1817 г.

February 27. Opinion of someone present in St. Petersburg. Consistory, Archimandrite Philaret, at the request of Stepanida Borovskaya, the wife of 9th class official Grigory Yakovlev, to encourage her husband to remove Lieutenant Colonel Zanden-Paskevicheva, who lives with him in an unlawful relationship, from himself, and to accept her, the petitioner, to himself. At the request of the wife of an official of the 9th class, Stepanida Borovskaya, with a copy of the certificate attached, so that her husband Grigory Yakovlev, who was living unlawfully with Lieutenant Colonel Alexandra Ivanova Zanden-Paskevicheva, would be pleased to separate and encourage him to take her into his house, into her legal cohabitation as before, Archimandrite Philaret, who was present at the consistory, gave this opinion: February 27, 1817. Respecting the intention of the petitioner, who wants to correct her husband by spiritual means and restore the holiness of the marriage, accept the petition; and since the certificate enclosed in the copy has not been approved by the public office, inform the Provincial Board so that, upon request from the Supreme Court, information can be delivered to the Consistory whether it contains the original of this certificate, and about the state in which the case of the petitioner with her husband, confirmed by this certificate, is in that court; first submit this opinion to His Eminence for his consideration 269. March 17. Opinion of someone present in St. Petersburg. consistory, Archimandrite Philaret, at the request of the collegiate adviser Ivan Zemshchinin, to issue a certificate that the baby Alexander, born to his wife on April 27, and baptized on May 1, 1811 before marriage, will actually live with him. At the request of the collegiate adviser Ivan Zemshchinin, for the issuance of a certificate to him that although the baby Alexander was not included in the register of births, he was his son, born to his wife Elisaveta Egorova and baptized on May 1, 1811, and taken by her with him until their legal marriage - Archimandrite Philaret, who was present at the consistory, gave the following opinion: March 17. The petitioner really needs a formal certificate of the authenticity of the birth and baptism of his son Alexander, because this son is omitted from the metric books, and therefore there cannot be a certificate about him in the usual way. since the authenticity of the birth and baptism of the aforementioned Alexander has been proven by witnesses, there is no obstacle to recognizing him as the son of the petitioner. But as by decree of the Holy Synod, dated March 5, 1803, it is prohibited to issue birth certificates to private individuals, and it is ordered to issue them only for matters carried out in public places: then, without issuing the required certificate to the applicant, present it to the State Secretary’s case regarding his son on behalf of His Eminence; In case of a certificate, which may happen in another case, make an inscription on the registry book of the Naval Council of 1811 about the birth and baptism of Alexander, which was discovered through research. And this opinion should be submitted to His Eminence for consideration and decision 270. March 17. Archimandrite Philaret's opinion on the draft charter of the committee for the care of poor young children of the imperial philanthropic society At a meeting of the council of the imperial philanthropic society, on March 17, 1817, a draft charter for the committee for the charity of poor children, consisting of 68 articles or paragraphs, was reported. Archimandrite Philaret presented a note about this project, written in his own hand, with the following content: The Charter on Charity for Poor Children in § 27 271 states that the caretaker has a special duty to monitor the morality of the boys entrusted to his care. At the end of the same paragraph, the hiring and dismissal of this caretaker, along with servants and female workers, is mentioned. The note to § 28 272 states that the committee can assign all positions, both superintendent and teacher (including teaching the law of God), to one person. In § 30 273, the caretaker is subordinate to the steward, becomes his commissar in all small economic matters, and is subject to strict reporting to him. When comparing these paragraphs, the question arises: is it possible to combine these qualities and duties in one person: a hired overseer of morality and a teacher of the law of God, obliged to strictly report to the steward? §§ 38 and 39 274 represent the duty trustee during the week of duty as a housebuilder and full owner of the establishment. He visits the charity home as often as possible; He enters into everything, witnesses the food, contents, teaching and activities of the boys, and writes everything down. From the signature of the charter it is clear what ranks these duty officers hold 275. Considering this, one can wish that a similar sacrifice would be made for the upbringing of children where the direct supervision of enlightened, experienced and important men in their rank could bring more fruit than when teaching the alphabet and numbers. § 57. 276 The care of sending orphans for training in crafts is completely left to the chairman and the steward. But as a subject this is no less important than admission to a charity house; and this § 54 277 prescribes to be done not without regard to the committee: then in the same order it would be possible to make a contribution to teach orphans crafts. The journal of the council, March 17, 1817, by the way, determined: a) to forward to the committee on the scientific part the draft charter of the committee for the care of poor young children and in the lists the comments made on it by the members of the council: Novospassky Archimandrite Filaret, Akhverdov, Count Lieven, Leontyev and Sturdza, with instructions that the committee on the scientific part bring the said charter into proper systematic order and corrected the syllable, guided in this matter by the comments of the named members of the council; and, after correcting this, would present the corrected charter to the council and b) on the formation, under the authority of the council of the imperial philanthropic society, of a committee for the care of poor young children, print it in the statements published by the imperial academy of sciences and at Moscow university 278. In 1817, on August 9, the draft charter for the care of minors was again presented to the council, revised according to the comments of the members; On August 11, the draft was sent back to the members for consideration. Bishop Filaret of Revel gave the following feedback on the new edition of the project: “I don’t have any comments on my part against the statute attached here, except that if the clause on going to church was found decent in it, then why did the clauses on morning and evening prayer or on supervision of behavior seem inappropriate? Filaret Bishop of Revel" 279. March 5th. Opinion of someone present in St. Petersburg. consistory, Archimandrite Philaret, at the request of the headman of the Vladimir, in St. Petersburg, church of Grigory Dementiev, to issue him a certificate for serving in this rank in two elections At the request of the headman of the Vladimir church, in the court settlements, Grigory Dementyev, to issue him, according to the recommendation of the parishioners, a certificate for serving in this rank for two three years, Archimandrite Philaret, who was present at the consistory, gave the following opinion: March 5. 