks? The Bishop answered: “It is the rector’s job to correct seminar pranks, and yours is to see that the rector corrects them, and to support him in doing so; You certainly have to calm down the professor’s pranks, but sometimes the rector can’t do it without your support.” At a time when Metropolitan Philaret did not approve of the behavior of the professors of the Ekaterinoslav Seminary, calling them dancing and feasting, and pointed this out to Gabriel, His Eminence Innocent, the rector of the St. Petersburg Academy, looked with completely different eyes at the Eminence Gabriel and his relationship with the professors; he expressed sincere gratitude to him for his fatherly treatment of the academy students who entered the Ekaterinoslav Seminary as mentors. The Most Reverend Gabriel liked this look from Innocent, and he answered him with the following letter: “If everyone looked at me with such a merciful eye as you do, I would build mountains of gold. I ask you not to come across my self-praise in this expression, but let one notice the delight with which I accept your lines, breathing with brotherly love. You call me caring for your pupils. Exactly, I care about them, having dealt directly with them for about twenty years, until this post, but sometimes I also get angry. This is out of common zeal for the benefit that is entrusted to the diocesan leader” 92. From this letter it is clear that the Right Reverend Gabriel, with all the fervor of new love, turned to the then new luminary, which was quickly rising on the horizon of the Russian Church. We will see later how this reverent affection of Gabriel was justified. In his letters to Innocent, the Right Reverend Gabriel depicts the state of some theological schools of the Ekaterinoslav diocese and points out the difficulties that he encounters in bringing them to better order. – In Mariupol, for example, the caretaker of the school, Archpriest Demyanovsky, was not only punished by Gabriel for some bad act, but was also removed by the academic board from the post of caretaker of the school, due to the envy and machinations of the Greeks. The Reverend Gabriel wrote to Innocent: “He should not have been deprived of the title of superintendent of the school, to which he was entitled, having served here as an inspector for more than 10 years, and supported the school despite the weakness of the caretakers who had been there before. For the clergy, he sacrificed his civil rank, in which he was already a member, and, giving it up out of obedience to me, became a priest, then became an archpriest. This is why the dissolute Greeks are jealous, who plundered churches and confused the spiritual government. Demyanovsky corrected everything as much as possible and lent it to me. Upon arrival, the new caretaker, they say, did not deign to allow him to sit down with him. So – their general ardor and inexperience.” About another theological school in his diocese, the Right Reverend Gabriel wrote the following to Innocent: “The Rostov school is now closed, having been annexed to Mariupol; and therefore neither the inspector nor the teachers who are prone to drunkenness will harm him. However, it is wise that other teachers at the schools do not become infected. In cities as empty as, for example, Rostov, they have no one to turn to; and they have little information to attract the best people to the union. There are no books, they don’t read them. Punish my courage, just let me express myself: there is no need at all to worry about the many district schools in the cities. OLEA ET OPERA PEREUNT! “The Crimean clergy is completely hypocritical. With the desire for schools, it only covers up its old tendency - to send children to the secular department. The Greeks are cunning. And how many of them are there to be schools? Isn’t it equal work when they bring their children to Mariupol or directly to the seminary, that is, to the school at the seminary, and back, when 93 ... they do not go to Crimea with their children. From this I conclude that the desire of the Crimean clergy is not sincere. Leave the schools in the places where they are now - only the caretakers and teachers need to be trained so that they do not reinterpret the powers of the charter in their own way. For example, on my current trip I come to school, of course, without students during the holidays. And since I didn’t see a chair, a table, or anything else like that, I asked: is it really always empty? “No,” they answered, “but things have been sorted into the apartments.” In this way, you will never save school savings, and we will all go back and be against the schools of another department in this regard. Let it not matter that things are taken; but when I noticed this was an error, objections flew. “This hinders us, completely hinders us from improving the affairs of the school and seminary. And when it gets higher, we’ll be slapped in the face” 94. About the state of teaching at the Elisavetgrad School, one of the students of this school at that time, later the Right Reverend Gennady (in the world Ivan) Levitsky writes this: “I entered the Elisavetgrad School in the 1st grade, but was soon admitted to the 2nd. He stayed for four years and suffered. I was especially punished for transcriptions, exercises in Latin and Greek, and for notated singing: comrade Andriyan Pogorelov will teach me “Worldwide” and “Who Won’t Please You”... for a penny worth of mommy’s apples; but they found out that I sing by heart and don’t know the notes, and they’ll tear me out, and a penny doesn’t help. And I began to find out the notes: ut, re, mi, and wisdom was revealed... The same with exercises, until I achieved the art of composing Russian meanings from dictated Latin-Greek words. It was especially hard on the Latin teacher Nikolai Osipovich Shelestovsky, who was killed by peasants for cruelty.” The same reverend speaks about the Ekaterinoslav School. Gennady: “In 1831 they transported me to the Ekaterinoslav Theological School. Here... oh, they fought!.. oh, Lipinsky! I suffered for two more years at the Ekaterinoslav School.” But he speaks quite approvingly of the Ekaterinoslav Seminary, especially of the two young mentors, Longinov and Kutuzov. The Reverend Gabriel asked Innocent to send one of the professors to the Elisavetgrad School as caretaker, and not someone else in Crimea. “The region there is highly enlightened regarding the secular,” he wrote; I need a good preacher, which is what they urgently demand from me. The diocese entrusted to me is vast; it is also diverse in tribes, languages, titles, and ranks, of which many are the most brilliant.” And then he presents the benefits and honors that a caretaker of professors could receive. “So a place has opened in Elisavetgrad. Positions under him: the rector of the Corps Cathedral - an archpriest, of course - the first presence in the local spiritual government, - more flatteringly, the dean of all the churches of the military cuirassiers of the settlement. And then he describes with what ceremony the archpriest was buried, in whose place a candidate was needed. “What a military ceremony! What shine! You'll envy the death blow! This is what the rector of the Corps Cathedral is!” 95. From this information about the schools it is clear that the perspicacious eye of the Moscow High Hierarch looked more correctly at the organization of educational affairs in the Ekaterinoslav diocese than the gaze of the Right Reverend. Innocent, and that the Reverend Gabriel, for all his concern for teachers and schools, was too kind and weak in relation to them. In a letter dated January 1, 1837, Bishop Gabriel complained about the weakness of his health and the fact that the bishop’s house was dilapidated. Consoling him, the Metropolitan wrote: “DEUS MELIORA! the late Bishop Plato used to say 96; and I'm behind him now. But I myself, having long ago had the condemnation of death in myself due to weaknesses, by the goodness of God I continue to live; I so hope that the Lord will alleviate your infirmities and prolong your life and ministry, for which I pray to Him. Meanwhile, that your health is not strong, and the house is dilapidated, I said in the Holy Synod, so that they would remember this when they discuss the purpose of the amounts, and when I will probably not be in St. Petersburg.” His Eminence Gabriel wanted to send away some Archimandrite Sergius from himself to Moscow; The Metropolitan answered him: “You often complained about the lack of people; and you throw Archimandrite Sergius to me, who, thank God, has the necessary people, and has had many who have been sent in for repairs. It’s more convenient for you to deal with it and use it” 97. Concluding our story about the friendly relations of Metropolitan Philaret to Gabriel during the latter’s administration of the Ekaterinoslav diocese, we cannot remain silent about how Gabriel himself treated the Right Reverend Innocent Borisov at that time. We first noticed that from the first acquaintance with Innocent in 1825, when Gabriel was Bishop of Oryol, Innocent became for him a person worthy of reverence and worship. And then he wrote to Innocent, the rector of the Kyiv Academy and only the archimandrite: “The case of our acquaintance is not so pleasant; but this acquaintance is my most precious acquisition of all. I began to love and honor you from the moment I saw you, and I will not stop unless you reject me, which, however, I do not expect.” This love and reverence for the then new luminary