Глава одиннадцатая. Филарет и Александр 1823–1825

The decline of the era of Alexander I began. Instead of the Union of Welfare, the Northern and Southern secret societies arose, which would lead the Decembrists to Senate Square to celebrate the end of the days of the Alexandrovs. The sovereign himself became more and more religious, plunged into mysticism, and thought about his departure. I also thought about who to give the throne to. The sovereign himself has no children or grandchildren. His next-eldest brother, Konstantin, married a person of non-royal blood, the Polish Countess Grudzinskaya, and lost his rights to succession to the throne. Therefore, it was necessary to write a will in favor of Nicholas. In the summer of 1823, Filaret was summoned to St. Petersburg. I both wanted and didn’t want to go - of course, it was flattering to receive the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky from the hands of the sovereign himself, but again to see the so-called high society there, to communicate with the fidgety Golitsyn... Upon arrival, the Moscow archbishop met with the Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education, and Alexander Nikolaevich informed him of the will of the sovereign emperor: – It is urgent to write a manifesto on the transfer of the rights of succession to the Russian throne from Constantine to Nicholas. Filaret fulfilled the order, and soon the first version of the manifesto was returned to him from Alexander with amendments. Filaret rewrote it and sent it to the sovereign again. Alexander signed the document drawn up by Filaret. It was possible to return to Moscow, hurry to the feast of the Dormition of the Virgin Mary, and on August 15, in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin, Filaret already pronounced the “Sermon on his return to his flock from St. Petersburg.” It expressed all the joy of returning from the bustling Northern capital to a calmer Moscow. “I appeal to you, God-loving brothers and children of this Church, I will not keep silent now about what I kept silent about here a year before - about the sorrow of separation from you... And only after that he moved on to talk about the Dormition of the Mother of God and spoke about the fear of death, which a true believer Christian should not have: – Ask yourself, listening to this, do you know how to celebrate the Dormition in this way, or are you just afraid of death, or don’t want to think about it at all? The question is important; he can show you the state of your soul, and what you can truly hope or fear. If you often, although without fear, call on mortal thoughts to yourself in order to make it the judge of your affairs and the guardian of your conscience: good for you! He can become an angel for you, who will be commanded to protect you in all your ways. But if you haven’t thought about death at all until now, and run away from everything that reminds you of it: woe to you! This disposition of spirit does not promise pure good in the present life and does not foretell bliss in the future, which, however, by using the means bestowed by grace, may our Lord Jesus Christ, our true life, vouchsafe to all of us through the intercession of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of Life. Amen. The emperor followed the archbishop to the Mother See. On August 25, Filaret greeted Alexander on the steps of the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin with a welcoming speech: “We honor you before God, most pious sovereign!” And we thank Him for comforting us with you; and we pray to Him that He will comfort you too. Look again at this royal-loving people and be comforted by their love, which did not allow your coming to be hidden in deep night, but received you with a voice of delight. Two days later, Filaret and Alexander decided to hide the original document in the altar of the Assumption Cathedral in Moscow. On the envelope in which the document was hidden, Alexander wrote with his own hand: “Keep in the Assumption Cathedral with state acts until my demand, and in the event of my death, open to the Moscow diocesan bishop and the Moscow Governor General in the Assumption Cathedral before any other action.” Nikolai Karlovich Schilder believed that this was done at the suggestion of Filaret. On his advice, three copies of the manifesto were taken to St. Petersburg for storage in the State Council, Synod and Senate. Another famous researcher of the life of Filaret and his era, Alexander Nikolaevich Arkhangelsky, having compared the draft manifesto with its final form, came to the conclusion that the king was going to voluntarily abdicate the throne, but then changed his mind and agreed to rule until the end of his days. One can only guess what conversations Filaret and Alexander had in those days in Moscow. According to the assumption of Alexander Ivanovich Yakovlev, the sovereign confessed to the Moscow ruler that he was experiencing a feeling of guilt caused by his indirect involvement in the murder of his father, Emperor Pavel Petrovich, and therefore was going to voluntarily leave the throne. And it is possible that Filaret, imbued with the torment of the sovereign, gave him his blessing to leave. It would be logical to look for at least some answers to these questions in the next word on the day of Alexander’s coronation, which Filaret pronounced in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin on September 15, 1823, two weeks after the sovereign’s arrival in Moscow. At least somehow, the conversations with Alexander should have been reflected in this speech. And they were reflected! The Moscow Bishop said that everyone should pray for himself, but everyone should also pray for others. In fact, he called on the king to pray for his sins and the flock to pray for the king, may he be forgiven. He knew that the sovereign would want to familiarize himself with the text of this sermon, and told him: – How can someone who does not see the truth find the way? Or how can one walk the path who has no LIFE in him? But Jesus Christ cannot become truth and life for us unless He becomes the way: for in this exact order He promised to reveal Himself to us when He said: I am the way and the truth and the life (John 14:6). How to resolve this multi-woven knot, all of whose ends are hidden inside it? How to open this imprisoned treasury, which at first glance does not present either a key or an opening where it fits? The main thread by which the entire knot of spiritual Mysteries is resolved, and the key by which all the treasures of grace are opened, is prayer. Pray with David: tell me, O Lord, the way, where I will go, for I have taken my soul to You (Ps. 143:8): - and the true path of the Lord will be revealed to you. Isn't this a blessing for Alexander's new path? The path of prayer and withdrawal from the world to the Lord. Philaret spoke about the same thing in his next sermon at Trinity on the day of St. Sergius of Radonezh: do not seek the kingdom of the earth, “seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness.” – Do not be afraid, Christians, to put aside care for earthly things to care for heavenly things; nothing will be lost; all yours if you are Christ's (1 Cor. 3:22). Seek only first of all the kingdom of God, and all these things will be added to you. Amen. Soon in St. Petersburg, opponents of the Bible Society, led by Metropolitan Seraphim, the personal rapporteur of the Tsar Arakcheev, Archimandrite Photius (Spassky) of the Yuryev Monastery, and Admiral Shishkov, rose up against the Philaret Catechism. Photius, who was gaining more and more weight in the eyes of the sovereign, in his response to the catechism did not spare Philaret, hitting backhand, roughly, with all his might: “... in the city of St. Peter there is a lot of water: 1) The Neva River is one, and how good and pure the water is in it! It has three main sleeves, it doesn’t matter if there is an increase in its origins. 2) There are also ditches, three or four, or more, I don’t know. But what kind of water is in them? Water, but a ditch. What? Everyone knows about it. 3) Like the Neva River, the Catechism of Peter Mogila is like in three branches, in its three parts about faith, hope and love. And as for ditch water, then the newly published Catechism, but people also drink ditch water...” Shishkov gave the emperor a note “On the evil actions of secret societies that invented the Bible Society in Europe and through it vigilantly direct everything towards their goal.” In it, Alexander Semenovich, without any hesitation, equated biblical societies with the Masonic lodges of the Illuminati system. But we must remember that back in August 1822, Alexander ordered the closure of all secret societies and Masonic lodges and demanded from his subjects to sign that they were not and did not intend to be members of such organizations in the future. Logically, Shishkov demanded the closure of the Bible Society, which he accused of spreading heresies and schism. In this he was right, since the missionaries of the Bible Society, especially foreigners, indeed contributed to the increase of religious confusion in the minds. Alexander Semenovich also attacked the translations made by Filaret and under his leadership: “The translation of the Holy Scriptures from a high and important language into the vernacular is the most powerful weapon of revolutionary plans.” Metropolitan Seraphim supported Shishkov, telling the sovereign that it was time to close the Bible Society as a Masonic Society, and “the distribution of the Bible is the surest means of introducing the Reformation.” On the eve of the new year, 1824, clouds were gathering over Filaret, and in St. Petersburg they were already talking that he would soon no longer head the Moscow department. And on the day of the Nativity of Christ he again read a wondrous sermon in the Chudov Monastery. And again, if you wish, you can find hints in it that Philaret advised Tsar Alexander to leave the royal palace - he draws the attention of the listeners, and therefore of one particular famous listener, to the fact that Jesus was born not among luxurious chambers, but in a manger, in the most run-down Bethlehem stable. - Christ is the real, perfect Anointed of God: but His sign is not a crown and purple, or - not withered (Faded - a church bandage) and a holy robe for honor and glory, but shrouds! Lord: but instead of a throne in a manger! Savior of men: but men do not give Him the last corner among themselves to save His infant life, and send Him to the dumb! It is no coincidence that he turns to talking about sin, because in the summer the king himself complained to him how the sins of his youth were tormenting his soul. – Sin deprives the soul of peace, the mind of light, the body of incorruption, the earth of blessings, every creature of all kindness. He begins by putting hell into a person, and ends by putting a person into hell. So, great is the joy indeed that at last He appears who will save His people from their sins. And what does He do to save sinners? Is born! From the immortal Divine life is born into human, mortal life. He puts aside glory, abandons bliss, hides what is sacred, and takes upon himself all the disasters of sin, except sin itself. Let's assume that Alexander is really destined to become the elder Fyodor Kuzmich. Isn’t this following Filaret’s sermon? To save himself from sins, the king “puts aside glory, leaves bliss, hides what is sacred” and goes into the world to endure suffering, reproach, and bodily torment, but gets rid of mental torment, atones for his sin and the sin of his age, all his subjects. Of course, this sermon is not for the Tsar alone, but for the entire flock, reverently listening to the voice of Moscow Chrysostom. But - for Alexander too. After all, he will want to know what Filaret talked about in Moscow. In Moscow, Filaret made a good friend - Prince Sergei Mikhailovich Golitsyn. Together they worked on charitable committees, the archbishop loved to visit Sergei Mikhailovich’s house on Volkhonka, and often visited him to drink tea and talk about this and that. The prince’s family life was not successful, and now he lived with his sister Anastasia Mikhailovna, a modest and charming woman, with whom the bishop also liked to communicate. Prince Golitsyn helped with the money necessary to open a clergy care for the poor at the Chudov Monastery. And henceforth he always willingly opened his wallet to help such undertakings of Filaret. The year 1824 arrived. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" flew all over Russia, fluttering the feathers of its winged expressions. In Odessa, the famous author of “Ruslan and Lyudmila” unsuccessfully tried to cuckold his boss, one of the great men of Russia and Philaret’s peer, Count Mikhail Semenovich Vorontsov. Karamzin was preparing for the publication of the eleventh volume of his “History”, which will be about Boris Godunov, about the vacillation of the Russian throne, about the beginning of the Time of Troubles - a formidable prophecy about the Troubles of the coming year!.. Many things began to appear that the Russian people interpreted as a harbinger of new troubles to come. In February, Moscow experienced a terrible snow storm that knocked down many trees and not very strong houses. On this occasion, Filaret wrote to Archimandrite Athanasius of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra: “Meanwhile, the general time suddenly frowns; It seems that one can hear: “Woe to those who live on the earth!”, And those who live on the earth burden their hearts with gluttony and drunkenness...” On February 12, Filaret in the Chudov Monastery again addressed the memory of Metropolitan Alexei. On March 9, he preached a sermon here on the week of the Cross. He talked about how many Christians try not to show in their lives that they are Christians. - They are afraid that they will not be recognized as Christians and for this the son of this age will not be mocked at them; so that they will not be told: your conversation actually creates you. And so they hide and remain silent; and they do not notice that they are ashamed of the Son of man, and that their silence sometimes clearly tells the world about Jesus: I do not know the man. He called on the flock to bear their cross: – Do not be ashamed when an adulterous and sinful generation wants to shame you with the cross of Christ, lest you be ashamed before the holy angels, before the Son of man in His glory and before His heavenly Father... In March, Archbishop Filaret spoke at the general meeting of members of the Moscow branch of the Bible Society with a report. In the metropolitan chambers of the Chudov Monastery, he spoke about the most important work of his life - the translation of the Bible: – I hear voices: what moral profit did the Bible Society bring? Only the Knower of the Heart can correctly calculate and evaluate the spiritual fruit that is born in the hearts. We should not think about the evaluation of labors, but diligently cultivate the entrusted vineyard of the Lord. If in a country suffering from a scarcity of bread, a food society was formed, collected benefits, opened local sales of bread at a reasonable price, and for the poor a cashless distribution - what more could be demanded?.. Our teacher Saint John Chrysostom spoke directly about the need to read the Holy Scriptures and teach in it for lay people, and not just for monks. Why do you not accept the Word?.. This meeting was published in Moskovskie Vedomosti, and this, of course, caused a new surge of indignation among Filaret’s opponents in St. Petersburg - Admiral Shishkov and Archimandrite Photius, who were then joined by the sovereign’s confidant, Count Alexei Andreevich Arakcheev. Once again they unanimously spoke about the need to ban the translation of the Bible, shaking the Moskovskie Vedomosti, which, by order of Filaret, reported that the New Testament in the new translation was selling out rapidly and even Old Believers were buying it. In the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin on April 6, Filaret read his Easter word and said that the Resurrection of Christ is a holiday that is always in your heart: – Blessed is the one whose heart has acquired the inalienable joy of its Risen Savior and does not lose it!.. The holiday will pass; everyday life will come that will awaken us early to worldly and carnal affairs, for the needs and benefits of our mortal life... Blessed, I will say again, is he who is granted to enter into this joy of his Lord (Matthew 25:21); who, even when the festive lamps go out, does not remain in darkness in his spirit; and then, when the solemn singing ceases, he does not cease to sing and sing to the Lord in his heart (Eph. 5:19). He spoke about those of little faith and doubters who seek to put to the test everything that is said in the Gospel - THEY will experience the same thing as the Apostle Thomas, who “turned short-term unbelief into eternal proof of the truth, and the apostolic lips, defiled by the word of unbelief, were cleansed by a strong confession of faith: My Lord and my God! (John 20:28)." For many Christians, both then, in the 19th century, and now, in the 21st century, the gospel words “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). The rest of the list of beatitudes does not raise any questions: “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied. Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Blessed are those who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are you when they revile you and persecute you and slander you in every way unjustly for My sake” (Matthew 5:4-11). Everything is clear here. But why are the poor in spirit blessed? Shouldn't the spirit be rich? And why does the bliss of the poor in spirit come first in the series of beatitudes? Probably, Vladyka Philaret was often asked about this, and on May 9, St. Nicholas, when visiting the Nikolo-Perervinsky Monastery, he devoted an entire conversation to the question of spiritual poverty, explaining it as the lack of pride, the main sin of man, from which all other sins are often born. – He who thinks he is rich does not feel the need; whoever does not feel the need does not ask, does not accept... What if, against the few dinars that you consider “your spiritual treasure, God and your neighbors can count many thousands of denarii of debts on you, that is, sins and untruths? Shouldn't you admit in this case that you are one of the beggars? On May 15, in the Archangel Cathedral of the Kremlin, on the day of the Ascension of the Lord, Filaret read a sermon about the emptiness in the world the apostles must have experienced in those moments when Jesus ascended into heaven. But this yawning abyss is in the heart of everyone who does not believe in the Savior. Without Christ, all is vanity, all is emptiness. However, the blessing of the Lord is on those who believe in Him. He ascended, blessing. – What an endless stream of Christ’s blessing is revealed to us, Christians! He begins the blessing and, without finishing it, ascends. When he blessed them, he became exalted (Luke 24:51). Thus, even having ascended, He still continues to invisibly teach blessing. On the day when Moscow Chrysostom spoke with divine inspiration about the miracle of the Ascension of the Lord, something happened in the Northern capital that zealots of piety had been eagerly awaiting for many years. The fall of Prince Golitsyn. Finally, Emperor Alexander heeded the voice of Christian reason and removed this in many ways extraordinary, but at the same time empty man. In an instant, Alexander Nikolaevich lost his post as Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Education. From now on, he was entrusted with the duties of acting head of the Postal Department, and in this position he would spend about twenty more years, almost until his death. “I bring you great joy! The Lord God finally heard the cry of his holy Church and freed her from the spiritual ministry, this yoke of Egypt, under which she groaned for several years,” Metropolitan Seraphim reported in a letter from St. Petersburg to Metropolitan Philaret. The seventy-year-old president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Admiral Shishkov, became the Minister of Public Education. In 1815, Pushkin wrote his famous epigram “There are three gloomy singers - Shikhmatov, Shakhovskoy, Shishkov.” Now, in his “Second Message to the Censor,” Alexander Sergeevich wrote differently about Alexander Semenovich and his new appointment: Having finally thought about good intentions, Our good king chose an honest minister, Shishkov has already accepted the leadership. This elder is dear to us: a friend of honor, a friend of the people, He is famous for the glory of the twelfth year; Alone in the crowd of nobles, he loved Russian muses, Unnoticed, he convened them, united them... At the same time, Shishkov was appointed chief administrator of affairs of foreign religions. Finally, in Russia the struggle against foreign domination, with servile veneration of everything European and contempt for everything Russian, has begun. At the head of this struggle was the one who thirteen years ago in his “Discourse on Love for the Fatherland” wrote: “Education should be domestic, not foreign. A learned stranger can teach us, when necessary, some of his knowledge in the sciences, but he cannot put into our soul the fire of national pride, the fire of love for the fatherland, just as I cannot put into him my feelings for my mother... Public education is a very important matter, requiring great foresight and foresight. It does not act at the present time, but prepares the happiness or misfortune of future times and calls upon our head either a blessing or an oath for our descendants.” And even earlier, in his famous “Discourse on the old and new syllable of the Russian language”: “What kind of knowledge can we have in our natural language, when the children of our noblest boyars and nobles from their youngest nails are in the arms of the French, cling to their morals, learn to despise their customs, insensitively receive the whole way of their thoughts and concepts, speak their language more freely than their own, and even become infected with It is with their passion that they not only never practice their language, not only are they not ashamed of not knowing it, but many of them, with the most shameful of all ignorance, boast and exalt themselves as if by some dignity that adorns them. Having been brought up in this way, they barely learn through the necessary hearing to speak in the popular language that is used in general conversations; but how can they draw art and knowledge from a bookish or learned language that is so far removed from the simple thoughts of their messages? To know the wealth, abundance, strength and beauty of your language, you need to read books published in it, and especially those written by excellent writers.” But he was not only a hater of Golitsyn, but also an opponent of Filaret. It’s amazing how sometimes people who are revered by their descendants with equal reverence can be enemies! Shishkov fiercely opposed the translation of the Holy Scriptures and Filaret's catechisms. By the way, a short one came out in the same year. Philaret called it this way: “The Beginnings of Christian Teaching, or a Brief Sacred History and a Short Catechism,” prefacing the text with an epigraph from the first conciliar letter of the Apostle Peter: “Like newborn babies, love the verbal and unflattering milk, so that through it you will grow into salvation.” The work is small in volume, but nevertheless very labor-intensive. It was necessary to briefly outline the entire Old and New Testaments, the entire history of Christianity, and provide answers to the main questions facing a Christian. Try to present the content of “Eugene Onegin” in a twenty-stanza poem, and you will understand what it meant to write this short catechism. On May 20, at the Chudov Monastery, Philaret again turned to the memory of St. Alexei and read a sermon on the second beatitude, but took it in the form in which it is described not in the Gospel of Matthew, “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted” (Matthew 5:4), but in the Gospel of Luke: “Blessed are those who mourn now, for you will laugh” (Luke 6:21). It was the word “laughter” that was important to him in order to talk about the gospel understanding of laughter and crying. There, in the Gospel of Luke, he takes words about punishment for laughter: “Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep” (Luke 6:25). But: “By the name of laughter,” said Philaret, “the Gospel, without a doubt, means more than just oral laughter, and it is not laughter itself that condemns... So, those who laugh, whom the Gospel condemns, are people who are so devoted to sensual pleasure that they make it the object of all desires, the goal of all activity... Likewise, not all tears constitute the cry of the Gospel... Those who weep in the spirit of the Gospel are people who find sensual pleasure rude, low, unworthy and insignificant, to whom nothing earthly is sweet, nothing corruptible is dear, but the One God and His heavenly kingdom are beloved, the one soul and its eternal salvation are precious; who, delving deeper into self-knowledge, feel their soul full of sins, voluntary and involuntary, known and unknown, and are now crying bitterly... It’s warm in the summer, and therefore it’s good to travel, and the Moscow Archbishop devoted this blessed time to archpastoral trips around the Moscow region. On June 6 I was in Vereya, two days later in Mozhaisk, four days later in Volokolamsk, and so on in towns and villages near Moscow. On one of the days of that pastoral trip around the Moscow region, the long-standing story of the beating of seminarian Drozdov found its unexpected end. Twenty-two years have passed since he was beaten and tortured, covered with blankets: - Prophets, Vasily, who hit you?! Not far from Zvenigorod was the village of Karaulovo. At the end of the 18th century, the landowners who owned it renamed it Koralovo, and in the 20th century, spelling guardians added a second letter “l”. But in the time of Filaret, it had another “l”, and in that Koralov, his long-time offender, the organizer of that beating, served as the rector of the church. He must have forgotten about that incident, you never know who was beaten in the seminary... And suddenly the Moscow bishop himself came to see him. He walked into the church, looking at everything carefully, as if he was looking for something. He stopped in front of the image of the Tikhvin Mother of God, ran his finger along the frame and showed the abbot a thick layer of dust: - Prophets to me, father, why is that dust here?! The former offender remembered everything, his eyes darkened - had Filaret really come to take revenge on him? - Forgive me, sir! – falling to his knees, he begged. Filaret smiled affectionately: - I understand, sir, I understand everything! Forgive me generously! -Well, if that’s the case, then God will forgive. This anecdote was very common among Muscovites. There is no documentary evidence of it, but many authors, including St. John (Snychev) and Alexander Ivanovich Yakovlev, happily reproduce it. I won’t erase him from my book either. No matter what was revealed in Moscow itself and its environs, they called Philaret to the consecration, and he tried to be there in time, to warm everyone with his parting words. Here he is making a speech at the opening of a house of industriousness, in which poor and homeless girls will be raised. Here he consecrates the church in the name of St. Nicholas in Kotelniki. Here he ordains the new Bishop of Dmitrov, Kirill, in the Assumption Cathedral. Here he consecrates the church in the name of St. Demetrius of Rostov the Wonderworker in the Borisoglebsky monastery. But he was invited to the opening of a new theater, which in Moscow is still called small with a capital letter, but will soon be called Maly with a capital letter. But Filaret treats theaters with a great deal of irony. In a letter to Ekaterina Novosiltseva, he wrote: “About the theater, which I have never been to in my life and of which I therefore only have a guessing concept, it is difficult for me to judge to what extent participation in this fun can be innocent.” So he politely declined the invitation to the opening of the Maly Theater. He also called theaters “houses of entertainment” and ranked them among “folk amusements”, which a wise government is obliged to allow, “just as indulgent parents allow children’s games” - this is from the “Word on the birthday of the most pious sovereign Emperor Alexander Pavlovich,” spoken two months after the opening of the Maly Theater, December 12, 1824. No one knew then that this was Alexander’s last birthday, which would be celebrated during his reign. But people who understood knew that the coming year would bring many changes. In November, Filaret learned about Shishkov's new achievements in his fight against him. The new Minister of Education achieved a ban on the printing of both the large and small catechisms, and also demanded a stop to the translation of the Bible into modern language and received approval. Rumors began to circulate that Filaret would soon be transferred from Moscow to Georgia. On December 8, he sent a letter to Metropolitan Seraphim in St. Petersburg. In it, he expresses fair bewilderment - after all, six months ago, the work on creating a catechism was greeted by the authorities, and both Alexander and Seraphim approved of this act. How can you change your opinion so dramatically?! “Having started to compile the catechism, I read the first part to Your Eminence in the presence of His Eminence Gregory, Bishop of Revel, and received approval in the main things, and corrected some details based on the comments made. Then the entire catechism was reviewed by Your Eminence for a considerable time - every mistake, word or expression that was prompted by your remark was corrected only with your approval. Then the catechism was submitted to the Holy Synod, which, having approved it, asked for the Highest command for publication. It is not clear how, and by whom, and why a matter has now been called into question, so purely and completely established by everything that is sacred on earth. It would be of little concern if this doubt threatened only the personality of the person who was the instrument of this work, but does it not threaten the hierarchy, does it not threaten the Church? If the Orthodoxy of the Catechism, so solemnly approved by the Holy Synod, is doubtful, then will not the Orthodoxy of the Holy Synod itself be doubtful? – Moscow Archbishop Filaret boldly and defiantly wrote to Metropolitan Seraphim of St. Petersburg. But the letter had no effect. The Gospel with parallel texts and both Filaret’s catechisms began to be confiscated from bookstores. At a brick factory, the newly printed edition of the Pentateuch of Moses, translated into modern Russian, was completely burned. They also started talking about Shishkov’s plans to ban the distribution of Philaret’s sermons. Metropolitan Seraphim, in his response to Philaret’s letter, referred to Shishkov’s arbitrariness and was himself largely perplexed: “You will ask why the Russian language should not have a place in the catechism, and especially in the short catechism, which is intended for small children... I cannot answer you satisfactorily on this and many other questions. I hope that time will explain to you what now seems dark, but this time, in my opinion, will come soon. Be sure that I take a friendly interest in you and sincerely wish you well. I feel that your situation is difficult, and I grieve for this with all my heart, that I do not have the opportunity to relieve you of the burden. So, be patient, good shepherd! There is no shame in patience. It will give you experience, which will later be extremely useful to you, as I had the opportunity to find out for myself.” The good shepherd will have to endure just a little bit - only some thirty-four years!.. He was ready to humble himself and endure, as the heart of a Christian told him, but no, no, and resentment burst through. Philologist, editor of “Son of the Fatherland” Nikolai Ivanovich Grech, who published the “Training Book of Russian Literature” and “An Experience in a Brief History of Russian Literature,” collected materials for a dictionary of Russian authors and sent a letter to Saint Philaret with a request to give him an autobiographical sketch, to which the Bishop replied: “Forgive me for being slow in answering this. I will not use the usual apology by deeds. It’s fair to say that I was repelled from this matter by the thought of what my biography was good for!.. If you would like to have my short biography from me, then here it is: I was poorly educated; studied worse; I use even worse what I have been taught and studied; The mercy of the Lord and the condescension of people are great.” This even sounds like something childish, offended by everyone: you yourself say that I’m bad, so what else do you want from me!.. The main work of the Moscow Chrysostom was under threat - explaining Christian teaching to the flock. It was given to him to penetrate into the essence of Christian evangelical concepts, and he was eager to share his understanding. He saw how often people, not understanding something in the Holy Scriptures, are in some way even offended if they, like little children, are told that they are not given the power to understand everything. This little by little undermines the foundations of faith, and in the end can lead to a complete aversion from the Church. It is no better when people begin to interpret incomprehensible passages of the Bible in their own way, and often very incorrectly. As in the case of the “poor in spirit” - don’t read anything, don’t understand anything, be ignorant, and that’s what you have, poor in spirit. It turns out that the Kingdom of Heaven will be inherited by complete ignoramuses and profane people! It’s even worse when the leaders of secret societies, sects, and Masonic lodges become interpreters. No, a pastoral explanation was needed, and Filaret would have considered himself a criminal if he had not given it. Almost every sermon he preaches carries evangelical enlightenment. He often takes as his preaching topic passages of Scripture that cause confusion and controversy. So, on the eve of the new year, 1825, in the “Word for the Nativity of Christ”, he took upon himself the responsibility to interpret why the prophecies say that the Messiah will be called “Immanuel”, and Christ will be called “Jesus”. – In this discussion about the exact fulfillment of the prophetic words relating to the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, someone may ask: why was the prediction about His name not so apparently accurately fulfilled? for the prophet Isaiah foretold His name Immanuel: but instead the angel commanded that you call His name Jesus. “Jesus”, in Hebrew “Yeshua”, means “Savior”. The word "Immanuel" in Hebrew means "God with us." For many centuries the Jews waited for the Savior, whom they called the Messiah. “Messiah,” in Hebrew “mashiʹa,” means “anointed one.” He was supposed to be a king from the line of King David, who would save the Jews from international captivity. His appearance means that God and the Savior are with us. But salvation through Jesus was not at all what the Jews expected. They waited for the anointed one to appear, free them from their enslavers and make the Jews enslavers of other nations. Jesus freed the Jews, and after them the rest of the nations, from the ancient covenants of enmity and mutual enslavement, from the law “tooth for tooth, blood for blood,” giving a new law: “Love your neighbor,” and even more: “Love your enemy.” And in his sermon, Filaret carries out a filigree operation to explain all this: – In the Son of the Virgin, God draws closer to us, or in other words, that we are saved by Him... Bring to your mind the fact that Emmanuel was both predicted and came to earth according to predictions for believers; and where there is faith, not everything should be clearly visible, but something must presuppose something hidden, since faith, according to the Apostle, is the conviction of the invisible (Heb. 11:1)... Separation from God and the state of sin are one and the same. Consequently, approaching God and salvation from sins are again one and the same thing. Consequently, Emmanuel is God with us, and Jesus, the Savior from sins, is also one and the same. Consequently, the prophecy is accurate, and the event is true to the prophecy. Emmanuel is the Savior; Jesus is God with us... In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, God is with us, Christians, always and in everything, through remembrance of Him, through prayer to Him, through faith and love, through constant exercise in that which pleases God and that which brings us closer to God. Amen. “God is with us” - all of Orthodox Russia could rely on this, facing the terrible year 1825, when the country and people stood on the brink beyond which a similar Great French - Great Russian bourgeois revolution could break out. A terrible harbinger of future storms was the flood in St. Petersburg in November 1824, which became a record in its entire history. Pushkin described this catastrophe as something apocalyptic in The Bronze Horseman. The Neva “rushed like a frantic beast at the city,” and “Petropol stood up, like Triton, waist-deep in water.” Having learned about the St. Petersburg disaster, Filaret immediately sent three thousand rubles to Prince Alexander Borisovich Kurakin, the chairman of the committee to provide assistance to the victims, and then appealed to the Moscow flock to start collecting funds. As a result, about 35 thousand rubles were collected and sent to the Northern capital. Such terrible phenomena are always considered as signs from above. A year later, this sign will be justified in the form of another flood - a political one. The Emperor, examining the consequences of the flood, swallowing tears, heard someone say in the crowd: - No, for mine! – Alexander said quietly, with pain in his voice.