1817. The headman, after the expiration of the urgent period of service, in accordance with paragraph 3 of the instructions, can be elected again when both the parishioners and the clergy agree to this, and when, after an examination of the affairs, his trusteeship turns out to be; but the two priests do not agree at all to continue the position of headman of Dementiev, and the archpriest agrees only on the condition that the headman be more serviceable in the future; upon examination of his affairs, it turned out to be faulty, which, by the way, is again confirmed by his very present petition, in which in the attached notes, 200 rubles are listed as a donation for the frames; and in the income book for this item 450 rubles are recorded and, consequently, 250 church rubles were used arbitrarily, against which all the clergy protested. Although some parishioners attached subscriptions at Dementiev’s request, they expressed a desire to continue his position: but this was done by them, of course, out of ignorance of his malfunction, which was discovered by formal research. Why leave Dementiev’s present request without action, leave in force the investigation made about him, the determination, and submit it to His Eminence for his consideration 280. April 26. On the determination of Archimandrites: Philaret and Innocent as members of the main board of schools, and their opinion on the project for establishing a second-class pedagogical institute A personal decree, April 7, 1817, ordered the archimandrites of the monasteries: Moscow Stavropegial Novospassky, rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy Filaret and Novgorod first-class Yuriev, rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary Innocent, to be members of the main board of schools 281. On Friday, April 13, Archimandrites Philaret and Innocent were present at a meeting of the main board 282. At this meeting, among other things, the above-mentioned personal decree and what was recorded in the journal, under Art. XV, presentation of the trustee of St. Petersburg. educational district of S.S. Uvarov that the main board of schools, at its meeting on January 12, instructed him to draw up a plan for the establishment, at the expense of the Larinsky capital, of a school dedicated to the education of teachers for parish schools. Having presented information about the amount of Larin capital, S.S. Uvarov stated that he had drawn up “a project for preliminary education of the second category of the main pedagogical institute and an approximate staff, which he presented to the board. When presenting the project and staff, S.S. Uvarov noted, “that the news and importance of this experience, the uncertainty of the methods, the need to act with force and rightly force him to ask to entrust this emerging institution to his direct management for a while. When it takes its intended course and approaches the desired structure, then this second category, with some unimportant changes in the way of management, will become part of the main pedagogical institute.” The board, at a meeting on April 13, decided: “to accept the project of preliminary education of the second category of the main pedagogical institute, as well as its approximate staff, as worthy of all approval, having made only some changes in the project, and submit it for the Highest approval.” Archimandrites: Philaret and Innokenty signed this journal, but with a reservation: “except for Article XV” 283. At the next meeting of the board, which took place on Friday, May 11, Archimandrites: Philaret and Innocent presented an opinion, signed by them, on April 26, with the following content: The project of establishing a second branch of the Pedagogical Institute for the education of teachers in district and parish schools is not such an easy subject that could suddenly be grasped in all its composition, relationships and consequences, in a short time of reading a note about it. Based on some comments made during this reading, upon further reflection on this matter, the following considerations emerge: 1) The second department of the Pedagogical Institute, although it joins this Institute in name, in fact is an alien member in the whole organism of public education. This organism consists of a gradualism of parish, district, provincial (Gymnasiums) and district (Universities and the Main Pedagogical Institute) schools: but the so-called second department is not at all included in this gradualism. The education assumed in it is not University education: and therefore it does not belong to the Pedagogical Institute, which is a perfect University, except in name. Not being the last place of learning, it does not have lower ones that would lead to it: and not being the first, it does not serve as a path to the main place of enlightenment. There is no place that would prepare for entry into the so-called second department: and those who have entered it will not find a place in which their education could be completed, for which, of course, some of them may be capable. 2) The Ministry of Education is not limited in the number of schools, and these schools are not so full of students that it is not possible to increase the number of students without multiplying the schools. Therefore, existing schools can and should train teachers. Otherwise, what does this vast organism of enlightenment mean when it cannot support itself? 3) If the most successful of the University students become teachers of Gymnasiums, then why don’t the mediocre ones become teachers of district schools? It seems that this was done at the local Pedagogical Institute. And this, being in accordance with justice, is also in accordance with the accepted order: for paragraph 101 of the charter of educational institutions subordinate to the Universities gives the right to teachers of district schools to become teachers of Gymnasiums, after improving their knowledge. 4) Gymnasiums, according to paragraph 4 of the same charter, having, among other things, the goal of teaching science, although elementary, but more fully in the discussion of the subjects of study, obviously have the purpose for which a new institution is now proposed. And so, instead of establishing a new institution, it seems sufficient to reinforce the Gymnasiums in fulfilling the duties already assigned to them. This is also very consistent with the general system of educational institutions. If Universities tend to train teachers for Gymnasiums, which serve as a breeding ground for Universities, then it is also common for Gymnasiums to supply teachers to district and parish schools, which serve as a breeding ground for Gymnasiums. There is experience of this in Theological Seminaries, which in the school system correspond to Gymnasiums. If there is a shortage of students in the Gymnasiums, let this deficiency be filled by those who would become part of the second department of the Institute. 5) If so many higher schools could not provide teachers to lower ones, then how can one second department of the Institute accomplish this? If many second departments are required, then this continued bifurcation of the school system will require large costs and can cause many difficulties for the authorities. 6) Without going beyond the current system of schools, without multiplying the places, officials and salaries required for them, the Main Board of Schools, for the acquisition of teachers for lower schools, will perhaps use Gymnasiums, which will receive no small encouragement for themselves and higher importance in the composition of the schools, if it is necessary: a) Gymnasiums, firstly, the most well-equipped, and, as internal improvement progresses, all, contain several government students, mainly teachers’ children, with the intention of training them to become teachers of lower schools. b) These pupils should listen to an ordinary gymnasium course of science, because a teacher of a lower school, who knows no more than the student, would not satisfy either himself or his students. c) Oblige these pupils, just as pupils of the Pedagogical Institute are obliged, to serve in favor of public education for at least six years. These considerations seemed to require bringing them to the attention of the Main Board of Schools and submitting them for their consideration; Moreover, the opinion expressed here is confirmed by the highest approved rule that has the force of law, which in paragraph 12 of the charter of educational institutions subordinate to universities reads as follows: “in the gymnasium, in addition to the usual teaching of science, those who wish to be teachers in district, parish and other schools are prepared for teaching positions.” Academy Rector Archimandrite Filaret Seminary Rector Archimandrite Innocent. Apr. 26. 