was somehow impetuous, fiery, enthusiastic. This feeling was completely different from how Gabriel’s soul was imbued with his comrade, friend and patron, mentor and benefactor - Filaret. Always serious, always sincere and benevolent, always unhypocritical, sometimes strict, always striking with the greatness of his mind, Filaret in his very friendship was powerful and did not look for feelings of fiery love in the soul of his comrade and friend. Always ready to come to the aid of a friend with the necessary advice and admonition, Filaret carried out the words of St. John: We do not love in word and tongue, but in deed and truth. But the heart of his friend and comrade was far from being like that. It was looking for friendship and hot, fiery love, which loves to be poured out in impetuous delights and passions. But, apparently, Innocent was not much carried away by the expressions of fiery love and respect of the Right Reverend Gabriel; he had a practical outlook on life. He did not write to Gabriel until August 10, 1836; and even now I wrote according to my own, so to speak, affairs and needs. In this letter, Innocent wrote about the state of the Ekaterinoslav religious schools, which were revamped this year. The Reverend Gabriel, for his part, depicts the state of these schools and, in general, the attitude of the Kursk clergy towards the schools 98. Sending his response letter dated September 20, 1836 to Innocent, Gabriel signed himself as follows: Heartily devoted to your Reverence and unfeignedly honoring you, Gabriel of Ekaterinoslav. Soon Gabriel received a second letter from Innocent. In this letter, Innocent thanked Gabriel for his fatherly care of the students of the Kyiv Academy, who served as mentors at the Ekaterinoslav Seminary, whom Philaret called dancing and feasting. We already know with what pompous words Gabriel began his response letter to him: “If everyone looked at me with such a merciful eye, I would build mountains of gold,” and so on. Such words were obviously directed against Filaret’s reproaches and already expressed some secret dissatisfaction with Filaret and sympathy for Innocent. Eminence Gabriel, after Metropolitan Philaret so strictly examined his sermon on repentance and mentioned in his letter that the Moscow Committee of Spiritual Censorship received a remark for inattentive consideration of this sermon, stopped sending his sermons and books to the Moscow Committee, and began sending them to the Kiev Committee - under the patronage of Innocent. About his literary activities in Ekaterinoslavl, the Right Reverend Gabriel wrote to Innocent in St. Petersburg in 1843: “In Ekaterinoslavl, I began a historical note about my diocese, which is closely connected with the fate of Novorossiya. My sources were not books, but half-rotten sheets of the monastery archive. For a year or two I rummaged through the pernicious dust, adding my personal comments. Part, perhaps a third, of his path passed in this way. But they pushed me to Odessa during the plague time; and all that remained was to think not about the fruits of action, but about ways to get rid of the evil spirit, from the arrow that flew in the darkness. Add that at that time I had, simply to say, neither a stake nor a yard.” “The Odessa Society (of History and Antiquities) turned its attention to my historical note,” continued His Eminence Gabriel; excerpts from it are placed in the works of this Society, but the whole will remain tuna. In order to replace the failure with something, I compiled a chronological table of all the churches of Novorossiysk with the addition of historical information about some. And thus he donated to the Society. But all this is a trifle, which I’ll stop talking about.”99 Metropolitan Philaret, without a doubt, kept his word; before his departure from St. Petersburg, he said to the Holy Synod that the health of the Right Reverend Gabriel was weak, and that his wooden house was dilapidated, in the hope that the Holy Synod, when assigning amounts, would allocate something for the repair of the dilapidated bishop's house in Yekaterinoslavl. But the Holy Synod decided the matter differently. On May 9, 1837, the Right Reverend Gabriel was again moved to a new see - Kherson - separated from Ekaterinoslav, with the title of Archbishop of Kherson and Tauride, in order to have him stay in Odessa. Since the Kherson diocese was then being formed again, His Grace Gabriel had to take charge of everything that related to the composition of the newly established diocese. And he immediately paid attention to all areas of church improvement. Wise from his previous experiences and advice from his friend and comrade, Metropolitan Philaret, and also supported by the chief commander of the region, Prince M. S. Vorontsov, and the friendship of the chairman of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities, N. I. Murzakevich, and trusting in his new patron Innocent, the Right Reverend Gabriel acts in Odessa with greater independence than before, although now he is not left without help and comments from Metropolitan Philaret. And there was a lot of work ahead. Upon entering the administration of the Kherson and Tauride diocese, His Grace Gabriel had to act during the plague, which was then raging in Odessa and throughout the diocese. “They pushed me to Odessa during the plague time; and I had to think about ways to get rid of the evil spirit, from the arrow that flew in the darkness... I then had neither a courtyard nor a stake in Odessa,” he wrote in 1843 to the Reverend Innocent. At this terrible time in Odessa, the churches of God, by order of the head of the region, Prince Vorontsov, were locked for fear that the plague infection would not intensify from the crowded gathering of people in one place. Meanwhile, the residents of Odessa, stricken with fear, sought consolation and grace-filled help in prayers and the performance of the sacraments. And the Right Reverend Gabriel revealed himself at this time to be the true father of his spiritual children and the caring shepherd of his new flock. Bearing in mind the example of the Moscow High Hierarch, who energetically acted in Moscow in 1830 during cholera, he immediately upon receiving the news of the closure of the churches of God turned to his flock with a fatherly appeal, calling everyone to fasting, repentance and intense prayer 100, then elected special priests who would be ready at any moment to give everyone grace-filled consolation through the holy sacraments and prayer services; and even he himself once fearlessly appeared to the people for their consolation and encouragement, and another time for the same purpose he entered 101 even into the quarantine itself. After this disaster ended, the Right Reverend began little by little to improve the sacristy and church furniture. And here it could not have happened without the especially enhanced help of Metropolitan Philaret. In the hope of Philaret himself and the generous donors of Moscow, the Right Reverend Gabriel sent two of his trusted representatives to Moscow, the steward of his bishop's house, Hieromonk Anthony, and the deacon of the cathedral, Thomas. To the misfortune of the Eminence, in Moscow circumstances encountered with Hieromonk Anthony, which at first extremely complicated the position of these trusted representatives and only with the especially intensified efforts of Metropolitan Philaret ended well for both Anthony and for the Eminence Gabriel himself. These circumstances were as follows: upon the arrival of the trustees in Moscow, it turned out that Hieromonk Anthony had his wife, Matryona Agapova, alive, and with her his 11-year-old son Peter. Anthony, in the world Vasily Osipov, a servant of Princess Obolenskaya, married Matryona Agapova in 1821, glorified her pregnant in 1827 and retired to the Korsun Edinoverie monastery; tonsured a monk in the Samara Bishop's House in 1833 or 1934. Anthony arrived in Odessa in 1837 together with His Eminence Gabriel and was made housekeeper of the bishop's house 102. Hieromonk Anthony, when he was in Moscow, more than once visited his wife, who lived in his sister’s house; Likewise, she visited him in his apartment, in the presence of Deacon Thomas of Levitsky. On this, at the suggestion of the Metropolitan (dated June 15, 1838, No. 172), a case was carried out in the Moscow Synodal Office and, upon completion, it was forwarded for consideration and a legal resolution to the Kherson Spiritual Consistory under the decree of July 12 of the same year, No. 736. The Most Reverend Gabriel now faced a new difficulty - to solve this extremely complicated matter. The Eminence turned to his comrade and friend. The Metropolitan answered him with such detail and wisdom that Gabriel could only rewrite his answer - and the solution came out to be exemplary. “To your question: what to do with a hieromonk who has left his wife in peace? - It’s not easy to answer. According to civil laws, in place and time, he is right. But how did you receive monasticism and priesthood? If he revealed himself purely and was allowed by his confessor, the confessor took his guilt upon himself. And if he did not open himself, then he received monasticism and the priesthood through untruth. In order to come out of these difficulties with truth and, if possible, with peace, I would think, firstly, about testing and pacifying his conscience, taking care spiritually, for the good of his soul; secondly, advise his wife to immediately join a