1812 г.

April 29. On the ordination of Hieromonk Philaret to the rank of archimandrite; about his determination: a, rector and professor of theological sciences in St. Petersburg. theological academy and b, present in the spiritual consistory; his opinion, as someone who was present at the latter, about the icons, which, after examination, turned out to be unusable Metropolitan Ambrose of Novgorod, with a proposal dated March 5, 1811, No. 35, submitted to the commission of theological schools for its consideration the proposal from the academic board, dated the 4th of that month, No. 33, about awarding bachelors: hieromonks Leonid and Philaret, with the addition that he also finds them worthy of awarding, for zealous and diligent service. In the aforementioned submission, the board explained that the said bachelors especially distinguish themselves by their diligent and zealous service at the academy, and therefore asked to reward them; Moreover, they also included their service records. From the list of Hieromonk Philaret, by the way, it is clear that he was certified by Metropolitan Ambrose as having “decent behavior and being competent in his position.” During the hearing of this case in the commission, Metropolitan Ambrose, in a verbal proposal, stated that he found Hieromonk Methodius, who served in the local seminary, equally zealous to deserve the award. The Commission, in a journal dated April 19, 1811, among other things, decided (Article 35): in reward for the zealous service of hieromonks Philaret, Leonid and Methodius and for their greater encouragement, to submit to the Holy Synod the promotion of all of them to the rank of archimandrite of the third class, and therefore with the greatest respect that these hieromonks are in those places from which they were requested here, for the training of spiritual youth, according to their excellent information and abilities, they could already be awarded for this. The Holy Synod, after hearing the submission of the seven commission, dated May 26 of the same 1811, No. 339, by resolution of the same May 31, decided: according to the respects expressed in the submission of the commission of theological schools, the Holy Synod agrees that the said hieromonks deserve, in all fairness, to be promoted to the rank of archimandrite. But as the elevation to that degree of hieromonks will be exceptional from the general order according to which archimandrites are promoted only for vacancies and with the designation of monasteries by which they should be named: therefore, the Holy Synod, deeming to promote these hieromonks to the rank of archimandrite, with the conferment of the degree of the 3rd class and with their retention in the present positions, first grants the synodal chief prosecutor to report about the above-mentioned assumption to the Sovereign Emperor, to ask for the Highest permission to bring it into action. The Synodal Chief Prosecutor, Prince A. N. Golitsyn, in a proposal to the Holy Synod, dated July 5 of the same 1811, No. 564, explained that the Sovereign Emperor, respecting the reasons presented by the Synod, most graciously deigned to ordain as archimandrites: hieromonks Philaret, Leonid and Methodius, with assigning them a 3rd class degree, and leaving them in their current academic positions 44. After hearing this, the Holy Synod, by resolution of the same July 5th, decided: about this highest permission, for proper execution, to send a decree 45 to the Metropolitan of Novgorod. Then, at a meeting of the commission of theological schools, on March 11, 1812, its member, Privy Councilor, Prince A. N. Golitsyn, explained in a verbal sentence that by the personal decree of His Imperial Majesty, which followed the report of the Holy Synod, the highest order was to ordain as bishop, among others, the rector of the local academy, Archimandrite Sergius, at Kostroma diocese. But since this archimandrite, upon consecration as a bishop, would have to go to his diocese, and therefore the positions of rector and professor of theological sciences at the local academy would remain vacant, Prince Golitsyn believed that the commission needed to make a preliminary order to fill those vacancies. The commission, after hearing this proposal, by the journal, on the same date, by the way, decided (Art. 1): 1, to appoint Archimandrite Philaret 46 as rector and professor of theological sciences at the academy; 2, the production of salaries, according to the staff, both according to the rank of rector and professor of theology, should begin from the day of his assumption of this position and 6, in order to put these resolutions into effect, forward a list of them to the Metropolitan of Novgorod so that he notifies the commission about the time of the installation of Archimandrite Philaret. The commission notified the academic board of this order by order dated March 13th, No. 174 47. Almost a month later, on April 10, 1812, Metropolitan Ambrose of Novgorod and St. Petersburg made a proposal to let the St. Petersburg consistory know that “the rector of the academy, the first-class Novgorod monastery Archimandrite Philaret and the seminary rector, Archimandrite Methodius of the Sergius Hermitage are determined to be present in St. Petersburg consistory, with the addition that since, according to the statutes of the academy and seminary, they are obviously allowed to be present in the consistory only during free time from other exercises, therefore, they are exempt from signing protocols on those cases that will not be heard by them, as well as from signing journals, by decree of 1767, April 11, for the highest decree, 1714, April 4, ordered protocols carry them home to only those present who cannot be in the public place due to illness.” The consistory, after hearing this proposal, in a journal dated April 11, decided: “the fathers of the rectors, archimandrites of the Novgorod first-class Yuryev (monastery) Philaret and St. Sergius Hermitage Methodius, announce this determination to His Eminence in the presence of the consistory, and upon announcement, bring them to take the oath to attend it, and then fulfill what follows according to the exact force of this definition.” The next day, April 12, for No. 1129, Metropolitan Ambrose reported to the Holy Synod, according to the news, about the determination of the said Archimandrites Philaret and Methodius to be present in the consistory On April 29, Archimandrite Filaret swore allegiance and signed: “Therefore, Archimandrite Filaret of Yuryev swore an oath.” He was sworn in at the Holy Trinity Alexandronevsky Lavra by his godfather, Hieromonk Peter, 1812, April 26th. 48 On the same day, Archimandrite Philaret was present in the consistory for the first time and with his own hand wrote his opinions on the papers entering the consistory, entered into the report register of the consistory. 49 In the report register of the consistory it is written: “according to the report of the deacon of the Nevsky Mother of God Church Nikita Nedremsky that 83 images of icon writing, upon examination, turned out to be indecent to such writing, Archimandrite Philaret, who was present in the consistory, wrote in his own hand the following opinion in the register: 29 (April). The icons, as unusable, on the basis of the decree of 722, April 12, should be sent to the Lavra Chancellery for delivery to the Sacristy: about which the Deanery Administration should be informed. 50 June 8. Notes from Archimandrite Philaret on interpretative theology; compiled by him: a, rank list of students studying theology and b, exam plan, in the month of July The rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Archimandrite Filaret, in pursuance of the journal resolution of the academic board, dated June 5, 1812, submitted to its board: a summary of interpretive theology and a rank list of students studying theology and a draft exam. 1. A summary of interpretive theology, written by him in his own hand, in Latin, with translation into Russian, with the following content: Cum ea sit justa et plenior studii Hermeneutici ratio, ut primum notiones hujus scientiae generales legesque stabiliantur, tum demum ad textum sacrum evolvendum accedatur, sive ut A) Theoriae succedat B) Praxis: utriusque simul specimen dabitur, ut et Praxeos fundamenta in Theoria, et theoriae usus in Praxi, cernantur. A. Et in