1817 284. At the same meeting, on May 11, it was determined: the regulation of the main board of schools on this subject, which followed at the last meeting on April 13, should be brought into effect; only in the most comprehensive report explain at the beginning what regulations already exist regarding the education of candidates for the teaching rank for lower schools, and that, according to long-term experience, such measures have not been successful in achieving the desired goal; Therefore, the current proposal of the trustee, which represents greater convenience, the beginning of which is based on acquired experience, is intended to be used in a small form, solely to consider the successes that may result from it, but even more, due to the need to already have a breeding ground for teachers according to the new Lancastrian method, which is supposed to be introduced here, upon the return from England for this 4 students 285. In 1820, by order of the government, a brochure was published entitled: “News of the opening of a teacher’s institute at the imperial university, based on the report of the main school board, approved by the highest on the 25th day of October, 1817.” St. Petersburg, 1820." April 26. Letter from Archimandrite Philaret to V.M. Popov 286 on questions about academic degrees and the second category of the pedagogical institute 287 The cases of degrees and tables, which have been held for a long time in the same hands, I hasten to return to Your Excellency, although, if I dare to admit, I still do not see the light in this chaos. I left some concepts in my notes: but in order to establish my opinion, I humbly ask Your Excellency to provide me with the laws that already exist for public education, namely, preliminary rules (which are often mentioned in cases, and which I have not seen) and university statutes. In the case of the second department of the institute, I could not persuade myself not to submit a note: why didn’t I sign the journal, but I will sign, if sent, with a restriction, except for this article. The note that, having read, and Fr. Innokenty decided to sign, and I present it. There was a strange incident. I thought that I was writing about a subject on which there is no law yet. I finish the note and accidentally open the charter of educational institutions subordinate to universities, which I wrote about only in my opinion. That is why this rule is placed not at the beginning, but at the end of the note. With deep respect and devotion, I have the duty to be, Your Excellency, Most Gracious Sovereign, Archimandrite Philaret. Apr. 26. 1817 288 May 18. Archimandrite Philaret's opinion on the draft charter of the trustee committee of the imperial philanthropic society In the journal of the meeting of the council of the imp. Humane Society, May 18, 1817, under art. IV, it is written: “When reporting, the Trustee Committee presented a draft charter for this committee and proposals for the distribution of assistance to the poor.” On this charter, comments were made by members of the council of the imperial philanthropic society, and by the way, by the Novospassky archimandrite, Father Philaret, with the following content: The project's language needs correction in many places. Instead of what was said in § 13 289 about the vicious, it would be more consistent with the spirit of the Humane Society to say, for example, this: for people who only pretend to be poor, but in fact have the means to support themselves, or who are poor from idleness and laziness, the trustee committee is not obliged to do anything other than advise them to take advantage of the means of well-being legally given to them by Providence. In two cases, the philanthropy of the Trustee Committee provides active assistance to those who are poor from their own vice: 1) when it comes to preserving their lives, and 2) when they see a desire to turn to a hard-working life. But this help should not consist of money. The name of the temporary successor is not distinctive; for the Chairman is temporary, but not permanent 290. § 19 291 does not define how candidates for the lot are appointed and how many there are. This § 28 292 contains a fair and beneficial provision; but his language requires correction. Instead of the words until the last meeting, it seems that we should put until the present meeting 293. § 77 294 requires the Trustee to report every matter to the Chairman and the Committee in two ways. Doing every task is doubly burdensome and unnecessary. Therefore, it would be possible to limit the relationship of the Trustee to the Chairman, for example, like this: in cases that cannot tolerate slowness or require special attention and those about which the Chairman especially finds it necessary to know, the Trustees treat him strictly, without waiting for the Meeting. The council, at the same meeting, on May 18, determined: 1. The charter drawn up for the trustee committee, and (in the lists) comments made on it by the ranks of the council: the chief trustee, the privy councilor, Prince Golitsyn; his most reverend, spiritual father, Protopresbyter Krinitsky, his most reverend, Novospassky Archimandrite Philaret; gg. lieutenant generals: Count Liven and Akhverdov, and collegiate adviser Sturdzoya, forward to the committee on the scientific part so that this committee, after proper consideration and consideration of the charter with comments, draw up a systematic charter and in a short time present it to the council of the imperial philanthropic society. 2. As for the opinion of the council member, Major General Leontiev, only forward to the scientific committee those comments made on §§ 9, 33, 34, 37, 62, 81 and 91. On this basis, issue an order to the scientific committee 295. September 17. Report of Bishop Filaret of Revel, rector of St. Petersburg. Theological Academy, according to the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary External board of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. On May 29, 1817, for No. 37, the commission of theological schools, among other things, represented: “The board, having considered the responsibility assigned to it by rule 454 of the statute of theological academies regarding the review of district seminaries, decided: 1) point: although due to the popularity of the local seminary it could be left without review, but to preserve order and for convenience, entrust the review of its academy Rector Archimandrite Philaret. 2) A review of the army seminary 296, which has never been audited before, is considered necessary, which is why it is entrusted to the rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, Archimandrite Innocent, to carry it out. 3) Likewise, a review of the Iskovsky seminary, which was also not audited, is necessary, which is why it should be carried out through the master, priest Pavsky. 4) The Novgorod and Tver seminaries should now be left without review, both because they have recently been audited, and especially because the academy, due to current circumstances, is not convenient for this. 5) Also, the Arkhangelsk and Mogilev seminaries should be left without review due to their remoteness and due to the lack of the academy’s current means for this.” The Commission of Theological Schools, in the 1st article of its journal, on May 30, 1817, by the way, stated: 1) The opinion of the academic board regarding the review of the St. Petersburg and army seminaries should be approved. 2) Provide an overview of the Pskov seminary to the diocesan bishop so that the commission can be informed in detail about its state. 3) Grant the same to the Eminence of Arkhangelsk at the seminary there. 4) As for the other seminaries that remain without review, namely Novgorod, Tver and Mogilev, then instruct the academic board to demand from the seminary boards themselves the information that would be delivered through the auditor. 5) In general, confirm to seminaries that the placement of students in the first category - in the student's degree - is done with all legibility, and among other things, make it a rule that the number of students in the first category, as excellent, never exceeds a third of the total number of students in theology. 