1822 г.

February 2. The opinion of Archbishop Philaret of Moscow on the issue of ways to strengthen Orthodox teaching among the people through students in theological schools On the occasion of a copy of its resolution, dated January 10, 1821, reported from the Holy Synod, about the orders it made to strengthen the Orthodox teaching among the people through the diocesan clergy, with the provision of the commission of theological schools to make a similar order and, in its department, through those teaching in educational institutions, the commission, in a journal, dated November 26 of the same year, decided: to request the opinion of a member of the commission, the Reverend Philaret, Archbishop of Moscow. On this occasion, Archbishop Filaret wrote on February 2: To the commission of theological schools, its member Filaret, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna, opinion. On November 26, 1821, as a result of the determination of the Holy Synod, the commission of theological schools determined: regarding ways to strengthen the Orthodox teaching among the people through the mediation of students in theological schools, to solicit my opinion for their consideration. In pursuance of this determination, I have the duty to submit the following to the discretion of the commission of theological schools: Although the specific purpose of theological schools is the education of youth preparing for spiritual positions, and although it is not entirely convenient to use students in schools to strengthen the Orthodox teaching among the people, because the teaching position, always combined with the obligation to strengthen one’s own knowledge, can completely fill the time of the most zealous and capable person with work; however, there still remains, in my opinion, a way - without distracting students in schools from their essential duty to educate youth, partly to turn their abilities and labors towards national instruction. For this purpose, schools could be prescribed: 1) In academies and seminaries, introduce interpretation of the Holy Scriptures on Sundays, in church, before the liturgy or at the liturgy. 2) If this interpretation is given at the liturgy, then the sermons prescribed by the charter of the schools for students to speak either in another church, or in the school hall, at a decent time. 3) Offer the interpretation not as a scientific study, but as an edifying reflection, in the form of conversations, in simple and intelligible language, in accordance with the teaching of Orthodox teaching to the people prescribed by the Holy Synod. 4) For interpretation, select those books of Holy Scripture that most closely introduce the interpreter to the teaching of active Christianity, such as, for example, the Apostolic Epistles. 5) Entrust interpretation to rectors and students, based on their main exercises, by mutual agreement, in turn, at the discretion of local authorities. 6) For this, introduced in seminaries, once a week, the reading of the Holy Scriptures, with an explanation during school hours, whether to continue or replace this with a church interpretation is left to the discretion of the local authorities, according to the circumstances. However, it goes without saying that in the academies the general class of reading the Holy Scriptures should remain in operation as before. 7) To allow sometimes, instead of interpreting the Holy Scriptures, to pronounce the conversations of the holy fathers, which, for the sake of decency, are selected and translated into a generally intelligible Russian dialect. 8) In district and parish schools, to the extent possible, introduce the teaching of Christian teaching in churches, through the heads and teachers of these schools, in the form prescribed by the Holy Synod for the clergy serving in churches. 9) Concerning persons, places, objects and plans for such exercises, seek permission from local bishops, to whom the spoken conversations can be presented, so that what is worthy does not remain unattended, but is brought to the attention of the Holy Synod or the commission of theological schools, to encourage the working people. 10) For everyone who has been constantly engaged in this generally useful exercise for at least a year, enter this circumstance into his service record. Filaret, Archbishop of Moscow No. 56. February 2, 1822 The commission, in a journal dated March 23 of the same year, 1822, recognizing the opinion of Archbishop Philaret on the ways of promoting Orthodox teaching among the people, through teaching in theological schools, is thorough and convenient for achieving the intended goal, decided (Article LIV) to put it into effect 85. July 29. Proposal from Archbishop Philaret of the Moscow Holy Synod Office, with a copy of the rescript on the storage of the shrine in the Assumption Cathedral attached. Moscow Holy Governing Synod office proposal. Based on the rescript addressed to me by His Highest Imperial Majesty regarding the storage of the shrine in the great Moscow Assumption Cathedral, I offer a certified list at this office of the Holy Synod. It is