monastery; thirdly, to keep him from priestly service until she is tonsured, and through that the whole matter will come into legal order. But this, in my opinion, does not prevent you from using him in assignments and even in the position of housekeeper, if, apart from the confusion that has occurred, his dignity is not in doubt. You have the scope to judge for yourself. If you yourself have any idea and want me to test it by consulting with some other members of the Holy Synod, you can write to me about it” 103. Thus, the wise High Hierarch of Moscow resolved one of the most difficult and confusing matters regarding diocesan administration and led his friend onto the path of truth and peace, and, moreover, resolved it in a spirit of humility, ready to listen to the opinion of the Most Reverend Gabriel himself and to propose this opinion for discussion by other members of the Holy Synod. But, without a doubt, His Eminence Gabriel considered it necessary to fulfill the opinion of his friend and comrade, and no longer bother himself or the other members of the Holy Synod. The diocese of Kherson, according to the words of His Eminence Gabriel, was “extensive and diverse in tribes, languages, ranks, ranks, many of which were the most brilliant.” It took a lot of wisdom and caution to be useful to everyone and in everything. The Tatars especially demanded attention, many of whom wanted to accept the Orthodox faith, but encountered delays in consistory office work. His Eminence Gabriel did not pay attention to this, and the consistory applied the law on baptism, issued for Jews, to the Tatars. – Where it was necessary and possible to build a church of God, they could not achieve this. And sometimes Gabriel himself was incorrectly squeezed into Mohammedanism with Christianity. The Metropolitan, out of his friendship, tried to correct and smooth out all these errors with his admonitions and instructions. Thus, in a letter dated October 29, 1838, he wrote to Gabriel: “They say that you make it difficult to baptize Tatars, and that they are treated according to the law issued for the baptism of Jews. If these two different kinds of people were mixed up by your consistory, then you will analyze the matter better. The strict law for Jews was made based on the observation that they are baptized hypocritically and more than once. And therefore it was made solely for Jews. The baptism of Tatars needs to be facilitated. Allow this to the priests as easily as possible, without hampering the work of God with the commanding forms of the consistory.” Thus, the wise archpastor of Moscow resolved another issue of church practice. “They say,” the Moscow High Hierarch continues, “the Right Reverend Agathopole, who lives with you in Feodosia, is disposed to convert the Tatars and has knowledge of their language; Why don’t you use his help?” “They also say; that those living in Crimea need a priest. There is a church somewhere there, to which you could give a priest, and the inhabitants of Crimea - the Orthodox - would band together to give him support. Pay your archpastoral attention to this” 104. So vigilantly did the Moscow High Priest watch the affairs of the Kherson diocese, entrusted to his comrade and friend. When the Right Reverend Gabriel arrived in Odessa, he quite rightly wrote to Innokenty Borisov that he had neither a courtyard nor a stake; for a whole year he did not have any comfortable accommodation. And, if not for the petition of the main commander of the region, Prince Mikhail Semenovich Vorontsov, before the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich, such a homeless situation could have lasted for a very long time. But the Right Reverend Gabriel knew how to gain the prince’s goodwill, and soon a very decent accommodation was arranged for him and for all subsequent archpastors of Kherson. At the request of the prince, with the Highest permission, the house of Count A. Pototsky, which belonged to the treasury, was transferred for permanent placement of local bishops. This house was located outside the city, in a secluded place, far from the noise of the city, and was completely convenient for the residence of the ruler. Using the amount allocated from the Holy Synod for additional buildings to this house, the Right Reverend built a church of the cross. The good relations of the Right Reverend Gabriel with Prince Vorontsov and the successful organization of the bishop's house could not but delight the heart of Metropolitan Philaret and arouse in him a tender poetic mood towards his friend and comrade. In May 1839, he sent the following letter to His Eminence Gabriel, filled with sincere friendship and original poetry: “The Most Reverend Hierotheus, Archbishop of Tabor, having been in Russia on behalf of the Most Blessed Patriarch of Jerusalem (and already elected as his successor), returning to his homeland, wishes to come to your Eminence, not alone, as a stranger, but with me, your old acquaintance. I willingly accompany him and greet you with my charter, and through his lips. I do not ask you to accept him brotherly; you will do this yourself, and he himself is able to find this. I only open the door for him to come to you. The idea comes to him to set up a Jerusalem courtyard in Odessa, and not too much. You will talk with him about the possibility of doing this. May your communication be mutually comforting. Remember me in peace, as I remember you with love." 105 The new diocese needed a seminary. The Most Reverend Gabriel, with the Highest permission that followed on April 14, 1838, rented the premises of the seminary, a house with a good garden and other amenities, and, having waited for the rector appointed to the seminary, Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky, master of the VIII year of the St. Petersburg Academy 106, and mentors from students of the Moscow Theological Academy, On October 1, 1838, he solemnly opened the course of study at the seminary and then, with fatherly care, attended to all the needs of both the institution itself and the students, especially orphans. There were many worries and troubles, illnesses and sorrows at the birth of this new seminary 107. In 1839, he petitioned the Holy Synod to increase the salary for the maintenance of the seminary and to raise it to the first rank in relation to the states. This is not enough. Bearing in mind that a very significant part of the population of Taurida and Odessa itself are Greeks, and that his diocese consists of people of different tribes, he established a practical Greek language class at the seminary, so that future priests of Greek parishes would not find it difficult to communicate with their parishioners; Likewise, the teaching of the languages ​​German and French, according to his order, was to be of a practical nature. Therefore, the teachers of these languages ​​were natural experts. Metropolitan Philaret apparently approved of the fatherly concern of the Right Reverend Gabriel for the seminary. In one of his letters he says this: “I wish your seminary success more than the communicants” 108 . In another he wrote: “I rejoice that your seminary is prospering. I brought a letter approving of her test with me and will show it here” (i.e. in the Holy Synod) 109. The rector of the seminary, Archimandrite Porfiry (Uspensky), “a humane man and an amusing critic,” as the Rev. Gennady, as well as young mentors from the Moscow Theological Academy, could and, indeed, placed the Odessa Seminary on a high level of mental development, and it rightly earned praise from Metropolitan Philaret. And we can judge what kind of procedures were in place at the Odessa Seminary for the supervision of students, and how the Right Reverend Gabriel himself treated the seminary inspector, we can judge from the following testimony of the inspector of this seminary himself in 1845, Archimandrite Gennady: “What an inspector I was like in 1845–57, I still remember this with fear. Pedagogy was only shown in essays; did not know certain theoretical principles; I loved my fellow countrymen... the children of my seminary comrades and relatives... like my own soul, and shook... as it was then... the guilty one like a pear. And there were many to blame, due to the special qualities of the city of Odessa and they are cresting. But there were few of them, no more than 200. The inner ones lived in a crowded crowd; They studied in the classrooms, and some even slept - due to the cramped conditions in the bedrooms. The outsiders lived in private apartments of every quality... But in the last extreme he shied away from exceptions, from formal correspondence, noting offenses in journals, enigmatically and generally. The Bulgarians and Serbs made it especially difficult, but they also suffered. Dobri Centulo studied well in the secondary department; but extremely hot-tempered, he severely beat his comrade, the little Russian; everyone was strictly forbidden to butcher each other; the offended one explained to me; they demanded that the offender see the inspector; and Dobri appears; in excitement he says: “I’ll beat you too”... in a dressing gown... He also recognized me as a Bulgarian, a Moldavian, a Ukrainian! Silishka was there; name was Batu, Tatar... But, I ran to Gabriel, who, during our meeting, scolded me and laughed”... This review shows with what fatherly simplicity and condescension the Rev. Gabriel with both the inspector and the students of his seminary. In 1839, the Right Reverend Gabriel committed one imprudence, which became very public and forced Metropolitan Frilaret to write him an impressive letter. Arriving one day at a Mohammedan mosque, Gabriel said the Lord’s Prayer there. He himself wrote to the Metropolitan about this, and it was published in the newspapers. Probably, Gabriel had in mind to promote the conversion of Mohammedans to Christianity, but, without a doubt, he went further than what the Metropolitan advised him in that letter, where he wrote: “They say that you are making it difficult to convert the Tatars to Christianity,” etc. The wise saint of Moscow, upon receiving news of this visit by Gabriel to the mosque, wrote to him the following: “This means that you are publicly accused, or accused themselves of violating church rules. If it is not allowed to pray with heretics, much less in a Mohammedan mosque, how much more so than the highest of prayers, which we want to say in church during the liturgy, we prepare for this with a special prayer: grant us, O Master, with boldness and not condemnation to dare to call on You, the heavenly God, the Father, and say: Our Father! You have not won a single Mohammedan soul, but you have broken the rules and seduced the Orthodox. Will you defend yourself and say that the Apostle Paul entered the synagogue? I answer: a synagogue is not at all like a mosque, especially at the time when St. Paul. The Christian Church was just being born; Until then, the synagogue was the abode of true religion, which, through the preaching of the Gospel, was to be transformed into a New Testament church, for which St. Paul. But we do not see him entering pagan temples to pray and preach; for this would mean to irritate and outrage, and, consequently, to block, and not open the way to edification in faith. In the Areopagus St. Paul did not come himself, but was brought and asked. Then it was okay to proclaim the truth.” “That the Mohammedans, listening to you in the mosque, remained silent, was their modesty. But if they decided to insult you, you would be subjected to this in such a way that you would not have the right to ask for satisfaction. It’s good that this didn’t happen; but what followed was not good. The Mohammedans are outraged by your invasion of their mosque and fear that they will be oppressed in their faith. Your local authorities are concerned about this; I know this from reliable sources and this is why I am prompted to write to you about this subject so aggressively. I fraternally ask you to accept my attack with patience and, having examined the matter impartially, take the rule of caution. We must also pay attention to acting in peace and with civilian authorities. Peaceful authorities support each other in a matter of general benefit and make its progress successful and reliable. “I ask you to forgive me my boldness,” the saint wrote at the end of his letter, “which I accepted without violating true respect and love” 110. The house hired for the seminary in 1838 did not ensure the stable existence of the seminary in it; it was necessary to build our own seminary building, but here we encountered some obstacles from the highest spiritual authorities. The Holy Synod saw that the estimates and prices for materials were set very high, not in truth, and that the place for the construction of the seminary was bought by someone in order to charge twice as much for it. When the Right Reverend Gabriel asked Philaret to speed up the matter of building a seminary in the Synod, the Bishop of Moscow pointed out these circumstances and asked Gabriel himself to ease matters by leading them to the right path. Father Rector of the Kherson Seminary, Archimandrite Porfiry, became mentally ill and, in order to cure his illness with the help of foreign doctors, asked for a place on some mission abroad. The Right Reverend Gabriel made a presentation about this to the Holy Synod, and the Synod appointed Porfiry as rector of the embassy church in Vienna. The High Hierarch of Moscow, informing Gabriel about this, wrote to him: “The idea of ​​your rector seems to be resolved. It’s a pity that he’s in the condition you write; it requires healing, and especially spiritual healing. The inner peace of the soul will restore peace at the boundaries between soul and body” 111. In the newly established Kherson diocese, His Eminence Gabriel had the intention of establishing a nunnery and in it a school for orphaned girls of the clergy, and in 1839, in April, on the basis of the draft charter of spiritual consistories - taking care of bishops about generally useful institutions, he reported to the Holy Synod that, since in the entire Kherson diocese there is not a single female monastery, then may the Holy Synod deign to petition him for the highest permission to establish such a monastery in Odessa. The Holy Synod demanded from him detailed information both about the foundations on which the monastery should be established, and about the methods for its organization and maintenance for the future. As a result, the collection of voluntary offerings for the construction of the monastery was opened. And immediately donors and donors of money and lands appeared, and Mr. Sturdza donated the complete 3rd edition of the beautiful Letters on the positions of the priesthood for the construction of this monastery. (See letter 5 of Rev. Gabriel to Innocent, p. 442). Encouraged by the generously opened funds, the Right Reverend Gabriel, on January 30, 1841, reported this to the Holy Synod and again asked him to petition for the Highest permission to establish a monastery and outlined in his vision the purpose of the future monastery - to be a haven for those seeking salvation and, at the same time, a shelter for orphans and maidens of the clergy. At the same time, in his presentation, he determined the number of pupils, their years, subjects of education, methods of maintaining and arranging their fate, and also designated a place for a monastery - at the Church of St. Michael the Archangel - parish, with its conversion into a monastery. At the same time, Bishop Gabriel asked permission from the Holy Synod to give him a compiled book for all dioceses. These assumptions were soon approved by the Holy Synod, in addition to the issuance of a collected book. Friend and comrade Rev. Gabriel, Metropolitan Philaret, wrote to him on January 21, 1842: “Your assumptions regarding the monastery school are approved, except for the combined book for all dioceses, because if you were given this right, then others would have the same right, and then in your diocese there would be combined books of all dioceses, which, of course, would not seem convenient to you. But you can give a collection book, according to custom, for your diocese and send with it to some others, which the bishops, out of brotherly love, will not refuse to allow collection in their dioceses. Maybe, if you like, your book will come to Moscow” 112. On the 31st day of May, 1842, the monastery was founded, and in two years a beautiful house was built with all the amenities to house nuns, pupils and mentors. A worthy person was needed for the newly built monastery and for the leadership of the school. His Grace Gabriel asked the Moscow High Hierarch to find and send him such a person. The Metropolitan did not answer for a long time and only in April 1844 wrote to him: “I rejoice that the establishment of the women’s monastery is coming to an end for you, with the hope of spiritual benefit. I hope that now you have already resolved the question about the abbess, which was suggested to me. I would not refuse to help you if I were confident in the reliability of my help. But it is also more difficult for me to choose abbesses for my monasteries, because it is more convenient to recognize and test the members of the monasteries. Moreover, in Moscow there is a strong predilection for Moscow. And the difficulty is that, for the purpose of your establishment, you probably need to have an abbess who is not only kind, but also educated. That’s why I thought and remained in silence, to which now bless me to return” 113. By this time, Rev. Gabriel became completely comfortable in Odessa; he had his own bishop's house, very comfortable and spacious, with a garden, his own seminary, his own nunnery with a school for maidens of the clergy, and became a good owner. In 1843, he sent grapes from his garden to the Metropolitan and wrote to him that he wanted to plant a vine with his name. The High Hierarch answered: “I enjoyed the grapes of your garden with pleasure, not only sensual, but also with reason, on the advice of a doctor, and with heartfelt, with the memory of you. But enough. I don’t want vines with my name on them, not wanting to name my name on the lands. Make haste for this name through your prayer, so that it may be written in the book of the living, grafted into the true Vine” 114. In 1846, Metropolitan Philaret established the Gethsemane monastery near the Trinity Lavra, on Korbukh. The Most Reverend Gabriel turned his attention to this monastery and asked the Metropolitan for a corner in it. The High Hierarch of Moscow very kindly answers him in his letter dated April 26, 1846: “It is the mercy of God to our small monastery that your Eminence deigns to have its attention and even wants to have a corner in it. And I wish that you continue to be healthy and act in the field of archpastoral service. In our monastery and for me; the corner is small, and the others are very small in order to adequately accommodate