6) The communication on the 2nd and 3rd points of this article should be provided to His Eminence Ambrose, Metropolitan of Novgorod, and regarding the content of other provisions, an instruction should be made to the academic board.” In the same year, 1817, September 19, No. 75, the external board of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, in its presentation to the commission of theological schools, wrote: “His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel, rector of the academy, presented to the external academic board a report on his review of the local seminary. The board, having heard it, decided: a) to approve the division of the seminary students, according to the circumstances explained in this report, into two categories. b) Information about the state of the seminary and about the people in charge and teaching is to be submitted to the discretion of the commission of theological schools. c) At this end, the original report with appendices, after removing the lists, should also be submitted to the commission of theological schools, following the example of previous audits of the local seminary. To the external board of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. Having completed the review of the local Seminary entrusted to me, for the Board to consider the order in which this happened, I present herewith extracts from the journals of the Seminary Board under the letters A. B. C. D. E. F. G. N. with appendices a) b) c). Therefore, based on paragraphs 466 and 467 of the Academic Charter, I present the following comments to the discretion of the Board. I. I am duty-bound to testify about the state of the educational department at the Seminary that I consider it partly to be quite perfect, partly in a good direction and a constant progress towards perfection. Theological sciences, despite the limited manuals in some parts, still undeveloped in schools, are taught thoroughly and satisfactorily. It was comforting to see that spiritual knowledge had taken root in the minds and hearts of the disciples. In the Philosophical Sciences, the dilapidation and poverty of a classical book, such as Baumeister's, is corrected and supplemented by the concepts of modern Philosophy, borrowed carefully, presented clearly and without violating the ancient order of truths. Language arts are taught without unnecessary space and in a clear manner. Knowledge of Latin literature has not yet reached the desired degree of perfection: however, reliable efforts have been made in this regard, by reading Latin writers outside of classes, with a classical report during class time. The teaching of Church History rests somewhat blithely on the classic book. The lessons of World History, although not entirely systematic, are accepted quite firmly. The instructions in Physics are sufficient. I am pleased with my progress in the Hebrew language. II. The moral part is also found in a good structure, which it owes to the unflagging attention of both senior members of the Seminary Board. The students do not show absent-mindedness or rudeness, but calmness, obedience and attention to their work. III. The economic part is not equal in structure to the first two. Some shortcomings, such as full clothing for students, are inevitable due to the limited Seminar salaries and income. But unfortunately, it can be noted that the Seminary Economist does not correspond in its activities to the efforts that the Seminary Board uses to maintain economy and order in the economy. Without presenting this remark as a decisive opinion, however, for verification, I submit it to the Academic Board with a list from the journal under the letter N and appendices b) and c). IV. The full attention of the two senior members is visible in the proceedings of the Seminar Board. Small oversights in the forms noticed in magazine N, according to my explanation with the members of the board, arose from the confusion of the former secretary, burdened with affairs at various places of duty. V. Not at ordinary times, some students who did not promise much to the Seminary in terms of their mental abilities were dismissed from the Seminary due to requirements in the mission, based on the Highest Will. VI. Of the people in charge and students at the Seminary, the first and complete approval - I only testify out of obedience to the duty entrusted to me that what is truer and higher than my testimony - belongs to O. Rector, Archimandrite Innocent. The Academic Board itself could have seen this from the previous articles of this report. His special works are: his continued publication of the classic book he composed on Church History - not a simultaneous, but lasting gift to spiritual enlightenment, and the lessons of Active Theology, also written by himself, with the same vigilance and with the same hope for spiritual enlightenment. The limits of my duties do not allow me to expand on his other works. I cannot keep silent about one random remark, but which means a lot: I saw an essay written by a student not in his class, during vacation time, which he nevertheless read and examined. For him, as can be seen from the above, the Inspector Hieromonk Polycarp 297, who also zealously manages the moral part and the class of philosophical sciences entrusted to him, deserves special attention and favor from the authorities. The fruit of his hard work is the extract of Philosophical History, compiled by him. Professor of Mathematics and Physics, Hieromonk (now Archimandrite) Neophyte 298, through his own labor, collected the lessons of Physics and taught them correctly. It’s just a pity that there weren’t enough experiments to decorate and create a vivid impression of them. Ivan Smirnov is a Professor of Literature, firm in concepts, persistent in suggestions, skillful in applying to the minds of beginners. In the position of Professor of World History, Polyansky, according to what was noted about him above, and by his seniority in the position in comparison with the new Professors of the second Academic year, whether he has the right to the title of Professor, I submit to the consideration of the Academic Board. The Professor of Church History was mentioned above. The Academic Board does not deign to associate with important conclusions, after the comments verbally made by me in the Seminary. Filaret Bishop of Revel, Rector of the Academy. September 17, 1817. The following documents are attached to the report, written in Bishop Philaret’s own hand: A. List from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, July 9, 1817. The meeting started at 8 o'clock. morning. The test was carried out for students of the highest department in theological sciences; at the same time, three students of the secondary department were tested in philosophical sciences. Pupils of the lower department composed in Russian from a proposal given by the auditor about the power of the human word. The meeting ended at half past one in the afternoon. V. List from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, July 11, 1817. The meeting started at 7 o'clock. morning. A test was carried out for other students of the secondary department in philosophical sciences. At the same time, the students of the higher and lower departments composed from proposals appointed by the auditor; the first of the sentences: a) everyone who sins has not seen or known God; everyone who abides in Him does not sin; b) everyone who denies a son does not have a father, but he who confesses a son has also a father; the last of the sentence: omnis, qui non operatur justitiam, non est ex Deo. The test ended at 10 o'clock before noon. S. List from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary This 1817, July 11th, due to lack of time with the city auditor, in the afternoon, it was agreed that the seminary board, in its absence, would test the students in the languages: Greek, German and French. Accordingly, the board, having arrived at the seminar hall at 4 o’clock, tested the students of all three departments in these languages as follows: G. the professor gave questions, and the board called for answers to these questions. For each class of languages, questions began with grammar and especially syntax, and continued with translations from the native language into a foreign language and vice versa. The meeting ended at 7:30. D. List from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, July 12, 1817. The meeting started at 8 a.m. The test was carried out for students of the lower department in verbal sciences. At the same time, the students of the higher department composed in Latin from the sentence given by the auditor: Quinam est status animarum inter mortem corporis et judicium extremum; and the students of the secondary department from the proposal also given by the auditor: 1st. Utrum natura sua intrinseca, an Dei voluntate anima est immortalis? 