my duty to add that for the holy things kept in the altar, I propose to arrange a decent and safe place in the chapel, opposite the relics of St. Peter. What to do before the announcement of the rules set out in the Highest Rescript to the Chudov hieromonks who are in charge of the shrine in the Assumption Cathedral, I have ordered the consistory to do so. No. 314. July 29, 1822 Attached to the proposal is a list from the following document: “The Most Reverend Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna Filaret. Wanting to remove the impropriety that could be tempting and incompatible with the shrine, revealed in the collection of manual contributions by clergy and guards who are entrusted with the supervision of the shrine in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral and who, not having a share in the general cathedral revenues, are not provided with their maintenance, I recognized it as good to approve the additional staff presented to me by the Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education salaries of employees when storing the shrine in the Assumption Cathedral, and for the future, establish the following rules: 1) to avert inconvenience, carry out in the hands of the shrine the things stored in the altar to those who come to worship the shrine and want to honor them with a reverent kiss, have a decent place set up for storing them, so that the worshipers themselves can begin to kiss them. 2) Priests and guardians, when guarding shrines, should by no means accept manual alms, allowing worshipers to place their offerings in circles arranged in decent places, and immediately place what is placed on the tombs of holy saints in these circles. 3) In addition to the general income circle of the entire cathedral clergy, it is prohibited to have a special one for collection in favor of sextons and watchmen, whose salaries will now be distributed according to additional salaries of 1,500 rubles. 4) The exact execution of these rules must be monitored by the sacellary and the cathedral elder, and any deviation from them must be strictly brought to the attention of the protopresbyter, who will put an end to the disorder, and, in cases of particular importance, report to the synodal office.” Along with this, I instruct our Eminence, by the title of synodal member and Moscow archpastor, to have special care so that the above rules are followed exactly. I am favorable to you. Alexy. In Peterhof, July 25, 1822 86. July 29. Report from Archbishop Philaret of Moscow to the Holy Synod, with an opinion on the brief Russian church history of Metropolitan Platon of Moscow, published in 1805 Archbishop Philaret, dated July 29, 1822, No. 312, reported to the Holy Synod: To the Holy Governing Synod from its member Filaret, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna and Knight, a report. Moscow Pokrovsky Cathedral, Archpriest John Platonov, in a petition submitted to me, states that Plato, Metropolitan of Moscow, his uncle of blessed memory, in 1808, September 13th, gave him permission to print all his works in print, if he wishes, to reprint them, or how many of them, or to whom he agrees to hand over their printing, and not to print them to anyone else. By this right, he asked the Moscow spiritual censorship, and in 1814, April 15, it presented the Holy Governing Synod with permission to print in the synodal printing house: church history, a speech on the coronation of the now reigning Sovereign Emperor Alexander 1st and the spiritual testament of the late Right Reverend, with the provision of one factory to the merchant Telepnev; but this spiritual censorship did not receive permission from the Holy Governing Synod. Now he wants to print the above-mentioned works and all other printed works, according to the right given to him, again in the synodal printing house for his own money, without granting this right to anyone else. In conclusion, the named Archpriest Platonov asks me to petition him from the Holy Governing Synod for permission to publish the newly mentioned, previously published, works of the late Metropolitan Plato. With the attachment of the certificate presented by the archpriest, confirming his right, reporting this to the Holy Synod, I most respectfully request the permission of the decree. Your Holiness's humblest novice. Filaret, Archbishop of Moscow After considering this report, the Holy Synod, taking into account that the Moscow spiritual censorship had previously intended to exclude some passages from the church history of the late Metropolitan Plato, by a decision dated August 25/September 22 of the same 1822, forwarded this history for consideration to the Most Reverend Philaret, so that, after consideration, he would present an opinion regarding the publication of that book again. As for the other works of the late Metropolitan, previously published, Archpriest Platonov is allowed to publish them again; about which His Eminence Philaret was given to know by decree of September 23, No. 5534 87. August 17. Report from Archbishop Philaret of Moscow to the Holy Synod on