you. If necessary, we would lovingly prepare for you a monastery in the monastery or in Bethany, but you can only get the monastery by inheritance after me. “But I also say again: hello, prosper and live long, for which I pray, entrusting myself to your prayers” 115. When Metropolitan Philaret refused to allow his friend and comrade room in his Gethsemane monastery, near the Lavra of St. Sergius, the Right Reverend Gabriel sought permission from the Holy Synod to allow him to build a hermitage near the city of Ochakov, and thought to have there for himself, in the words of Cicero, NONESTUM OTIUM 116, which he wrote about in 1847 to His Eminence Innocent 117, before whom he now revered with all his soul. And not a word to my old friend and comrade about this desert. In May 1846, the Metropolitan of Moscow addressed his friend, the Right Reverend Gabriel, as a full member of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities, with the following letter: “I come to you with a request. The Berlin newspaper of April 1846, No. 119, says that the Odessa Society of Antiquities has a Jewish manuscript of the prophet Habakkuk from 916, notable for the fact that the vowel signs in it are different from ordinary ones. It would be desirable for me, if possible, to have a photograph of one page of this manuscript, as similar as possible to the original in letters and characters. To prove that I am writing, I am enclosing a piece of newspaper. May it not be difficult for you to condescend to my curiosity and satisfy it. Maybe this is not entirely idle curiosity.” At the end of the letter, the saint reminds the Right Reverend Gabriel of his joint stay with him in the Lavra in the years of his youth. “I bow to you from under the roof of St. Sergius, where we once instilled together with you” 118. This letter was the last letter from Metropolitan Philaret to his friend and comrade Gabriel, as Archbishop of Kherson and Tauride. Finishing the depiction of the friendly relations of Metropolitan Philaret with the Reverend. Gabriel during the service of the latter at the Odessa See, we have reason to assume that the repeated offensive and intelligible letters of Metropolitan Philaret to his comrade and friend were not always received by the latter with corresponding complacency and love. The Most Reverend Gabriel, due to his characteristic ardor and ardor of character, sought for himself, as we said above, the patronage and friendship of the then new luminary who appeared on the horizon of the Russian Church, Innokenty (Borisov). So, for example, in 1841, having learned that Innocent had been made an independent bishop of Vologda, he greeted him in the following enthusiastic expressions: “The Lord has sent you a double Easter today: the Easter of Christ, common with everyone, and the special Easter of your resettlement to the God-saved city of Vologda. On both occasions, I have the honor to most earnestly congratulate Your Eminence. Perhaps darkness appears to you in the deep north? That's why light is needed there; For this reason, God commands the radiant sun to shine there almost without setting in the summer. I’m flying after you, gracious archpastor, I’m flying there with my thoughts, regretting that I cannot be there physically... Some time ago I dared to seek affection for myself in you 119. Wasn't this my premonition? Was it not a prophetic angel who inspired me about your destined journey to a country that I love, for I myself was loved there. I received the book back and thank you for your careful reading, which was all I wanted. Look at the attached new notebook and consign it to decay” 120. In another letter to Innocent from Odessa, the Right Reverend Gabriel uses the following expressions: “I sincerely thank you, gracious archpastor, for sending your little books. Having sent them to decent places, I will scatter diamonds and other jewelry” 121. March 1st, 1848 Rev. Gabriel was moved from Odessa to Tver, to the Tver archbishop's see. This transfer took place completely unexpectedly for Gabriel and without the knowledge of the Metropolitan of Moscow, who had not been to St. Petersburg since 1848, and, it seems, not without intrigue. Nikolai Ivanovich Murzakevich, the then chairman of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities, a contemporary of the circumstances we are telling, writes the following about this movement: “When this venerable old man was thinking about the repose of his weary body and spirit in the south of Russia, his hopes were unexpectedly destroyed by the search of a young fellow in rank. The famous preacher, Innocent (Borisov), who in a short time from the rector of the Kyiv Academy achieved the title of archbishop, really wanted to go to Odessa. Distinguished by his particular dexterity (for example, in the Pochaev Monastery, during the expulsion of the Uniates), the director of the office of the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, A. I. Voitsekhovich, was able to settle the matter so that the old man, under the pretext of promotion, was transferred to Tver. This diocese is considered one degree higher than Kherson" 122 . His Grace Innocent himself, the same one whom Gabriel revered so much and who so cleverly became his successor in Odessa, notified him of the transfer of the Right Reverend Gabriel to Tver. In his letter, Innocent probably used the expressions: “it’s time for you to rise, it’s time to grow,” thereby indicating his transfer to the Tver diocese, as higher in comparison with Odessa. How did the Rev. receive this news? Gabriel? Here is a letter from Gabriel himself to Innocent: “I most humbly respond to your Eminence for your good news to me. Is it time for me to get up now? Am I tall? Already the eyes are dull and the legs are weak. But, according to your words, the will of the Lord be done! “I have always wanted, at least once again, to see Moscow, to bow to the holy ruler there, who was once my closest comrade, then my benefactor... This opportunity is now being given to me by the Lord, to the greater joy that I can now visit the tombs of my deceased parents, etc. So, everything is looking up for the best for me; however, I cannot hide my heartfelt sorrow. I cry bitterly as I leave this region, having lived in it for twenty years. There are troubles in the local climate, but the northern climate frightens me more, despite the fact that I was born under its breath. I foresee my fate. This is the last thing I do in the race. Grant me, Lord, patience!” At the end of his letter, Eminence Gabriel notes that he cannot rush to leave Odessa, because those who love him here are doing a lot to prevent him from doing so 123. Reading this letter, you involuntarily feel deep heartfelt regret for the venerable elder archbishop, who, in the simplicity of his kind heart, so sincerely relied on the affection of his new friend. Having accepted the “good news” from the lips of this friend about his displacement with Christian complacency, although not without heartfelt sorrow, he now did not want to be disappointed in the friendship of the Reverend. Innocent and continued to have a cordial affection for him, as we will see below. How highly they appreciated the service of Rev. Gabriel in Odessa are people worthy of complete trust and respect, this can be seen from the following two reviews. The chief commander of the Novorossiysk region, Prince M. S. Vorontsov, wrote the following in relation to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Count Protasov: “I saw in him a well-intentioned shepherd who diligently assisted the local authorities in fulfilling his various proposals for the benefit of the region. With patience and prudence, he overcame all the difficulties that naturally should have presented themselves during the formation of a new diocese. Through his actions he acquired general trust, love and respect. Through his constant care, many new churches were built, and many churches were decorated with splendor. The Right Reverend Gabriel participated in all the charitable societies of the region and set an example with tireless activity and efforts for good... Staying in southern Russia for about twenty years and laboring during all this time for the good of the dioceses entrusted to him, he left behind the best memory in all the inhabitants”... This is how the chief commander of the Novorossiysk region, Prince, spoke about the activities of the Eminence Gabriel. Vorontsov 124. Another person worthy of full respect, namely, the chairman of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities N.I. Murzakevich, in his notes says the following about the Right Reverend Gabriel: “In May 1848, I lost one of my best acquaintances, I can say, friends, the local Archpastor Gabriel. Our eleven-year-old friendship was imprinted in lasting friendship. We were brought together by unity of goals - this was historical research about the Novorossiysk region, to which Gabriel, among many troublesome affairs for a vast and unsettled diocese, consisting of two provinces, devoted himself with all his heart. A number of his articles graced the pages of the Society's Notes... General popular regret, even among people of other faiths, accompanied the departure of the beloved and respected, not a bigot, bishop. And he boldly and nobly expressed his sadness in a wonderful farewell speech to the people. Hardly many bishops dared to make such a public confession... The diocese of Gabriel (Odessa) owes many educated priests, the opening of a