Metropolitan of All Russia Maxim

The successor of Metropolitan. Cyril was Maxim, again installed from the Greeks, as was usual in the pre-Mongol period. Forty years ago, immediately after the terrible Mongol invasion of Russia, when there was still an unresolved question of what would happen to her - whether she would perish from the sword of the terrible Asian savages or whether she would remain busy, the Greeks had no desire to come to us to occupy the see of our metropolitanate. But Rus' remained intact and it turned out that existence was possible under the yoke of terrible savages - that in particular they treated the church of the conquered people with complete tolerance and with their decisive patronage. Then the Greeks again found hunters to occupy the see of the Russian Metropolis, and the Patriarch again wanted to use his imaginary right to elect Russian metropolitans himself, that is, to elect them from his own clergy. History of the appointment of Metropolitan. We don’t know Maxim at all. Probably, after the death of Cyril, the Russians did not dare to elect his successor themselves and let them know about the release of the metropolitan see to Constantinople, and from here they were told that a metropolitan chosen by the patriarch from his Greek clergy would be sent to Russia. But it is not impossible that even during Cyril’s lifetime a warning was sent to the Russians from the patriarch, so that in the event of his death they would not elect a successor to him, but would wait for the last one from Greece. Maxim was made a Russian metropolitan and arrived to join his flock in Kyiv in 1283. in the second year after Cyril's death. Immediately after his arrival in Kyiv. in the same year 1283, the Metropolitan traveled to the Horde. to Khan Toda-Mangu (successor of Mengu-Temirov since 1281). The chronicle does not say what was the reason for the trip. Regarding the assumption of some of our researchers that the Khan of Toda-Mangu decreed that every new metropolitan who occupied the department, as the head of the clergy, should appear in the Horde to ask for an affirmative letter for his rank, we have already said above 1 that it cannot be accepted, since neither the label given to Maxim himself on his journey to the Horde, nor the labels given to his successors when they occupied the department 2 are known. Not obliged to appear to the khan as the new metropolitan, Maxim could undertake a trip to the Horde immediately after his arrival in Rus' but for any special church needs. But it is more likely to assume that he hastened to make a trip to the khan not for the needs of the church, which he did not yet have time to get acquainted with, but on behalf of his Emperor of Constantinople (Andronikos the Elder, who had just taken the place of his deceased father Michael Paleologus), for some Greek political affairs, for the emperors, as we said and indicated above (the trip to Constantinople of the Bishop of Sarai in 1272 years) were then in relations with the khans. Upon his return from the Horde, the Metropolitan in the following year, 1284, invited all Russian bishops to his council in Kyiv. The calling of all the bishops suggests that the reason for the council was something special and important; but our chronicles, in their true and tearfully deplorable way, can be expressed as a terrible custom of silence about everything related to the church, do not say a single word about the reason 3. Perhaps the metropolitan brought something important, requiring the calling of all bishops, from the khan from the Horde; maybe before the Horde he brought something similar from the patriarch...; after all, we do not have the slightest positive data to make any assumption. It is more than likely that we are being informed about an important church-historical fact, but it is being communicated in such a way that it would be all the same and even perhaps better if it had not been reported... In 1285, Metropolitan. Maxim went from Kyiv to the Suzdal region or northern, Vladimir, Rus', and since the local Grand Duke, who continued to be Dimitri Alexandrovich of Pereyaslavl, was then in Novgorod, then, going or not going to Vladimir, he passed into it. From Novgorod he went to Pskov. Regarding this trip, Met. Maxim's Nikon Chronicle literally repeats about him what it says about Metropolitan. Kirill, namely, that he “according to his custom, walked throughout the entire land of Rustei, teaching, punishing, ruling.” And it seems very likely to think that the chronicle tells the actual truth - that Met. Maxim, due to the inconvenience of a constant stay in Kyiv, more or less often left it in order, following the example of his predecessor Cyril, to undertake travels around Rus', which had the appearance and significance of its supreme pastoral surveys. The positive information we have about the travels and places of