2nd. Quodnam est firmissimum argumentum pro immortalitate animae? At the end of the questions, the students of the lower department were given a proposal for an oral composition (expromptum): “after work, relaxation is pleasant,” and these compositions were heard from some. The meeting ended at 1 o'clock in the afternoon. E. List from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, July 12, 1817. The meeting began at 3 pm The students of the highest department were tested in church history, and the middle department in the mathematical and physical sciences. The meeting ended at half past six. F. List from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg spiritual seven- The test was carried out on students of the lower department in general history and geography, and in reading Latin writers. At the same time, the students of the middle department composed in Russian from the sentences given by the auditor: 1st. Since the concept of motion is relative, is it the same that the earth revolves around the sun, or the sun around the earth? 2nd. Is light a substance or just a phenomenon of substance? Finally, the students of the higher and secondary departments in the Hebrew language were tested. The test ended at 1 o'clock in the afternoon. G. List from the journal, August 28, 1817 At a meeting of the seminary board, in common with those appointed to review the seminary, the exercises written by the students during the test were considered, and, based on their merits with the comments made during the oral test, and with the testimony of the rector and inspector of the seminary about the behavior of the students, rank lists were compiled. Due to the state in which the higher department of the seminary was found and due to the fact that the students of this department were engaged in theological sciences for four years, this time it was decided that the third category in this department should not be and for this to seek the approval of the academic board. Then the first category, which is the category of students, is made up of 6 people, and the second of 7. In the middle department of the seminary, the category of successful students, appointed for entry into higher education, consists of 27 students; category of unsuccessful ones, left to repeat the philosophical course, out of 3; category of unreliable, designated for exclusion, from 3. From the lower section of the reliable and successful, 51 were appointed to the middle section; trustworthy but less successful were left in the same department 19; 6 unreliable persons are designated for exclusion. N. List from the magazine, September 4 days, 1817 Appointed to inspect the seminary, together with the rector of the seminary, the board and the seminary house in some of its parts were inspected. It was proposed to the seminary board: 1. Provide the observer with written information about how many students live in the seminary house, and how many of them more or less enjoy government support, and how many live outside the seminary house. 2. Let the observer know why the seminary economist, who was present at the board meeting on June 9, 1816, did not sign the journal of this meeting, although it contains economic articles? 3. The exclusion of incapable students should not be confused in the title with dismissal, as was done in 1 article of the magazine, July 19, 1816, contrary to the rule of the charter given there. 4. Do not leave matters reported at board meetings without resolutions, as was done with Article 1, March 10, 1816. 5. Priests and deacons should not be assigned to teaching positions, nor should they be dismissed or removed from them, without the approval of His Eminence, as was done in Articles II and III of the journal, April 9, 1817. 6. Give the reviewer lists from article VI of the magazine, June 9, 1816, and articles III and IV, June 2, 1817. 7. Confirm with the seminary housekeeper that the tablecloths in the dining room are cleaned of pieces and crumbs after each table. a) To His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel, the rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy and the gentleman reviewing the local seminary, a presentation from the board of the St. Petersburg seminary. In response to Your Eminence's proposal as to how many students live in the seminary house, and how many of them more or less enjoy government support, and how many live outside the seminary house, the seminary board submits that from September 1, 1815 to September 1, 1817, there were 126 students in the seminary house; of them, from 100 to 85 were on government pay, of which 4 used apartments and food, 32 students contributed money for maintenance; 5 students lived outside the seminary house. September 17, 1817. b) List from article VI of the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg seminary, June 9, 1816. c) List of articles III and IV from the journal of the board of the St. Petersburg seminary, July 2, 1817. The Commission of Theological Schools, having heard the presentation of the external board of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy with a report on the audit of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, magazine, September 21, 1817, decided: 1st. Please take note of the position of the academic board on dividing the students of the local seminary, in respect of their four years of listening to theological sciences and satisfied successes, into two categories. 2nd. The academic board will take care of the works of the seminary professors, so that those of them that are needed for classical use, either now, or after revision by the authors, are required for consideration for publication at the academic conference. 3rd. Accepting with respect Archimandrite Innocent’s three-year zealous and excellently successful holding of the positions of rector and professor, his three-year service as a senior member of the censorship committee of the St. Petersburg district, without salary for this last position, and his composition of a classic book, which he placed at the disposal of the commission of theological schools, let Mr. Privy Councilor Prince Golitsyn report on his, Archimandrite’s, excellence Innokenty, service to the highest knowledge, and to ensure his maintenance, from the general reserve school funds, while he continues his school service, 1500 rubles. per year. 4th. To present the zealous service of the inspector and professor Hieromonk Polycarp to the Holy Synod, with approval for election to the rank of archimandrite. 5th. Professor Smirnov, as a reward and in respect of his family fortune, due to which he cannot use the apartment from the seminary, will be given a lump sum annual salary of 650 rubles from the school surplus under the department of the seminary board. 6th. In the position of professor, Polyansky should be called professor as an encouragement. Issue instructions to the academic board regarding the contents of paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 6 of this article. 300 December 27. Opinion of Filaret, Bishop of Revel, on the project of the former superintendent of schools of the Skopinsky district, Kuminsky, on the opening of one parish school throughout Russia in two parishes In the journal of the main board of schools, on November 14, 1817, it is written: “a petition was heard from the superintendent of schools of the Skopinsky district, titular councilor Kuminsky 301, dated September 25, in which he writes that his 30-year stay in an academic position gave him the opportunity to find out by experience the impossibility of establishing parish schools everywhere, on the basis of the charter of educational institutions, without the use of more any other means. Why did he draw up a project for the widespread dissemination of education in Russia, through the establishment of one parish school in every two parishes, which, presenting it, asks to bring it to the highest attention. This project requires: 1) The position of deacon to be combined with the position of a parish teacher without salary to this day. 2) Excluding holidays and time days, dismiss the deacon-teacher from all requirements. 3) To appoint educated people as deacons, that is, from seminarians who have completed a course of science, who are promoted to priest after six years of service in the rank of deacon-teacher. 4) Parochial schools should be established only in parishes of the first three classes, that is, in which deacons have been appointed. 5) The construction and maintenance of schools should be entrusted to the parishioners. And to make it easier, in each parish to build houses, use the church sum of the parish in which the school is located, so that within three or six years it will be returned to the church from the parishioners, according to a voluntary donation. This is the same remedy to use if you do not receive from them in due time the amount required for heating and lighting the school building. 6) In every parish, appoint a priest as the overseer of the school. 7) The economic part is in charge of the church warden, under the main supervision of the overseer-priest. 8) The guard, who is required by the staff at each church of the first three classes, to be appointed as the guard of the school. 9) Educate children of all conditions in parish schools. 10) To collect fees for teaching, based on the report of the main board of schools, June 14, 1817. 11) Parish schools should depend on district religious schools. Their dependence on the district public schools will consist in the fact that the superintendent of them, together with the ecclesiastical rectors, make plans for rewarding parish teachers; together they are present at open tests carried out in these schools, and receive semi-annual and annual reports from them. This same project proposes to the spiritual authorities: 1) distribute parishes into classes; 2) appoint a staff of church ministers for each class. 3) determine what portion of the total income from the church each clergyman should receive: 4) establish rules for the production of clergy and clergymen.” At the same meeting, on November 14, it was determined: “to allow the member of the board, the Most Reverend Philaret, Bishop of Revel, to consider this project and report his opinion on whether the measures proposed in it for the establishment of the mentioned schools can be sufficient, and whether they will be consistent with all the circumstances related to them, so that the board can judge whether this matter should be given further progress, in accordance with the decision of the petitioner.” Filaret, Bishop of Revel, on December 27, 1817, presented to the board an opinion, written in his own hand, with the following content: In the project on parish schools, the consideration of which the Main Board of Schools was pleased to entrust to me, the following assumptions are found, among other things: 1) The office of deacon should be permanently combined with the office of parish school teacher. 2) Upon completion of the course of study, seminarians are graduated not to become priests, but to become teachers with the rank of deacon for six years. 3) Use a church loan for the construction, heating and lighting of the school house. 4) Reduce the staffing number of parish religious schools to 500. 5) Proceed immediately to the distribution of parishes into classes and to the placement of clergy according to their abilities, about which the author of the project gives his rules. 6) Appoint a staff of clergy for each parish. Which staff he appoints. 7) Determine what portion of the total income from the church each of the clergy should receive. Which is what he defines. 8) Establish certain rules for the production of clergy, which they decide; for example: cancel approvals from parishioners altogether; the distribution of seminarians among parishes should be provided to the seminary council, etc. It is not difficult to see that the basis of these assumptions is the following general assumption: to transform the parish clergy and its administration for the sake of the formation of parish public schools. Without entering into a discussion about the correspondence of this means with this goal, and without accepting a full consideration of such a subject, which by its nature and importance belongs to the consideration of the Spiritual Authority, I will limit myself, according to the instructions of the Main Board of Schools, to comments on the compatibility of the above assumptions with the circumstances affecting them. It is not convenient to combine the position of deacon of a farmer (and most of them, except for urban ones) with the position of a teacher. The payment for studying does not provide daily bread, which is provided by cultivating the land with one’s own hands. There are not enough seminarians who have completed their course of study for priestly positions: where can we find them as teachers with the rank of deacon? The church sum in most churches is barely enough for the churches’ own needs. However, the idea of ​​using deacons for the instruction of adolescence, in a private form, is not entirely unfeasible, and even deserves attention. Filaret Bishop of Revel. Dec. 27. 1817 Bishop Filaret's opinion was heard at the board meeting. February 14, 1818, and it was determined: “Give Mr. Correcting the position of Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education to express gratitude to Mr. Kuminsky for his well-intentioned work, while informing him in a copy of the written opinion about the project presented by him, in order to show him the reasons why his project should remain unfulfilled” 302. Report registry. St. Petersburg spirit. Consist. for 1817, No. 362. Report registry. St. Petersburg spirits Consist., for 1817, No. 268. The content of § 27 is as follows: “To supervise the boys, the order and arrangement in the house and all the small domestic affairs, regarding food, clothing, shoes and linen of the boys, as well as keeping them in the best possible neatness and constant cleanliness, a reliable caretaker is appointed, by election of the committee, who, in addition to the above-mentioned economic positions, has a special duty to monitor the morality of the boys entrusted to his supervision, who for this reason are obliged to show him complete obedience and obedience in everything; so evenly, those servants and workers who, by order of the committee, will be recognized as necessary for services in the house, should be under its jurisdiction and under its command. The hiring and dismissal of them, as well as the caretaker himself, depends on the committee.” In § 28 it is said: “The committee has the responsibility for finding and assigning teachers to teach boys, depending on their age, the law of God, reading and penmanship of the Russian language and the first four rules of arithmetic, having due monitoring of the success of this teaching; in his free time from studying, he occupies the boys, at his discretion, with their work and housework, which is typical for summer. The duty of the committee will be, on the one hand, to accustom boys to hard work and to find funds in the nursing home itself, to give them basic concepts and exercises in certain crafts; on the other hand, to reveal their natural abilities and innate talents, and promote their development; those of them, who will subsequently prove capable of doing so, will provide means for the study of the arts and liberal sciences. Note: If the committee finds it convenient, then it can assign both positions, that of caretaker and that of teacher, to one person.” The content of § 30 is as follows: “The housekeeper has the obligation to make in advance, at an appropriate and convenient time, a detailed and thorough estimate of all materials, supplies and other needs for the charity home for poor children, with approximate prices and estimates for everything, and submits this estimate to the respect of the committee. After consideration and respect by the committee of this calculation, the treasurer is ordered to release the money to the steward, according to his requirements, to account for the amounts that have been approximately calculated for these costs. The housekeeper, for his part, did not waste time, making all the necessary purchases in those ways and means that he recognized as the most convenient and profitable, observing in any case and by all means the benefit of this establishment. Everything purchased by the housekeeper is handed over to the caretaker of the house, whose responsibility lies with the integrity and lasting preservation of it all; for the steward is actually responsible only for the goodness and freshness of the needs he has purchased, and so that a premature deficiency cannot result from them; at which end he receives a weekly report from the caretaker about everything that was issued or consumed during the week. Moreover, he carefully monitors that there are no unnecessary and wasteful issuances and expenses, having every right to demand from the superintendent a strict account of everything and often verifying the integrity and availability of the needs purchased by him with his own supervision and personal inspection. In the event of any omissions on the part of the superintendent, a faulty report, or non-compliance with the duties assigned to him, the steward must immediately notify the committee of trustees so that appropriate measures can be taken on this subject.” The contents of §§ 38 and 39 are as follows: § 38. “The guardian on duty is, during the week of his duty, literally the true house-builder and complete owner of the institution for the care of poor young children; and therefore the caretaker of the house, with all the servants, is at his complete disposal and unquestioningly carries out all his orders. The guardian on duty is obliged, if not every day, then at least as often as possible during the week of his duty, to visit the charity house at any time, delving into everything that happens in it and witnessing the food, maintenance, teaching and activities of the boys. He ensures that everything related to the improvement of the house is strictly observed; immediately stops any disorder he sees and gives his permission to the caretaker and all other persons for all cases requiring it. The visit and placement of orphans who enter the house during his watch depend on him, on the basis of the rules established below on this subject. In the event of any emergency that exceeds the authority assigned to him or requires a meeting of the committee, he notifies the chairman, who, depending on the importance of the matter, can immediately invite the members of the committee to meet or allows it himself, or leaves it until the first ordinary meeting. The guardian on duty pays his main attention to everything that can serve to improve the physical, and especially the moral, situation of the despised orphans; for he must see in himself a humane father, whose children make up his family, and therefore, in accordance with this concept, he must measure his care for them.” § 39. “The guardian on duty writes down every day in a corded book specially kept for this purpose in the charity house, both the time of his visits and everything worthy of attention, such as: in what order he found the institution that day, or what disorder he saw and how it was stopped; what permissions were made in response to representations from the superintendent or other persons, or what orders were given to him; what and on what subject is ordered to be issued for different needs, in a word, this book should be a journal of all remarkable actions and incidents, and serve instead of handing over one duty trustee to another. And since it must be proposed for consideration by the committee at each monthly meeting, it will serve the trustees on duty instead of reporting on their actions while on duty.” The draft charter for the committee for the charity of poor children was signed by: chamber cadet, 5th grade, Lansky; college advice. Apukhtin; chamber cadet, 5th class, Vielgorsky; regiments Petrov-Solovago; coll. advice. Kishensky; Headquarters physician, superintendent advice., Mundom; above advice to Rimsky-Korsakov and above. advice. Yartsov. Journal Council, for 1817, March 17, No. 7, pp. 1 and 2. The text of § 57 is as follows: “A poor child who is thus placed in a charity home remains there under the command of a caretaker, practicing learning and other activities, as stated above in § 28, until the time when he can be given to study any craft or art, that is, having reached the age of 12 to 14, depending on the build of the orphan and taking into account the craft and art to which he is assigned. Everything related to giving orphans for training in crafts and arts, such as: finding good behavior, sober and well-known masters to whom to send them; the age of the boys, when they will receive such training, the rules under which they can be assigned, and so on, are entrusted entirely to the care of the chairman and the steward, who, when assigning boys to crafts and arts, are guided as much as possible by their own desires and the inclinations and abilities noticed in them, and in addition, about their physical constitution, they consult with members of the medical profession, in order to choose a craft for them accordingly. Moreover, they try to send them to education without any payment for this, and in years, but if in relation to another orphan an obstacle is encountered from this side, then in this case they are presented to the respect of the committee of trustees and, with its approval, they charge as reasonable a fee for education as possible. The chairman and the steward do not limit their care on this subject only, but even after sending the boys to study, they often inquire about their behavior, diligence and success; and upon demand, they sometimes take the necessary measures of rigor to induce greater diligence in the boys and to show due obedience to their masters, sometimes verifying everything with their personal supervision and often delivering detailed information about all this to the committee in its monthly meetings. Note. Contracts with artisans for the education of orphans in crafts or arts are concluded and signed by the chairman on behalf of the committee of trustees. The text of § 54 is as follows: “Everyone who submits to the committee of trustees for admission to an orphanage a poor child whom he has found, is obliged first of all to collect all the information necessary about the orphan proposed by him, and, having compiled a detailed note from it, signed by himself, present it to the chairman of the committee, who, if he does not find it sufficient, demands the necessary additions from the one who submitted it; If he finds it satisfactory, then he sends it, in his opinion, to the trustee committee so that he would be pleased for his part to testify to the validity of the information collected about the proposed young poor person, and if the feedback received from the trustee committee confirms the reliability of the helpless situation of the orphan, then the chairman, on behalf of the committee, refers to the authorities in whose jurisdiction the proposed poor person is, asking his consent to dismiss this orphan for education in a charity home and at his complete disposal and dependence, until the time when he is trained in some craft or art, that is, until the age of 19 or 20, and if he agrees to this, he asks for a ticket to be delivered, according to which the said poor minor could be placed in a charity home. Meanwhile, if during this time a monthly meeting of the committee occurs, the chairman notifies the trustees about all these actions and offers for consideration all the information collected on the account of the orphan being submitted for adoption. The committee then decides whether it should be accepted or not; and if it is determined to accept him, then when, in response to the request made for his dismissal, the authorities to whom it concerned respond that, on the basis of the rules set out about this in the highest confirmed draft of this institution, there is no obstacle on his part to the placement of the said poor minor in a charity home, then the chairman, with a note drawn up from the information collected about the orphan, forwards him to to the duty trustee, who places him in the position described below in §§ 55 and 56.” Note. If there does not happen to be a meeting of the committee during the time when the orphan is presented for adoption, and until all the information on his account has been collected, the consent required for his dismissal is also obtained from the authorities on whom he depends, then, in order to avoid wasting time, the chairman of the committee is entrusted with the right in his own person to determine, at his own discretion, the placement of this orphan in a charity home, about which the chairman notifies the committee at the first subsequent meeting. Genuine stores. in the case of chancellor emperor manol. society, 1816, No. 20, part. 1st, l. 104. It's a matter of office. imperial council philanthropic. general., 1816, No. 20, fox. 45; magazine advice and part about, for 1817, No. 7. Report. registry. St. Petersburg spirit. Consist., for 1817, No. 897. Here is another view of the archimandrite. Philaret about church elders, written by him in the report register of St. Petersburg. consistory, in the case of the examination of the Vladimir church: “February 19. 