the state of the Moscow Theological Academy On the occasion of the upcoming completion of the training course at the Moscow Academy, the commission of theological schools, recognizing the need to review it, decided on May 25: to entrust this matter to the Most Reverend Archbishop of Moscow Philaret, so that, upon completion of the audit, he would deliver the necessary information to the commission; This was reported to Eminence Philaret in an extract for No. 636. On this occasion, Archbishop Filaret wrote: To the Holy Governing Synod, on the commission of theological schools, from its member Filaret, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna and Knight, a report. Both on the duty of the local bishop, and on the special instructions of the commission of theological schools, communicated to me in an extract from its journal, dated the 25th of last May 1822 (No. 636), I made a review of the Moscow Theological Academy, at the end of its educational course. The preliminary test of the students, in my presence, lasted from the 16th of June until the 24th. On the first of these days there was a written test in theology and philosophy, on the last a verbal test in philosophy, and on the other days a verbal test in all parts of theology. In philosophy, we continue and in other parts the academic conference was tested, on the basis of the charter. Test questions were proposed by lot. The open trial was on the 3rd and 4th day of July. Having visited the academy, in addition to this case, twice more during the past academic year, in all these cases I found reasons to certify that the improvement of this institution is rising, and in the education of the students of the current course, more maturity is noticeable, in comparison with previous courses, which should have been expected with the correct progress of the new institution. Other classes did not allow me to examine the economics and writing part; however, the cases that reached me testified to the existing order. The abilities of the leaders and students of the commission of theological schools are known from the evidence given by me on the service records at the end of this academic year, as well as from the nomination of some for awards made by the academic board, with my consent. Now, in particular, it is my duty to testify about the rector of the academy and professor of theology, Archimandrite Kirill 88, that, with sufficient knowledge of his subject, tireless diligence in his position and an edifying way of life, he especially contributed to the establishment of teachers and students in a similar disposition, and therefore to the growing structure of the entire institution, and therefore deserves the benevolent attention of the highest authorities. No. 346. August 17, 1822 This report, as determined by the commission of theological schools, was taken into account on April 30, 1823, and the rector, Archimandrite Kirill, was asked to request the Order of St. Vladimir 3 tbsp. 89. August 22. Letter from Archbishop Philaret of Moscow to Prince A. N. Golitsyn about his dismissal from the rank of member of the main school board Archbishop Filaret, on August 22, 1822, wrote in his own hand to Prince A. N. Golitsyn: Most illustrious prince, gracious sir! Last year, April 7, 1817, His Imperial Majesty’s highest personal decree most mercifully commanded me to be a member of the main board of schools, which position, in conjunction with others, and I fulfilled to the best of my ability. In the past 1821, when His Imperial Majesty was most mercifully pleased to entrust the Moscow diocese to my management, I immediately explained to your Excellency verbally that, feeling the greatness of this burden, I see myself in the need to dare most humbly to ask for dismissal from some positions that are not so significantly associated with my real title, which is the position of a member of the main board of schools. I stopped at this verbal explanation because this position then itself ceased with my departure to Moscow; Now I am again inspired and accept the courage to most humbly ask you, dear sir, to bring my above-stated most humble request to the feet of His Imperial Majesty. With the deepest respect and devotion, I have the honor to be your Excellency, dear sir, most humble servant and worshiper. In Verona, October 28, Emperor Alexander I signed: a) decree of Rights. To the Senate on the dismissal of Archbishop Philaret from the rank of member of the main schools of the board, and b) a rescript addressed to Archbishop Philaret, expressing favor for his work in the said institution 90. Case comm. spirit. taught., 1821, No. 1913 (20), pp. 13–23. The case of the Muscovites. Holy Synod office. 1822, No. 96. File of the Archives of the Holy Synod, 1822, No. 899 (37), pp. 1–6. See No. 160. Case comm. spirit. taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1822, No. 40 (2092), pp. 7 and 35. Case min. people. enlightening, storing in his archive, 1817, maps. No. 209, case No. 9607, pp. 9–13. Journal Ch. learned. ed., storing in the arch.min.public education. for 1822, No. 26, Art. 1.