stay of Metropolitan. Maxim after 1285, are that during the years 1288 and 1289 he was in Kyiv, that in 1295 he came to Vladimir, that in 1300 he permanently moved from Kyiv to Vladimir, from which in the same year he went to Novgorod, and finally, that sometime during his stay at the department he visited the Galich-Volyn region 4. News about the church and government activities of Metropolitan. We have even less information about Maxim than about the activities of his predecessor Kirill, namely, we have none at all. One written monument of his government activities has survived to us. This is his letter, containing instructions or instructions (statutes) regarding the fast of Wednesday and heel and exhortation to enter into marital cohabitation only through legal church weddings 5 ​​. We said above that our difference with the Greeks regarding the observance of fasting on Wednesday and Fridays attracted the attention of Metropolitan. Cyril and that Bishop Theognostus of Sarai asked a question about this to the Patriarchal Council of Constantinople. The answer was given to the bishop in the sense that the Russian Church must observe the orders of the Greek Church 6. Metropolitan Maximus in his letter, either as a result of a deliberate commission from the patriarch, who from the question of Bishop Theognostus learned about our difference with the Greeks, or out of his own zeal to bring us into agreement with them, or finally - as a result of the desire declared by the Russians themselves regarding this latter, again insistently prescribes the observance of the orders of the Greek Church, setting them out with greater detail than as was done in the response of the council to the bishop. Metropolitan Charter The maxim about fasting on Wednesday and the heel is as follows: fasting is canceled: on the holy week of Easter, on Wednesday before sex - for those who do not want to fast, on the week of St. the Spirit according to the penticost, although especially zealous Christians fast during this week, on the Nativity of Christ, if it happens on one or another of our days, and then from the Nativity of Christ to Vasiliev’s days, on the Epiphany of the Lord and on the week before Meat; fasting is weakened: on the feast of the apostles Peter and Paul, on the Transfiguration of the Lord, on the Dormition of the Virgin Mary and on the feast of the Apostle Philip, on these holidays, if they happen on Wednesday or Friday, it is not allowed to eat meat, but it is allowed to eat fish. To the injunction about fasting Wednesday and Friday, the Metropolitan adds an injunction about the eves of the Nativity of Christ and the Epiphany and specifically says: on whatever day the eve of the Nativity of Christ occurs, one should not eat meat or fish; if it happens on Saturday or Sunday, then, without violating the rules (about fasting, not fasting on Saturday and Sunday?), one must eat bread and wine according to the service of John Chrysostom about after Vespers; The same thing is observed regarding the eve of Epiphany. Since the admonition that follows the charter on fasting about entering into marital cohabitation only through a church wedding does not have any logical connection with it and represents something unexpected, it may be suspected that it does not belong to Metropolitan. Maxim and added to his charter by some illiterate scribe for some random reason. But on the other hand, it is also not possible that the Metropolitan, not caring about the logical connection, wanted to take advantage of the opportunity of promulgating the charter with the charter on fasting in order to make this admonition, which he found very necessary. Here is this admonition: “I am writing to you, my children, and all my children, born in the font of the nobility, keep wives from the holy catholic and apostolic church, for the sake of human salvation there is a wife; If you keep them in fornication, without the blessing of the church, then what help do you have? But pray to them (pray? i.e. priests) and encourage them, whether they are old or young, so that they may get married in the church.” Regarding the participation of Metropolitan. Maxim in the state affairs of Rus' we know that in 1304, when, after the death of Grand Duke Andrei Alexandrovich Gorodetsky, Mikhail Yaroslavich Tverskoy was supposed to take the Grand Duke's throne by right of seniority, the Metropolitan began to look for the Grand Duke's throne under the legitimate candidate of Moscow Prince Yuri Danilovich. As for the success of this pastoral-peaceful intervention in the feuds of the princes, the Moscow prince, whose fierce struggle with Mikhail Yaroslavich then filled almost the entire reign of Maximov’s successor, St. Peter, did not listen to the urgent admonitions of the Metropolitan. The historical fame of Metropolitan. Maxim is that in 1300 he moved the capital of the