1817. The headman, according to the investigation and a new report from the dean, turns out to be faulty and unreliable for continued service because 1) during the almost eight-year continuation of his position, he remained with a faulty and unapproved inventory of church property, without trying to bring what was entrusted to him into clear knowledge and, in case of inattention to this by the clergy, without reporting the faulty inventory to the higher authorities; 2) did not try to repair the sacristy, despite the representations of the clergy; 3) occupies a church apartment worth 300 rubles, which, according to the testimony of Priest Platonov, costs more than 800 rubles, and according to the investigator, more than 1000 rubles; 4) uses sums willfully and contrary to the consent of the priest, such as he especially used 450 rubles to make three frames, when the clergy found it necessary to update the entire iconostasis, which is why they did not sign the account book for the month of March of last year. Why instruct the dean that during the upcoming election of a new headman, the previous one should not be accepted as a candidate, but another person worthy of general trust would be elected? Since the compilation of a correct inventory of church property required the care of the clergy, and especially the archpriest, as a commander, then confirm both to him, the archpriest, and to the entire clergy, so that care was attached to strictly compile a complete and correct church inventory, and, after proper signing, submit it to the consistory for approval, and upon delivery of the property to the elder who will be elected, strict and vigilant supervision over the integrity of it and the storage and use of amounts in accordance with the full force of the instructions of the elders. Without putting this into effect, submit this opinion to the discretion and permission of his Eminence. Report. registry. St. Petersburg spirit. Consist., for 1817, No. 288. Minister's case. people. enlightenment, storage in his archive, 1817, maps. No. 209; case No. 9607, fox. 1; business comm. spirit. taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1817, No. 47 (1276). In 1817, in the main board of the schools, in addition to the archimandrites: Philaret and Innokenty, the following were members: the current minister of public education, Comrade Sov., Senator Prince A. N. Golitsyn; valid Art. owls Peter Havre. Divov; will take care Kazan educational district, valid. Art. owls Mich. Alex. Saltykov; valid Art. owls Nick. Iv. Fus; will take care St. Petersburg educational district, actual Art. owls Serg. Semyon. Uvarov i-act. stat. owls Iv. Iv. Martynov. Journal chapters right taught, stored in the archives of the Moscow Nar. prosp., for 1817, No. 4. Case minis. people. enlightening, storing in his archive, 1817, maps. No. 98. No. 972. Journals of the main government. schools, storage in the archives of the minister. people. education, for 1817, journal. No. 5. Letter without first and last name; but it, of course, was addressed to Vasily Mikhailovich Popov, who occupied the position of director of the department. min. people. enlightenment, from February 17, 1817 to May 16, 1824. Ministerial case. people. enlightenment, 1817, No. 9691, map. No. 210. Metropolitan's opinion Filaret on the issue of the second category of the pedagogical institute, see above, No. 98, and on academic degrees - below, No. 103. From the case of the minister. people. enlightenment, 1817, map. 98, No. 972. The text of § 13 is as follows: “Although it is regrettable for humanity to expose deception and shy away from the poor, whose debauchery and laziness are the cause of his condition; but justice stands up for bashful and modest poverty, so that arrogance and pretense do not take away what belongs to this and not this. And so the wicked are excluded from participation in the charity of a humane society.” This remark belongs to § 17. The content of § 17 is as follows: “In case the chairman cannot be present due to illness or departure, the trustee committee has one temporary successor to the chairman, elected in the same manner by all members, and approved by the council for a year. This successor, since the chairman is absent, will correct his position.” The content of § 19 is as follows: “With this intention, the members of the committee, when reviewing the poor, try to notice those who differ among them in their love of humanity, prudence and pious life, and about such they submit to the committee, with their own signature, considerations that they are worthy of occupying positions of trustees; these certificates are kept without disclosure in the committee under the seal of the chairman; and in the case of a trustee vacancy, from these approved ones, and also from those especially honored by the members, the candidate is chosen by lot, in the assembly drawn.” The contents of § 28 are as follows. “The Committee promotes charitable enterprises for the benefit of the poor to all beneficent persons when its actions in accordance with philanthropic assistance are required.” This remark belongs to § 36. Its text is as follows: “So that the members in each meeting can keep in mind the information that belongs to their titles, then at this meeting they decide: the secretary, the formation of a philanthropic society and other decisions related to this; also lists and alphabets for the poor; treasurer, calculation of receipts, expenditures and cash availability until the last meeting.” The text of § 77 is as follows: “Each trustee accepts assignments from the trustee committee, carries them out with precision and reports their success or obstacles to the meeting, first letting the chairman know about it.” Journal p.ch.o., for 1817, No. 11. Genuine opinion of archim. Filaret, in the file of the office of the society, 1816, No. 35, was not found. In 1817, on July 23, the rector of St. Petersburg. Theological Academy, Archimandrite Philaret, was ordered by the highest decree to ordain the Bishop of Revel. The personal decree given to the Holy Synod states: “Based on the opinion of the Metropolitan of Novgorod and St. Petersburg, I command that Archimandrite Philaret of the Moscow first-class Novospassky monastery be consecrated to the rank of bishop, vicar of the St. Petersburg diocese, with the title Bishop of Revel, leaving him, however, under the St. Petersburg spiritual Academy rector is still under his control of the Novospassky Moscow monastery. He shall perform the office of vicar according to the rules that exist for vicar bishops; The next salary for this rank should be made from the sums generally allocated for the spiritual department, instead of 60 acres of land, fisheries, a mill and 12 servants, allotted to vicars, to be issued from the same sums at two thousand rubles per year. He will be content with the services of the clergy during the rites, as well as with the sacristy, from the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. The Holy Synod will not leave to make the proper order on this matter. Case comm. spirit. taught, stored in the archives, Holy Synod 1817, No. 89 (1218).” The army seminary, established in 1800, was closed in 1819, and the students were distributed to diocesan theological schools and seminaries. Polikarp, Goitannikov, 1st year master of St. Petersburg. spirit. academies; in 1817 he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite; in 1819 he was appointed rector of St. Petersburg. spirit. seminaries; in 1824 he was appointed rector of Moscow. spirit. Academy, and then the Novospassky Monastery was given to him to manage. Upon his dismissal from the post of rector of the academy in 1835, he lived in the Novospassky Monastery, where he died on January 17. 1837. Subsequently, Bishop of Arkhangelsk, died on June 8, 1825. The documents attached to the report of Bishop Philaret of Revel were signed by: the rector of the seminary, Archimandrite Innocent; inspector, Hieromonk Polycarp; housekeeper, archpriest Pyotr Turchaninov and secretary Platunov. Affairs comm. spirit. taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1817, Nos. 68 (1297) and 115 (1345). Titular Councilor Kuminsky studied at the Ryazan seminary until the Philosophical class, then, at his own request, he entered the Ryazan Main Public School to study the method of teaching science in public schools, from where he was appointed teacher of both classes at the Pronsky Small Public School, 1787, February 14th. While in a teaching position, at the same time he privately studied logic, legal philosophy, physics and geometry. In a supervisory position at the Skopino district school, since 1808, August 4th. Discharged, June 6, 1817, having been in the service for 30 years. (The file of the Ministry of Public Education, stored in its archives, 1803, card No. 1015, file No. 39056.). Case min. adv. Prosv., 1803, No. 39056, map. No. 1015.