seminary, an orphanage for girls at the St. Michael's Monastery and the construction of many good churches. House-building with poor means was his distinctive feature. Exemplary order, cleanliness and care for the seminarians will be an unforgettable monument to him. For excessive trust in his associates, especially in the scoundrel D-vu, his cell-attendant and bribe-taker, Gabriel paid with a transfer to the harsh north. Arriving in Odessa, his successor at first had the imprudence to discredit some of the alleged omissions of his predecessor, but general love and respect for Gabriel soon forced him to change his tone” 125. From the reviews we cited above and the letter from the Most Reverend Gabriel himself, one cannot help but guess that the Eminence Gabriel could not get out of Odessa soon; Meanwhile, Metropolitan Philaret was already expecting him to go to Moscow. “I can’t wait for you,” wrote Filaret on May 27, 1848 126, “but time is running out. The House of the Most Holy Trinity calls me to itself, and I have a strong need to be there both for the sake of the holiday and besides this. What should I do? I find no other way than to humbly and convincingly ask you to make a small addition to your journey; and since I did not deserve this, then do this for the sake of our venerable father Sergius, under whose wings you once grew up. – It will add a little more work and time to you. If you wish, from the Lavra you can, without returning to Moscow, go to Klin or to your Korcheva. Do me a favor, do not deprive me of your sight and conversation - which deprivation may now be irrevocable. I hope and I think and say one thing: you are welcome.” When the Right Reverend Gabriel arrived in Moscow in early June 1848 and stayed at the Chudov Monastery, he was given the following letter from Philaret: “Congratulations on your arrival in Moscow. And please forgive me for not waiting for you there. I have already told you about the reasons for this. Would you like, if you stay in Moscow until Sunday, to celebrate the Divine Liturgy in the Assumption Cathedral? The Right Reverend Vicar 127 will order this. And then do not deprive your visit to the Lavra of St. Sergius, so that its humble abbot is not deprived of this. Let me stay with pleasant hope" 128. It would have been a sin not for the Right Reverend Gabriel to visit the Lavra with the Monk Sergius, under whose wings he once grew, and with its “humble abbot,” his friend, comrade and benefactor. And he, indeed, visited the Lavra and was received by Filaret with the cordiality and love of a true friend and comrade. Together they venerated the relics of St. Sergius and other saints of God resting in the Lavra, together they walked around all the churches of the Lavra, visited the academy together, were in classes, in the rooms of mentors and students, and Eminence Gabriel was very pleased to meet among the mentors of the academy the venerable Archpriest Theodore Alexandrovich Golubinsky, who was once his student at the Kostroma school, and now his husband scientist, famous not only in Russia, but also in Germany. Here, another relative of his from Kostroma, the famous teacher of church history, Alexander Vasilyevich Gorsky, introduced himself to him. Together with the Metropolitan, they also went into the dining room during the students’ lunch, tasted bread and kvass and compared the food with what they ate during their studies at the Lavra; We visited Korbukha, Bethany, and the newly built monastery of Gethsemane. Those of the academy students who had entered it from the Tver Seminary 129 also presented themselves to Eminence Gabriel; he received them very favorably, invited them to his service and promised them his protection and mercy. His Grace Gabriel arrived in Tver on June 11, 1848 at 7 o'clock. evenings. The arrival in Tver was not very favorable for the Reverend Gabriel; a few days before his arrival, cholera appeared in the city and began to cause its devastation. Several priests died, for example, at the Simeon Church, two priests and a deacon, at the Nativity of Christ - two priests and a deacon; two cathedral priests, sent to the Simeon Church to correct the needs, died; the priest died at the Voznesenskaya church, which is on the avenue, the priest of the Intercession Church beyond Tmaka, the Trinity Church, which is beyond the Volga. Once upon a time, seven coffins with cholera victims had accumulated in the Simeon Church, and it was necessary to find a foreign parish priest to perform the burial service for the dead. His Eminence Gabriel ordered that on July 8th a procession of the cross around each parish should be carried out in all parishes by the parish priests. The religious processions were completed, and cholera began to gradually weaken, however, continuing to act until the end of August. The Eminence sat all the time in his Trekhsvyatsky 130. This was the reason that the residents of the city. Tver treated him coldly. Two years have passed since the arrival of the Most Reverend Gabriel in Tver, and during this period of time we do not find the Most Reverend in the book. Savva, not a single letter from Metropolitan Philaret to him, although we know for certain that the High Hierarch of Moscow continued to make Rev. Gabriel sometimes receives very strict suggestions regarding certain disorders in the management of the Tver flock. And Gabriel himself, it seems, turned to him less than before, and with all his heart clung to Innocent, who repeatedly visited him in Tver on his way to St. Petersburg, to the Holy Synod. In Gabriel's letters to Innocent there are such obsequious expressions that, it seems, are no longer entirely appropriate for the elder archpastor. For example, in the very first letter from Tver, the Right Reverend Gabriel, apologizing to Innocent that after their meeting in Tver, he had not yet had time to thank Innocent for his mercy, that he visited him, writes: “Now accept, Vladyka, what is due from me; Now listen to the message of my mouth: glory to you, who showed me your light! Meanwhile, one desire burns within me: to know whether you arrived safely in the capital, whether winter met you, whether it brought any news on its wings?” etc. 131. In another letter, praising Innocent’s funeral homily at the burial of St. Petersburg Metropolitan Anthony, Gabriel wrote to Innocent: “Saint Anthony is more blessed than the Seraphim, Michael and Ambrosie 132. Their burials were not marked by such teachings as flowed from your golden lips” 133. Presenting one of his books to Innocent, the Right Reverend Gabriel wrote to him: “If hay can lie on fire and not burn, then graciously accept my little book, which is laid at your feet, remembering your order to me to print.” 134 And one more thing: “The past year was joyful for me. I enjoyed the sweetness of your brotherly love for me. Do mercy: do not deprive me of that same thing now” 135. And many other similar expressions. How bitterly the simple-hearted old man was mistaken in his new friend! The former comrade and friend, with his often harsh, but always truthful remarks and admonitions, seemed to have been forgotten... But in July 1850 there was a rumor that Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow was being summoned to St. Petersburg. What this rumor was based on is unknown; what is undoubtedly known is that Filaret was not in St. Petersburg after 1848 until the end of his life. Be that as it may, Gabriel believed the rumor that was circulating and, for his part, made orders to meet Metropolitan Philaret and accompany him within the Tver diocese, along the way from the borders of the Moscow province to the borders of Novgorod through all monasteries, cathedrals and churches with special solemnity. On this trip of the Moscow High Hierarch, Gabriel saw the only case when he could express to his comrade, friend and benefactor those ardent feelings of appreciation and gratitude for all his good deeds to him, with which his heart was filled, although sometimes hesitant. “Living in Tver, on the battle road,” the Right Reverend Gabriel “had the consolation,” as he himself put it, “that he could often see his brethren,” that is, the archpastors. “Every minute I wait for the traveling Eminence Eusebius, and then Demetrius and others... Chambers are ready for them,” he writes to Innocent 136. For the Right Reverend Innocent, to whom Gabriel had become particularly attached with his heart lately, the preparation and reception were more cordial than for others. “And I prepared a new bed for the dear guest, and ordered fish to be caught in my lakes, where, fortunately, they caught a sterlet; but OLEUM ET OPERAM, I see, PERDIDI.” This is what he wrote to Innocent on May 3, 1849. This is all wonderful; but he did not so desire to meet his main and only comrade, at the same time his father and benefactor, Metropolitan Philaret. Initially, on the 26th day of July, Eminence Gabriel gave the Tver Consistory the following proposal: “It has come to my attention that these days His Eminence, Moscow Metropolitan Philaret, is traveling from Moscow to St. Petersburg. I propose that the consistory make every possible arrangement so that the Metropolitan is met and escorted through all the cities and villages of our diocese, which are located on the highway from Moscow to St. Petersburg, in the most decent manner, which depends on us.” The consistory listened to this proposal and presented to the bishop the following opinion on measures for the decent reception of Metropolitan Philaret, which were approved: “Order along the entire tract of the Tver Diocese of the Moscow-St. Petersburg road, in cities and villages, at churches on the bell towers to monitor the passage of the Most Reverend Metropolitan and to ring bells during the passage of His Eminence, unless it is too late; and for the clergy everywhere to be ready at monasteries, monasteries and churches for a meeting where it would please His Eminence to stop, in such a way that if at a church located on the highway there are two priests, then one of them should be in vestments with a cross in the church and with the clergy (but not leave the church), and the other, standing simply and decently with his clergy, can receive his saintly blessing; - in the same place where there is only one priest at the church, he must stand in vestments inside the church and upon his entrance make a proper greeting.” On July 28th there was some modification of this order; His Eminence Gabriel gave the following order: Along the entire route of the Tver diocese of the Moscow-St. Petersburg road, in cities and villages, at churches located near the road, guards should be placed on the bell towers to monitor the passage of the metropolitan, and during his passage, ring bells, unless it is too late; and the clergy, without bothering the traveler with a formal meeting, appear to him in the most decent form at the edge of the road and give him honor with a modest bow, accepting the blessing. But in monasteries and cathedral churches, where if His Eminence had chosen to arrive, he should be greeted formally, that is, in robes, with a cross, except in those cases when he himself does not decide to accept the ceremony. However, in all cities, for example, in Tver, Torzhok and Vyshny Volochyok, it is the responsibility of the cathedral archpriests and city deans to ensure that they do not leave to meet the metropolitan outside the city limits, if the passage happens not too late, so unexpectedly that it would be impossible to guess,” and so on. This was the order of His Eminence Gabriel regarding the meeting of Moscow Metropolitan Philaret in the event of his passage from Moscow to St. Petersburg. His Eminence Gabriel, apparently, was extremely concerned about this meeting and wanted to give it a special, sacred honor characteristic only of the Highest Persons. But alas! he had to now repeat the Latin proverb that he used in his letter to Innocent: ET OLEUM, ET OPERAM PERDIDI. Metropolitan Philaret did not think of traveling from Moscow to St. Petersburg, and the rumor that reached His Eminence Gabriel was a false rumor. Yes, even if there had been a need for Metropolitan Philaret to go from Moscow to St. Petersburg, then, we are sure, such a meeting as Eminence Gabriel planned to give him would have outraged his soul and would have greatly displeased him. He loved simplicity and humility and avoided all unnecessary solemnity and pomp during meetings. And he himself greeted even the Highest Persons simply and unpretentiously, and he advised His Eminence Gabriel, as we have seen, to meet them just as simply and unpretentiously. The meeting invented by the Right Reverend Gabriel could have hampered the traveling high priest himself, stopping him unnecessarily at every parish, cathedral and monastery church standing in his way - and the clergy, who were obliged to wait all day for his passage, and those unfortunate guards who were supposed to be on the bell towers. See No. 4, 1894, unofficial part, pp. 75–89. This article was compiled primarily from the letters of Metropolitan Philaret to the Right Reverend Gabriel, Archbishop of Tver and Kashinsky (see Letters of Metropolitan Philaret to the Highest Persons and various other persons; collected and published by Savva, Archbishop of Tver and Kashinsky. Tver. 1889, pp. 27–92), according to letters from himself Gabriel to Innokenty Borisov (see Tver Diocesan Vedas, 1884, Nos. 14 and 15), according to the notes of the chairman of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities N.I. Murzakevich (Russian Antiquity, February 1889, p. 126 et seq.), according to the notes of the Right Reverend Gennady (Levitsky), who recently lived in retirement in the Zheltikovsky Monastery near the city of Tver, (stored in a manuscript, according to the Biographies of the Tver hierarchs of Archpriest K. Cheredeev and others. See Letters of Metropolitan Philaret to the Highest Persons and to other persons, page 41. Letter to Gabriel 13th dated June 24, 1821. Letter 4, dated April 8, 1841 from Odessa. See Gabriel’s letters to Innocent in the Tver Diocesan Gazette for 1884, No. 14, p. 440. See letter 5 to Innocent, page 441. The Dogmatic Collection conceived by Innocent remained unpublished. See the 1st letter to Gabriel, dated March 13, 1820, in the book: 'Letters of Philaret to the Highest Persons and various other persons', page 29. See letter 2, dated May 5, 1820, page 29. See letter 3, dated October 24, 1820, page 29. See letter 4, dated October 29, 1820, page 30. See letter 5, dated November 1, 1820, page 80. On the occasion of the death of St. Petersburg Metropolitan Michael. (See letter 6 to Gabriel). See Letter 6, pp. 30–32. See Letter 6, pp. 30–31. In March 1821 (See letter 7, p. 32). That is, so that the truth does not arouse hatred. See letter 8th, March 21, 1821, pp. 34–35. To whom exactly is unknown; not to Filaret himself? See letter 9, dated April 12, 1821, page 36. The Bible passages indicated by the Metropolitan say the following: Art. 11 And say to the house of the king of Judah, Hear the word of the Lord: Art. 12. House of David! Thus says the Lord: From the early morning carry out judgment and save the one who is offended from the hand of the offender, so that My wrath does not come out like fire and flare up because of your evil deeds until no one can extinguish it. Art. 13. Behold, I am against you, inhabitant of the valley, rock of the plain, says the Lord, against you, who say: “Who will come against us, and who will enter our dwellings?” Art. 14 But I will visit you according to the fruits of your deeds, says the Lord, and I will kindle a fire in your forest, and it will devour everything around it. Art. 1. Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of My pasture! says the Lord. Art. 2. Therefore thus saith the Lord God of Israel to the shepherds who feed my people: Ye have scattered my sheep, and driven them away, and have not looked after them; Behold, I will punish you for your evil deeds, said the Lord. Art. 3. And I will gather the remnant of My flock from all the countries where I have driven them, and will bring them back to their folds, and they will be fruitful and multiply. See letter 9th, dated April 1st, 1821, pp. 36-37. That is, the death of Metropolitan Michael. See Letter 10th, April 7th, 1821, pp. 37-39. See letter 11th, April 18, 1821, pp. 39–40. Philaret's letter to Gabriel, p. 9, ed. History Society and ancient Moscow, 1868 Letter from Filaret to Gabriel (Rozanov). Readings of the Society of Spirit Lovers. Enlightenment for 1871 No. 4. Philaret's letters to Gabriel in the Readings of the General Spiritual Lovers. enlightenment 1871, no. 4; letter dated June 10, 1821. On page 28 of this article, the time of appointment of the high-ranking official is erroneously indicated. Philaret to the Moscow Department: instead of June 3rd, it should be read on July 3rd. Simeon (Krylov-IIlatonov), born in Moscow province, Dmitrov district in the village. Rogacheve near Pesnosha; Studied at the Lavra Seminary. After being tonsured as a monk, he was subsequently archimandrite of the Moscow Donskoy Monastery, from there he was ordained bishop in Tula in 1891 on February 27. In 1818 he was transferred to Chernigov, where on September 17, 1819 he was granted the rank of archbishop. In 1820, on September 20, he was transferred to Tver, and from there, on July 3, 1821, to Yaroslavl, where he died. Letter from Filaret to Gabriel dated August 2, 1892. Readings in general. love the spirit. enlightenment 1871 No. 4. The report of the Holy Synod was approved on July 17, 1821 (See Moscow Ved. for 1821, No. 96). The Moscow Archbishop was at that time in St. Petersburg: Filaret arrived in Moscow between August 11 and 15. Letters from Filaret to Gabriel, Readings in general. spirit. enlightenment 1871 No. 4, p. 47. St. Petersburg, Seraphim. See Readings in general. loves. spirit. enlightenment 1871 No. 4. See Letters of the Metropolitan. Philaret, published by highly Savva, Letter to Gabriel 15th, dated April 11, 1822, p. 42. Readings in General love spirit. enlightenment 1871 No. 4. Simeon (Krylov-Platonov). Collection of opinions and reviews of Filaret, vol. II, pp. 22–23. Archimandrite Ambrose (Morev) was ordained Bishop of Orenburg on July 17, 1823. Letter 17th, January 16, 1823, pp. 43–44. Readings in general love spirit. enlightenment 1871 No. 4. See letter 18, dated February 20, 1828. See about Jerome the history of the Moscow Theological Academy by Archpriest S. Smirnov, page 449. See letter 20th, dated August 31, 1823, countries. 47. The speech, delivered on August 25, 1823, was published in the second volume of Philaret’s works. Moscow 1871, p. 125. Simeon (Krylov-Platonov), Archbishop of Tver, later Yaroslavl, died on May 27, 1824. Afanasy (Telyatev), Bishop of Dmitrov. Letter 21, dated May 18, 1824, pp. 48, 49. Jerome, mentioned above. See letter 1 of the Right Reverend Gabriel to Innocent. TV Ep. Ved. 1884, pp. 434 and 435. Letter 22, dated January 3, 1826, pp. 49–50. What kind of adventures there were is unknown, although it is obvious that they stemmed from the rector. Grigory Postnikov, later Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, and then rector of the St. Petersburg Academy. How highly Metropolitan Philaret respected Gregory can be seen from Philaret’s review, who says about him in one of his letters: “Although Gregory is my student, I also have something to learn from him.” (See Rus. Star. February 1894, p. 228. Metropolitan Seraphim of St. Petersburg. The matter of the catechism of Metropolitan Philaret is set out in detail in the article by I. N. Korsunsky, placed in volume 2 of the collection published on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Moscow Metropolitan Philaret, countries. 667–825. See letter 23, dated January 19, 1825. See letter 24, dated March 5, 1826, page 52. See letter 25, dated June 30, 1826. Letter 26, dated August 5, 1826, p. 54. Name day of Metropolitan. Moscow Platon (Levshin). Letters from Filaret to Gabriel. Readings in General love spirit. Education 1871 No. 4. In Odessa, according to N.I. Murzakevich, he was harmed a lot by the scoundrel cell attendant D-v, in Tver his home secretary, Iv. Kuzmich Porkhovenko, taken away by gendarmes from Tver to St. Petersburg. Jonah Vasilievsky was Exarch of Georgia from October 1, 1821, retired on March 5, 1832; died June 22, 1849 See Filaret's letters, published. high pr. Savvoy; letter 27, dated February 7, 1827, p. 55. See letter 28, dated November 4, 1827. See Letter 29, November 29, 1827, pp. 57–59. See letter 30th, April 11, 1828. Feofan Tatarsky was retired in 1827 to the Kuryazhsky monastery of the Kharkov diocese, where he died on November 14, 1830. Onisophorus Borovik died on April 20, 1828. Letter 32, dated September 17, 1828, pp. 61–62. Letter 36, dated April 5, 1832. Letter 34, dated January 3, 1830, p. 63. Letter 35, dated January 8, 1831. Letter 37, dated April 21, 1832. Rector Anastasy in 1836 was transferred to the Penza Seminary as rector, in 1834 to the Tula Seminary to the same position, in 1850 he was dismissed from educational service and appointed rector of the Novotorzhsky Borisoglebsky Monastery of the Tver Diocese, where he died in 1868, leading the monastery to extreme desolation. See Historian about him. Moscow spirit. acad. S. Smirnova, p. 452. Letter 38, dated January 16, 1833. Letter 39, dated October 21, 1833, pp. 67–68. Letter 42, dated October 20, 1834, p. 71. Metropolitan. Filaret was, among other things, a teacher of poetry at the Lavra Seminary. Letter 43, dated April 28, 1835. Archimandrite Anastasy. See about him above. See Letter 44, February 4, 1836, pp. 73-75. Kutuzov Roman Nikolaevich, senior candidate of the second year of 1817 at the St. Petersburg Academy, professor at the Ekaterinoslav Seminary, then inspector, dismissed from his post in 1838. Those. the former rector mentioned above. See letter of the 3rd Rev. Gabriel to Innocent, p. 438. The word in the manuscript is not spelled out. Letter to Innocent 2nd, p. 437, dated September 20, 1836. Letter 3 to Innocent, dated October 20, 1836, p. 438. Platon Levshin, Metropolitan of Moscow, died on November 11, 1812. Letter 46, dated January 25, 1837. We have placed this information above. See Tversk. Eparch. Ved. 1884 No. 14, pp. 441–442. This appeal was published in the 1st part of the works of the Right Reverend Gabriel, published in Moscow in 1854. Obviously, the student wanted to be higher than the teacher. Thank God that there was no trouble for the careless student! It is impossible not to note the imprudence of the Right Reverend Gabriel in determining the steward of the bishop's house. Letter 48, dated October 29, 1838. Letter 48, dated October 29, 1838, pp. 79–80. Letter 49, dated May 8, 1839, p. 80. Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky, appointed in 1838 to the rector of the Odessa Seminary, served there until 1841. It is impossible not to notice that the Right Reverend Gabriel opened the Odessa Seminary on the very day on which the Moscow Theological Academy was opened in 1814, and which to this day serves as a particularly solemn day for the academy. The Reverend Gennady, who studied at the Odessa Seminary at its opening and was later an inspector there, wrote in his diary in 1888: “This October 1st 1888 will mark the 50th anniversary of the Odessa Seminary - the birth of my almae matris, which I visited on September 4th of this year. Where did you get rich? And it was sad to remember the illnesses at her birth, despite all the loving care of Archbishop Gabriel, Archimandrite Porfiry and others.” Letter 48, dated October 28, 1838, p. 80. Letter 50, dated October 18, 1839, p. 80. Letter 50, dated October 18, 1839, pp. 82–83. Letter 51, dated April 23, 1840. In Vienna about. Archimandrite Porfiry was rector until 1847; then, until 1855, as the head of the spiritual mission in Jerusalem, on February 14, 1865, he was ordained Bishop of Chigirinsky, Vicar of Kyiv; in 1878 he was retired; died on April 18, 1885 with the rank of member of the Moscow Synodal Office and manager of the Moscow Novospassky Monastery. Letter 52, dated January 21, 1842. Letter 55, dated April 12, 1844. Letter 54, dated February 7, 1843. Letter 56, dated April 26, 1846. It is obvious that Rev. Gabriel imitated his friend and comrade in this case; In terms of the purpose of establishing a monastery and a hermitage, they differed like heaven from earth. Tver Eparch. Led. 1884 No. 14, p. 443. Letter 57, dated May 28, 1846, p. 90. Without a doubt, Rev. Gabriel means that he began to send his writings to the St. Petersburg Committee of Spiritual Censorship, and not to the Moscow one. Letter IV, Rev. Gabriel to Innocent, pp. 439–440. Letter V, April 27th, 1843, p. 442. This was the case before, when dioceses were divided into classes. – Murzakevich’s notes were published in Russian Antiquity, 1889, February. Letter V, Rev. Gabriel to Innocent from March 21, 1848 Tver. diocesan Ved. 1884 No. 14, p. 443. See Biographer. Tversk. hierarchs arch. Cheredeeva, pp. 197–198. See Russian Antiquity, February 1889, pp. 126 ff. About how the Right Reverend Innocent, who arrived in Odessa, responded and looked at those persons who served under the Reverend. Gabriel, you can cite here the testimony of Rev. Gennady, who was then an inspector at the Odessa Seminary. This is what he says in his notes about his first introduction to Innocent and his first visit to the seminary: “In 1848, Innocent arrived. That's how the coward was celebrated. He greeted me menacingly, standing his ground in the hallway. - “Well, what do you have, Gavrilovites?” - “Prayers and fervent desires to be loving and beloved Innocentites.” We, seminarians, saw that he was prejudiced; "crests"! did not leave his lips; - and out of fear they cut themselves even more... But they closed and pulled themselves together. My colleagues will gather together, we will talk, we will excite each other - to stand firmly and unitedly for the honor of the seminary... and they distinguished themselves! He came to the seminary for the first time in June; went into the middle department, where he found M. M. Znamensky, a smart professor, a Muscovite, an archpriest, highly respected by us and the citizens, a clever key keeper, etc. - “Ah! What are you doing here? - “Wonderful science! I love her. Let me listen to your philosophy." - “Well, let’s leave you then”... We arrived at the lower section. And there it is the same, no matter how clever I was to untie the teacher’s teeth... And all the people were capable: Grebinsky, Mstislavsky, Znamensky, Lebednitsev, Arseny Gavrilovich, Pavlovsky, Popruzhenko, Lashkevich. - “There’s no point in going any further: that’s where we’ve probably finished”... They saw us off, gathered with me and, like Job’s friends, we sit in silence, sniffling, reproaching each other with our glances... The philosopher was the first to say: “It’s your fault, brothers! He set a bad example”... (The rector was not at the meeting..., but he himself said: we’ve finished. The next day I go, I apologize that, indeed, the lectures are over, and there were repetitions, preparations for exams. And I hear: “You are weirdos! What I found you doing, they would have retold... Well, if I had come to you with the Governor-General, as I thought, - and then you would have said: “finished”? - No, then they wouldn’t have said that either... A consistor’s minister would accidentally show up in class with papers, and he’d be tongue-tied...” He smiled and started talking about the lack of training in closed educational institutions... how before Nicholas I the pastor “chatted”, and the priest-master “kept silent”... See letter 59, dated May 27, 1848. Joseph (Theological), Bishop of Dmitrov, and then of Voronezh, died in the Voronezh Mitrofanievsky Monastery. Letter 60, dated June 4, 1848. In 1848, senior students of the Moscow Academy from Tver were: Grigory Petrovich Pervukhin, now a cathedral archpriest in Tver; Nikolai Semenovich Volkov (died); in the junior year: Alexander Vasilyevich Sokolov, later rector of the Tver Seminary, now deceased, and Ioann Stefanovich Vasilievsky, now the archpriest of the Voznesenskaya, on the avenue, church in Tver and a member of the consistory. Country bishop's house. Letter 8 Rev. Gabriel to Innocent, pp. 445–446. St. Petersburg metropolitans, predecessors of Anthony. Ibid., page 446, letter 9. See letter 9, page 447. See letter 15 of Gabriel to Innocent, p. 452.