Theoria quidem, post Hermeneuticae Sacrae notionem, in ordine scientiarum possibilitatem, imo necessitatem, diversa etiam in coetibus christianis fata, exposita, quaeruntur: a) Solida exegeseos fundamenta generalia, b) Media interna, h. e. de sinu ipsius Sacrae scripturae petenda, c) Subsidia externa, denique d) Regulae practicae de sensus inventi tractatione. B) Ad Praxin deducent annotationes in Libri Geneseos Nomen, Auctorem, Tempus, obiectum, scopum, et ordinem in eo quaerendum. Tum demum in ipso libro, analysi generaliori, et selectioribus quaestionibus illustrabuntur: a) Historia conditi universi, b) Historia hominis creati, et c) Historia lapsus primorum Parentum. Translation of the abstract. The correct and complete teaching of interpretative theology is arranged in such an order that first the general concepts and main provisions of this science are proposed, and then they proceed to the actual interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, or, which is the same as A, Theory is followed by B, Practice. Therefore, the experiments of both will be presented at the same time, so that both the foundations of practice in theory and the benefits of theory in practice will be visible. A. In theory, according to the presentation of the concept of Interpretive Theology, its possibilities, even necessity in the circle of knowledge, and its course in the Christian Church, are sought: a, solid grounds of interpretation, general; b, the means of interpretation are internal, that is, drawn from the Holy Scripture itself; c, external benefits, and finally, d, rules on the actual use of the meaning revealed in the words of Holy Scripture. C. The practice will begin with notes on the name, writer, time, subject, intention and internal order of the book of Genesis. Then in the book itself, through resolution of the main parts, and some noteworthy questions, the following will be explained: a, the story of the creation of the world, b, about the creation of man, and c, about the fall of man with its consequences. 2. List of students of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy showing success in the class of Theological Sciences Gerasim Pavsky. Good luck. Vladimir Ignatiev. Good ones. Vasily Erofeev. Pretty good ones. Ivan Shchelkunov. Very good. Andrey Tikhvinsky. Pretty good ones. Dmitry Alekseev. Excellent. Vasily Sebrzhinsky. Very good. Grigory Levitsky. Excellent. Yakov Belyavsky. Pretty good ones. Mikhail Bozhanov. Very good. Ivan Lileev. Pretty good ones. Alexander Kandorsky. Prosperous. Vasily Khersonsky. Very good. Egor Lebedev. Pretty good ones. Gabriel Moshkov. Prosperous. Alexey Malov. Very good. Alexander Pokrovsky. Prosperous. Goat Organs. Very good. Semyon Snigirev. Medium. Alexander Protopopov. Excellent. Herodion Vetrinsky. Pretty good ones. Avksentiy Martynov. Good ones. Dimitry Tunoshensky. Very good. Matvey Platonov. Excellent. Ivan Lebedev. Very good. Konstantin Platonov. Very good. Egor Postnikov. Excellent. Mikhail Malein. Very good. Peter Podlipsky. Very good. Egor Vishnyakov. Due to poor health, weak. Mikhail Vrevsky. Good ones. Ivan Nevdachik. Pretty good ones. Egor Polotebnov. Very good. Semyon Krasilnikov. Pretty good ones. Onisim Barkov. Prosperous. Mitrofan Protopopov. Very good. Arseny Tyazhelov. Very good. Nikolai Greshishchev. Prosperous. Ivan Talyzin. Pretty good ones. Peter Goitannikov. Pretty good ones. Grigory Belogorodsky. Very good. Mikhail Leontovich. Very good. Vasily Kutnevich. Excellent. Vasily Grigorovich. Very good. Yakov Knimovsky. Good ones. Grigory Ogievsky. Pretty good ones. Grigory Yanchukovsky. Prosperous. Ivan Kryzhanovsky. Very good. Nikolai Shchutsky. Prosperous. Mikhail Flerov. Very good. Alexey Nenarokomov. Pretty good ones. Yakov Magnitsky. Diligent. Alexander Bogdanovich. Very good. Ivan Lavrovsky. Pretty good ones. Ivan Diakonov. Pretty good ones. Elpidifor Lestev. Excellent. Stefan Raikowski. Very good. Yakov Gladkoy. Pretty good ones. Peter Veselovsky. Pretty good ones. Peter Tuberovsky. Good ones. Victor Vensky. Prosperous. Pavel Protopopov. Very good. Ivan Bazarov. Very good. Gabriel Levandovsky. Medium. Ivan Nosov. Very good. Petr Kivrov. Medium. Afanasy Skvortsev. Pretty good ones. Vladimir Kazansky. Good ones. Ilya Levikov. Pretty good ones. Ivan Sanin. Pretty good ones. Timofey Nikolsky. Good ones. Stefan Loshakov. Prosperous. Alexey Ilyinsky. Medium. Vasily Belozersky. Pretty good ones. Konstantin Puzina. Prosperous. Vasily Diakonov. Pretty good ones. Mikhail Penzensky. Medium. Vasily Razumovsky. Pretty good ones. Ivan Dukhovsky. Prosperous. Gabriel Fovitsky. Good ones. Vasily Polyansky. Pretty good ones. Andrey Vasiliev. Good ones. Vasily Suvorov. Pretty good ones. 3. Plan of the exam intended at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy 51 I. The exam will last three days, that is, the 22nd, 23rd and 28th of this June. II. On the first day there will be a test in the Theological, Philosophical and Mathematical sciences. III. On the second day in General History and languages: Hebrew, Greek, French, and German. IV.On the third day in Church History, Aesthetics and Geography. V. An hour and a half is assigned for testing in each science, and half an hour in each language. VI. Exams begin at 10 a.m.; students will meet an hour earlier. VII. For each class, notes on the intended subjects must be prepared, briefly and systematically presented; as well as general lists of students with recommendations about their success. VIII. On all three days, the exams begin and end with the students singing decent spiritual verses. Rector Archimandrite Filaret The board of the academy, after reviewing these documents, journal, dated June 27 of the same, decided (Article 1): to keep them together with similar ones in business. 52 December 14. Presented to the board by the rector of St. Petersburg. Theological Academy, Archimandrite Philaret: a, notes on hermeneutics, b, list of students in the class of theological sciences and c, order of testing students in December In accordance with the magazine St. Petersburg. Theological Academy, dated November 30, 1812, its rector, Archimandrite Philaret, presented to the board: 1, notes on the class of practical hermeneutics; 2, a list of students, showing progress in the theological sciences class and 3, a note on the procedure for testing students. A. In class B (theological) sciences Chapters VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII are offered for testing in practical Hermeneutics from the book of Genesis. Based on the subjects contained in these chapters with a certain testing time, the following is assigned for detailed analysis: A. The story of the end of the first world by the flood. b. The story of Abraham's migration to the Promised Land. V. The Tale of Melchizedek. The analysis consists of showing the connection and order in the sacred narrative, presenting the literal meaning of the text on the basis of the original Hebrew text, resolving any misunderstandings encountered, and discovering, under the guidance of S. Writers, the educational and internal meaning of S. History. Distinguished visitors, if they please, offer their questions to any of the chapters shown at their discretion. B. List of students of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy showing success in the class of theological sciences Andrey Tikhvinsky. Good ones. Dimitry Alekseev. I was absent most of the school time due to illness. Vasily Sebryansky. Very good. Pavel Naumov. Pretty good ones. Alexander Pokrovsky. He does very little. Goat Organs. Pretty good ones. Semyon Snigirev. He does very little. Herodion Vetrinsky. Good ones. Avksentiy Martynov. Pretty good ones. Dimitry Tunomensky. Very good. Matthew Platonov. Excellent. Ivan Lebedev Very good. Peter Podlipsky Quite good. Ivan Nevdachin. Pretty good ones. Egor Gorodkov. Pretty good ones. Semyon Krasilnikov. Good ones. Nikolai Greshishchev. With success. Grigory Belogorodsky. Pretty good ones. Vasily Grigorovich. Pretty good ones. Yakov Kizimovsky. Good ones. Grigory Ogievsky. Good ones. Grigory Yanchukovsky. Good ones. Alexey Nenarokomov. Good ones. Yakov Magnitsky. He works with diligence and success. Alexander Bogdanovich. Pretty good ones. Yakov Malitsky. Very good. Stefan Raikowski. Pretty good ones. Ivan Spassky. Pretty good ones. Peter Veselovsky. Very good. Victor Vensky. Pretty good ones. Pavel Protopopov. Pretty good ones. Ivan Bazarov. Pretty good ones. Gabriel Levandovsky. Good ones. Afanasy Skvortsov. Very good. Vladimir Nazansky. Pretty good ones. Ilya Levkov. Pretty good ones. Timofey Nikolsky. Very good. Alexey Ilyinsky. Pretty good ones. Vasily Belozersky. Good ones. Konstantin Puzina. Good ones. Mikhail Penzensky. Good ones. Ivan Dukhovsky. He is doing it with success. Ivan Smirnov. Pretty good ones. Vasily Suvorov. Good ones. B. The procedure for the internal December test of students of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy in 1812. 1. The test lasts two days: December 20 and 21. 2. In each of them, the test begins at 9 o'clock in the morning and ends at 1½ o'clock in the afternoon, unless the most respectable visitors decide to continue longer. 3. On the 20th day, Friday, the following are assigned: a) for the class of Theological Sciences 1¼ hours, b) for the class of Philosophical Sciences 1¼ hours. c, for Literature class 1 hour, 4. 21st day, Saturday: and, for Church History 1 hour, b, for Civil History and Geography 1½ hours, c, for language class 2 hours. 5. The meeting opens and closes with the singing of decent spiritual verses. 6. Abstracts of test subjects and lists of recommendations are presented to the most respectable visitors as usual. On this document, the hand of Metropolitan Ambrose is marked: “Looked. 1812. Dec. 16". The journal of the board, dated December 20, 1812 (Article 1), stipulates that these documents should be kept in the file 53. Here is what Filaret wrote to his father on this occasion, dated July 11: “On the 5th day of this month, as a result of the presentation of the Holy Synod, a decree was announced to him named after His Imperial Majesty, which ordered the academic bachelors of Philaret, Leonid and Methodius without vacancies to be promoted to archimandrites with a third-class degree. As a result of this, the first one was performed on the 8th of the same month in the Kazan Cathedral; and the next day, in the Lavra, at the early Liturgy, and the last two (Letters of Philaret to his family, No. 134). Leonid (Zaretsky) died as an ordinary professor at the academy in 1813, on November 13th. Methodius (Pishnyachevsky), from 1813 bishop of Old Russia, 1816 of Poltava, 1824 archbishop. Astrakhan, 1825–Pskov; 1834, May 10, dismissed." Cases: a, comm. spirits taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1811, No. 300; b, office. Holy Synod, keeping. in his archive, 1811, No. 471 and in, ext. ed. spirits academician, storage in the arch. Acad., 1811, No. 3. In view of the opening of a vacancy for a rector in the stauropegial Novospassky monastery, regarding the appointment of Archimandrite Sergius as bishop of the Kostroma diocese, the Holy Synod, on March 14, 1812, decided: for the indicated rectoral vacancy, appoint an archimandrite of the first-class Yuryev Monastery, Novgorod diocese, and a rector to the Moscow stauropegial Novospassky monastery Ambrose Seminary there, and in his place at the Yuriev Monastery, professor of theological sciences at the St. Sheterburg Theological Academy and rector of it, Philaret, leaving him at his present place and positions. Cases: a) office. His Holiness Sunod, 1812, No. 297; b) internal rights. St. Petersburg spirits academician, storage in the academic archive, 1812, No. 12. Affairs: a) communication of spirits. taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1812, No. 462 and b) internal. are right. Sib. spirit. academician, storage in the academic archive, 1812, No. 9. St. Petersburg case spirit. Consist., for 1812, No. 342. Report. registry. St. Petersburg spirit. Consist., for 1812, No. 1024. Report. registry. St. Petersburg spirit. Consist., for 1812, No. 1113. At the top of the “plan” is a resolution: “June 17, 1812. The plan is approved. Ambrose M. Novgorodsky." The matter is internal. ed. St. Petersburg spirit. academician, storage in his archive, 1812, No. 18. See op. I. A. Chistovich, History of St. Petersburg. spirit. acad., St. Petersburg, 1857, p. 190. The matter is internal. right St. Petersburg spirit. academician, storage in his archive, 1812, No. 28,