Russian Metropolis from Kyiv to Vladimir. His predecessor Kirill came from Kyiv to northern, Vladimir, Rus' many times and did not live in it permanently, but only from time to time and, perhaps, even for the smallest part; Before 1300, he himself came to Vladimir Rus' at least twice and also, but in all likelihood, lived in Kyiv only temporarily, in fits and starts: but nevertheless, Kyiv continued to be the capital of the metropolis - there remained a household house and the courtyard of the metropolitans; their clergy members or officials remained in it; Metropolitan Kirill died in northern Rus', but his body was taken for burial to Kyiv, to his pulpit. In 1300, Metropolitan. Maxim formally moved the capital of the metropolis from Kyiv to Vladimir, moving from the first to the second “with all his life,” as the chronicles say, and with his cliroshans or officials. There is no doubt that Maxim, like Cyril, from the very beginning of his reign recognized it as very inconvenient for the capital of the metropolis to remain in Kyiv; but the decision to move it from the latter to Vladimir was caused in him by sudden circumstances, for back in 1295 he installed a bishop in Vladimir and, therefore, did not think about his own resettlement there. In 1299, Kyiv was so plundered by the Tatars that the entire city fled; The Metropolitan was forced to flee along with others - and he decided to flee forever 7... Maxim transferred the see of his metropolitanate from Kyiv to the capital city of Vladimir Rus', and not Galich Russia, as is self-evidently implied, because in the first, and not in the second Rus', - in “Great Rus'”, and not “Little Russia”, as perhaps they were already called then, and in any case, soon after that the Greeks began to call two Russias - northern and southern, he saw the main and most important part of his metropolis. Having transferred the metropolitan see from Kyiv to Vladimir, Maxim transferred the local bishop to Rostov, to the latter’s then idle see. As for Kiev with its own diocese, the Metropolitan did not install a bishop in it, but left it behind him, as his senior capital, so that from that time on, the metropolitans had two dioceses, and the Kiev diocese began to be under the jurisdiction of their governors 8 . Transfer of Met. The maxim of the capital of the metropolis from Kyiv to Vladimir provided the first reason for those attempts to divide the Russian metropolis into two special metropolises, which, as a result of the political events that soon followed, in any case became inevitable. Between the two Russian great principalities - Vladimir and Galich, Kyiv occupied such a neutral position, so to speak, that as long as the capital of the metropolitans remained in its old place, they could be metropolitans of both principalities or all of Rus'. But when Maxim moved his capital from Kyiv to the capital city of the great reign of Vladimir, the great reign of Galich turned out to be, in ecclesiastical terms, no longer equal to the first part of the metropolitanate, but only, as it were, some appendage to it. It was completely natural that the Grand Dukes of Galich would not like such an ecclesiastical role for their country and that they would make efforts to acquire their own special metropolitan. They actually began these efforts immediately after Maxim moved from Kyiv to Vladimir, and since they were successful in them, the first case of dividing the Russian Metropolis into two special metropolises took place under Maxim himself. In some lists of the catalog of episcopal departments compiled under the emperor. Andronikos Palaiologos the Elder (1282–1327, a historical note is read about Galicia: “Galicia, which was the bishopric of Russia, was elevated to a metropolis by the Emperor of Cyrus Andronikos Palaiologos under the Holy Patriarch of Cyrus Athanasius in 681 1 (1303)" 9. We do not yet know the history of this first opening of a special Galich metropolis. Later Galich evidence claims that the first special metropolitan of Galicia was Nifont 10. If they are telling the truth, then this Nifont should be taken for the metropolitan installed in 1803. This year the Grand Duke or King of Galich was Yuri Lvovich, the grandson of Daniil Romanovich. Metropolitan Maxim died at the end of 1805, but according to some chronicles - on December 6th, according to others - on the 16th. His body was laid in the Vladimir Assumption Cathedral 11. In an article about the enslavement of Rus' by the Mongols. See Bogosl. Vestn. 