His Eminence Archbishop Smaragd (Kryzhanovsky) at the Oryol and Ryazan Sees and his death

“With eloquent ceremony,” Rev. Smaragd left Astrakhan 1 a few days before Christmas, where he did too much in such a short period 2 . He arrived in Orel on the night of January 5, 1845. On the 3rd and 5th he took over control 4. Metropolitan Filaret welcomed Smaragd that the Oryol “Diocese was waiting for your glorious activity and, with the help of God, will take advantage of it” 5 . This was true in both respects 6 . Although the immediate predecessor (June 22, 1840 – November 12, 1844), Evlampy Pyatnitsky († March 12, 1862 in the Sviyazhsk Mother of God Monastery) assured the Moscow High Hierarch that he “did not abandon difficult matters” 7, but in fact it was different. Reverend Evlampius led a secluded cell life, was inaccessible to petitioners, loved only extremely long services 8, and was poorly involved in diocesan administration, which is why all office work proceeded slowly, and even so that great bribery developed in the bishop's house and the Consistory 9. Suffice it to say that a strange case has arisen about the cathedral itself, which was consecrated by Evlampius, but was not accepted into the ecclesiastical department 10. The apostle's house was poor and in need of assistance 11, but the monks did not go there 12. Everything required energetic and severe correction 13 . With all this, the Oryol “diocese turned out to be pleasing to Smaragd and favorable to health 14, which he fell in love with, becoming close to it with all the strength of his soul 15. The administration gave him the reputation of an “excellent administrator” 16, “the most famous of the deceased Oryol eparchs, the unforgettable Smaragd”..., “a worthy representative of the initiative of a worthy cause” 17, with attention and determination penetrating everywhere and into all the little things. And in Orel, many matters were decided by him directly - without a Consistory 18, or in private letters 19, due to his always disinclined attitude towards litigation and reluctance to spoil the reputation of members of the clergy through formal proceedings. However, Smaragd did not take on anything that could not be overseen personally and therefore did not accept a monastery for himself as abbot, although he was prompted to do so by material needs 20 . Smaragd corrected the dilapidation of the archpriest's house, arranging (with the help of subordinate clerks and supposedly guilty seminarians) an excellent garden with highway paths 21, and expanded the premises of the Consistory with an archive and diocesan care for the poor of the clergy 22, and in his presentation to the Holy Synod he touchingly noted how the archiean brethren and retinue live in the basement, where the singers huddle “in excessive cramped conditions”, “in the summer the servants wander here and there around the yard, and in the winter they warm themselves in the fraternal and singer’s kitchens” 23. Apxiep. Smaragd arranged all this 24 and set his choir so high 25 that they were admired in St. Petersburg when he was a member of the Holy Synod there 26, having managed to accumulate quite a significant capital for the singers 27. The Pavlovsk Cathedral, built extremely poorly 28, suffered such severe damage that it was impossible to serve since 1851. Smaragd, with a jealousy that was unpleasant for many and partly bordered almost on confession 29, initiated successful petitions to win over the local nobility to make material sacrifices for the completion of the St. Paul Cathedral and suffered in this matter many other troubles, labors and grave sorrows 30, but also took care of the construction of a house for the cathedral 31. Along with this, he himself took further measures to create a new magnificent (Trinity) cathedral church at the bishop's house 32, in which he thought “to lie down for awakening in eternity” 33. Meanwhile, on May 26, 1848, Oryol suffered a terrible fire, which devastated it three miles long and three miles wide, then 1,237 state-owned and private houses were destroyed and losses amounted to 3,425,000 rubles. middle, so the city almost did not exist 34. At this time, four churches also burned: Holy Cross, Pokrovskaya, Preobrazhenskaya and Sretenskaya. Without resorting to treasury benefits, Rev. Smaragd, who had benefactors among the Oryol merchants 35, again began to energetically collect from everywhere, in particular from rich Astrakhan residents, for example. from the fishmonger A.A. Goloshchapov 36 , and used everything he collected to restore the damaged churches, but he was especially diligent and worked a lot about the Vvedensky Convent 37 , which was solemnly opened by him again on October 31, 1848 at the Church of the Nativity of Christ 38 . At this monastery, Smaragd “intended” to establish a shelter for spiritual maidens of poor condition 39, then he petitioned for the opening of a nunnery and invested significant capital in this 40, achieving the fact that, “only thanks to the persistence and tireless efforts of this archpastor, the area of ​​the burnt Vvedensky monastery was placed at the disposal of the diocesan authorities, and therefore Oryol The diocesan girls’ school was founded and is located in the very center of the city, in the most crowded and best part of it, and at the same time completely isolated from the city noise and traffic” 41. In general, this archpastor built many churches and huge buildings in Orel 42, using special instructions 43, and he consecrated most of the first ones personally, traveling not only to district cities, but also to more remote points 44. Reverend Smaragd revealed zeal for the observance of church regulations in all layers of the flock, tried to ensure church splendor and decorum 45 and avoided all innovations, even fearing that the court regent would introduce them 46, which he also took care of in theological educational institutions 47. He was attentive to the Seminary, loved to conduct public examinations in a solemn manner, dismissed the inspector Archimandrite from the spiritual school service. Irinarch for opposition to his immediate superiors and replaced him with Jonathan (Rudnev, †apxibishop of Yaroslavl) 48, but after his own audit in 1854, in almost all parts of the administration, he interceded and gave awards to almost all employees 49. Reverend Smaragd in Orel, as in other dioceses, did his best to attract the best clergy to his cathedral city and surrounded himself with prominent and competent assistants in administration and clergy 50, everywhere he took care of the selection of good clergy 51, which is why it was not easy for him to get a responsible position 52, although he called worthy ones from other dioceses 53. In an effort to raise the mental level among pastors 54, he established libraries, tried to provide material support for the clergy and did not allow them to be offended in this regard under the pretext of extortions 55, and showed special diligence in placing surplus people of clergy in civil departments 56. Some care was taken to establish a proper anti-schism mission, which the archpastor wanted to “most diligently promote,” but there were no completely suitable assistants 57, and individual measures sometimes caused great complications and troubles 58. “Especially loving monastic monasteries and monastics and invariably wishing them well-being” in the Oryol diocese 59, its archpastor took systematic measures to streamline monastic life and existing monasteries, to elevate spiritual and educational principles in them through the proper persons 60. Under Smaragda, the Bolkhov Mother of God-All Saints women's community was established again (in 1851) by the Tula landowner Sofia Iosifovna Trubitsina (monastic Vera, in the schema of Sophia, † January 15, 1885) 61, and also created (in 1851) 70 versts from Bryansk and 12 from the village of Moracheva at the swamp river Kletna (at the site of the appearance of the icon of St. Nicholas under Peter I) the men's Trinity-Nikolskaya Kletnevsky monastery, assigned to the archbishop's house and called the “monastery”, which monastery was founded with the permission of the archbishop. Smaragda - Cossack of Chernigov province, Mglinsky district, village of Zikeeva, Stepan Klimov Feshchenko 62. From private facts, it is noted during the Oryol period that Smaragd sheltered and protected in the Bolkhov Trinity Monastery 63 and with exceptional solemnity he himself buried the famous Altai missionary Archimandrite Makariy Glukharev († May 18, 1847), a senior comrade in St. Petersburg and a good friend in Kiev 64 . Oryol activity of the Reverend. Smaragda is all the more remarkable because it was accomplished in the absence of uniform support from those around him. This is what we read in his letter to Fr. To Hierotheus from St. Petersburg on October 30, 1853: “Everything... relative... is absolute justice. And therefore, with a power of attorney, I entrust the unrest, the disorder, the omission to be corrected soon... There is no one to choose from among officials... Only ignorance, laziness, self-interest, lofty dreams and malicious intent in all its strength. I have always been and am afraid for the evil....., in which I do not find a single one... according to my desire. Some scoundrels, such as J., it would be necessary to sweep him out of the court of justice soon. The Lord is my witness that when A.V.I. was weak, I suffered, and did all the work myself with..., I lost my eyes, my heart was tormented. The newly sent... does not understand much... Tell S... that I will soon organize an audit, maybe I will ask the official from here to ensure that everything is in order, and in full accordance with the laws; and so that there is fear and apprehension" 65. Apparently, this energetic activity of Smaragd was sympathetically appreciated at the top and had favor. In April 1853, he was summoned to the Synod 66 for a year-long session and before leaving, with rare foresight, he gave detailed instructions on the progress of diocesan affairs 67, as he always generally took care that the clergy did not suffer from the burden of delays and indecent costs 68. It seems that Bishop Oryol was not very happy about this difference, 69 which significantly deprived him of his activity, alienating him from diocesan life and dooming him to serve various bureaucratic duties in St. Petersburg. The Synod did not then have scope for extensive work, 70 and Smaragd did not actually show outstanding participation in it. He lived entirely in the interests of the diocese and followed it with unflagging attention, as evidenced by letters from the capital to Fr. Hierotheus. Nevertheless, his stay in St. Petersburg was apparently accompanied by success, since on April 11, 1854, Smaragd was awarded the order. Alexander Nevsky in attention to Orlovskaya’s “long-term and diligent service to the church and pastoral care for the spiritual good of the flock entrusted to him” 71, which he, indeed, cared for vigilantly and beneficially 72. The archpastor himself thought that - in addition to the construction of the cathedral - “other articles during the 12-year administration made sufficient progress. The monasteries were decorated with new churches - internal and external. In the apostle's house, many missing but very necessary buildings were completed, and this was done without asking the treasury for assistance. Especially the religious schools have been brought to the best, according to his concept, condition” 73 . All of the above could inspire Vladyka Oryol with good hopes about the future, but in fact, for a long time, menacing clouds had been gathering over Smaragd’s head - and, for example, at the end of 1849 there was a rumor about a transfer to Pskov, and in April 1853 somewhere else 74 . It was from Orel that dark rumors about the extortion of Smaragd, and the Metropolitan himself, intensified. Filaret reminded him afterwards (April 18, 1859) about the hotel he had built for the “not free quartering of the clergy” and about the importance of the bishop’s secretary 75 . The artificially inflated enmity with the Oryol governor, Prince Pyotr Ivanovich Trubetskoy, also did a lot of damage. Some other hostile persons also joined in this 76 . In the end, “certain errors” 77 were accidentally brought to the attention of the Sovereign regarding the management of the Oryol diocese. Among them, undoubtedly, the story of the priest Semov was of decisive importance. It began with the protection of the latter by Smaragd, and then, through intervention from St. Petersburg, it turned into a malicious lawsuit between the rural empire and its archbishop, who found himself under investigation and even among members of his clergy... Thus, the smallest matter of purely local significance turned into the greatest scandal not only in the Oryol region, but throughout Russia. In addition to the sickly fanatic and litigious Fr. Semova - the St. Petersburg authorities were solely to blame for this, for allowing such incredible complications. This is undoubtedly due to the very essence of the whole process and the irresistible fact that recent history has already rehabilitated Smaragda 78. However, the people in charge were least inclined to admit this, and they tried to put out the fire by eliminating the enemy from the scene of action. Under such conditions, the transfer of Vladyka Oryol became an actual necessity and was arranged at the first opportunity with possible plausibility. On June 5, 1858, Smaragd was moved from the third-class Oryol diocese to the second-class Ryazan 79 following the dismissal of the bishop. Gavriil Gorodkov († April 7, 1862), whom he once succeeded in Mogilev, and then led the whole land on his journey. For Smaragd, who had traveled around the world quite often and involuntarily, this new movement was a great disappointment and a heavy blow. At first he even fell ill 81 and thought about retiring and settling privately in Orel (in the house of his secretary I.A. Bonch-Bruevich) 82 , but after a terrible struggle with thoughts 83 he decided that it was better to read the entire book of life to the end 84 , submitting to these “unforeseen temptations” 85 . The Synodal decree on the transfer dated July 19, 1858 was received in the Oryol Consistory on June 27, - and, having said goodbye to the Oryol flock in the Church of the Epiphany, Smaragd quietly left Oryol in a roundabout way, to ford the Oka River 86. There is not the slightest resemblance here to the departure from Astrakhan, but as for the essence, Smaragd always considered the Oryol flock “dearest” and “beloved” 87, and we have outside evidence that even after “the clergy of the Oryol diocese regretted his departure” 88, for a long time “preserving the memory of him as a wise and good archpastor” 89, cheerfully “standing on the Oryol guard” 90. This is quite understandable and in every possible way possible, for the very near future has justified and confirmed the most important undertakings and activities of Smaragd by the orders and attention of his successor, the Reverend. Polycarp (Radkevich) 91. On Saturday, July 19, 1858, Smaragd arrived in Ryazan for the last stage of his multi-rebellious earthly wanderings. At first he “cryed and suffered greatly for the Oryol bishopric,” but then “he completely calmed down in his lot” and even believed that he was “brought out of the depths of the evils” of the Oryol 92, and, finally, in Ryazan he fell in love 93. The archpastor was already burdened with years and morally depressed, meanwhile there were “proposals to dismiss him from service” 94 . The Ryazan diocese, huge and not restless, had too many material and moral neglect 95; however, the ruler did not weaken to work for her benefit 96 “without ceremony or cunning” 97 and with the same solemn simplicity 98 he annually undertook trips across the vast region, despite his ailments 99 . His church-building activities here are commendable and significant. For Ryazan, the memory of the Grand Duke of Ryazan Roman Olgovich, who suffered in the Horde on July 19, 1270, 100 was especially sacred, but there was no church to him in the entire region. Smaragd conceived the idea of ​​honoring the blessed martyr, on the day of whose death he arrived in Ryazan, and erected a church in his honor in the Episcopal “Novopavlovskaya” dacha (1 verst from Ryazan), setting up a house there for the summer stay of local bishops 101. The iconostasis is remarkable in concept, for in the upper tiers of the latter, in several groups, the faces of saints are depicted, named after the former Ryazan bishops, who represented and sanctified the entire history of the Ryazan bishopric. When the royal doors were opened, in the altar a majestic icon of the forty martyrs of Sebaste appeared in the altar before the eyes of those praying, among which were the “angels” of the creator himself by baptism (Alexander) and by monasticism (Smaragd). With deliberate solemnity and special consolation, the consecration of this church was carried out on September 20, 1861 - on the day of the episcopal thirtieth anniversary of Smaragd, who uttered a touching word 102, and - according to the chronicler - “for this most favorable feat for Ryazan, the Bishop truly acquired the sincere gratitude of the Ryazan flock.” He also took care of the renewal of the Archangel Cathedral 103; here again we find the icon built by him of the forty martyrs of Sebaste, among whom are St. Smaragd is depicted above the place where (on the right side at the southern door) rests the Archbishop of Ryazan (since April 13, 1651) Misail 104, killed (in April 1656) near the village of Konobeeva near Shatsk by the Mordovians 105, deeply revered by the Reverend. Smaragdom 106. In general, the latter always took care of churches 107, developed and encouraged church building 108, provided it in every possible way both in the present and in the future 109, although he especially put forward that here the moral interests of spiritual progress should be pursued primarily, as well as charitable and auxiliary - in the spirit of piety - ideas, but not actual material buildings, acquisitions and donations 110. At the same time, Smaragd did not forget about maintaining for a long time 111 and under him 112 the dilapidated historical building of the bishop's house 113, as the former palace of the appanage princes of Ryazan 114. He took great care of orphans - and, for example, the number of such girls in the Ryazan school of clergy with the installation of this archpastor in Ryazan increased more and more 115, thanks to his special attention to the improvement of this institution in all respects 116. Energetic instructions were made 117 to streamline the Consistory with strict indoctrination to all ranks about courtesy, selflessness and readiness to be useful to petitioners. A lot of effort was put into providing for the clergy, a question that became more complicated with the liberation of the peasants. For this purpose, diocesan committees were established to improve the life of the clergy from the apostle, the governor and the manager of the chamber of state property 118. This was the case in Ryazan, where Smaragd also took part 119, but energetically opposed excessive secular interference, defended both the authority and interests of the clergy 120, not sparing any influential persons 121 and equally protecting both senior and junior clergy in everything 122. Smaragd weaned everyone away from capricious complaints about the clergy and elevated the latter in the eyes of parishioners, who began to treat him more respectfully and cautiously 123 . But there was not the slightest connivance here. On the contrary, Smaragd, even in Ryazan, was strict and inspired awe, not leaving out little things without comment even in clothing 124 and certainly demanding earthly worship from all spiritual people 125. Everything was directed exclusively towards the establishment of pastoral service, where the Ryazan Bishop called and blessed everyone to work 126, for the sake of which he did not hesitate to remove the elders and replace them with more capable ones from the younger ones 127. He had no personal bias here, and in the interests of the cause he accepted every fair word 128, willingly apologizing for his harshness 129. Smaragd did not inflict captious harassment 130, did not tolerate slander and quarrels and preferred to reconcile in every possible way 131, avoiding formal courts, so as not to forever spoil the reputation of this or that clergy 132. Himself a lover and skillful performer of solemn church services, Smaragd taught others to church splendor 133. Theological and educational institutions were kept under vigilant control so that they functioned properly and successfully 134. Attention was paid to monasteries in terms of their organization - with the introduction of hostels and auxiliary institutions 135. And along with all this, Smaragda also had to temporarily manage the Tula diocese in Ryazan 136. And in Ryazan, Smaragd enjoyed general respect. True, even with his very “dark and expressive physiognomy of the eastern type” he instilled fear, aggravated by many of his features, not alien to some eccentricities. “A man of a quick and broad mind, a decisive and powerful character,” Smaragd, however, “was sometimes strict and harsh to the extreme, and sometimes he was kind and condescending to the extreme” 137, filling his subordinates with “boundless gratitude for his lively and heartfelt participation” 138. Smaragd was considered a “wise archpastor” 139, and he knew how to speak simply, frankly and so kindly that he seemed like a wise and kind father 140, who had “an open shirt” 141. And after his death, Smaragda and secular people spoke of him with respect and sympathy, defending his memory 142. But the strength was already broken, and at the age of 66 it was not easy for the ruler to manage the new vast eparchy, and plethora and obesity 143 turned out to be too burdensome in old age, although, having a naturally athletic body 144, the stubborn ruler with inflexibility fought his ailments and weaknesses to the end. Before Ryazan, his health was generally strong 145 and at the beginning remained satisfactory there 146, but in 1859 he suffered “a severe illness in which Smaragd was turned over on the sheets, did not control his arms and legs and did not even have the strength to sign papers to the authorities” 147, however he recovered and hurried on a detour around the eparchy 148. Traces of rheumatism constantly made themselves felt (in the legs) 149 and - after some reinforcement 150 - again showed up in frequent ailments 151; On January 23, 1863, Smaragd already called himself a frail old man, adding: “I am spending this winter painfully” 152, and on June 4 he reported to Fr. To Hierotheus: “since February, he fell into a serious rheumatic illness throughout his whole body, and especially in his arms and legs; from which, despite all the medical benefits, he endured hellish torment; was unable to control his legs or use his hands; “I couldn’t sign even the simplest papers to the authorities” and recovered so poorly that he was tired even of this writing 153 and found it difficult to answer 154, although he had previously been tireless in this area 155. He lived only by faith, confessing and commanding Fr. This is the conviction of Jepotheus: “honor the doctor against his needs (Sir.38:1), but rather resort to the heavenly Physician of souls and bodies, remembering that we cannot all escape death” 156. Finally, suffering from severe dropsy from rheumatism, Smaragd still did not go to bed, but spent the last days of his life in a chair and “died on his feet” 157. He rested in the Lord 158 after a short but serious illness (on Monday) on November 11, 1863, at 5 1/4 o'clock in the afternoon, to the general sorrow of the Ryazan diocese 159 - after 32 years and one month from the day of his episcopal priesthood, having lived only 67 years and 8 months with two days inclusive 160. Transferred on November 15 to the Nativity Cathedral, the body of the deceased bishop was buried on Saturday the 16th with reverent solemnity 161 by the Reverend. Dmitrovsky Leonid (Krasnopevkov, † December 15, 1876 Archbishop of Yaroslavl) 162 and - with a huge crowd of people (at least ¼ of all residents of Ryazan) - transferred for burial to the renewed and chosen by him for this Archangel Cathedral 163, according to the will 164, and there and to others Many of his expensive things were given to Ryazan churches 165. How much Ryazan mourned its archpastor, respected during his lifetime 166, can be seen from the fact that - on the occasion of the death of Smaragd - all public pleasures in the city were stopped for 9 days of mourning 167 and a “huge wake” was organized 168. The saint's last testament to his spiritual children is the touching request of the quatrain that adorns his grave, composed by him shortly and as if in anticipation of his death 169: Fathers and brothers! I ask you incessantly: For Me the King - Pray to Christ constantly, May He lead me to the eternal kingdom And let him infuse where the life-giving light is. See “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1895, No. 18, pp. 457, 451. In the case of the construction of the cathedral sacristy in Astrakhan (pp. 1070, 36), it is not superfluous to add some particulars. Smaragd himself appointed several sakkos, omophorions and stoles for exclusion, which is why the cathedral prot. Andrei Ivanov and sergeant Fr. Vasily Ivanovsky petitioned for the construction of priestly vestments and stoles from them. On February 26, 1842, Smaragd gave the following resolution: “How the cathedral sacristy was reduced to complete impoverishment under the former bishops; so that during the bishop's services there is nothing for the priests and deacons and other church servants to put on: this should be done according to this report immediately. Let us allow: a) that the proposed alterations of the sacristy items be carried out under the watchful supervision of both the clergyman and the cathedral archpriest himself, and b) that upon completion of such alterations, everything in detail (which is required by due clarity in terms of amount and materials:) is reported to me.” See the file of the Archive of the Astrakhan Spirit. Consistory for No. 37,740 households, a ibid. No. 39.162 states the following. For two miters of white and gold glazet and for a third crimson one, the nun of the Moscow Novodevichy Convent, Elizaveta, was paid 2,370 rubles. 41 1/3 kop. banknotes (fol. 42), which includes payment for new materials (for example, rhinestones and amethysts), added to pearl stones taken from the old miter No. 2, “barely usable due to age and disrepute,” from the decoration of the icon of the Dormition of the Most Holy. The Virgin Mary, sewn on scarlet satin, and from the aureole of the same icon of the Assumption (fol. 5: report of the senior cathedral brethren headed by the keymaster, Archpriest I.F. Pavlinov, who was then holding the position of cathedral archpriest, and the elder merchant M.I. Kozlov dated September 16, 1843). The installation of new mitres in Moscow and the payment for them with nun Elizabeth were carried out through the intermediary of the housekeeper of the bishop's house, Hieromonk Hierotheus, who went there, who on August 8, 1844 asked to review the whole matter, “quite significant in monetary interest,” “and, if there is no doubt, to provide him with a receipt for the undoubted completion the whole matter on the subject of his business trip to Moscow" (l. 45 rev.), and on August 26 the Consistory decided to announce Fr. Archpastoral gratitude to Hierotheus with inclusion in the formal list (fol. 49 ver.). This matter, however, did not happen without some troubles for Smaragd, about which see Archpriest. N.T. Kamensky (apxhip. Nikanor) in the “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1884, No. 11, p. 192, and separately: A brief history of the Astrakhan diocese, p. 113. “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1899, No. 13, p. 648, and in “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1906, No. 20, p. 596, January 5 is shown, just like Fr. Hierotheus in “Memoirs” on fol. at 40 rev. G.M. Pyasetsk iy, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 940–941, as well as in the “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1888, No. 17, p. 980. See "Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment" 1870, book. XII, p. 32, where for the Oryol period the obviously erroneous date “Apr. 22, 1835,” – obviously – instead of 1845. For the Oryol period, see “Memoirs” of Fr. And ero fairy on l. 40 rev. – 82 (and according to the Ryazan edition on l, 40 rev. – 83) See “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, pp. 33–34. † Apxiep. Nikanor (Kamensky), Collected Works (Kazan 1909), p. 546. Cf. The life of Archimandrite Nikodim Kazantsev in the “Theological Bulletin” 1910, No. 12, p. 648, that Evlampius “tormented the Orthodox and the clergy with long services,” as well as P.A. Possiev in the “Historical Bulletin” 1909, No. 8, p. 418 (–419) that the piety and long services of Evlampius were harmful to the cause and useful only to consistory lawyers. However, the same course of action, with long church services, Rev. Evlampius also remained at the Vologda department, about which see E.V. Gryaznov. From the school memoirs of a former seminarian at the Vologda Seminary (Vologda 1909), p. 203, and in the “Vologda Diocesan Gazette” 1903, No. 10, pp. 283–284. See “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1895, No. 15, p. 391. See also the letters of M. Philaret to Evlampius in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1877, I, pp. 19, 21–22. See letters from M. Philaret to Smaragda in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, pp. 39, 41. Ibid. 1871, book. XIII, p. 36. See letters from Smaragd to Innocent in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 17, p. 592. It is only in this sense that one can accept the anecdotal message † P.I. Bartenev (in the “Russian Archive” 1903, book III, p. 480) with the following content: “The predecessor of Smaragd in Orel was Evlampius, a humble man. Taking his place, Smaragd announced: “Eulampius ruled with the spirit of meekness, and I will rule with a stick on the bone.” See letters from M. Philaret to Smaragda in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, p. 34. “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1906, No. 20, p. 596. † G. M. Lyasetsky, History of the Oryol diocese, p. 941. This is what he said at the consecration of the Peter and Paul Cathedral under Bishop Polycarp. You. Yak. Vasiliev, about which see † G.M. P Yasetsky. An outline of the history of cathedral churches in the provincial city of Orel on the occasion of the centenary of the Peter and Paul Cathedral in the Oryol Diocesan Gazette, 1897, No. 34, p. 1256, and according to the reprint on page 112. See “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1895, No. 15, pp. 391–342. See Fr. Hierotheus in letters to him apxhiep. Smaragda on page 56 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 7–8, page 980, that this archpastor “in letters often (sometimes) resolved such matters, gave such advice that saved the Diocesan Administration from fruitless correspondence and unpleasant worries.” See letters from M. Philaret to Smaragda in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, p. 36. About this, see † prot. P.F. Polidorova, Most Reverend Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky: an outline of his life (St. Petersburg 1870), p. 85 note, and † apxhiep. Savva, Chronicle of my life IV (St.-Tr. Sergius Lavra 1902), p. 337, and regarding the participation of seminarians, we were informed by one Orlovets A.V. G-m. † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 954 ff.; †apxiep. Nikanor (Kamensky), Oryol Archpastors, Archierean House, its sights, lands and personnel in Collected Works (Kazan 1909), pp. 547–548. See † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, p. 942. See letters from M. Philaret to Smaragda in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, p. 47. See and †apxiep. Nikanor (Kamensky), Collected Works, p. 549. † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol diocese, pp. 942–945. "Church and Social Bulletin" VI (1879), No. 34, p. 6a. This is undoubtedly because by the 90s of the 19th century the entire building had again fallen into ruin and required major repairs, as evidenced by the “Journals of the Commission for the Restoration of the Oryol Peter and Paul Cathedral” in the “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” of 1894, Nos. 20, 24, 32–48, 50; 1895, Nos. 23, 24, 26–28, 32, 41, 54–52. Cp. ibid. 1891, no. 51–52, pp. 1527, 1528. Smaragd himself called himself “another confessor for the St. Paul Cathedral,” but the comparison with the latter’s patron, St. Paul the Confessor: see “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 7–8, p. 978 and separately in our published “Letters of Archbishop Smaragd to Archimandrite Hierotheus” (St. Petersburg 1911) on p. 54. Wed. about this in Smaragd’s letters to Innocent in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 20, pp. 700, 701–702. The resolution of the Oryol provincial assembly of nobles, which met on December 11, 1889, even states that “the former Eminence Smaragd proposed to the nobility in 1856 to donate 30,000 rubles. ser.": see † G.M. Pyasetsky: History of the Oryol Diocese, p. 970, in the Historical Sketch of Cathedral Churches in the provincial city of Orel in the Oryol Diocesan Gazette, 1897, No. 14–15, pp. 471 ff.; No. 27, pp. 971–972; No. 29, pp. 1051–1053, 1056–1057; No. 34, p. 1259 and according to the imprint on p. 14 seq., 81–82, 85–87, 90, 115, as well as in the letters of the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus in Christian Reading 1911, no. 7–8, pp. 974–975, 977–979, 981–982, 986; No. 9, p. 1138 and separately on pp. 50–56, 53–55, 57, 62, 69. See also the article: Church celebration on the occasion of the renovation and consecration of the Oryol Peter and Paul Cathedral in the “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1895, no. 51–52, pp. 1520–1551. See † prot. P.F. Polidorova, His Eminence Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, p. 85 approx. Wed. “Church and Social Bulletin” VI (1879), No. 26, p. 5c, and † prot. P.F. Polidorova, Eminence Polikarpov, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, p. 85 approx. See letters apxhiep. Smaragda to Innocent in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 20, p. 702, and his Letters to the archimandrite. To Hierophey on pp. 91, 110 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1246; No. 11, p. 1369. See also † G.M. Pyasetsky, Essay on the history of cathedral churches in the provincial city of Orel in the Oryol Diocesan Gazette, 1897, No. 34, p. 1259 and from the reprint on pp. 104–115, as well as from † Prot. P.F. Polidorova, His Eminence Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, p. 85 approx. See Smaragd’s letters to Innocent in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 17, p. 593. See † N.S. Lyskova, The Deceased Estate in the Complete Collection of His Works, published by Niva, vol. XX (St. Petersburg, 1903), pp. 126–127. See Smaragd’s letters to Innokenty in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 17, pp. 595–596: “...However, with the help of God, I managed, without the slightest assistance from the Treasury, to restore and restore the burnt churches to their previous form. This was especially facilitated by the kind, first-ranking merchant Goloshchapov, a fish merchant who was familiar to me from the Astrakhan diocese that was in my administration [see. above 1912, No. 10, p. 1069], from whom, I must admit, I asked for help for the restoration of the devastated shrine of the Lord... He also sent help to the convent that burned down, where he intended to establish a shelter for spiritual maidens of poor condition, following the example of your Odessa one.” † G . Pyasyatsky: History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 552–554; Historical sketches of the Oryol Vvedensky nunnery (Oryol 1896), pp. 92–124 and in the “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1889, No. 5, pp. 351–360; No. 7, pp. 457–469; No. 8, pp. 562–575; 1890, No. 11, pp. 763–778; No. 12, pp. 816–835; No. 13, pp. 885–899. Wed. in our publication of letters apxiep. Smaragda to S.I. Trubetskoy in “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 6, i (mixture). See Smaragd's letters to Innocent in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 17, pp. 595–596 (above pp. 182, 34). See † prot. P.F. Polidorova, Most Reverend Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, p. 61. See Historical sketch of the establishment and development of the Oryol Diocesan Women's School in the Oryol Diocesan Gazette, 1899, No. 17, pp. (638 ff.) 641–642 ff. “Church and Social Bulletin” VI (1879), No. 34, pp. 6 a–b. See Description of churches, parishes and monasteries of the Oryol diocese, vol. I (Orel 1905), p. 41. Ibid. I, pp. 8, 23, 51, 260, 302, 312, 315, 327, 402, 447, 461, 464, 465, 478, 484, 488. For this reason, in the cathedral, Smaragd appointed representative, vocal and lively people for services and dedications, as evidenced by the still living priest of the village of Vyshny Olshany in Livensky district, Fr. Evgraf Nikolaevich Ostrogorsky, ordained by this archpastor as a deacon on December 25, 1854, and as a priest on the new year 1855. See letters from M. Philaret to Smaragda in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, pp. 36 and 38. So, according to the testimony of Fr. Evgr. Nick. Ostrogorsky (pp. 182, 43), Smaragd, when visiting the Livensky Theological School, inspired the Rector, Archpriest. I.I. Mertsalov to keep students under strict discipline so that freethinking and disobedience do not penetrate. See “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 5–6, p. 759, 3 and separately: Letters of the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus, pp. 24, 5. † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 959, 946, 951. Even some of the features of Smaragd did not interfere with choosing and distinguishing efficient people. According to the story by † N. S. Leskov, everyone knows the story of the guilty cleric who achieved the mercy of the Oryol ruler only by choosing the most difficult block to cut wood with him and forcing him to hit himself. All this applies to Konstantin Pavlovich Orlov (nicknamed “Koblek”), who served as a psalm-reader at the Mtsensk Cathedral and suffered penance for drunkenness and spilling the Holy Gifts. Smaragd made him a subdeacon, and K.P. Orlov remained in this post for more than 50 years, dying on January 11, 1907. According to the review of the Reverend. Ekaterinburg Mitrofan, whose father is you. Peter. Afonsky († 1875), as rector of the Trinity Church in Mtsensk, was a colleague here with K. P. Orlov - the latter was “a man exceptionally capable for this position and, one might say, a wonderful subdeacon.” According to Fr. Evgr. Nick. Ostrogorsky, Smaragd adhered to such a system as to appoint educated pastors to the best parishes. Therefore, when someone who graduated from the Seminary in the second category asked for one of these, he first wrote a resolution “to offer to students” and, if the latter were not available, only after that did he satisfy the requests of the second-class students. In the cities, Smaragd first of all tried to assign seminary (or school) teachers and only if they refused did he give places to Seminary students. It is also known that, at the request of his successor in the Oryol department, Rev. Polycarp, Smaragd responded from Ryazan that - in his opinion - “Deacons in clergy vacancies constitute a church plague in parishes” (see † Archpriest P.F. Polidorov, His Eminence Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, p. 67, 1). See † G.M. Pyasetsky, Essay on the history of cathedral churches in the provincial city of Orel in the Oryol Diocesan Gazette, 1897, No. 36, pp. 1360, 98 and from the reprint on pp. 157, 98. Thus, Smaragd was summoned from Astrakhan by Smaragd to become rector of the Karachevsky Cathedral from Orlovets Vasily Dimitrievich Lyubomirsky: see Oryol Diocesan Gazette, 1866, No. 21, pp. 1192–1193. See † prot. P.F. Polidorova, His Eminence Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, p. 40, that the latter ordered to support the libraries established at Smaragd and replenish them with copies of spiritual books and journals, so that the priests themselves would read sermons and give them to the people. Wed. y † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 960–961. Wed. u † o. M.Ya. Moroshkin on page 148. Met. Filaret wrote to Smaragd on January 1, 1847: “Out of concern for the common good, just in case, I would ask you to tell me your thoughts, what means could be used to give work and bread to the children of the clergy, in some dioceses already in a burdensome number remaining for assignment to places of service” (see “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book XIII, page 35). For M. Philaret’s own thoughts on this subject, see his opinion of June 15, 1853, “On the excess of people of clergy, which is burdensome in some epochs” (ibid. 1883, book II, section III, pp. 5–12). Wed. back in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 5–6, p. 761; No. 7–8, pp. 977, 984 and separately: Letters from the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus, pp. 26, 53, 60. See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus in Christian Reading 1911, no. 7–8, pp. 984–985; No. 9, pp. 1145–1146 and separately on pp. 60–61, 77–78. Archim. Hierobey writes (see “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 9, p. 1146 and separately: “Letters of Archbishop Smaragd to Father Hierotheus” on p. 78): “On the occasion of slanderous denunciations against the Archpastor and the sharp, allegedly, measures taken against the perpetrators of unrest in a parish infected with schism, a special stewardship of the Diocesan Administration and subsequent Diocesan administration. But slander remained slander after that; and the innocence of the Archpastor has been clarified.” If the “Semov case” is meant here, then see about it below in a special appendix. See Fr. Hierotheus in letters to him from Smaragda on page 113 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, page 1509. For this purpose, Smaragd tried hard to attract back to the Oryol diocese Fr. Macapius (Mich. Nik. Ivanova, † September 6, 1860), the Optina elder, also known for his spiritual and educational publishing: see “Christian Reading” 1913, No. 1, pp. 119, 4. Wed. ibid. 1911, No. 5–6, p. 767 approx. (and separately: Letters from Archbishop Smaragd to Archimandrite Hierotheus, p. 32, 2), that - placed in the monastery - Sevsky caretaker Hieromonk Pimen can be engaged in scientific work on conducting and drawing up the Church Charter, for teaching in theological schools of the Oryol diocese. See about this in detail in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 5–6, pp. 771 ff. (separately: Letters from Archbishop Smaragd to Archimandrite Iepofey, p. 37 ff.) and “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities”, vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, pp. 1–46 (mixture). See about this in † V.V. Zverinsky, Materials for historical and topographical research on Orthodox monasteries in the Russian Empire, vol. I (St. Petersburg 1890), No. 586, p. 289; y † apxiep. Nikanor (Kamensky), Collected Works, p. 559, and in the brochure “Kletná (late 17th century, - 1889): historical essay on monastic documents and local legends,” Bryansk (1890), pp. 1–2 ff. Wed. "Oryol Diocesan Gazette." 1896, no. 27–28, pp. 1148–1151. See letters from M. Philaret to Smaragda in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, pp. 37 and 42. See prof. K.V. Kharlampovich, Letters of Archimandrite Macarius, p. 55 (biographies), 3 and 524, 1 (in letters), and in † P. V. Tstokhov on p. 210, as well as Collection of the Oryol Church Archaeological Committee, vol. I (Orel 1905), pp. 419, 421–422. See also “Christian Reading” 1911, no. 3, p., 387 (and separately: Letters from Archbishop Smaragd to Archimandrite Hierotheus, p. 8); 1913, no. 1, pp. 118–129. See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on pp. 51–52 and in Christian Reading 1911, no. 7–8, pp. 975–970; Wed “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1906, No. 20, p. 599. Wed. to this and letters from Smaragd to Innocent in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 20, p. 701. † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 941–942. See "Oryol Diocesan Gazette" 1906, No. 20, pp. 601–602. This was the case in other dioceses, for example, in Mogilev, where in the archives of the Spiritual Consistory there is a resolution from Smaragd dated November 4, 1838, ordering to “announce” the sticharical deacon Gursky, who was looking for a deacon’s place, so that, while inquiries are being made, he, “not waiting in vain, now went to the house, but appeared to him in his time." Smaragd himself wrote on April 27, 1853 to Fr. To Jerotheus (in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 3, p. 397, and separately on p. 18): “Behold, in my old age, I was overcome by severe circumstances and anxiety.” Even long after (January 15, 1871) Met. Innokenty (Veniaminov, † March 31, 1879) wrote to Eusebius (Orlinsky, † February 21, 1883) that in the Synod one can die from idleness (see “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1884, part III, department 3, p. 37). † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, p. 942. See Church and Social Bulletin VI (1879), No. 34, p. 6 b. See Smaragd’s letter to Innocent dated February 20, 1857 in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 20, p. 702. See Smaragd’s letters dated December 19, 1849 and April 13, 1853 in the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette, 1896, No. 18, p. 638. Smaragd himself also allowed for the possibility of his transfer (to the place of Bishop Evgeniy, who was dismissed on December 24, 1853, † July 27 1871) to Yaroslavl, although “at the onset of old age he sighed incessantly to the south,” about which see Letters from Archbishop. Archimandrite Smaragda Hierotheus on page 57 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 7–8, p. 981. See “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1871, book. XIII, p. 48. See also in the notes of apxiep. Leonida words by Met. Philareta: “I wanted to make sure and asked the Most Reverend Anthony [which one? Anthony of Pavinsky, Bishop of Nizhny Novgorod from July 20, 1857?]: Is it true what is said about him (Smaragda) that he opened an inn for the clergy, and received an affirmative answer! (see “Soulful Reading” 1906, No. 7, p. 356). Smaragd mentions that in the case of the Peter and Paul Cathedral, he was especially campaigned against by “the former G... M..., the most evil person in the world,” who “wrapped him with the blackest and merciless colors verbally and in writing,” and Fr. And epotheus explains to this that “the Eminence had a clash with him in Kharkov; and, unfortunately, met this gentleman another time at the service and in Orel,” and of course Governor S.N. Mukhanov: see in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 7–8, pp. 978–979 and separately: Letters of the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite To Jepotheus on pp. 54–55. † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, p. 963. For information on the Semov case, see the special appendix. † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, p. 963. † Apxiep. Nikanor (Brovkovich), Biographical materials I, p. 248. See "Memoirs" about. And Erofey on page 78 rev. 79 rev. (“The Reverend, distressed and shocked by the news - about the transition to Ryazan, - with his strong plethora, fell ill and was close to a state of fever”), 80 and rev., 81 rev., and also from here in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, pp. 1247–1249 and separately: Letters of the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite To Jepotheus on pp. 92–93. See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite To Hierophey on page 92 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1247. From the notes of His Grace Leonid, Archbishop of Yaroslavl, in “Soulful Reading” 1906, No. 7, p. 356. Expressions of Smaragd himself in letters dated June 20, 1858 to Fr. Hierotheus in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1248 and separately on p. 93. See “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1895, No. 15, p. 393. See in the letter from Smaragd S.I. Trubitsyna from Ryazan on October 20, 1858 in “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 32 (mixture). † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, p. 963. They privately tell us that this happened because “a terrible demonstration was being prepared at Smaragd’s exit from Oryol, not in his favor; he found out and managed to leave ahead of the appointed time, in the dead of midnight and not on the bishop’s horses.” See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite To Hierophey on pp. 25, 34 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 5–6, pp. 760, 768. See Memoirs of Osif Samchevsky in “Kyiv Antiquity” 1894, January, page 39. Father Hierotheus in his “Memoirs” (on page 56 reverse) writes: “The bitter tears of this (lesser) brethren, shed at farewell to the departing Archpastor, and at the death of His Eminence, as well as the current reverent memories there is sufficient evidence of the mutual love between the Archpastor and the Oryol Clergy.” † Apxiep. Nikanor (Kamensky), Collected Works, p. 549. O. Evgr. Nick. Ostrogorky writes to us: “I reverently and respectfully treat the memory of my ordainer and in my long service I have always remembered and remember the famous Archbishop Smaragd along with Philaret and Plato in my unworthy prayers.” See “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 32 (mixture). Yes, Reverend. At the Peter and Paul Cathedral, Polycarp ordered to “reconcile the previous assumptions” apxiep. Smaragda (see † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 969–970); according to the report of the first, the Spiritual Boards of Bryansk, Trubchevskoye, Sevskoye, Livenskoye and Yeletskoye were closed in 1865 (ibid., pp. 977–978), but on December 18, 1853, Smaragd wrote from St. Petersburg about. Hierotheus (see “Christian Reading” 1911, no. 7–8, p. 983 and separately on p. 59): “Our Kromsk Spiritual Board, as unnecessary, in my opinion, is being closed. It would be necessary to close some more spiritual boards. Extra for extortion from the clergy authorities”; the shelter designed by Smaragd for spiritual maidens of poor condition (see above on pp. 182, 37–39) Polycarp really built and always cherished with special love (see † G.M. Pyasetsky on pp. 987 ff. 993); the church at the bishop's house, conceived and authorized for construction under Smaragd, was also erected by his successor (ibid., p. 975 ff.). At first, Polycarp left his previous employees, as if without affecting the orders of Smaragd (see † Archpriest P.F. Polidorov, His Eminence Polycarp, Bishop of Oryol and Sevsky, pp. 33 and 32, 1) and generally consulted with the latter (ibid., p. 67, 1; cf. and above on pp. 183, 49), although this the archpastor was not in agreement with his predecessor in everything (see, for example, “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” vol. 243, book IV for 1912, pp. 31–32 in the mixture). See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on pp. 96–98 and in Christian Reading 1911, No. 10, pp. 1251–1252; Wed and “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 32 (mixture). See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on page 96 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, page 1251. This is what Philaret of Moscow proposed to Metropolitan of St. Petersburg: see his Letters to the Highest Persons II, p. 222. See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierophey on page 95 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, page 1250, as well as by Archpriest. AND . G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church in the village of Gorodkovich in the Spassky district of the Ryazan diocese with a chronography of its pastors (Ryazan 1898), p. 341. “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 32 (mixture) in a letter from Smaragd from Ryazan dated October 28, 1858: “a lot has been neglected here, but after correcting what is out of order, I hope everything will be better than it was in Orel.” On December 31, 1858, Smaragd wrote to Fr. To Hierotheus (see in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, pp. 1250, 1251 and separately on pp. 95, 96): “It wouldn’t be bad to live (in Ryazan) if it were possible to regain the same energy and activity somewhere. However, even without that, there are so many material and moral neglects here that they will sooner defeat me than I will be able to overcome them.” †Prof. C. S. Kazansky on November 3, 1860 reported: “you can live with Smaragd, but only he does not like ceremonies and cunning, but keeps himself far away” (see “Theological Bulletin” 1904, vol. II, p. 78). So we judge from the messages delivered to us by the St. Petersburg archpriest Buccapion Yakovlevich Nekrasov, who was in Ryazan near Smaragda among the small singers of the apostle choir, which was then directed there by the famous church composer Archpriest. Mikhail Alexandrovich Vinogradov. On July 26, 1859, Smaragd wrote to Fr. Hierothea (see in “Christian Reading” 1911 No. 11, pp. 1358–1359 and separately on p. 99): “And I wandered through the local Ryazan Palestine. I will tell you frankly that she did not at all encourage my spirit, which had cooled to everything like this... In addition to many churches, the buildings are good and bad, and I examined five local monasteries, of which only the Ranenburg Hermitage and the ordinary Skopinsky Monastery are suitable for improvement; the others are very similar to the Belarusian Monasteries.” Having barely recovered from the serious illness that befell him at the end of 1859, Smaragd reported on June 19, 1860 to Fr. To Jepotheus (Ibid. 1911, No. 11, p. 1369 and separately on p. 109): “Now I am also going to go to those places of the Diocese that I did not visit last summer, namely: in the city. Mikhailov, Zaraysk, Yegoryevsk and Kasimov. I will rest for a few days in the Nikolo-Radovitsky managed Monastery, so that with greater zeal I can swim across the worldly sea of ​​\u200b\u200bworks and worries.” See also Smaragd’s letters to Pelageya Vasilievna Shenshina in Christian Reading, 1911, No. 1, pp. 128, 133. See also Ryazan monuments collected by Archimandrite Jerome, with notes by I. Dobrolyubov (publication of the Ryazan Scientific Archival Commission), Ryazan 1889, p. 18b (§ 50), and also cf. u † prof. E. E. Golubinsky, History of the canonization of saints in the Russian Church (Moscow 2 1903), pp. 66 and 196. However, about this † prof. P. S. Kazansky wrote on November 3, 1860 (see Theological Bulletin, 1904, vol. II, p. 78): “he collected more than 12,000 rubles for a country house from the (Ryazan) clergy (Smaragd). silver and built an intricate house,” but Fr. AND . G. Before Brolyubov it was said (Historical and statistical description of churches and monasteries of the Ryazan diocese, vol. I, Zaraysk 1884, p. 11) that this house with the church “was built by the Ryazan arch. Smaragd for the amount collected partly from the clergy of the Ryazan diocese, and partly from other sources.” The archpastor himself wrote on June 19, 1860 to Fr. Hierotheus (in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 11, p. 1369 and separately on p. 109) that “he did this for his own health and consolation.” Those who knew this Pavlovsk dacha, which later burned down, claim that the amount indicated by P. S. Kazansky was exaggerated three times, if not four times (for example, Pyotr Ivanovich Tikhomirov, who was secretary of the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg under the Reverend Palladium Raev, is now secretary of the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg). See message from prot. Nikolai A. Ildomsky in “The Wanderer” 1861, No. 11, dep. IV, pp. 188–191: on the cross under the throne the inscription says that this church “was consecrated in grateful memory of the episcopal consecration of His Eminence Smaragd on September 20, 1861.” See about him in I. S (ladkopevtsev) in “Additions to the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette” 1865, No. 3, pp. 68–69. About Misail’s tomb, see I. S (ladkopevtsev) in “Additions to the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette” 1865, No. 7, pp. 185–186. Wed. and in letters to apxep. Smaragda to Archimandrite O. To Hierophey dated April 19, 1859 in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1252 and separately on p. 97: “It would not be dishonorable for me to lie lifeless together with our fellow countryman Stefan Yavorsky and other famous Hierarchs of Ryazan, of which there is one - Misail the martyr, killed with arrows for preaching Meshcheri of Christ, - my brethren, buried in large numbers in the local Archangel Cathedral.” With the blessing of Patr. Nikon, Misail in 1656 went for the third time to “bring Mordovians and Tatars to baptism” in the Shatsky district and here the Mordvin Gorechishka was shot with an arrow near the village of Yambirina (Yanberna, Yambirnaya) - 10 versts from the sovereign’s palace village of Konobeev - on Tuesday of Holy Week, April 9, 1656, and died in the village Oglomazov on Thursday 17th on St. See Tikh about him. Vozdvizhensky, Historical review of the Ryazan bishopric and all church affairs of this diocese from its establishment to the present time (Moscow 1820), pp. (85–) 124–129. † Apxiep. Filaret (Gumilevsky), Ryazan bishops in “Christian Reading” 1859, part I, pp. 373–381. A. Dittel, Shrines, antiquities and sights of the city of Ryazan in “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” 1859, book. III, dept. 1, pp. 117–118 and from the reprint Moscow 1866, pp. 13–14. † Apxiep. Dimitry (Sambikin), Mesyatseslov, vol. III (Tambov 1880), pp. 178–180. Ryazan monuments collected by Archimandrite Jerome, pp. (61 f. 73.) 74–75. N. I. Shishkin, History of the city of Kasimov since ancient times, ed. 2, Ryazan 1891, pp. 105–109. (197.) N.D., Hierarchy of the All-Russian Church I (Moscow 1892), p. 71. Prof. V.S. Ikonnikov, Experience of Russian historiography, vol. II, book. 1 (Kyiv 1908), p. 1042. S. N. Vvedensky, Missionary activity of Ryazan Archbishop Misail among foreigners of the Tambov region in 1653–1656. in Theological Bulletin 1910, No. 7–8, pp. 527–551. See “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1884, No. 13, pp. 221–222 (and Archpriest N. T. Kamensky († Archbishop Nikanor) separately, pp. 121–122). Wed. “Church and Social Bulletin” VI (1879), No. 26, p. 5b. Thus, Smaragd applied for the Order of Anna, 3rd degree, to the headman of the village of Nikulich, Ryazan district, Ivan Pavlovich Kubitsky, because - instead of a burnt wooden church - he built a new stone church for poor peasants: see file No. 1.606 in the Archives of the Holy Synod. Therefore, Smaragd did not immediately agree to unfunded buildings (see Archpriest I.G. Molchanov, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church in the village of Gorodkovich, Spassky district of the Ryazan diocese, Ryazan 1898, pp. 132 ff., 363) and did not approve of too grandiose church-building “undertakings” - with a waste of funds and if there are not enough of them for future repairs (see “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities”, vol. 243, book IV for 1912, pp. 33–34 in the mixture). See “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities”, vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, pp. 4–5 (mixture). See I. Blagoveshchensky, Archbishop Evgeny Kazantsev: a biographical sketch (Moscow 1875), pp. 29–30 in a letter dated October 21, 1831. See Smaragd’s letter from 1859 to P.V. Shenshina in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 1, p. 127. Apxiep. Nikanor, Biographical materials I, p. 249. Smaragd himself wrote about this on January 4, 1863 (probably 1867) to Count D.N. Tolstoy the following (see “Russian Archive” 1899, book VI, p. 218): “I am very glad that your Excellency is participating in the committee on improving the life of the clergy. But first of all, in my opinion, we need to think about the maintenance of bishops, who (except for Kiev, Moscow, Voronezh and a few others) receive the poorest salary according to the staff of the last century, under Emperor Pavel Petrovich of blessed memory. For example, Ryazansky, one of the senior rulers, receives a salary of 900 rubles. yes from the Radovitsky Monastery up to 400 rubles. How can one live here and maintain one’s dignity in any way?! The bishop’s house has not been supported by anything for more than half a century, and your Excellency is not unaware that in the whole city there is not a single barracks as dilapidated, ugly and inconvenient for living as this house, in which I lost my last health, in the past year I860 I almost died, in fact, from the dilapidation of this house. Do not think, Your Excellency, that I have any desire to ask for any increase. No. I am already 67 years old, and I will never ask for an increase if there are no provisions for this, consistent with the age, labors and merits...” Regarding the Ryazan bishop's house, see also the letters of the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on page 98 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, page 1253. Wed. about him and A. Dittel in “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities” 1859, book. III, dept. I, pp. 108–109, and from the reprint on pp. 4–5. See “Additions to the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette” for October 15, 1877, p. 97. See Smaragd’s letter from 1857 to P.V. Shenshina in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 1, p. 130, as well as in “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities”, vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 35 (mixture) in a letter from Smaragd to S.I. Trubitsyna from Ryazan dated April 8, 1859 that in the summer it is proposed to establish a shelter (school) and a house church. In the Archive of the Ryazan Spiritual Consistory there is a proposal apxiep. Smaragda dated August 16, 1860 with the following content: “1, According to the unfavorable rumors reaching me about the Archivist of the Consistory Candidov, I propose to immediately replace him with another trustworthy person and introduce him. 2, The retired clerk Terenty Pospelov should not be allowed into the Consistory for writing under any circumstances under the personal responsibility of the Secretary of the Consistory. 3, All officials and clerks should treat petitioners and persons who have need in the Consistory with due courtesy, unselfishness and readiness to be useful to them, under the fear of immediate removal from office directly given to me by the authorities of the Archpastoral authority for disgusting, intolerable disorders; announce to all of them for execution against their signatures.” Wed. to this and letters from M. Philaret to A. N. Muravyov (Kyiv 1869), p. 509. It is in relation to the affairs of the Committee that the cited letter (pp. 315, 22) from Smaragd to Count. N.D. Tolstoy, about which see † N.P. Barsukova, Life and works of M. P. Pogodin, book. XXI (St. Petersburg, 1907), pp. 184–185. In January 1911, I. N. Golubov, who knew Smaragd well from Orel and Ryazan, wrote to us from the latter: “The late archpastor did not like secular authorities at all, and when “freedom” was declared, which served as a reason for raising parish fees and the invasion of the Governors into this matter, he simply, simply, kicked out the governor’s officials.” Wed. and apxhiep. letters from Smaragd to the archimandrite. To Hierophey on page 112 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, page 1590. Priest of the village of Kornevoy in Skopinsky district of Ryazan province. Pavel Vasilyevich Cheltsov testifies that - contrary to Gabriel, who listened excessively to the landowners and immediately satisfied their statements - Smaragd always carefully checked the latter and did not hesitate to publicly denounce even the governor’s couple for their lack of foundation, and knew how to send out pretentious slanderers. See also Fr. AND . G. Molchanova, Church Chronicle of the Parish of the Assumption Church, pp. 344–345, that in August 1862 in Spassk, some officials complained to Smaragd about the prints, but Smaragd publicly exposed the emptiness of their complaints, noting to them: “The governor ordered all of you to collect gossip about the priests in order to burden the priesthood with them,” and when the officials left, the bishop said to those around him: “Well, what? Did I count these gentlemen well? Of course, I did all this not for myself, but for you! After this, not everyone will dare to interfere with their empty complaints.” “We are for such strong and fatherly protection,” says Fr. Molchanov, - they thanked him and bowed to him from the bottom of their hearts.” Deacon of the village of Navel, Skopinsky district, Alexy Iv. Urusov confirms this about the sexton of the village of Erlina, his father, from whom, according to the translation, the landowner Ivinsky wanted to take his buildings, but Smaragd did not allow this with his intervention. Priest P.V. Cheltsov, who knew Smaragd well, writes to us decisively about this. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church, pp. 222–223. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova ibid., p. 341. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova ibid., p. 223. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova ibid., p. 222. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova ibid., pp. 341–342. When this Priest was first introduced, Smaragd remarked to him that he was probably grieving for his relative, the retired Archbishop of Ryazan Gabriel (Gorodkov); he agreed, but added that he hoped to have his patron and father in him too. Smaragd immediately fell in love with him for his bold word, and then warned him that he would also be his benefactor if Molchanov himself was good and correct in everything, and then he always distinguished this worthy shepherd. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church, p. 133. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova ibid, on page 343, that Smaragd did not hesitate to directly make harsh remarks for any omissions of the clergy, but they “did not entail any unpleasant consequences.” Priest Ts.V. Cheltsov reports that when two priests did not come to mutual peace at Smaragd’s suggestion and a day later came again with complaints, he knocked their heads and sent them away to live peacefully, and they actually made peace. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova, Church Chronicle of the Parish of the Assumption Church, p. 344, that Smaragd preferred to punish privately, “he did not like formal paper courts and could not tolerate the inclusion of fines in formal lists; why during the entire period of his management of the diocese, the clergy lists of none of his subordinates were soiled.” According to Fr. P.V. Cheltsov, newly identified people - especially sextons - were detained in Ryazan for months or more, teaching them reading and singing, agility, etc. at the Church of the Cross. Deacon A.I. Urusov writes that Smaragd strictly and threateningly inspected the Skopinsky school (under the rector Fr. Ioann Antizatrov and the inspector Vas. Pavel Smirnov), paying attention and doubting whether the teachers in the clergy were teaching the lessons properly, and about one of them, being dissatisfied with the answers of his students, the bishop immediately said: “pancakes, wakes, baptisms - when will he teach?"... About the Sushkinsky Nikon women’s community in Spassky district and about the Kazan Yavlensky nunnery in Ryazan, see “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities,” vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, pp. 33–34, 36–39 (mixture). See also Letters from apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite To Jepotheus on pp. 95–96 and in Christian Reading 1911, No. 10, pp. 1250–1251. See Letters from Archbishop about this. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on page 111 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, page 1507 and note: after the transfer from Tula (August 22, 1860) Rev. Alexy (Rzhanitsyn) to the Tauride Diocese, the Tula Consistory on matters relating to episcopal consideration, by the resolution of the Holy Synod of September 3–8, 1860, it was ordered to contact His Eminence of Ryazan (see case of the Archive of the Holy Synod of 1860 No. 1.063) - pending the appointment of a new Tula bishop, which was Nikandr (Pokrovsky), assigned to this place on October 22, 1860 († June 27, 1893). See Fr. I. G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church, pp. 341, 343. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church, p. 138. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova ibid., p. 137. This is what Fr. writes, for example. Pav. You. Cheltsov regarding the presentation of Smaragda with his father-in-law when he was appointed to the priesthood. See Fr. I. G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church, p. 343. † Apxiep. Nicanor, Biographical Materials I, p. 244. † N. S. Leskov, Trifles of Apxierean life in the Complete Collection of His Works, published by Niva, vol. XXXV, St. Petersburg. 1903, p. 77. See Letters of the bishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on page 93 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, page 1248. † Apxiep. Nicanor, Biographical Materials I, p. 251. "Memories" about. Hierotheus on l. I, 29 rev., 98 rev. See also “Christian Reading” 1912, No. 7–8, p. 802; 1911, No. 12, p. 1516 and separately in “Letters of Archbishop. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hieropheth" on page 120. In a letter to Archim. To Hierophey dated June 20, 1858, Smaragd states “disordered health” (see “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1247 and separately on p. 92), but on December 31, 1858 he says; “health still doesn’t change me much” (ibid. 1911, No. 10, p. 1251 and separately on p. 96); April 19, 1859: “I wasn’t sick all winter” (ibid. 1911, No. 10, p. 1252 and separately on p. 97); July 26, 1859: “health still holds” (ibid. 1911, no. 11, p. 99 and separately on p. 1358). Letters from Smaragd P.V. Shenshina in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 1, p. 125: “my health is not bad” (dated March 29, 1859); 130; “General and private health is good. So (at a good time to say) it’s good that something like this hasn’t happened for a long time”... (dated July 26, 1859). In a letter to S.I. Trubitsyna dated October 28, 1858 in “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities”, vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 32 (mixture): “Thanks be to the Lord God! I am healthy and carry out my affairs without hindrance”; ibid., page 35, April 8, 1858: “I am grateful to the Lord! throughout the past winter I was healthy and capable of performing my duties. I am completely at peace in spirit, by the grace of God, and I entrust my further service to the Universal Church to the all-good Providence of Him Who alone is Her Head.” See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on page 108 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 11, page 1367. Ibid, on page 109 and Christian Reading 1911, No. 11, page 1369 in a letter to Fr. To Jepotheus, June 19, 1860; see also letter dated June 8, 1860 by P.V. Shenshina ibid. 1911, No. 1, p. 133. “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, p. 1509 and separately on p. 113 in a letter to Fr. To Jepotheus, May 26, 1861; Wed at o. I. G. Molchanova, Church chronicle of the parish of the Assumption Church, p. 346. “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, p. 1512 and separately on p. 116 in a letter to Fr. To Jepotheus, February 4, 1862 “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, p. 1544 and separately on p. 117 in a letter to Fr. To Jepotheus, April 15, 1863 “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 12, pp. 1516–1517 and separately on 119 in a letter to Fr. To Jepotheus, January 23, 1863 "Christian Reading" 1911, No. 12, pp. 1516–1517 and separately on pp. 119–120 in a letter to Fr. To Jepotheus, June 4, 1863 See “Readings in the Society of Russian History and Antiquities”, vol. 243, book. IV for 1912, p. 35 (mixture) in a letter dated January 3, 1862. Smaragd personally conducted a huge correspondence and, for example, sent up to 160 letters to one Fr. Hierotheus (see his “Memoirs” on pp. 2 ver.–3 and in “Letters of Archbishop Smaragd to Archimandrite Hierotheus” on pp. 3–4 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 3, pp. 382–383), and, having arrived in St. Pegerburg, by November 10, 1853 he had up to 300 letters to answer, meanwhile, for this purpose he did not keep personal secretaries until Ryazan and only from time to time used the services of Fr. Hierotheus and then Mr. Bruevich (see “Memoirs” of Father Hierotheus, l. 21 rev. 9 rev.; Letters of Archbishop Smaragd to Archimandrite Hierotheus on p. 52 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 7–8, p. 976). In a letter from Smaragd dated April 19, 1859, Fr. Hierotheus separately on page 69 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1251. † Apxiep. Nicanor, Biographical Materials I, p. 252. Metropolitan. Filaret, in a letter to A.N. Muravyov (p. 612) dated November 22, 1863, said: “Reverend Smaragd died. This is a timely word: Blessed are those who die in the Lord.” This is stated in the official report of the Ryazan Spirit. Consistory of November 13, 1863 (No. 8.021) to the Holy Synod (in the Archives of the latter for 1863 No. 1.763): “to the general regret of the Ryazan Diocese, our Archpastor, the Most Reverend Smaragd, Archbishop of Ryazan and Zaraisk, after a short but serious illness, died on the 11th of this November at 51/4 o'clock in the afternoon." See also M. Philaret: Letters to Anthony IV, p. 411; - to Muravyov (p. 612) about the death of Smaragd, but some special circumstances associated with it will be discussed below. “Oryol Diocesan Gazette” 1906, No. 20, p. 594 - according to the “Memoirs” of Fr. Hierothea (on page 3 ver., approx.). See “Ryazan Provincial Gazette” for November 23, 1863, No. 47, p. 463. One archpriest (V. Ya. Nekrasov), who was among the bishop’s singers at the funeral itself, writes to us that “the burial of Smaragd was performed by Leonid and with his wonderful tenor voice he made a wonderful impression during the service.” Metropolitan Filaret wrote to the Governor Anthony (IV, p. 411): “Eternal memory to the Most Reverend Smaragd. I’m sending the vicar [Leonid] to his burial.” See in the Synodal Archive for 1863, No. 1763, from which it is clear that the Ryazan Consistory itself treated Metropolitan Philaret with the lowest regard, “requesting the appointment of the Vicar Eminence for the burial” of Smaragd. The relatives of the deceased archpastor erected on a pillar on the left side of the Archangel Cathedral a metal plaque with the image of the saint’s regalia and with the inscription: “Here is buried the body of Smaragd Krizhanovsky, who from 1831 ruled the vicariate of Revel, the dioceses of Polotsk, Mogilev, Kharkov, Astrakhan, Oryol and Ryazan. Died November 11, 1863, age 69.” Tomb of apxhiep. Smaragda has still been preserved in good condition. See Smaragd's letter dated April 19, 1859 to Fr. Hierotheus on pp. 97–98 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, 10, pp. 1252–1253, as well as above on pp. 314, 13. The report of Smaragd’s immediate successor, Archbishop Irinarch of Ryazan, dated March 31, 1864, states that “by the determination of the Consistory on December 31, 1863, it was concluded to do the following: from church things - a silver gilded ark, a chalice, a paten, a spoon, an asterisk, a spear and two plates and the silver gilded censer should be transferred to the Cathedral for the commemoration of the presented Eminence (Smaragda) in the Archangel Cathedral (which is being renewed), where the Eminence is buried, and order the Cathedral Archpriest (N.A. Ildomsky) with the brethren, so that words would be carved on the base of the chalice, indicating that these vessels were transferred to the Cathedral for the commemoration of the late Right Reverend, and also to transfer the surplice and orarion to the Cathedral for use by the protodeacon during the bishop's service; the cross, silver-gilded censer, palm and air should be transferred to the Cross Church of the Bishop's House also for the commemoration of the person who presented himself; Miters (2), Sakkos (2), Omophoras (2), Epitrachels (2), Clubs (2), Belts (2), Armbands (2), Priests (2), Sulkas (2), pillows (2), Orlets (2) and the Mantle to be transferred to the Bishop’s sacristy by order of the Sacristan.” See case No. 765 for 1864 in the Synodal Archive. See Letters of apxhiep. Smaragda to Archimandrite Hierotheus on p. 98, 2 and in “Christian Reading” 1911, No. 10, p. 1253, 2. “Ryazan Provincial Gazette” for November 16, 1863, No. 46, p. 453, which reports the death and burial of Smaragd, about which see “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” of 1899, No. 1 (for January 1), p. 36. One of the St. Petersburg archpriests (V. Ya. Nekrasov), who was a bishop’s choirmaster in 1863, tells us that “a huge funeral was organized for the deceased Smaragda - at least for a third of all residents of the city of Ryazan.” I. S (ladkopevtsev) in “Additions to the Ryazan Diocesan Gazette” 1865, No. 7, p. 187, but in general see † G.M. Pyasetsky, History of the Oryol Diocese, pp. 963–964; “Astrakhan Diocesan Gazette” 1884, No. 13, pp. 222–223 (and by Archpriest N. T. Kamensky [† archbishop Nikanor] separately on pp. 122–123); “The Wanderer” 1863, November, dep. IV, p. 27.