1893 Wohl, p. 41. approx. We are not saying that it is not known about any of Maxim’s successors that they traveled to the Horde immediately after occupying the department, for here it would be possible to assume that they all passed directly from Constantinople through the Horde. The Nikon Chronicle under our year: “the bishops of all Russia were called to Kiev to Maxim, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Russia.” The last news is found in Kinrian's life of St. Peter, which tells that Peter brought the icon of the Mother of God of his letter to Maxim, when he came to the Volyn land to visit and view it. Published in the History of Rev. Macarius, vol. IV, appendix. XXIV, and in the Monuments of Canon. rights, col. 131. Question (19th). Is it possible to eat meat on Wednesday and Friday on the Apostolic feasts? Answer. Neither Wednesday nor Friday will be ruined by the Lord’s holiday, except for the great days of the holy week - let them eat on Wednesday and Friday, and on the Descent of the Holy Spirit and when the Nativity of Christ or the Epiphany occurs, and when there is a week for the publicans and Pharisees; Moreover, let the 5th holiday not be ruined by the environment and the heel, for it has been forbidden by the divine canons... What Metr. Maxim fled from Kyiv in 1299, the Novgorod Chronicle makes it clear under this year (end of the year): In Novgorod in this year it was not known where the metropolitan was, i.e., having fled from Kyiv, he made his way to Vladimir in places unknown to the Novgorodians. He arrived in Vladimir, according to some chronicles (Resurrection), on April 18, 1300. Metropolitan Maxim's transfer of the metropolitan see from Kyiv to Vladimir (actually not the see, which remained in Kyiv, but the capital, the seat, κἀθισμα, see below) was a case of the metropolitan transferring his see from his capital city, which had fallen to the power of the barbarians, to one of the episcopal cities of his metropolis. Regarding this case, Balsamon writes (in the interpretation on 82 Ave. of the Council of Carthage, - in Ralli and P. III, 486, that some metropolitans considered themselves to have the right to do this without permission, - that others recognized the need for conciliar permission, and others - the royal command, and that in his own opinion, both were necessary. Did Metropolitan Maxim belong to the first category of metropolitans or for some other reason, only he transferred the metropolitan see from Kyiv to Vladimir without asking in Constantinople, and this transfer was formally recognized by the patriarch only in 1354, when St. Alexei was appointed metropolitan. – In the Vladimir Assumption Cathedral there is an icon of the Maximov Mother of God, on which the Mother of God is depicted teaching the omophorion to Metropolitan Maxim. The signature on the icon reads: “This holy, miraculous image of the Most Holy Theotokos was painted in the summer of 6807 ([1299], according to the vision of Maxim, Metropolitan of Vladimir and All Russia (sic) wonderworker, a Grechenin by birth: when he came from Kyiv to Vladimir and from a worthwhile procession in his cell, having fallen asleep a little, Abiye sees that in reality the light is great and unusual, and in that light the Most Pure Virgin Mother of God appeared to him, holding the Eternal Child in her hand, and the verb: my servant Maxim, you have come kindly to visit my city, and give him an omophorion, saying: accept this omophorion and feed the verbal sheep in my city, aka welcome, awaken from sleep and in; There was no one in sight of the cell, and the omophorion was found in his hand..., and this miracle became famous throughout the Russian land and in Palestine, and he commanded (the Metropolitan) to paint this image in the same likeness as in the form” (Dobrokhotova Monuments of Antiquity in Vladimir Klyazme, p. 74, § 2. The miraculous vision that Metropolitan Maxim had was supposed to serve in the eyes of the Russian people as a justification for his action. Γάλιτξα, ἐπισκοπὴ οὐσα τῖς Ρωσίας, ετιμ ή θη εἰς μητρ ό πολιν παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως λυρο ῡ Ανδρον ί κου τοῦ Παλαιολ ό γου ἐπὶ τοῦ Rally and II. V, 494, approx. 1. Met. Cyprian in the Life of St. Istra speaks of the attempt of the Galich Grand Duke Yuri Lvovich to obtain a special metropolitan for Galicia, made after the death of Metropolitan. Maxim, how about the first attempt. But, on the one hand, Met. Cyprian might not have known about the actual first installation of a special Metropolitan of Galich; on the other hand, knowing could feign ignorance, for it was in the interest of the Moscow metropolitans that the history of the Galich (Galich-Lithuanian) metropolitanate should be as little known as possible, so that each installation of a special Galich metropolitan could be protested as against an unprecedented and unheard-of innovation. See in Memory, kaionich. rights, adj. col. 125. To Vookresensk. The chronicle regarding the place in the cathedral where Maxim was laid says: “in the cathedral church of the Holy Mother of God, in the church (altar) of the Martyr Panteleimon of Christ,” - Collected. years. VII, 184. (Also in the Degree Book, I, [403]. You might be interested in: