Review of Russian spiritual literature (862-1720)

Contents From the publisher Book 1. 862–1720. Preface to the first two editions of the first book of the Review of Russian Literature Period 1. 862–1239 Period 2. 1237–1410 Period 3. 1410–1588 Period 4. 1588–1720 a) Southwestern writers b) Northern writers Book 2. 1720–1863 Preface to the second edition of the second book of the “Review of Russian Spiritual Literature” (Chernigov, 1863) Preface to the “Additions” to the second book of the “Review of Russian Spiritual Literature” A voice to the Lord (Ps. 76) To the God of truth (Ps. 93) The desire of God (Ps. 41) “Earthly sadness” is also beautiful Probably, only a few people know that the late, right reverend author of the “Review of Russian Spiritual Literature”, being the Archbishop of Chernigov, published a lot of additions, inserts and amendments to his work. These additions and amendments were placed in the unofficial part of the “Chernigov Diocesan News” from August 14, 1863 until the end of 1865 and took up to 290 pages of rather neat printing (up to 190 pages of additions to the first book of the “Review” and up to 100 to the second book). They were located according to the text of the “Review”, indicating its §§ and pages, which included certain additions, this or that insertion and change. Some paragraphs of the “Review” were completely redone in the “Additions”, others were corrected, others were added again; additions concerned both writers and compositions. Eminence Philaret then intended to publish these “Additions” in the form of a separate book, but the enterprise did not materialize during the life of the archpastor. In 1870, his heirs thought to do the same, but a separate publication of the “Additions” again did not take place. Having undertaken a new edition of the Review of Russian Spiritual Literature, we, of course, could not help but publish the indicated “Additions” to the Review. But, of course, now it was necessary to publish them not separately, but to include them in the very text of the Review, which we did under the editorship of a competent person. Preface to the first two editions of the first book of the Review of Russian Literature Deciding to review Russian spiritual literature, we do not undertake to write a detailed history of it. For such an essay, there is currently still a lot of data missing; and writing history based on assumptions, based on considerations that are not based on anything, is an unwise thing to do. For now, we limit ourselves to the literature of 850–1720 and present only a chronological overview of Russian literature of that time. The primary subject of our attention is Russian works and writers; translations from Greek, like others, although not excluded from our review, do not constitute a necessary subject. Those non-Russian Slavic writers who had a significant influence on the formation of the Russian Church cannot be ignored in Russian history; such are Cyril and Methodius with their disciples, with whom Slavic literature began, and about whom not to speak would mean the same as not to speak about the beginning of Russian spiritual literature. Still, others are a foreign subject for us. Russian literature before modern times, before 1720, was all, or almost all, spiritual literature. Only in modern times did people of clergy begin to write about spiritual subjects. In the old days, the Russian people lived, or at least thought to live, primarily a religious life. That is why those who wrote then wrote in a religious spirit. From the circle of spiritual literature, it remains only to remove those written works of ancient times, which contained statutes for temporary everyday life - civil contracts, deeds of sale, exchange, contract, sureties, customs, court, letters of complaint. Yes, and sometimes they were written in a spirit of deep piety and with bright thoughts about the significance of man; why not otherwise than with caution should they be excluded from the circle of spiritual literature. So the subject of our review is very extensive in itself. Therefore, we think that a lot will be done if a) the necessary things are said about the writer’s personality, namely, only what is necessary to get to know him as a writer; b) if his works are listed clearly and as completely as possible, and more important ones will be examined according to their content. Everyone needs to give theirs. We consider such a review of Russian spiritual literature necessary for the present time. “The Dictionary of Writers of Clergy who were in Russia” was very useful in its time; but at present it turns out to be very insufficient, not to say useless. In the space of time 862–1720, you will find information about only 160 writers and almost the same number of works whose writers are not known by name. 1. Cyril and Methodius are Slavic educators. They translated the Readings from the Gospel and the Apostle and the necessary liturgical books. The latter completed the translation of all the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. The Confession of St. Cyril is also known. Their life and works are described in detail in the essay: Cyril and Methodius in Thu. Moscow General East. Let's add here: a) In Volokol. RKP. No. 74 is written: “Prayer of Cyril the Philosopher and teacher of the Slovenians and Bulgarians, who also added the Greek charter to the Russian, of Scytian repentance. This prayer for repentance, for the exodus of the soul and for all the peasants and for the deceased and for victory over the enemy, visible and invisible, will be read for the consolation of the soul and for the remission of sins, whenever you want.” Beginning: “I thank You, Most Holy Trinity, for Your great mercy and love for mankind, for Your abundant grace and consolation,” and so on. The entire prayer is written on 31 pages. b) “Translate the eighth part of the grammar” from Hebrew into Greek, speaks of St. Kirill is his biographer Clement. This translation is now unknown, as is his composition - his dispute with the rabbis, translated by Methodius into the Slavic language; it is only known that in the 9th century experiments on Jewish grammar were already written (Gesenius, Hebraische Gramm., 1842, § 3). 2. St. Clement, a student of Cyril and Methodius, Bishop of Velich, in the land of the Dryagovichi and Sakulats, a Bulgarian by birth, who died in 916. According to the biographer, his student (Vita S. Clementi, Viennae, 1847): a) wrote “in simple and clear language” teachings; b) wrote words of praise to the Mother of God “on all Her solemn days” and praise to the Baptist; c) described the lives of the saints and translated the Colored Triodion. To this day, the works of St. have been found from manuscripts. Clement Bishop: a) teachings: on Sunday, on the day of the apostle, or martyr, on the day of the saint, on the Transfiguration of the Lord; b) words of praise: on the Dormition of the Mother of God, on John the Baptist, on St. Day. Zechariah the Baptist's father, St. Lazarus, the great Demetrius, the archangels, St. Clement, Pope of Rome, St. Cyril of Slavic, “the glorious teachers of the Slavs, who transposed the New and Old Law into the Slavic language, Blessed Cyril and Methodius”; c) two lives - one of St. Cyril the first Slavic teacher, another St. Methodius Archbishop of Moravia (Read. Moscow. General. Ist. 1848, No. 7. Bodyansky, On the time of origin of Slavic writings. M. 1855, art. 37–49, XIX–XXVIII). 3. Simeon, the first Tsar of Bulgaria, a "book lover", a famous patron of education († 927), compiled a selection from the words of Chrysostom, in the Slavic language, calling him Zlatoustrum; in his choice there are 136 words of Chrysostom (in the Imperial pub. bib. list. XII century, in B. Moscow. Assumption. Sob. XV century. No. 16. 65, in the bib. Moscow. Spiritual. Ak. RKP. 1574). Cheat. century of the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon, op. Palauzova, St. Petersburg. 1852 4. John Exarch of Bulgaria, or otherwise, “the builder of the church land of Bulgaria,” under Prince Simeon. He a) compiled the Sixth Day from the works of Basil the Great, Severian of Geval and John Chrysostom, with the addition of his thoughts on the creation of the world. “These six arguments,” he says in the preface, we did not compose on our own, but in another place we quoted the exact words from Vasily Shestodnev, in another only his thoughts; John and others were used in the same way.” In the same preface, the work is dedicated to Simeon: “Illuminate your heart, Lord, great king, Christ-loving Simeon!” And in the fourth word, the Exarch reproaches the pagans who remained among the Slavs, which could not have happened under the second Simeon - Roman, who, moreover, only bore the name of the Prince of Bulgaria, but was not even a small king. b) Nowadays four Words are known - the works of John the Exarch, of which one was published from a manuscript of the 12th century (Reader General History 1848 No. 7), the fourth: about those buried in the church, placed in the Vel. Min. M. Makaria (at 16:00 January). c) I. The Exarch translated the Theology of Damascus, or the book “Heaven”, its Dialectics, Grammar. He translated the latter in such a way that he not only explained the rules with Slavic examples, but also sometimes changed the rules themselves in the spirit of the Slavic language. He also, without a doubt, translated small articles of Damascene - about the months and about the canonical books (read Kalaid. John the Exarch. M. 1825. Cyril and Methodius). The translation of the Izbornik, rewritten with changes for Prince Svyatoslav in 1073, should also be attributed to him: according to the copy of Kirillo-Belozersky, it says: “Simeon, the great king of the kings, greatly desired.” The collection is close in content to the theology and dialectics of Damascus. 5. Constantine, Bishop of Bulgaria, one of the disciples of St. Methodius and employee of the Exarch. He a) compiled weekly teachings, choosing them from Chrysostom (37 Words) and Isidore Pelus. (5 Words) with the addition of his introductions and conclusions, whereby he placed one of his Words. In the preface he says: “I am humbled by Constantine to you, my brother, fathers and sons, even more rudely, and I want to talk a little... My humiliation, I am convinced of the formerly faithful people of the legend of the Holy Gospel from the Greek language in Slovensk.” According to Safarik, the work was completed in 898, under Prince Boris. But in the preface there is not a word about the year of translation, nor about Prince Boris. The preface is followed by a prayer, where, among other things, Constantine says: “I now walk in the footsteps of the teacher, following his name and work” (Rkn. Synod. bib. and Volokol. m.). b) “By the command of our prince Bolgarsk, in the name of Simeon, convert (the four Words of St. Athanasius against the Aryans) Bishop Constantine into the Slovenian language - in the summer of 6414 (906), disciple of this Methodov, Archbishop of Moravsk": this is what the Monk Tudor, who wrote the books of Athanasius in 907, says in the afterword (Rkp. Synod. bibl.). c) The same translator of Afanasyev’s works should be assigned the translation of Afanasyev’s life of St. Anthony and the Lives of St. Pankratia. Their translator says: “It was not on my own that I dared to do this, because it is a great thing, but it was forced by the builder of the church John of the Bulgarian land.” The Monk Nestor read the lives of Anthony the Great and Savva of Palestine, as we see from his life of Theodosius. d) Finally, almost the same hardworking shepherd and zealot should be given the title of national mentor and translate the catechumen of St. Cyril: the ancient translation (Description of music. No. 195) in terms of language is undoubtedly recognized as the modern Exarch. 6. Gregory, “the presbyter and clergyman of all the Bulgarian churches,” that is, the senior hieromonk and judge, “by the command of the book lover Prince Semion, and more truly decided by the lover of God,” translated the chronicle of John Malala; This is what he himself says in his translation of the chronicle. In the story of the conquest of Troy, he writes: “this Achileus, who was his own, was then called Murmidones, now Bolgar, Unnu.” Gregory supplemented the chronicle of Malala with: a) Events of church and biblical history. After the fourth chapter of Malala there are inserted: an extract from the Palea about Melchizedek, an extract from the book. Job, ch. 13–48, book. Genesis, then the other four books of Moses, the books of Joshua, Judges and Ruth, After 5 books. Malala is followed by the four books of Kings, but in 4 bk. several chapters from Isaiah and Jeremiah are inserted; further extract from the book. Tobit, book of St. Daniel, extract from the book. Esther. b) After 45 books. Malala is placed: “the book of Alexander,” or the history of Alexander the Great. c) In the ninth book there is an insertion from Josephus and the Gospel (see Prince Obolensky's preface to the Pereyaslavl Chronicle, pp. 29, 31, 35 and 47. M. 1851). 7. Chernorizets Khrabr is known for his research “about pismenekh,” or the Slavic alphabet, depicted by Cyril and Methodius. He writes: “Saint Constantine the Philosopher, called Cyril, created those writings and translated the books, and Methodius is his brother. The essence is still alive, who saw them.” Consequently, Brave wrote then, when the students of the Slavic enlighteners were still alive (Bodyansky about the time of origin of Slavic letters, pp. 51–61, 348. 342, XXIX–XXXIV) / 8. Kozma, a Bulgarian presbyter, wrote a book on the newly emerged Bogomilov heresy. This book was placed in the Menea of ​​Makaria on August 31. in the RKP. Moscow Spirit. Academician and in Sborn. Solov. monastery, XV century 856. An excerpt from the last, moralizing part of the essay is placed in the prologue under January 21. A presentation of the Bogomilov teachings was published in 33 notes. to East. heresies Russian. M. 1838 9 . Leo, Metropolitan of Kiev († 1007), wrote a letter in Greek against the Latins (ed., in Time. General, East. 1842); An ancient Slavic translation by Grigorovich in Putesh. The Epistle discusses at length about unleavened bread, shows the injustice of Saturday fasting, the celebration of the full liturgy throughout Lent, the wifelessness of priests, the use of strangled meat for food, and finally the teaching about the procession of the Holy Spirit and from the Son. 10. Vladimir. Prince Equal to the Apostles, who enlightened Russia with the holy faith († 1015). The Charter with the name of Vladimir on the church court must be recognized by the Charter of St. Vladimir, partly according to the chronicle of Nestor, especially according to its use in the life of centuries (see, Chron. Cht. 1851, East Russian Church 184–186). It is very natural that due to its use it has diversified in the lists. It is only necessary to note that it is completely in vain to point out, as a special type of Vladimirov’s Charter, the presentation of church rights by Metro Kirill (Belyaev, About the Helmsman, pp. 121–124). Here you can see only the metropolitan’s writing, exposing the rights that the spiritual authorities enjoyed with the permission of all the previous princes, starting with St. Vladimir. And an example of how they allowed themselves to deviate from the letter of Vladimirov’s Charter, even when they were introducing it into history, is provided by the Pereyaslav Chronicle of 1213 (ed. Obolensky, pp. 34, 35. M. 1851). The Confession of Faith brought by Vladimir from Korsun is very remarkable (Lav. sp. pp. 48–50). Nestor writes that it was offered to Vladimir along with the Nicene Symbol. since it is known that the Nicene Symbol is read by everyone who is baptized; then it is very likely that this Confession was studied by Vladimir, together with the Nicene Symbol, when he was among the catechumens; then it served as a monument to the sincerity and purity of his belief and remained a model of faith for the Russian Church. Only in such thoughts could it have been placed in the chronicle by the Monk Nestor. Vladimir's confession contains a presentation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, the incarnation of the Redeemer of the Son of God, the veneration of saints, with denunciations and latinism. 11. St. Luke Zhidyata, from 1034 Bishop of Novgorod († 1060). In 1051, he consecrated the famous St. Sophia Church, which still exists; and not long after that he was slandered before the metropolitan, as a result of which he was kept in Kyiv for three years and died on the road. His teaching is known, breathing simplicity and intelligence; it contains a brief statement of the duties of a Christian (ed. in 1 part. Russian. Dostopam. M. 1815). Blessed Luke translated books from Greek, but these works of his are now unknown. 12. St. Hilarion, Metropolitan of Kiev from 1050, and before that time the pious priest of Berestovsky, who labored secretly in a cave. At the pulpit, with apostolic zeal, he cared about the spread and establishment of the new faith in the hearts of Russians. His Teaching on the Old and New Law, Praise to Kagan Vladimir, Confession of Faith and edifying Teaching are brilliant monuments of pure Slavic eloquence, wonderful fruits of a living and strong feeling, deep knowledge of faith and a bright mind. The doctrine of the Old and New Laws shows that at that time there was a need to speak against Judaism; it makes it clear that the unsuccessful preachers of Judaism under Vladimir did not abandon hopes of acquiring proselytes among the Russians; They were very mindful of their successes among the Kazars. Hilarion's teaching shows that in Russia they knew in person about their opinions about Christianity with Jewish teachers. Praise for Kagan is precious for the history of Russia's enlightenment with the Christian faith. “Let us also praise... the great and wondrous one who created, our teacher and mentor, the great Kagan of our land, Vladimer, the grandson of old Igor, the son of the glorious Svyatoslav, who in her time ruled; Having served in many countries with courage and bravery, he is now remembered and celebrated. Your dominion is not in evil and not in an unknown land, but in Russia, which is known and heard by all, is the end of the earth. This glorious... Vladimer... was the autocrat of his land, having subdued the countries at hand, those who were at hand with peace, and those who were not subdued with the sword... Come visit the Most High, look upon the all-merciful eye of the good God and in this mind in his heart, as if he understood the vanity of idolatry of flattery and seeking the one God... Moreover, he had never heard of the most faithful of the earth More Greek, more Christ-loving and stronger in faith.” Praise to Kagan, according to some lists, ends with a prayer, which is not in the parchment list. But the church use of Metropolitan Hilarion’s prayer for Orthodoxy (A.E. I, 258) is known from acts, and of course that is why the use of prayer, according to its use in the rite of church prayers, does not appear in other lists of instructive works by Metropolitan. Hilarion. At the end of the Confession we read: “By the grace of the man-loving God, I am the presbyter Hilarion, by His will, from the pious the bishop was sacred and appointed in the great city of Kiev, as if to be a metropolitan shepherd and teacher in it. In the summer of 6559 (1051), the right-believing Kagan Yaroslav, son Volodimer, reigned.” These words show that the Confession was written on some occasion by Hilarion, who had already been ordained a metropolitan. Later news says (Palinodiya in Konissky, in Reading Obshch. Ist. 1846, p. 7) that the dedicated Hilarion asked for and received confirmation of himself in the rank of metropolitan from the patriarch. Of course, it was for this occasion that the Confession was written. "The Word of St. Hilarion Metropolitan of Kyiv" in simple, heartfelt language, convinces to live holy. All these works of Hilarion were published in Prib. to Creation Father 1844, and according to the parchment list - on Thu. Moscow General East. 1848 13. Yaroslav Vladimirovich, Prince of Kyiv († 1054). His a) Charter on the Church Court (ed. in the 1st and 2nd parts. Ven.) suffered the same fate as the Charter of Vladimir. Its presentation in the Pereyaslav Chronicler, pp. 42–44 is curious. b) His Russian Truth (ed. in the 1st Dostop. 1815. Wed. 2nd part. Dost. 1843. M. Tobien. Russka Prawda, Petersb. 1844) has come to us in a brief and complete form; its contents are criminal laws and several civil ones. The Monk Nestor writes: “Yaroslav was very fond of books, read diligently day and night, gathered many scribes and ordered them to be translated from Greek into Slavic; Thus he wrote many books, with which faithful people were enlightened and enjoyed the divine teaching... He sowed the hearts of believers with bookish words... Loving books, having copied many of them, he put them in the holy. Sofia." What works were translated or rewritten under Yaroslav? Now known: Ostromir Gospel of 1057 (published by Vostokov in 1843); Psalter with the interpretation of Athanasius, donated by Metropolitan Eugene partly to Pogodin, partly to Keppen, according to the letter - the 11th century and with some traces of the Russian dialect (Izvest. Academician Sciences I, 85, 95, 101; Psalm 103 printed by Palauzov: The Age of Simeon, pp. 142-149); Lives of the Saints (from March 4 to March 31) and Words (20 words of Chrysostom, 1 Photius and 1 St. Epiphanius) according to the Suprasl RCP. XI century (ed. Miklosic: Monumenta linguae palaeoslovenicae, Vindob. 1851, words. Izvest. Acad. I, 24, 25, 97, 102); Canons of Saints of the 11th century in Novgorod. bib. (Izv. Acad. I, 89, 97); 13 Words of Gregory Nazianz. XI century (Bibliography sheets, pp. 85–91. M. 1825); Collections rewritten for Prince Svyatoslav - one in 1073 (Kalandovich Exarch, p. 102–104, 2 V Vostokova Description. music pp. 499–506); a photograph from a page of it in Pogodin (in Samples of ancient writing, M. 1840), in Buslaev, with grammar and dictionary (Materials for the history of writing. M. 1855); another was written in 1076; both with changes from the Bulgarian dialect to Russian. In the Collection of 1073 on the RKP. Synod. Bible: “great prince Svyatoslav”; and according to the list of the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery: “Simeon, the great king, greatly desired with desire.” (Shevyreva's Trip II, 30–32. M. 1850). Monk Zinovy, a student of St. Maxim, at one time saw the rules of the “first translators”, rewritten under Prince Yaroslav I, and also the “book of rules” written under Prince Izyaslav Yaroslavich (Homiles 52 and 55 against Theodosius Kosy). No copies of the Nomocanon from the 11th or 12th centuries are currently known. We only know that M. John and St. Nifont gives the rules of the Nomocanon not in an abbreviated text, but in their exact, complete form. 14. In the Novgorod Chronicle under 1030 we read: “And his (Novgorod Bishop Joachim) disciple Ephraim was like us” (Novgor. 2 years. Nikon. l. I, 132. Rost. and Supr.). In another it is added: “Having taught people for 5 years, he was not worthy of the priesthood” (Nov. 3 years). These words give the right to think that the senior Novgorod chronicler was one of the disciples of blessed Ephraim. Have his notes reached us? The now known Novgorod Chronicles contain, up to 1100, in addition to the news of Nestor, several special pieces of information. Among this information there are also those that provide detailed information, for example. about the days and hours of events and other details, show that they belong to a contemporary: in 1 Novgor. l. These are the news of 1016, 1045, 1051 and 1068; in 2 Novgorod. news about the years 990, 991 and 1049. The so-called Joachim Chronicle, ed. Tatishchev (in I volume. East Ross). There is no doubt that this chronicle was written by Bishop Joachim: this can be seen from its content. But its content shows that the information from the second half of it, without contradicting undoubted monuments, speaks of many things that Nestor does not have and that cannot be recognized as fiction in a historical work. The closeness of the disciple Efremov to Bishop Joachim itself indicates the likelihood that much of the notes of the disciple Efremov were preserved in the Joachim Chronicle. It was called the Chronicle of Bishop Joachim, perhaps because its author called himself Joachim; and meanwhile they read his words: “We are standing in the trading country, walking in the marketplaces and streets, Uchiha people, eliko mozhamov,” which could be conveyed on behalf of the teacher by the student Efremov. Unfortunately, with the current form of the Joachim Chronicle, like other Novgorod chronicles, one can only be content with assumptions and conjectures. 15. Ave. Theodosius of Pechersk, head of the monastic community in Russia († 1074): a) introduced the Studite Rule into his monastery, leaving it not in tradition, but in writing. b) He wrote accusatory messages to Prince Svyatoslav, which have not reached us. c) Nestor writes that St. Theodosius often taught the people and brethren. In the 15th century Triumphant (Rumyantsov No. 435) it reads: “The teaching of Blessed Theodosius, Abbot of Pechersk, on the executions of God.” The beginning of this teaching about God’s punishments and the subsequent denunciation of superstitions: “Aren’t we doing filthy things, and whoever kills a monk or a monk will return,” etc., word for word, are read in the Nestor Chronicle, although without the name of the author. Further, the teaching talks about reverent standing in the church, abstinence and drunkenness. The last instruction, the instruction on drunkenness, is found in the RKP. and in a separate form, with the inscription: “Word of St. father about drunkenness” (Rumyants. No. 358). In the Golden Matitsa (Pogodina No. 1024), which was once respected, it is written: “The Word was written by St. Theodosius Mnikh,” and according to the inscription and content, there is an undoubted work by St. Theodosius of Pechersk. The Word rebels against those who converted the table of St. love in a meal of drunkenness. “During a feast, troparions should not be sung at the cups, except three times: once for the glory of Christ God, at the beginning of the meal, another in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, at the end of the meal, the third for the health of the Emperor: we no longer allow it.” Then he says about drunkenness: “he who is mad suffers involuntarily and is rewarded with eternal life, but a drunkard suffers of his own free will and is subjected to eternal torment; A priest will come to a man who is possessed, say a prayer and drive away the demon, but to a drunk man, at least the priests of the whole earth gathered and said a prayer over him - they would not drive away the demon of arbitrary drunkenness from him.” The list of the Announcements of St. Theodore the Studite (Rumyants. No. 406) contains five teachings with the name of St. Feodosia. The first teaching is about love for God: “What shall we bring, my beloved ones, into the world or what shall the imams bring out? Have we not forsaken the world and those in the world, according to the commandment of Christ?... Who will not be surprised, beloved, that God will be glorified by our deeds? And the colic in us that is bad is poured out with His love! For he said, “The Father loved Me, and I have loved you” (John 15:9). The second lesson is about helping the poor, who, in reproof, murmured against the abbot for his love for the strange and poor. “It is not fitting for us, beloved, to retain only for ourselves what God sends to us through God-loving people, for spiritual and physical benefit... It is better, it is said, to give than to receive... What did you bring from your estates to this place? Or what did I demand from you, accepting you into this monastery and into the love of God, which gives us everything to the poor, through the prayers of St. Mother of God? The third teaching is about patience: “Beloved, accept the parable of suffering and patience,” etc. reminds us of the monastic vows: “Have we not all promised to endure reproaches and reproaches, humiliation and exile?” The fourth is about asceticism: “Strive, O laboring women, that you may receive the crowns of your patience”: private instructions are given on standing in the church and, first of all, the Rule of St. Theodore the Studite: “For the blow that strikes is not made to lie down, but to stand up in prayer, as the God-bearing Theodore taught us.” The fifth lesson is about going to the service of God. “There is nothing to say about Compline: how many times have I spoken about it and no one listens... I did not write this as a reproach to you, but I urge you to leave your negligence.” In these teachings, regardless of their inscription, almost every line says that these are the instructions of St. Theodosius of Pechersk; The strongest witnesses to this are the reference to the Studite Rule, beloved by Theodosius, the reference to the Protection of the Mother of God, the monastic spirit and the simplicity of the instructions. In the same meeting, one teaching, without the name of the author, speaks of allocating to the Lord tithes of time from the continuation of the year. And St. Nestor offers the same words on behalf of his mentor: “He says to the whole world, for God has given us 40 days to eat to cleanse the soul... for this is tithe” (Collected Years. I, 79). Two other teachings from the same collection are inscribed with the name of St. Theodora; but they do not belong to the Studio Master, but should also be recognized for the teachings of St. Feodosia. One says: “in all times and services, the divine Theodore is found, rejoicing in the commandments, and have yearning.” In another we read: “we are like for the ladder, for the betrayal of St. the great and divine Theodore of Studium." Here and here speaks the one who tried by all means to arrange the life of the brethren according to the rules of St. Theodore of Studium. c) Also known: “Answer of Theodosius to Prince Izyaslav about the Varangian faith” and another answer to him about Sunday and about the fast of Wednesday and Friday. Both are included in the Collection of abbots. Paisius, an educated contemporary of St. archbishop Gennady. (RKP; Belozer. m. No. 410). The second begins: “What did you think, O God-loving prince, to ask me, unlearned and thin, about such a thing?” So this is a letter to the prince. “From the time our God descended to earth, everything Jewish fell silent... He who told you that on Sunday you should not slaughter or eat what was slain, spoke not from the Holy Scriptures, but from his heart.” “Az Theodos, evil thinker, am a servant of the Most Holy Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”: this is how the answer about the Varangian faith begins, according to the best lists. Unfortunately, this answer suffered greatly from the scribes who changed it both out of ignorance and superstition, so that according to the lists it appears in three types. The answer enumerates the strange opinions and customs of papism and proposes rules for how a prince should behave in relation to the Latins. The opinions of papism are shown according to the information that reached the Pechersk abbot. These oddities of papism are the same as those indicated in the Confession of Faith of St. Vladimir and about which the Greek teachers of that time spoke (Cotelerii Mon. Graec. III, 495–509). “Be merciful,” says the answer, not only to your own Christians, but also to strangers... If someone tells you that God gave both faiths: answer: is God trustworthy?” Finally d) in the Psalter of 1296 it reads: “the prayer of St. Theodosius of Pechersk for all the peasants,” recently published by Mr. Buslaev (Materials for historical writings. M. 1855). In it, after the names of the saints, the name of Theodosius is placed; but this is an insertion common in prayers by the grace of scribes. St. Simon preserved the prayer of permission given by Theodosius to Simon Varangian. 16. John, Metropolitan of Kiev 1180–1189, originally Greek, according to Nestor, an exemplary shepherd in the severity of his life, in his education, in his gift of speech. He owns an Epistle to Pope Clement III, or Archbishop Vibert of Ravenna, recognized as pope by the will of the emperor. Henry and took the name Climepta with the title of pope. “Your love is pleasing in the Lord, man of God, worthy of the apostolic see and title,” this is how the saint of the Russian Church begins the letter: and being far from our poverty and humility, you touch us with the wings of love, kiss us as if you were your own, lovingly pray for us in the spirit, and accept the dogmas of our pure, Orthodox faith with reverence, as your bishop announced to us and clearly showed Holiness. since this is the situation and you are the bishop given to us, not like those who recently became bishops, troublemakers and insulters of the truth: then I, humble, mutually kiss you and your honorable head and shoulder.” The pride and love of power of Leo IX and Gregory VII are known: they decisively broke the alliance with the Eastern Church. Henry's struggle with Gregory forced the emperor to look for alliances everywhere - especially in Russia, where the princes were related and had relations with him. His dad Clement looked for followers in the Czech Republic and Poland (Jaffe Regesta pontificum. Berolini 1851). It is clear that then in the West the circumstances of the time were exactly those indicated by the beginning of the Epistle of M. John to the Pope, and it could only have been written by John II to Pope Clement - Vibert. The message is distinguished as much by gentle love as by firm knowledge of Christian truth. This is a wonderful example of a pastoral dogmatic message. Calculating the deviations of the Western Church from the Eastern, the pastor writes: “The pinnacle of all evil, and you have ascended to it, is that you dare to change the pure and holy image of faith, approved by all holy councils, - you dare to say that the Holy Spirit comes not only from the Father, but also from the Son.” In a brief refutation of the oddities of papism, he writes: It is amazing and strange how you dare to change the faith of 318 St. fathers and saints ecumenical councils... You are introducing a new teaching. And the apostle says: whoever preaches the gospel to you more than he eats, cursed be he... You introduce two reasons, two principles for the Holy Spirit and, humiliating Him, are close to falling into the heresy of Macedonius.” The Greek text of the Epistle and the ancient Slavic translation, distorted by scribes, with amendments and additions, published by Grigorovich, in Uchen. Zap. II Dept. Academician SPb. 1854 The Church’s “Rule of M. John, Prophet of Christ” is worthy of study for a church historian. Extracting what you need is in East. Russian church I. Contents of the Rule: a) on the relationship of Orthodoxy to papism (pr. 4, 5); b) against sorcery and pagan customs (pr. 7:16); c) against seductive songs (pr. 17, 28); d) about infant baptism and communion (pr. 1, 2, 21); e) about marriages (pr. 6, 10, 18, 22, 23, 25, 27–33); f) about icons and churches (pr. 9, 11, 12); g) about the meeting of bishops for a council and diocesan administration (pr. 8, 19, 34); h) about the behavior of priests (pr. 13, 15, 36, 37); i) against those establishing feasts in monasteries under the guise of piety (pr. 31); i) against the slave trade (art. 24); j) write about eating together with the pagans (Proverbs 20:31); k) about the wives of those who were in captivity (pr. 29, 30). The Rule of M. John was published in Part I of Russian. Hon. (M. 1815), but its text is more correct and complete in the RKP. Rumyantsev No. 238, 338 and others. 17. Jacob, a monk, was so distinguished among his contemporaries by his education and strictness of life that St. Theodosius in 1074 proposed him to the Pechersk brethren as his successor in managing the monastery, and M. John honored him with his friendship. Nowadays they are known with the name of Jacob: The Life of Princes Boris and Gleb, Praise to Prince Vladimir and Message to Prince Dimitri Izyaslav. In the Praise to Vladimir, as in the Message to Prince Demetrius, the writer calls himself the monk Iyakov. In the Praise we read: “I think Iyakov is a bad man, having heard from many about the blessed prince Volodymyr... and having collected little from many, he wrote about his virtues and about his son, but I say about St. Glorious martyr Boris and Gleb." Obviously, Iyakov, the author of the Praise to Vladimir, by his own admission, also wrote about St. princes. In the now famous Life of Jacob's Princes, the writer presents himself as not far from the time of St. Vladimir, how many St. Luke was close to the time of the gospel events. Therefore, here it is natural to see a contemporary of Ave. Theodosius. Lives of Princes and Praise of St. Vladimir published in Chron. Thurs. 1849, where the Life of Vladimir is placed - a compilation of Nestorov’s news, which is in vain passed off as the work of Iyakov. An excellent study on the text of the Lives of the Martyrs, an essay by Mr. Sreznevsky, is in Izv. Academician II, 117–130, 210–220. The legend about the princes is in some places enlivened by pictures and breathes fiery feelings. “Instruction to the spiritual son Prince Demetrius” - Izyaslav Yaroslavich (1054–1078) all of moral content. The spiritual father offers various instructions according to the needs of his son. “Be always a cheerful guardian of your body; beware of drunkenness, because it removes the Holy Spirit from us; pride, because God opposes the proud.” He especially speaks a lot against carnal uncleanness (Description of Music, p. 304. Izv. Acad. I, 331. II, 101). The Slavic translation of the Rule, written by M. John for the monk Iyakov, undoubtedly belongs to Iyakov himself. 18. Philip the Hermit, in 1095, wrote in Greek for the Smolensk monk Callinicus Dioptra - a spiritual and moral work (ed. a Pontano. Ingolstadii, 1604, in. 21 volume. M. Bibl. Patr. Cl. Lambec. Comm. Vind. V. pp. 81–88, 97. ed. Kollarii). The Slavic translation, of course contemporary with the original, is known from the 1306 list of the Chudov Monastery (Snegirev Pamyatn. p. 146) and from the RKP. XV century (Tolstoy I. No. 7. Rumyantsev No. 96. 95). 19. Venerable Nestor, who rests incorruptibly in the Kyiv caves with the name of the Chronicler. Little is known to us about his life. According to Polycarp, “Nestor, the same chronicler,” also took part in the healing of Niphon from demonic seduction. This was under Abbot John, therefore around 1085. According to Nestor’s own words, in 1091, with the blessing of the abbot, he found the incorrupt relics of St. Theodosius. He owed his education to his talents and to reading books. He speaks with warm love about book teaching. “By teaching us books,” he writes in the chronicle, and by teaching us the ways of repentance and wisdom, we gain and abstinence from the words of books: for the rivers are the waters of the universe; These are the sources of mercy; books have no source of depth; With these we console us in sorrow; These are the essence of abstinence; There is great wisdom." His blessed death is most likely dated to 1114. The first work of the Monk Nestor (of those now known) was the Life of the Holy Princes Boris and Gleb - “reading for the benefit of the obedience of the younger ones to the elders.” A study about him in Izv. Academician II, 117–130, 210–220. “After I wrote about the life and murder and miracles of Boris and Gleb, I forced myself to turn to another narrative, I am a sinful Nestor,” this is what the monk says at the beginning of the Life of St. Theodosius. This work of his is an example of a biography, excellent in all respects, in the grace of style, in the spirit of piety, in historical fidelity. It was written in such a way, as he says, “and for us, the monks, having accepted the scripture and honoring and seeing a man’s valor, will praise God and glorify His saint and strengthen themselves for other deeds.” It is precious both for its deep edification and for its living eloquence; It is also valuable because it contains a lot of information about modern church life. Unfortunately, the precious work has not yet been published in its original form (with the exception of a few places printed in the Ist. Collection of 1838). In the printed Patericon it is largely changed. Let us review its content, keeping with literal accuracy its remarkable passages. Theodosius was born not far from Kyiv, in Vasilevo, from pious parents. “On the 8th day I brought it to the priesthood of God, as is the custom of the peasants, and they would name the child. Prozvuter, having seen the brainchild, with the eyes of his heart clear about him, as if he wanted to be given to God, calls him Theodosius. Just as I passed the 40th day of the child, I sanctified him with baptism.” The parents moved “to the city of Kuresk, we call it, the prince commanded... They grew up, body and soul, drawn to the love of God, going to the Church of God all day, listening to the divine books with all attention... To this end, he commanded that only one teacher should be given to the teaching of the divine books... The haste of the acquisition and to all students with him.” At the age of 13 he lost his father... “From the holy places of Esma,” said the wanderers who came across Theodosius in Kursk. Inflamed with a desire to see Palestine, he left home with them; but the material was returned with severe beatings. “You go to the church of God all the days; You see how many times the liturgy is deprived of its essence for the sake of pastry... Consider, with your humility, to leave for that task, and do... Sitsa. having spent 12 years or more creating...” Mother strictly forbade this activity. “And I went to the city, not far from that (from Kursk) and lived with the presbyter and did my business according to custom.” His mother returned him to the house. Love for the Lord flared up more and more in his soul. He put on the chains. “The ruler of that city saw the youth... love him and command him that he should abide with his church.” His mother happened to see the chains on his body and threw them off. Theodosius secretly left home and went to Kyiv, with the intention of devoting himself to monasticism. “Be heard about the existing monasteries (in Kyiv). Then come and walk around the entire monastery” (in Kyiv). Having heard “about blessed Anthony living in the oven,” he came to him and asked to accept him into monasticism. After the test, “and he commanded (Antony) Nikon to cut his hair, who is the surname.” Four years have passed, and the mother, having learned from travelers that her son is in Kyiv, comes to Kyiv, goes around the monasteries and learns from Anthony that her son is in a cave, but does not see anyone. The struggle was difficult for Theodosius - the struggle with maternal love. Finally, the mother says: “I’m going to the monastery, and having cut my hair, I will spend the rest of my days.” Anthony “inform about her (the princess), let her (the princess) into the monastery of Jaunesque, we name Saint Nicholas. And she had her hair cut and was clothed in Mnish clothes. Behold the life of our blessed father Theodosya from a mile away, until he came to the cave, his mother confessed to the only one of the brethren, named Theodore, who was the cellarer under our father Theodosya, and having heard everything from him, I wrote it down as a keepsake.” And what is said about the mother shows her as an eyewitness. “She is as strong and strong in body as a husband; even if someone, without seeing her, hears her talking, begins to think of her husband.” Nestor, the son of the first boyar Izyaslavov, appeared to Anthony, continues, and declared: “I want to be with them... Then the elder came to him: look after the child to whom you promised. Whose warrior do you want to be? Behold, the angels of God stand invisibly, accepting your promises... Then the Monk Anthony commanded the great Nikon, let him cut his hair and clothe him in Mnish clothes. He, as usual, prayed to the monk; clothed in black robes, Varlaam called his name... Then a certain official from the prince of the court came, someone like him (Nikon) cut his hair, clothed him in Imaginian clothes, and named him Ephraim.” The tonsure of two princely favorites raised a storm against Antonieva's cave. Father “let us take off from him (from Varlaam) the holy mantle, throwing it into the wilds, and the helmet of salvation that was on his head, we will take it off.” Grand Duke Izyaslav threatened to excavate Anthony's cave. “And behold, one young man came in and told him that Anthony and those with him were to depart from this city into another region.” The meek wife softened Prince Izyaslav. Upon the return of Varlaam, “many who came to the oven were blessed for the sake of the hedgehog from the father of those who became friends from them.” Nikon and another monk of the “monastery of St. The mines left the cave. “The Great Nikon left for the island of Tmutorokani and there you found a bright, clean place, near the city, sat on it and by God’s grace grew that place and the church of St. Mother of God, build on it. And the monastery became famous, and it still exists to this day, but it was also in the Pechersk monastery... To this day, Ephraim the monastery went to Constantine City and lived in a single monastery. Then he was brought to this country and appointed bishop in the city of Pereyaslavl.” Theodosius was then “ordained presbyter.” The brothers gathered up to 12 people. First, a church was dug in the cave itself, and Varlaam was appointed abbot; then “build a small church over the stove in the name of the Holy Mother of God, you say, so that the brethren will gather for Divine praise; eat their rye bread only with water, but eat it on Saturday and during the week; many times, and in those days I did not find the potion, brewing one poison. He also works with his hands and weaves hoods and builds other handicrafts, and carries them to the city and sells them, and thus lives the purchase.” They worked at night, “every year waking up to divine praise, so together with the singing that came to the church, they created laughter, including the divine liturgy.” Varlaam (1055) was taken as abbot of the Demetrius Monastery, and Theodosius was put in his place. The church above the cave became cramped; The Monk Theodosius built a church in another place in the name of the Mother of God, surrounded it with a fence, and “moved from the oven to that place.” It was "in the summer of 6570" 1062. “For now, a single ambassador from the brethren to Constantine was sent to Ephraim the prisoner, and he copied the entire charter of the Studite monastery and brought it to him.” Ephraim immediately carried out his will. “Our father received him and commanded Theodosius to honor him before the brethren. And from then on they began to build all their monasteries according to the charter of St. Studite Monastery. Theodosius lovingly welcomed everyone into the monastery; zealously cared about the implementation of the rules; walked around the cells; He was the first to go to every task, just as he was the first to go to the church; He especially instilled humility in the brethren: “When you go, he said, do not get ahead of each other; When meeting, humbly bow to one another.” Book learning flourished under him. “Many times did the great Nikon sit and make books, and the blessed one raised the gray, spinning threads that were needed for such a task (for binding books), so that one could see his meekness and humility. This same paki, also a monk Larion, led us. It's cunning to write books. All these days and nights I write books in the cell of our blessed father Theodosius, quietly singing the psalter with my lips, spinning a wave with my hands, or doing some other work.” At night the monk prayed secretly. It happened that they came to him for a blessing at the beginning of Matins; they came up and heard him praying and crying bitterly, beating his head on the ground; but as soon as he began to hear that they had arrived, he stopped praying and pretended to be asleep. At meals I always ate dry bread; but we never saw him unhappy at meals. Grand Duke Izyaslav came to listen to his conversations. “Why is your food so tasty?” Izyaslav asked once. “Because,” answered Theodosius, “everything here is prepared with prayer and blessing, and your slaves are quarreling.” The brothers Svyatoslav and Vsevolod expelled the legitimate prince and elder brother Izyaslav. Theodosius freely denounced Svyatoslav “from the holy books. “” “Even in the octenation I ordered that he (Izyaslav) be remembered as the prince of that prince and the eldest of all; This (Svyatoslav), as he said, through the law I sat on that table, did not order to be remembered in my monastery. Having barely been begged for this by my brother, I commanded him to remember him, and first of all, the lover of Christ, then this good thing.” Near the monastery he built a courtyard and on it the church of the Holy First Martyr Stephen; Here he gathered the poor, the blind, the lame, the sick, and fed everyone. In addition, every Saturday he sent a cart of bread “to the cellars” (to the prisons). During Lent he usually went into a cave; and from it he secretly left “one for the village of Monastyrskoye.” So he lived “united until Palm Week.” Above this, Nestor says: “The friends and villages gave them their care.” Before his death, the Monk Theodosius called “all the brethren who were going to villages or to other needs; Having gathered everything, they began to order the tivouns, bailiffs, and servants, each to remain in the service entrusted to him with great diligence and fear of God.” This is Nestorov’s description of the life of Feodosiev. “Nestor wrote the chronicler,” Blessed Nestor wrote in the chronicler about the blessed fathers,” wrote the Pechersk monk Polycarp at the beginning of the 13th century. The Chronicle of Nestor (ed. in It. Collected Chronicles) is written in places with fascinating eloquence, with the animation of living piety; and how much she values ​​the truth is already shown by the fact that she speaks briefly about ancient times, limiting herself to extracts of information from the chronicle of Malala and George Amartol, - according to the Bulgarian translation (Prince Obolensky's preface to the chronicle. Transl. pp. 6, 19, 85); Vladimir's information about time is criticized. The stories of the long-time governor Jan († 1106), stories of Russian traders, warriors, and travelers, supplemented for him the legends and written notes of earlier times. Now that such a number of Slavic writers who preceded Nestor are known, skepticism against Nestor’s chronicle would be ridiculous. The chronicler says: “in the summer of 6360 (852) I will begin the Emperor Michael’s reign, beginning to be called the Russian Land... From there we will begin to set the numbers.” Then, having shown the years of the reign of Oleg and others before Yaroslav and saying that 60 years passed from the death of Yaroslav to the death of Svyatopolk-Mikhail, at the conclusion of the painting he says: “but we will return to the previous one and say that this was the time of this year (852–1113).” Consequently, the chronicler decided to describe the events of 852–1113. Everything that preceded it serves as an introduction to his chronicle. The chronicler's personality is visible in the chronicle, for the last time in 1106, where he recounts his conversation with Jan Vyshatich: there is not a word in it about the reign of Grand Duke Monomakh. In the Life of the Monk Theodosius, Nestor speaks of the consecration of Theoktistos as bishop, which took place on January 12, 1112: This shows that the chronicle of the Monk Nestor does not extend beyond the year 1112. 20. Vasily, according to his story about Prince Vasilka, seems to be a resident of Vladimir Volynsky, and if not a hieromonk, then a priest. Before him, unfortunate Vasilko opens his conscience. “Behold, I will tell you in truth, that God brought me down on me for my exaltation... I did not think of any harm to my brother in any way, but for my ascension, God brought me down,” this is what the sufferer says to Prince Vasily. Even Vasilkov’s enemy trusts Vasily - he instructs him to announce his condition to Vasilkov, which again indicates Vasily’s spiritual title. Vasilyevo’s story about the blinding of Prince Vasilko and the consequences of it was included in Nestor’s chronicle (Collected years. I, 109–116). 21. Sylvester, abbot of Vydubitsky, since 1119 bishop of Pereyaslavl († 1123 April 23). In the Laurentian list of the ancient chronicle for 1110 we read: “Hegumen Sylvester St. Mikhail wrote books and a chronicler, hoping to receive mercy from God, under Prince Volodymyr, the prince of Kiev, and at that time I was abbessed by St. Mikhail in 6624 (1116) ind. 9 summers; and if anyone reads these books, then be in our prayers.” The word: wrote, according to ancient usage, meant: rewrote; but this is not always the only thing. Polycarp says about Nestor: “the chronicles are written.” Regarding Sylvester, we also have the voice of history. The chronicler who described the Edigeevo invasion of Moscow in 1409, in justifying his description, says: “our first rulers without anger commanded all the good and bad things that happened to be written... just like under Volodymyr Monomakh of that great Selivester Vydubitsky, without decorating what he wrote, if you want, read it diligently, yes rest." Here, both the words about Sylvester, that he wrote without embellishment, and the comparison of the narrator himself with Sylvester, clearly indicate that the narrator allows us to see in Sylvester the writer of the chronicle. What exactly did Sylvester write as a writer? Nothing prevents us from believing that Sylvester, having rewritten Nestor’s chronicle in 1116, which ended in 1110, continued it until the beginning of 1123, that is, until his death. On the other hand, it is very well known that several additions were made to the Nestor Chronicle in its last years. So, under the year 1096, only in one Laurentian list, where Sylvester’s signature is included, is the teaching of Monomakh inserted, and, moreover, not quite in the right place. The incident on which Monomakh's teaching was written took place in 1100; Moreover, Nestor’s story about the northern peoples was interrupted by the teaching. Under 1097, Vasilyevo’s story about the blinding of Prince Vasilko was introduced; from that in the chronicle under 1098 and 1099. the news already reported by Vasily is repeated. Under 1100, the news recorded under 1097 is repeated. All these are obvious additions to Nestor’s work; and since the first of them undoubtedly belongs to Sylvester, we have the right to think that Sylvester, when rewriting Nestor’s chronicle, did not limit himself to the work of a copyist, but also brought in his own news. 22. Gregory, creator of canons, ascetic of Pechersk. The pious Polycarp, describing how the seduced recluse Nikita, under Abbot Nikon (1074–1088), got rid of his seduction, places among the “venerable men” who prayed for Nikita, “Gregory the creator of the canons,” and places him after Nestor, who wrote the chronicle, and before Theoktistus, who was later (1112–1123) Bishop of Chernigov. Thus, Gregory the creator of the canons was known under Metropolitan John II, and the time of his death was probably 1120. The Monk Gregory earned the name of the creator of canons, of course, not without reason: he was named so, no doubt, because services and songs for those days that were supposed to be celebrated during his life were written by him. Among these services-works of St. Gregory, without any doubt, we include the service to Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir (July 15). It contains RCP. we read: “Your great city Kyiv rejoices and rejoices... People of Rustia will come more honorably than the church of Vladimir, the blessed Grand Duke... Grow for us (Vladimir) our more honorable shoots of Solomon and David (Boris and Gleb), so we too celebrate with love, may our princes pray to God to give victory to our filthy enemies... Glorious is your memory, even as the princes celebrate the names of Christ, you praise your forefather.” From all these expressions it is obvious that the singer lived during the time of the Pechenegs and Polovtsians, for whom the common name was: filthy enemies; but not at all under the Tatars, when Kyiv was not at all a great city, and the tithe church, where the relics of Vladimir lay, was completely destroyed. The service of St. Theodosius, whose relics were discovered in 1091, and whose memory was ordered to be celebrated in all places in 1108 (Ist. Russian ts. I, 148), also belongs to St. Gregory. 23. At the end of the 11th century it was written: a) The Tale of Two Miracles of St. Nicholas - with a carpet and with a servant, making up the 33rd and 34th chapters in the handwritten Life of the saint. The miracle of the carpet begins with its introduction. This miracle “having happened then,” says the writer, in my thinness in Tsarigrad,” was announced to “the then existing Patriarch Michael” (The miracle is published in the Life of Nicholas. M. 1640–1642). The miracle with the servant begins like this: “I want to tell you another miracle.” Therefore, this is what the previous narrator says. The saint delivered from prison the master’s servant, “who was honored with glorious honor by Tsar Constantine, having many servants.” (The miracle is printed in Life, M., 1640–1642). Michael Cerularius was patriarch 1043–1059 under Emperor Constantine Monomachos (1042–1059) and briefly under Constantine Ducas (1059–1067); and after Constantine Duca, not a single Constantine had Patriarch Michael. Consequently, these two miracles occurred around 1051–1059. But they were described in Kyiv after Patriarch Michael, that is, after 1059. “To the then existing Patriarch Michael,” says a contemporary narrator. b) The story of the saint’s rescue of a baby who drowned in the Dnieper River was written when they went to Vyshgorod to venerate the relics of St. Boris and Gleb “many people from all cities and villages”; when there was the St. Sophia Church and the Metropolitan in Kyiv; therefore before the 13th century. The miracle of the baby from St. Nicholas the Wet occurred in 1092 (Description of the St. Sophia Church, Kyiv, 1854, p. 61). The description of the miracle was compiled, no doubt, at the same time. It was published in the Life of the Saint, M. 1640–1642. c) The story of the miracle over the Polovtsian is told by a Kievite and ends like this: “We, brethren, having heard the miracle of this saint in the land of Russia, strive to please God, as if we did not despise the people who knew Him new” (printed in the Life, M. 1640–1642). Obviously, this was written no later than the end of the 11th century. d) “Life and Deeds” of the saint. Nicholas, beginning with the words: “In the days of old, God was pleased to seek out the writings.” Russian essay. It consists of two parts: the first describes the life of the saint and his 27 miracles that occurred in times preceding the time of the story; the second part begins like this: “and this is good for us to preach God’s Scripture to you... as even now among men Nicholas was the great wonderworker, in our years he did many deeds.” 14 miracles are described here, including the miracles we cited. (Tsar's RKP. 1514 No. 381. 16th century No. 368. 388). Whether the writer also used the stories of others, or whether he himself described all the miracles of his time, as he compiled the Life and Deeds with the help of ancient sources, is now difficult to decide. In any case, his description was written close to the time of the transfer of the relics to Bar, since he does not yet talk about this transfer. e) “The Sermon on the Translation of the Relics of St. Nicholas. Ever since then, brothers, we must tremble as a holiday of God in honor of creativity.” The transfer took place “in the year one thousand and ninety-six... in the years of the Russian princes, blessings. V. book Vsevolod and... his son K. Vladimir of Chernigov.” (Tsarsky No. 381. 388. Rumyantsev RKP. XV century. No. 435). This Word is in both the Prologue and the Life, printed in Moscow in 1640–1642, but with many changes; there are some differences in the lists. f) As for the Eulogy to St. Nicholas, which is in the lists of Rumyantsev of the 15th century. (No. 435. 434) begins like this: “Behold, brothers, a bright festival”; and in the Tsar’s lists (No. 381. 388) it says: “Behold, brethren, a bright festival,” that is, in the latter with changes in words; then its language and especially the exhortation: “let us strive for good deeds, abstaining... from carrion and blood-eating,” show that it was written for the newly baptized Slavs, but hardly Russians: among the latter, even during paganism, but the chronicles do not show the custom of eating carrion. The word also contains a brief description of life. 24. Abbot Daniel is known from the Description of his journey to holy places, completed in 1113–1115 (ed. by Sakharov: Tales of Russian People, vol. II). The description is animated by warm faith and sincere piety; curious about the many information about holy places. Explanation of the incomprehensible names of places near the city of Norov in the Addendum to his Journey to Jerusalem. “God listened to him and St. the Holy Sepulcher, says Daniel at the end of the Description, for in all the holy places the names of the Russian princes and princesses and their children and the bishop and the abbot and the boyars and my spiritual children have not been forgotten.” Having listed the names of some princes, he continues: “With funeral liturgy for the Russian princes and for all the peasants, 50 liturgies and for the deceased liturgy with funeral service. And be a blessing from God and from St. to all who worship this with faith and love. the tomb and from all holy places." 25. Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh (1113–1125) left an excellent Teaching to Children, preserved in the Laurentian copy of the Chronicle. There is also his Message to his son about peace with the non-peace-loving Oleg of Chernigov. “Have the fear of God in your heart and do endless alms, because here is the beginning of all good”: this is how Monomakh begins his Teaching. Having then spoken about the incident that aroused his instruction from his soul, he teaches repentance, prayer, hospitality; advises learning foreign languages; condemns laziness and sets out as an example how he himself worked all his life. It is a precious picture of ancient life, simple and deeply pious. 26. Metropolitan Nikephoros, a Greek from Lycia of Asia Minor, who ruled the church from 1104–1120, was an enlightened shepherd and zealous for his duty. Under him, the Russian Church was glorified by several signs of heavenly love. The holy relics of Boris and Gleb, transferred to the new church, were marked by many miracles. The relics of the Holy Great Martyr Barbara from Tsariagrad visited Kyiv for the consolation and protection of the Russian country. Blessed Nicephorus, ruling the church, acted not only by authority, but also by the word of the gospel truth. His a) Message to the Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh about fasting, or more precisely about attention to oneself, excellent in style and content (ed. in the first part of the Venerable Russian. M. 1815), written at the onset of Lent. “Fasting,” he says, is necessary after Adam’s sin; Life in man is twofold - rational and animal, and fasting is very useful for maintaining power over the latter.” Finding it indecent to talk about fasting in front of such a prince, “his own piety was brought up and his fast rewarded,” the writer turns to the most important rule of life: “take heed to yourself when reading books.” Therefore, he talks about the soul, about its three main powers - mind, feeling and will, explaining their actions with examples from life. “Thou hast led, O prince, philanthropic and meek, with this word the tripartite soul, and led also her servants. As if you, prince, are sitting here in your land, acting as governors with your servants, acting throughout the whole earth, and you yourself are a master and prince: so the soul acts throughout the whole body with its five servants, acting through the five senses - eyes, hearing, etc. Finding the prince’s actions according to the four senses irreproachable, he stops at hearing. The soul, he says, is obliged to verify the reports of feelings. You yourself cannot see everything with your eyes; The servants bring you information. Try to see if “some kind of dirty trick” comes from them. Remember about the condemned and punished, was it not slander that destroyed them?... “Don’t be sad, prince, about this word,” says the blessed shepherd in conclusion... For this reason, we are bold, as the church charter and the rule at this time and to the princes say what is useful... Even if we are tatsi (in the scabs of sin): but the word of God, which is in us, is healthy and whole...” The last thought, the thought about the power of the word of God, the unweakened weakness of the preacher, alone is worth a hundred long-winded papal bulls; and yet the whole Epistle is so clever, so sincerely pious. b) A message to the same prince about the reasons for the rejection of the Latins by the Orthodox Church (ed. in Pamyatn. XII century M. 1825), written on the occasion that the pious prince himself asked the metropolitan about this. Nicephorus shows twenty differences between the Roman Church and the Orthodox Church, establishing a division between them. Some of them are dogmatic, others are ritual, and others are moral. In order not to embarrass the prince with disputes, the Metropolitan sets out the differences of the Roman Church briefly, but everywhere he adds a brief but thorough refutation of Latin opinions. He says this about the main thing: “They keep an evil thought with a corrupted and meager meaning, making an addition to the holy rule, that is, I believe in one God; the holy fathers wrote this: “and in the life-giving Holy Spirit who proceeds from the Father”; and they added: “who are from the Father and the Son.” This is a great evil faith that leads to Judaism and the Sabellian heresy. By adding this, they reject the faith of the holy fathers of the 1st and 2nd Councils, and the word of Christ that He spoke to the apostles about the sending of the Spirit, when he says, according to the evangelist’s account, thus: when the Comforter comes, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, He will teach. If Christ did not say: like and from the Son; How did they dare to add more”? It is worthy of attention that the metropolitan causes the departure of the Latins from Orthodoxy from the Germans: “Old Rome was occupied by the Germans and took possession of that land. The old people who kept the law of Christ, the apostles and holy fathers soon died; After their death, the young and inexperienced followed the charms of the Germans and entered into various retreats that were contrary to the Divine law, and therefore clearly reached the point of Judaism. Despite the admonitions and advice of other churches, they did not want to lag behind the evil they were doing, and therefore they were rejected by us.” It is clear that the intelligent metropolitan knew and understood the history of Charlemagne and his successors well. c) The message to the same prince on how to act in relation to the Latins is so far known only from manuscripts. “Before, blessed child and son of light, because you have the land of Lyadsk in court, those who live and are on it are the essence of servants, the Latin is the accepted teaching.” d) The Fourth Epistle of Nicephorus, to Prince Yaroslav of Murom, against the Latins, is placed in the Chet Min. m. Makaria on August 31st. 27. Venerable Anthony the Roman, founder of the monastery named after him and abbot since 1131 († 1147). His vessels are kept in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral. One jasper; its terminals depict the Holy Trinity and a four-pointed cross; on the rim there is an inscription: πίνετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες. The other vessel is onyx; On the rim there is an inscription: Drink from her, all of you. This is my blood of the new testament, shed for you and for many. The Synodal Library contains the Service Book of St. Anthony (No. 605) with one liturgy of Chrysostom. Here is the reading of one prayer: “Who so loved your whole world, as you would give your son to another, so that everyone who believes in her will not perish, not to have eternal life, who came and fulfilled everything that was for us, at night, in vain surrendering for the worldly life, we accepted the bread with our saints and with most pure hands.” (Samples of ancient writings. No. 5. M. 1840). The inventory of 1636 shows: “three service books of the charatean of the wonderworker Anthony the Roman.” (Description of books of statistics. Moi. No. 1927–929. M. 1848). His stone cross is kept in his monastery; on the top crossbar of this six-pointed cross are the words: ІС. HS. The six icons of the saint on copper boards are also remarkable: three depict the Lord Almighty, and the other three depict the crucified Savior. In his spiritual letter, the monk describes the labors and sorrows that he suffered during the founding of the monastery, and entrusts the monastery to God and the Most Holy Theotokos. In another letter he writes that he bought land for the monastery from the sons of the mayor and describes the boundaries of the land. It is not surprising that only lists of charters have reached us, and not the originals. It is enough that one of them was approved by Tsar John. They were published in Karamzin, II, pr. 210, and lists of them in Tolstoy, II, no. 220. Examples of such modern charters important for history: Around 1130, Prince Mstislav gave a charter for lands and court fees to the Yuryev Monastery (Vestn. Evropy 1818 No. 15, 16, 20. Addition to Act. Ist. I, No. 2). In 1131, the charter of the Novgorod Baptist Church was given by Prince Vsevolod (Addition to the historical act. I, No. 3). In 1137, the St. Sophia Cathedral was given a charter by Prince Svyatoslav (Dost. I. M. 1815). In 1150, Rostislav, Prince of Smolensk, gave a charter to the Smolensk bishopric (Addition to the historical act. I, 4). The charter of Prince Vsevolod of the Baptist Church has reached us in two forms, as well as the charter of Vladimir; but it is not difficult to guess that in the later copy it was changed from the original, due to the circumstances of the time. The chronicle also mentions: under 1144, a contractual letter between Vladimir Galitsky and Prince Vsevolod, and under 1147, the same letter with Prince Izyaslav; but they did not reach us. 28. Theodosius, monk, interlocutor of the holy Prince Nicholas, in the world of Svyatoslav, or Saint, who died in the Pechersk monastery in 1142. “I call upon your monastic servant Theodosius, my patriarch of prayer,” says Theodosius (preface). These words show that Theodosius was a Greek from Constantinople, and not a Kievite. His language, dark and irregular, shows the same thing. After that, his words about worldly and rhetorical books are understandable, as well as the words: “the ideas of silence lack clarity.” Simon writes about the ascetic Prince Nicholas: “the essence of his books is still with you.” The prince loved books and for this love he asked Theodosius “from Grchsky Slovesky to transfer the divinely wise and dogmatic epistole” to St. Leo of Rome. Theodosius, having begun the translation, wrote a dedication to his prince and a story about the Council of Chalcedon; but the translation of the message was completed already when the prince ascetic died, and the translator at the end of the translation wrote: for the sake of the Gospel commandments, this message is like a talent of a trembler who betrayed us, the Christ-loving and noble Saint, eternal memory. People: eternal memory." (Translation published in Reading General History, 1847, No. 7). 29. Kliment Smolyatich “Chernorizets Skimnik”, 1147–1155 Metropolitan of Kiev, forced to flee to Vladimir of Volyn when Rostislav lost the throne. In 1159, the sons of Izyaslav, by whose will Clement ascended the see, again wanted Clement to rule the church; but the dispute ended with the fact that it was necessary not to give power to either Clement or his successor, the Greek Constantine, but to ask the patriarch for a new metropolitan (Historical Russian Church I, 169–174). Clement was, according to the Kyiv Chronicle, “a scribe and a philosopher, so there’s no way to talk in the Russian land” (Collected Let. II, 2, 29); and according to others, “he is well-read and learned and a great philosopher and has written many scriptures before his father” (Nik. Let. II, 35). Kirik gives several of its rules (Ist. Russian ts. I, 123, 129, 130, 190). Based on the review of the chronicles about Clement, we can admit that it is more than probable that this teaching shepherd gave an eloquent teaching on the Sunday of All Saints. “Who is pleased to speak the power of the Lord”? After calculating the places in the east where the saints became famous for their exploits, mention is made here of “the Pechera, which newly appeared in Rus'.” After the saints of the east, “we also glorify you, honest father, the Russian affirmation, honest Anthony, the head of the blessed life, who created Theodosius after you... We please Prince Igor, having honestly accepted the torment who brought - a pure sacrifice to God.” In conclusion, the mentor writes: “I pray, Lord, my people, the flock of Christ and God-loved brethren; “Behold, I say to you my son.” From these words it is clear that this is said by the shepherd of the church, and, moreover, one who has “lords” in his flock, that is, princes; Therefore, this is what the Metropolitan Shepherd says. “I tell the prince,” the mentor says further and directly, “you too, princes, will be saved by righteousness, having rejected the love of gold; You too, princesses, will be saved by the truth, and not by the malice of the hateful love of money” (Rumyants. Collection. XV century No. 406). Blessed Prince Igor was killed by the people of Kiev in 1147, although Clement “rebuked them a lot.” Grand Duke Izyaslav, for whom the people of Kiev rebelled, upon learning of Igor's death, wept bitterly about Igor and sharply accused the people of Kiev. Meanwhile, a “great sign” appeared in the church where the body of the murdered man was laid. Igor's brothers with honor in 1150 transported Igor’s body from Kyiv to Chernigov (Collected years. I, 137, 138. II, 33–35, 53). And so, the chronicle, for its part, shows that in Kyiv, under Metropolitan Clement, the murdered prince was considered innocent and blessed, and therefore Metropolitan Clement, on the Sunday of All Saints, could already mention among the saints not only Anthony and Theodosius, but also the murdered Prince Igor. 30. Saint Niphon, Bishop of Novgorod. He performed monastic feats in the Pechersk Monastery. Ordained a bishop in 1130, in 1135 he stopped, with his admonition, the fighting that had begun between the people of Kiev, Chernigov and Novgorod. Many times after that he took upon himself to organize the affairs of the Novgorodians, and it happened that the dissatisfied party kept him in prison. In 1147, he strongly rebelled against the consecration of the metropolitan by the Russian bishops and refused to recognize Clement as the supreme shepherd of Russia. For this, Grand Duke Izyaslav imprisoned him in the Pechersky Monastery, and Patriarch Nicholas sent him a letter of commendation. He was a zealous builder of churches, and in Pskov he founded the Spassky Monastery on Mirozh. “A zealot for sacred and divine things” died in 1156 (Collected years 11, 29, 30, 80. III, 6, 9, 13, 214, 215). Answers from St. Nifont's response to Kirik's questions shows both the experience of the shepherd and the bright understanding of the Christian spirit; they were also introduced into the composition of the Helmsman, as an excellent experience of Russian church legislation. To the question: should communion be given to patients who are spewing pus? St. Niphon replies: “It absolutely must: it is not the stench that separates from the sacred that comes from the mouths of others, but the stench of sin.” About a loan with growth he ordered to teach: “if it is a priest, tell him - you are not worthy to serve, unless you stop (demanding growth); and if you are a layman, then say - you should not take (height); It would be my sin if I had not told you this. If they cannot leave it: then say - be merciful, take light (growth); if given 5 kuna, take 3 or 4.” (See Ist. Russian ts., I, 116–128,136,138–219). St. Niphon is considered the successor of the Nestor Chronicle (Starchevsky in Ist. ist. literary. pp. 34–35, St. Petersburg, 1843): a probable opinion, as we will see below (41). As for Nifont’s instructions about mermaids, about the temptation of God, etc. (Handbook of Tolstoy, pp. 123, 130, 135, 456), then in vain they are taken (Dictionary II, 142. Shevyrev II, 181, 182) for the instructions of St. Nifont of Novgorod. This is nothing more than extracts from the life of St. Niphon of Cyprus, described by a not very meaningful Byzantine, from his life, also known from the Rostov manuscript of 1219, located in the Sergius Lavra. 31. Kirik, hierodeacon and domestic of the Anthony Monastery, who proposed questions to Niphon, is known for his doctrine of the numbers of years, which he wrote in 1136. This is a type of chronology. The work was published in Trud. total ist. 1847, no. 6. 32. Andrey, abbot of the Anthony Monastery, 1147–1157, described the life of his teacher, the Venerable. Antonia. This is shown in all lists of Antoniev’s life (Bib. general history No. 38, 52, 222. Tsar’s No. 132, 133, 135, 470. Description of music. 209). 33. In 1164, under John Bishop of Rostov, the relics of the Rostov saints Leonty and Isaiah were discovered, and then a celebration was established for them: this is what Nikon’s chronicle says, and its news is justified by other chronicles (Karamz. III, pr. 27,147,213). In all likelihood, the lives of the saints were briefly described at the same time. In the life of Leonty it is said that “Leonty was born in Tsarigrad” (Tsar’s manuscript, 1514, No. 381. Tolstoy II, No. 292). This is not true. But everything else is justified by the chronicles. 34. Daniel Zatochnik's Message to Prince Yuri Dolgoruky is the fruit of Russian Christian wisdom, complacent amidst sorrows (ed. in Pamyatn. XII century, pp. 227–240). It was respected by many later, so that with the name of Lake Lacha, chroniclers noted: “where Danilo was imprisoned” (years around 1378). Daniel wrote: “Look on me, my lord, like a mother on a baby... For some there is love, but for me there is fierce grief; To some the lake is White, but to me it is blacker than tar; to whom the lake lies, but to me, sitting on it, the weeping is bitter; who has Novgorod, but the corners have fallen for me, my part has not prospered.” The imprisoned man then expounds in the same good-natured, humorous language thoughts useful to the prince. “The prince is a generous father to everyone, because many people are deprived of their father and mother and resort to him... With a good thinker, the prince will come up with a high table, but with a dashing thinker, he thinks and will be deprived of a small table... More marvelous than a diva, who captures a wife for an evil profit for the sake of... What is an evil wife? an inexhaustible inn, a demonic shop. What is the wife of evil? rebellion in the world, blindness of the mind, the leader of all malice, in the church a demonic bridge... I, my lord prince, neither went overseas nor learned from a philosopher, but was like a falling bee in different colors and copulating like a fashionable honeycomb, and so I collected verbal sweetness from many books.” “The Sermon on Wives” in the Collection of the Sergius Lavra (No. 31) with the inscription: “on the feast of John the Baptist of John Chrysostom,” both in content and in a good-natured joking tone, is so similar to the Message to Prince Dolgoruky that one cannot help but recognize in both works the same author. The Word was composed in imitation of the well-known, forged Word of Chrysostom against Herodias, and therefore is called Chrysostom; it contains some of the “Bee” by Rev. Maxima; and "Message" also refers to Maxim's Bee. 35. Patriarch Luke's Message to Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, 1160, on the reception of Bishop Nestor and on holidays (ed. in Nikon. Let. II, 180–189; lyrics by Medvedev). 36. John Elijah, Archbishop of Novgorod. He was a priest at the Church of St. Blasius on Volosovaya Street, and in 1164 he was elected bishop of Novgorod, and in 1167, at the request of the Novgorodians, he and his successors were given the rank of archbishop. In 1169, his prayers called for the help of the Mother of God to save Novgorod from the Suzdal army. In 1170, 3 versts from Novgorod, on Lake Myachine, he founded a monastery with the Church of the Annunciation. Happy in the reconciliation of Prince Andrei with Novgorod, in 1172 he built a stone Church of the Epiphany above the gates of the Annunciation Monastery. Having built several more churches, the elderly saint retired in 1186, accepted the schema with the name of John, and soon died. (Collected years. III, 13, 15, 17, 18, 126, 215, 216). He is known for: a) 28 rules given to resolve Kirik’s issues. (Ed. in Memory of the 12th century, pp. 200,203. 25 rules, according to handicraft Rumyantsev, belong to Bishop Arkady). “If a person repents, and he has many sins, then he did not immediately order penance to be imposed, but to assign something small; when he learns, then add to him little by little, but not make him too aggravated (pr. 10). If someone, while under penance, goes on a long journey: then allow him, read the prayer of permission, and then let him fulfill the commandment that the confessor has assigned. If someone goes to war or becomes sick: give him the sacrament (pr. 11). They carried children to pray to the Varangian priest! Appoint penance for six weeks, for they are like two-believers” (pr. 16). b) Of his two other rules, one talks about how to act during the liturgy when they forgot to pour wine into the cup; and the other refers to St. lamb (ibid., pp. 223, 224). c) Dictionary (I, 255, 258) bases the opinion about St. John, the author of the Novgorod Chronicle, on the fact that under 1230 in one copy of the chronicle it is written: “and give a priest to me, the sinner John,” and under 1144 It is written: “In the same summer, make me priest, Archbishop Saint Niphon.” What St. John († 1186) could have been ordained a priest in 1144, this is likely: he died in old age. We see notes from a contemporary in the 1st Novgorod Chronicle under the years 1138, 1145, 1156, 1161. These are the reasons why it is more than likely that St. John wrote a chronicle. 37. The Unknown Word about Igor's Campaign is a poetic depiction of Igor's unfortunate campaign against the Polovtsians in 1188. The sorrow for his native Christian Rus', unhappy from the civil strife of the princes, imparts a touching liveliness to the singer's story. The word was written in the popular language of that time, with the addition of Volyn-Polish and Turkic expressions and words. (Ed. by Sakharov in Tale. Russian. vol. I, book. IV. Snegirev in the III part of the Historical collection. 1838; Dubensky in the III part of the Russian book. 1844). The best critical analysis of the Word in aesthetic-historical terms is Maksimovich’s analysis in J.M. Nar. Enlightenment 1836 IX and XI parts and in Moskvityanin 1855 38. Kirill, Bishop of Turov, was a strict ascetic from his youth, dividing his time between prayer and study of scripture. At the request of the residents of the city of Turov, where he himself was born of wealthy parents, he was elevated to the Turov See before 1171; this year, already in the rank of bishop, he denounced the unworthy Bishop Theodore. Caring for the salvation of his flock, he offered them teachings from the pulpit. “Behold now, as in Galilee, and St. the church gathered,” we read in his Word for Easter, and we see similar things in other Words. (Ed. Kalaid. pp. 17, 9, 73, 87). Since according to the chronicle in July 1182 we see Bishop Lawrence of Turov at the dedication of Vasily and Pechersk Archimandrite, that priest Vasily, whom he prepared for acceptance of monasticism with his messages from his bl. Kirill; there is no doubt that St. In July 1182, Cyril no longer ruled the Turov flock, but lived in retirement, and probably died soon after. “To Prince Andrew of Bogolyubsk (so says the ancient biography of St. Cyril) many messages were written from the Gospel and prophetic writings, which are essentially for the Lord’s holidays and many soulful words, even prayers and words to God to many saints, and having written many of them, he will betray them to the church; create the great eve of repentance to the Lord according to the chapters of the alphabet: and even to this day people are doing the faithfulness of Rustia.” (Rum. music. No. 322). According to these words, the writings of St. Kirill consisted of: a) words on the master’s holidays, which he sent in the form of messages to the strong and pious Prince Bogolyubsky; b) from spiritually beneficial instructions, of which there were many; c) from prayers and the penitential canon. a) Words of St. Kirill for the holidays are still known today. Of those published (in the 12th century Memorial) 9 words are undoubted in their authenticity, and they show that the ancient biographer, not without reason, called St. Kirill by Russian Chrysostom. The most excellent, both in content and syllable, is his word for the 5th week. Here he reproaches his flock for lazily going to listen to his instructions. The saint says: “If they had spoken about themselves, they would have done good quickly, without coming; Now, my Lady, I proclaim to you and read the letter of Christ to you. As if someone brings a letter to the Tsar and the Prince to the city under his hand: they do not torture the life of the one who brought it, whether he is rich or poor, whether he is sinful or righteous, and they listen to those who are so careful, so that nothing forgets them... if an unruly person makes a noise (noise), then they will drive away as if they were doing dirty tricks. Yes, even if there is only so much attention from an earthly prince, how much more should you pay attention here, where the Lord talks with an angel. Thus I pray to those who have come here, that you may teach those who do not come and exhort them to come to the church... Lead us, brothers, if someone closes his eyes to the rising sun, unwilling to see this light and says, “It would be better if there is darkness of light: or will someone have mercy on him, and not rather hate him and reject him? It’s also a lesson in words. For the word of God is called light in the scriptures, and that is, more visible than this light; This is why he enlightens the eyes of the flesh, but he enlightens the eyes of the soul... If he had given out gold or silver all day long, or honey, or any beer: wouldn’t they come quickly on their own and not be called? And they cooked each other's best. Now I am distributing the words of God, better than gold and precious stones and sweeter than honey and honeycomb, and you will be deprived of them, not coming to the church!” In the Tsar's manuscript of the 14th century. (No. 361) reads, still unpublished, “the punishment of the same Cyril. Receive, brothers, from the repository a certain sense of spiritual benefit: let us learn from these books.” As for the published Word about the ordeals (pp. 92–101), even in the best lists it is not attributed to St. Kirill of Turov and its content does not fit the teaching of St. Cyril, who always put the Holy Scripture in first place. Edition “The Word for Pentecost” (p. 86), but the best copies belong to Clement, Bishop of Bulgaria; and in terms of style it is not the work of the eloquent Turov preacher. Word (XI) about wisdom is very simple and in its simplicity indicates that the author is a simple monk. b) The allegorical image of a monk and a layman, presented in the letter to Abbot Vasily, the same image of the relationship of the soul to the body (ed. Kalaidovich in the 12th century Memorial), are edifying and curious. Even more important is the letter to Abbot Vasily, with excellent instructions for the monk (published in the appendix to the creative father, 1851). And this is all that we have so far from the many edifying instructions of St. Kirill, known to his ancient biographer. c) One cannot help but regret that the penitential canon of St. remains unpublished. Cyril (in perg. manuscript. Soph. bib.); he breathes deep contrition. Handwritten Volokol. mon. (No. 109, 413), in the Synodal (No. 470), at Tolstoy (II, No. 111) the daily prayers of Blessed Kirill of Turov are read, 4 prayers for each day, 30 prayers in total. Of these, 22 prayers were printed in the Vilna prayer book of 1596 and 1635, in the Ostrog trace. Psalms of 1598 (Sakharova Bibliography No. 102, 108, 319). The scribes introduced their own arbitrariness into these prayers; but it would have cost little effort to separate the work of the scribes from the work of Kirillov, and Kalaidovich was in vain not to take on this task. In general, Kalaidovich’s edition requires many amendments and additions. 39. Anthony, Archbishop of Novgorod, in the world Dobrynya Yadreikovich, monk of Khutyn, since 1212 Archbishop of Novgorod - a victim of the self-will of the Novgorodians; in 1219 he was expelled by the Novgorodians and appointed metropolitan to the See of Przemysl; in 1225 returned to Novgorod; but in 1228, having lost his language, he retired to Khutyn; in the same year he was again forced to take control of the diocese; however, No. the next year returned to Khutyn, where he died in 1238. His journey to Constantinople, made in 1200, known from a list of the 15th century, is very curious, among other things, from the news of St. Princess Olga. (Severn. Bee 1846 No. 11). 40. Around 1200, “the life and walking of Saint Euphrosyne, Princess of Polotsk († 1173) was described.” The description came to us in a parchment manuscript. XIV century, found by I. I. Sreznevsky in the Lviv monastery (J. M. Nar. Pros. 1843, Feb.). It is also placed in the Chetyi Menaion Met. Macarius on May 23rd. 41. The chronicle of the events of 1116–1201, according to the Ipatievsky list, reveals that its compiler was a resident of the south, who completed his work around 1202. Here, under 1171, we read: “on Saturday morning I went with Volodymyr (deceased) from Vyshgorod” to Kyiv. This is said, of course, by the hieromonk who accompanied the prince’s coffin with prayers. “The year 1187 was the winter of evil, the like of which has never happened in our memory.” The story about the construction of a stone wall in the Vydubitsky monastery, written in 1199, undoubtedly belongs to an eyewitness, the Vydubitsky monk. “According to your good custom,” says the narrator, turning to Prince Rurik, accept our rudeness as a scripture.” According to these words, we see in the chronicler Hieromonk Vydubitsky, who described modern events; and the example of abbot Sylvester Vydubitsky makes us think that Vydubitsky, a chronicler of the late 12th century. There was also abbot Vydubitsky, unfortunately unknown by name. since under 1114 and 1136 we see in the Ipatievo list also a contemporary of the Kievite, this makes it clear that the Vydubitsky abbot of 1200 for the first half of the 12th century used the notes of his predecessors. Let us also add that since 1202 the Volyn chronicler is already visible in the Ipatievo list, and this again serves to reinforce our thoughts about the compiler of the chronicle of 1116–1201. 42. According to the Laurentian copy of the chronicle of 1111–1207, it must be recognized that its compiler was the Vladimir chronicler, who completed his work around 1210. Here, under 1176, we read about the Rostovites: “listening to evil people of debauchery, who do not want good for us, envy of this city (Vladimir).” Talking about Vsevolod’s war with the Ryazan people in 1180, he writes: “the Ryazan people settled down with our guards... our prognasha.” We also see it under 1185 in the story about the Vladimir Bishop Luke († 1189) and under 1207. At the end of the story about the murder of Prince. Andrei Bogolyubsky (1175), the narrator, addressing the noble prince, says: “Pray to have mercy on our prince and Mr. Vsevolod, his own brother.” It is clear that the narrator wrote under the Grand Duke Vsevolod, who was the Grand Duke 1176–1212. About the Kyiv events, the Vladimir chronicler briefly repeats what is said in the southern chronicle according to the Ipatievsky list; however, in places it also says something that is not in the Ipatiyevsky list. 43. The year 1214 ends with the chronicler of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal (ed. by Prince Obolensky, 1851). Before 1206, it is almost literally similar to the Laurentian list of ancient chronicles; and after that he records the events mainly of Pereyaslavl, as a contemporary eyewitness. We said that it is similar to the Laurentian list almost literally; this means that he changes the text of the chronicles in places: either he replaces it with his own words, or he adds some historical features. This is the case, for example, in the news about Bishop Luke in 1185. In him we see the statutes of Vladimir and Yaroslav with his news. It is especially remarkable that he calls the Polovtsians Tatars; this shows either that the Pereyaslav chronicler wrote at least not before 1225, or that the text of his list was changed after him. A detailed comparison of the Pereyaslavl Chronicle with the Laurentian copy of the chronicle is in Uchen. Zap. 2nd Div. Academician I, 62–92. 44. Simon, Monk of Pechersk, then abbot of the Vladimir Nativity Monastery, from 1215 bishop of Vladimir and Suzdal, who died in the schema in 1226. The chronicle calls him merciful and teacher (Laurel sp. let. pp. 185, 190). His message to the Pechersk monk and spiritual friend Polycarp, with stories about the 8 Pechersk monks, is excellent. Polycarp was troubled by thoughts of ambition and power. To heal his friend, Simon writes a message and talks about former ascetics. The main idea of ​​the message is to keep Polycarp in the solitude of Pechersk. "Brother! - this is how he begins the message, - sitting in silence, gather your mind and say to yourself: man! have you not forsaken the world and your carnal parents? You came here to be saved, but you are not acting spiritually. Why did you call yourself a monk? A black dress will not save you from torment... The Lord Himself says: My house will be called a house of prayer; Where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I among them. If such a council gathers more than a hundred: believe that our God is with them... The Pechersk monastery - the sea - does not hold within itself what is rotten, but will sweep it out... Just as from Christ our God himself the apostles were sent throughout the whole universe, so from our mother, the Lady Theotokos of the great monastery, many bishops were appointed throughout the whole earth.” Having listed up to 16 bishops by name, he continues: “if you want to know, read the old Rostov chronicler - there are more than 30 there, - and I think there were up to 50 before us. Understand the fame of that monastery, and be ashamed and repent... I would be glad to leave the bishopric to serve the abbot; but you know what's holding me back. Who doesn’t know me, sinner Simon, the bishop of this cathedral church - a decoration for Vladimir - and the other Suzdal church, which I myself built? How many cities and villages do they have? They collect tithes from all that land. And all this is owned by our thinness. But before God I tell you: I would consider all this glory and power to be dung, if only I had to stick around like a twig outside the gates of the Pechersk Monastery, or lie around in rubbish to be trampled under foot by people.” (Monuments of the 12th century, pp. 249–257). Simon's stories about the ascetics, which followed the epistle, are placed in the printed Pechersk Patericon, but without the admonitions with which Simon addressed Polycarp at times, and without many private comments that are dear to history. Simon presents examples of various virtues in the ascetics: in Eustratius, Nikon and Kuksha - examples of martyrdom for the faith; in Athanasius - the feat of seclusion; in Svyatosha - renunciation of princely power and honors; in Erasmus and Arethas - selflessness; in Titus - love that seeks to extinguish enmity. For Simon, the sources of information about the lives of his fathers were partly legends and monuments, partly his own inquiries: “Everyone knows,” he says about Kuksha, how he drove out demons and baptized the Vyatichi; the cell, garden and books of the Saint are still intact”; the icons of Erasmus were kept under the altar; and Simon heard about the death of Erasmus from the “blessed elders who saw themselves”; Vavila himself spoke about the healing of Vavila by Athanasius; the story of Arethas and Titus took place before Simon's eyes. “The Tale of the Founding of the Pechersk Church” was written for the same purpose as the message - to nourish reverence in the Pechersk residents for their place of residence. Simon's story about Shimon, the benefactor of the church under construction, is important for history. “The St. Shimon was taught. Theodosius, having left the Latin riot, true faith in our Lord Jesus Christ with all his household, like 3000 souls, with his priests, for the sake of miracles that happened from Anthony and Theodosius.” Anthony predicted to the princes an unhappy battle with the Polovtsians, and announced to Shimon that he would not only remain intact, but would be buried in a church that was to be built near the caves. Speaking about the Greek painters of the church, he adds: “and their books were kept in Greek as a keepsake.” Tatishchev (Ist. book I, part 1, p. 58, chapter 5, § 2) saw a list of the chronicle where Simon, using the rich library of Prince Constantine, recorded the northern events of 1200–1225, and where he praised Prince Constantine for his love of enlightenment. But now such a list is not known. 45. Polycarp, a friend of Simon and a Pechersk monk, but not an archimandrite, wrote a letter to Archimandrite Akindinus with legends about the 13 fathers of Pechersk. “For one hundred and sixty years there was no memory of St. fathers of the monastery,” he says, after saying that Nestor wrote about the Pechersk fathers in the chronicle; and Nestor speaks of them under 1074; therefore, Polycarp wrote in 1231. In Polycarp’s own words, he took his information partly from the stories of Simon, partly from the chronicle of Nestor, and writes in imitation of his predecessors, who, as he says, compiled the Patericon of Pechersk. Polycarp tells about Nikita the recluse, Agapit the doctor, Gregory the wonderworker, John the recluse, about Moses the chaste, about Prochorus, Mark, Theodore, Basil, Alypius and Pimen the long-suffering. His work, like Simonovo’s, does not have its original form in the printed Patericon (about the Patericon of Pechersk. Kubarev in No. 9 of Reading General History, 1847; Butkov in the Answer to the Question about Nestor. St. Petersburg, 1850). 46. Timofey, sexton of the Novgorod Church of St. Jacob. According to the list of the Novgorod Chronicle, which belonged to Count Tolstoy, the chronicle begins with the admonition: “bow your ears wisely: like the ancient princes.” Then it says: “We are from the beginning of the Russian land until this summer and everything is known in a row, let’s say, from Tsar Michael to Alexander and Isaac” (Collected years. III, VII. V, 87). If the chronicler begins the story with Tsar Michael, then he ends it, of course, with Tsar Isaac, and not with the mayors, as, on the contrary, Mr. Stroev assumed (Sof. Vremennik I, XIV). Among the Emperors of Constantinople, only one Isaac is known - this is Isaac the Angel, who ascended the throne in 1185; in 1195 he was blinded by his brother Alexei Angel, and in 1203 he reigned together with Alexei IV, and was strangled by Murzuphlus, from whom the Latins took Constantinople in 1204. And so, the writer of the Novgorod Chronicle decided to describe events before his time, before Isaac the Angel († 1203), following the example of how Nestor intended to keep the chronicle from Michael to his time. In the chronicle itself for 1230, having spoken about the burial of Savva, the former abbot of Yuryevsky, the chronicler adds: “God grant his holy prayer to all the peasants and to me, the sinful sexton Timothy” (Collected years. III, 47). By combining the beginning of the chronicle with this postscript, we receive undoubted evidence that the sexton Timofey was not only a copyist of the chronicle, but its author, who fulfilled his promise with accuracy and even with a slight excess; We are also confident that the Novgorod Chronicle of Timothy the Sexton was completed in 1230. We also find confirmation of the latter in the fact that since 1232, in the current first Novgorod Chronicle, differences in its lists begin (Collected years 111, 48, 69, 75, 76, 78). But here is another circumstance that is important in relation to the chronicler Timothy. There is a well-known prologue with the following afterword: “In the summer of 6705 (1197) I wrote this book with my hand, the sinful Timothy sexton of St. James, to the holy image by the acquisition of Zachary Olekshinich under the priest Ovstafiya,” etc. (Historical collection vol. III, book III, p. 294). In ancient Novgorod, according to the chronicle, we see one church of St. Jacob - at the Nerevsky end. And this church was used by a contemporary chronicler of 1188–1209. especially busy. “In 1186, the servant of God Herman died, the priests of St. Jacob's name Voyat, who served him at St. Iyakov is about fifteen years old... While singing with him to Plskov, Archbishop Gavrila and when he got to Plskov, he got sick and was tonsured, and the bishop went to St. Savior to the monasteries. Lord rest the soul of Your servant Herman." Then in 1208, “Lazarus, Vsevolozh’s husband (v.k.) came from Vladimir and Boris Miroshkinich, commanded the murder of Olksa Sbyslavets in the Yaroslavl courtyard and killed him without guilt at the saint’s place on Saturday, March 17 on St. Alexey; and in the morning the cry of St. Theotokos at St. Jacob's, in Ierevskom end." (Collected years. III, 19.30). And so, in the own words of the chronicler of 1188–1209, he was a contemporary of the events of 1188–1209 and a person interested in everything related to the church of St. Jacob, who was at the Nerevsky end; and by comparing his notes from 1230 we are undoubtedly convinced that the Novgorod chronicler was Timothy, the sexton of the church of St. Jacob. Sexton chronicler? As it stands now, this is an oddity. But this was not the case in ancient times. From the letters we see that the church clerks were both the writers of spiritual letters and the producers of all the affairs of the parish; they made an agreement with the clerk “in a letter from the great sovereign’s affairs and from the monastery, from clerks and from lay people, I will always be ready” (Legal act. No. 286, 185, 288, 302, 334, pp. 111, 113, 119, 430, 451, 458, 460, 401), 47. Ephraim, monk, student of Rev. Abraham of Smolensk, who died in 1221, described the life of St. his mentor. (Rukon. Smolensk. Semin. Tsarsky No. 265, 372, 380). St. Sava, ascetic on Athos, from 1222 the first archbishop of Serbia and enlightener of his homeland, deceased. in 1237. Known for him: the cenobitic charter, the monastery charter, a description of the life of his father, the reverend. Myrrh-streaming Simeon, a word about the relics of St. Simeon, confession of the Orthodox faith, and finally a dying letter to King Vladislav. Partly in full, partly in extracts, they are placed in the life of St. Savva, ed. in arr. to creativity fathers, 1849 48. Cyril I, metropolitan, 1223–1233. An active shepherd, who worked very hard to reconcile the princes of Russia who quarreled among themselves, and who often visited his vast flock (Ist. Russian ts. I, 203, 204). According to the chronicles, he was “a great philosopher, keenly taught and cunning in the teaching of divine books” (Laurel sp. 190), otherwise “understanding the divine scriptures” (Resurrection II, 182). The message to him by the Venerable is known. Herman about not accepting non-dismissed slaves into the clergy, and not allowing those dismissed to be treated like slaves. It was published, but not all of it, in Opis. Room. music., pp. 304,326. In all likelihood, this message was caused by the message of Metropolitan Kirill himself: but the latter is now unknown. There is not a single work known to date with the name of this teaching metropolitan 1 . Of the untitled Russian works of the pre-Mongol period, his work “Instructions for the Peasants,” which has come down to us in hand, should first be recognized. XIV century (in the Golden Chain of the Sergius Lavra and in the Tsar’s handicraft of the 14th century No. 361). The list from the Golden Chain, reported by me, was published in Moskvityanin 1851, No. 6. In the form that has come down to us, this Teaching contains 18 private instructions: “about faith; about fasting; about neighbors; about monasteries; about the bishop; oh pop; O princes; about friends; about fear; about servants; about the woman of death; about the sorcerer: about the mystery; about sleep; about humility; about bravery; about slaves; about prayer." But since almost every instruction begins with the author’s appeal: “my dear child,” one cannot help but see in the composition a district pastoral epistle, similar to the one written by St. Peter or St. Alexei. It all breathes with pastoral love, pastoral meekness and pastoral simplicity. We do not consider it necessary to say much about the fact that this work is a Russian work. It is enough to point to the instructions: “about princes, about servants, about courage.” Part of the teaching about servants is found in manuscripts with the name of Matthew, Bishop of Sarai, the one who was dedicated by Metropolitan Alexei. But from the fact that in the latter form it is partly an abbreviation, partly a dissemination of the complete instruction, it is not difficult to understand where the original is and where the list is inaccurate. What is most important is that the instruction to Christians in its entirety is the instruction not of a bishop, but of a metropolitan. This is clearly shown by the article about the bishop; This is also evident from the spirit of the entire instruction, where, despite all the meekness of the mentor, a person with strong authority speaks out, a person who freely instructs both prince and slave. It must also be said that the teaching pastor knows not only all of Holy Scripture, but also knows the apostolic decrees and the life of the Eastern teachers; In general, his education is Greek, and not Russian, which again shows in the writer a higher clergy person, the face of a metropolitan from the Greeks, which was Kirill. 49. Russian works of the pre-Mongol period, whose authors and time remain unknown, include the following: a) “The word of a certain lover of Christ and zealot for the right faith,” very interesting in content. “As Elijah Thesbytania slaughtered the herey and the sacrifice... so the peasant could not tolerate the peasants living in two faiths, believing in Perun and in Khors, and in Mokosh and in Sima and in Rgla and in Vila (according to other lists: Vols), their number being distant sisters, they say neveglasi; then they think of everyone as goddesses and so they put food on them and chickens for them to slaughter. Pray to the fire, calling him Svarozhits, and create garlic with God. Whenever anyone has a feast, then they put it in buckets and cups and drink it, rejoicing over their idols. Are not the Jews and heretics worse than those who do such things in faith and in baptism? Not only do ignorant people create things, but also knowledgeable ones, priests and scribes. Otherwise, it’s not good to do things like drinking and eating prayer services; If you don’t drink, or eat, or hear, and don’t want to teach them... For this reason, it is inappropriate for peasants to play demonic games, which are dancing, gudba, demonic songs and idolatry sacrifice, which are praying under the barn of fire and Pitchfork and Mokosha and Sim Regla and Perun and Hair of the cattle god, Rod and Rozhanitsy and all those who are similar to them. The same, beloved, flee from the sacrifices of idols and the demands of laying and all the services of idols, so that we do not say lies when we are baptized: I deny Satan and all his works and all his services and all his angels and all his flock...” (Golden Chain of the Sergius Lavra. Part of the Word with variants was published by I. I. Sreznevsky in the Kalachev Archive, book II, part I, pp. 103, 104). b) “The Word of St. Isaiah the prophet interpreted by Chrysostom” against the veneration of the Family and the Rozhanitsa. By the way, it says: “You are thirsty, but you drink what you are drinking from the demon... You... who are serving a meal for the Family and the Mothers in Birth, will cry out in the pain of your heart and will weep from the contrition of the spirit.” (Published by I. I. Sreznevsky in the Kalachev Archive, book II, part I, pp. 100, 101). This Word was written, without a doubt, before the 12th century. Nifont of Novgorod already knew it. Kirik asked: “Should the Rod and the Mother in Birth steal bread and cheese and honey (drink)? Harrow Velmi (Nifont). There is no place to say: woe to those who drink to the Mother in labor.” It is the given Word that speaks about those who drink Rozhanitsa. As for the Word of Gregory the Theologian, found by Mr. Shevyrev in Paisiev’s Belozersky Collection, about Russian paganism, found in other manuscripts, I. I. Sreznevsky, by language, dates it to the XIII or XIV century (Moskvityanin, 1851, No. 5); Let us add that “the very content of the Word points to the end of the 13th or 14th century. The Word says: “but in Ukraine it is not right to pray to him to the cursed god Perun and Khors and Mokosha and Vila and then do the same.” Paganism persisted in the Ukraine - in the border corners of Russia, and only secretly, of course not in the 11th and 12th centuries, but perhaps in the 13th and 14th centuries. c) The instruction “about three fasts” with an exhortation to leave the mermaids. d) “The word of a certain father to his son is beneficial to his soul. My son, my child, incline your ear to me and listen to your father who advises you.” Both this and the previous teaching are found in the Golden Chain, where is the Word of the Christ-lover. They are also in the Tsar’s manuscript of the 14th and 16th centuries, No. 361, 369, 179. The word of a father to his son, according to the list of the Golden Chain, was published in Moskvityanin, 1851, No. 6. e) “The Word about Evil Wives. There is nothing like an evil woman, scattering fire and the sea.” (Rumyants. No. 359). Compiled in imitation of the well-known, forged, Word of Chrysostom on Herodias, with the addition of Russian sayings. Part of the story from this word - about a husband crying over the death of an evil wife - was already included in his letter by Daniel the Imprisoned. f) “The teaching of a certain elder about spiritual struggle and drunkenness. It is fitting for a repentant to live alone, take care and work.” This teaching is also found in the Golden Chain. Let us remember the words of Vladimir the pagan about wine. g) Interpretation of the Lord’s Prayer, under the title: “The Lord taught His disciples how to pray. This is a prayer with meaning: Our Father”; the composition is, without a doubt, Russian. It talks about the baptism of Vladimir; between debts and sins, “swarba, resentment, resentment” are mentioned; in the explanation of the words: but deliver us from the evil one, it is said: “there is a greater misfortune than to take away.” It is in the Collection of the 15th century. Minister Foreign Case, No. 478; in Rumyantsev, at the end of the Apocalypse of the 13th century, No. 8; in Kormchay XVI century, No. 232. h) Praise to the angels, extracted from Chrysostom, Epiphanius and Hippolytus, in the Hypatievsky copy of Kiev. chronicle, p. 3. i) The Word about St. Clement of Rome, during the renovation of the Tithe Kyiv Church. The last half of it was published in Kievlyanin, M., 1850, pp. 144–146. i) Teaching on the Sunday of All Saints. “Rejoice in paradise and rejoice in the sky... Rejoice, holy martyrs Boris and Gleb, who pleased Christ in the newly enlightened Russian land... With him and all the nobles, appearance and non-appearance, holy abbess of Pechernia, Theodosius of the Russian monks, elders... Pray for peace, giving victory to our filthy princes" (Rumyants. Collection. XV century, No. 620). The teaching was written, as is obvious, after several successors of the teacher. Feodosia, under the Polovtsians. j) Praise of St. Kozma and Damian. “Let us praise, brothers, the good God and all those who please Him, who have kept all His commandments... Having asked Christ for victory for our faithful prince, crown him with prayer and gird him with strength.” Blush. handwritten XVI century, No. 434, p. 677. l) To Novgor. Helmsman 1282 (Synod. Bible No. 132) “The speech of the Jewish language, translated into Russian” is a weak experience of a biblical dictionary. (Ed. by Kalaidovich in Exarch, appendix No. XII). 50. Monuments of faith and teachings of piety date back to the 12th century: a) The Gospel of Mstislav, Prince of Novgorod, written around 1120 (photograph from Pogodin’s page in Obraztsy, M., 1841); Galich Gospel 1144; Galich Gospel of 1164, written by clerk Konstantin for the priest Simeon (Description of music, pp. 170–175; Kalaidovich Exarch, pp. 28–31, 104–111, 214, 217; Buslaev in Material;, M., 1855, pp. 11–17). By comparing the text of Mstislav's Gospel with Ostromir's and with the Greek text, undoubted signs are revealed in the first that the ancient text in it was corrected according to the Greek text; and in the Galich Gospels one can see the courage of the Russian interpreter, who allowed the ancient text to be changed at his own discretion, with the intention of making the words of Scripture more intelligible (Ist. Russian ts., I, 58, 59). Apostle 1220, in the Synod. bibliography, described by Buslaev (Materials for historical writings, 1855, pp. 20–22). A snapshot from several lines by Pogodin, in Samples. Apocalypse, in Rumyants. Museum I. No. 8). b) The Pentateuch of Moses, written in 1136 in Novgorod, was preserved in copies of the 15th century. (Kalaid. Exarch, p. 971). Chertkov has a Psalter of the 12th century, with a month book, where the year begins with the month of March, as it was in Russia before the Mongols (Addendum to the description book, p. 443). The books of the Prophets, copied in Novgorod in 1030 for Vladimir Yaroslavich, were preserved in copies of the 15th century. About the text in detail in the Description. handwritten Synod. librarian (M., 1855), pp. 84–124. The books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, in parchment. manuscripts of the Sergius Lavra, which ends with the chronology: “from Vladimir to Vsevolod Gyurgevich 200 years”; Therefore, the chronology ended in 1193. Part of the XI, part of the XII century belongs according to translation: a) Stichirary Synod. bib., written a year before the death of Prince Yuri Dolgoruky, therefore in 1157, with notes: described by Buslaev (Materials, M., 1855). Chertkov (in Addendum 443) has the Order of service during Holy Week, written in the 12th century. In the Sofia Novgorod Bible. Irmologist of the 12th century, important for determining the origin of ancient words and the pronunciation of semivowels (Izvestia Akad., vol. IV, 255–257). b) Teaching works of the fathers: The Ladder of the Rev. John, according to the language of the Bulgarian translation of the 11th century. (Description of music. 255). Rev. Theodore the Studite Announcement, numbering 128, in parchment. handwritten XIV century (Moscow Dukh. Acad. 32), translation, according to the language, Russian. In the Rumyantsev manuscript of the 15th century. 406) The catechumens are mixed with the Teachings of St. Feodosia. From the Words of Rev. Ephraim's testimony was given by Simon (About St. Nicholas); Vladimir Monomakh cited the Words of Basil the Great. Vasily's fasting instructions in hand. XV century Thick. I, 144, 195; Sergiev Lavra, No. 5. c) In the library of the Sergius Lavra parchment. manuscript with the Lives of St. Euthymius, John Kushchnik, Mary of Egypt (op. Sophronia Hierarchy), with the stories of the Most Rev. John and Bishop Polubius about Epiphanius of Cyprus. This manuscript was written by the hand of the same Epiphanius who wrote the Stichirar in 1330 (manuscript No. 14 and 7). Translation of articles in both manuscripts of the pre-Mongol period and the Russian system; and all these Lives are distinguished by their historical fidelity. About Novgor. Prologue of the 12th century. see § 45. In 1227, the Prologue of Bauze was written. Let us note that this edifying and useful work for history is incorrectly called Prologue in the translation; in fact, this is the Synaxarion of Saints - a collection of short stories about the saints; It was called a prologue after the preface (πρόλογος) to the Synaxarion. The Greek composition belongs to the 11th century. d) The Book of the Bee - a collection of sayings of Holy Scripture, church fathers and famous Greek philosophers, poets and other writers, arranged by subject, was in the mind of Daniel the imprisoned (§ 33), and from them are given places in the Righteous Meril (§ 50). Lists of Bees from the 14th and 15th centuries. (in the library Pogodin and others); translation language is Russian. See Moskvityanin 1843, No. 9, pp. 150–155; Known 2nd Div. Academician II, 220–233. e) Brief chronicler Rev. Nikephoros, - the Law of Moses and the Judgment Law of Constantine - were preserved in the Novgorod Helmsman of 1282 and in the Collection of the 13th century. The last two articles were published in the 2nd part of Hon. 1843. In terms of language, their translation dates back to the beginning of the 12th century. 51. Kirill, confessor of Prince Vasilko of Rostov, since 1231 Bishop of Rostov. A modern chronicler says about him that he “does not remain anything like the previous bishops, following their character and teaching... Everyone who came was surprised by listening to his teaching, even from the holy books.” The chronicler says about himself: “I marveled at the loving teaching and diligence of this honest Saint Cyril, listening with fear and submission in a certain narrow place and not knowing how to write this first word of a figure.” (Chronicles of the Laurel Sp., p. 195). About his death he writes this way: “the same summer (1362) the blessed teaching bishop Kirill of Rostov reposed on May 29” (p. 204). In the Life of Peter Tsarevich, whom Kirill took from the horde and converted to the Christian faith, it is said that during Kirill’s time in Rostov in the Church of the Holy Mother of God “the left choir was Greek, and the right was Russian.” In the library of the Sergius Lavra there is a parchment manuscript (No. 6): Life of Niphon. At the end of it is written: “in the summer of 6730 (1222) the books of the month of May were finished on 21 days, in memory of St. Martyr Jeremiah in the city of Rostov under the prince under Vasilets, under the son of Konstantinov, and grandson Vsevolozh... Holy Lady Theotokos, holy apostles, prophets and martyrs, holy. Nifonte, help my master Vasilko and save your sinful servant Kuril from eternal torment on the day of judgment.” Based on the chronicler’s review of Kirill, we can assume that Kirill was not only a scribe of Nifontov’s Life, but also a translator. Let us add to this that this Life of Niphon was respected; extracts from it, under the name of the teachings of Niphon, are found in many manuscripts, which could partly depend on the importance of the person who translated the book. With the name of Cyril the Bishop, or St. Father Cyril, the following works are found in manuscripts: a) “The Word of St. Kirill Bishop about not forgetting your teachers. Whether someone is great, a saint or a small one, he has learned from priests that the mind is beneficial to the soul.” This article is preceded by: chronicle numbers from Noah to 6746 (1238) with Russian events, and the Word of St. Nifont, “as the soul contributes” - four extracts from the Life of Nifont (Royal manuscript of the 16th century, No. 371): both circumstances indicate that the Word belongs to Cyril, Bishop of Rostov. b) “Teaching of St. father Kiril. The spiritual seed in your souls is already right... I am the one who sows.” c) “The Word of St. Father Kiril about the primordial. God first created Adam from the earth and from his side created woman.” d) “The Word of St. Father Kiril about the Passion of God. “Beloved, we always have the fear of God before our eyes.” e) The Word of St. Father Kiril about heavenly powers. God, the good lover of mankind, created from non-existence into being.” Words No. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are in manuscript. Tsarsky XVI century, No. 142. One 4th is still in hand. Tsarsky, No. 179,691; Tolstoy, II, no. 299. f) Word of St. Father Kiril about evil and unfaithful people (Tolstoy, III, No. 70). g) The Word of St. Kiril “about evil souls”, with reproaches for pagan superstition. printed in Moskvityanin 1844, No. 1, p. 241. h) The Word of St. Kirill about the ordeals, published between the Words of Kirill of Turov (p. 92); in Rumyantsev’s list it follows an extract from the Life of Nifontov (No. 179) and in content is quite consistent with the spirit of the translator of the Life of Nifontov. A new edition of this Word is in Izvestia Acad. IV, 178–184. Probably, the recently published ancient Russian work (Tsarsky, No. 179) belongs to this teaching pastor: “On the 7th week - about the collection of St. father of Arya the Heretic. Today is the memory of St. father is honored... Pray for peace and for our faithful prince and for all the peasant people, deliver us all from the troubles and sorrows that come upon us” (Journal of Min. Nar. Prosv., 1854, December. According to the language, it belongs to the 13th century. According to the inventory of 1638, the Rostov Epiphany Monastery shows the “Book of the Holy Orders of Cyril the Bishop” (inventory of books of the steppe monastery No. 1270, M., 1848). 52) Cyril II, Metropolitan of Kiev, 1243–1280, the most beneficent shepherd of the church, which was subjected to defeat and the yoke of the Tatars. Fortunately for the church, he received a label or preferential letter from Khan Mengu-Temir in favor of the clergy. This first label, known so far, is more serviceable than in the 2nd volume of the Collection. gram. No. 2., published by Grigoriev in the essay “On the reliability of labels”, M., 1842, p. 124; but could still be corrected based on the collection of Mosk labels. Spirit. Academy, presented to the cathedral in 1503. The blessed metropolitan, on the one hand, using the khan’s letter, on the other, deeply feeling the disorder in church affairs caused by the pogrom of the Tatars, and partly by the passions of Christian souls, turned with fiery jealousy to the possible arrangement of church affairs. In 1270, at his request, a list of Nomocanon was sent to him from Bulgaria. “The Bulgarian Despot John Dragoslav (writes Jan Dubovich) sent the rules to the Metropolitan as an expensive gift, according to the Greek account in 6778, from the birth. Christ in 1270; this is how it is indicated in the letter, which is inscribed in that very book” (Hierarchia, wo Lwowe, 1644, p. 60). This review, by the way, resolves Mr. Vostokov’s doubt about the year in which the Helmsman was sent (Description of music, pp. 291, 292). The lists of Helmsmen contemporary to Blessed Kirill are now known: Ryazan 1284 and Novgorod 1282. But the list with the Bulgarian Helmsman sent to Metropolitan Kirill must be recognized as the list of Rumyants. museum of the 16th century No. 232, since it preserved the very letter in which the Helmsman was forwarded to him (Description of music. 290-293). The difference between this list, as well as the aforementioned Novgorod Helmsman, is that the text of the eastern rules is presented here in its original, complete form, as it is found in Zonara, while in the Ryazan Helmsman the text is abbreviated, as in the interpretation of Aristin. For this difference, the Bulgarian Helmsman is called Zonara in a letter to the Metropolitan. In 1274, Cyril proposed at the Council of Vladimir a rule on the deanery of life and worship. The rule, approved by the cathedral, became part of the Helmsman. It was published in Part 1. Hon. Page 106–118, but not all. Additions were published in Op. music., pp. 321, 302. During the council, the metropolitan offered the Word for the day of the Archangel Michael, where among other things he says: “Hear ye fathers in the Lord, bishops and monastics and priests, venerable and sacred council! My word comes to you.” According to the list, this word is called “The Word of Cyril the Philosopher.” Based on the words given, it is obvious that it was said by the Metropolitan. The modesty of a clergyman would not have allowed not only any monk Kirill, but also no bishop Kirill to address the council of archpastors in such a harsh tone; in this form only the metropolitan, the bishop above bishops, could speak. At the end of the instructions to the cathedral, the shepherd mentor says in consolation: “our land will be relieved from the heterodox Besermen countries... the peoples of the entire Russian land will live in silence.” According to these words, we see in the comforter the shepherd of Russia, suffering from the Tatars. (Word published in Reading General History, 1846, No. 8). Part of the Word - instructions to the sacred council - is also found in those lists of the Helmsman, where the “Rule” of Metropolitan Kirill is placed: it is here called the Instruction to the Priests, Kirill. (Rumyants music, 231. 233, 234, 238). This serves as new confirmation that the Word on the day of Archangel Michael, and therefore part of it - the Instruction to the Priests - belongs to Metropolitan Cyril, famous for the council of 1274. Given the celebrity of such Cyril, it is also natural that the Instruction to the Priests was subsequently included in the instructions to newly ordained priests, which were given by the bishop. (Hist. Act. I, p. 160). After this, it is clear that the doubts of the publisher of the Instructions to the Priests (Appendix to the creative fathers, 1843, pp. 425–431), whether it belongs to Metropolitan Kirill, or Bishop Kirill of Rostov, are completely in vain. In the Word, the Metropolitan Preacher speaks about the creation and orders of the heavenly spirits, about the fall of Satan and his actions on man: “ineh (deceptions of believing) in the seas and rivers and in springs of water and in the trees of the woods and in the beasts of the meadow and in fire and in many other creatures”; this is an allusion to the superstitions of pagan Rus'. Next he speaks about the works of God for man, and in particular about the service of angels to man; about the relationship of spirits to the human soul after its separation from the body, or about ordeals: the 7th ordeal “dancing at feasts and at weddings and in evenings and at games and on the streets and fables are frightening - Sotanin’s sniffles”; 11th ordeal “coldless drunkenness, as long as we lived on earth, we drank through our strength all day and until dinner”; 15th ordeal “believe in the meeting and in the choh and in the crawl and in the bird’s eye and in divination and in every creature and in renounced things.” All these, as is obvious, are types of Russian sins contemporary with the 13th century preacher. At the 20th ordeal, he points out unmercifulness and stinginess, and speaks at length against the enmity towards each other that destroyed Russia. This is followed by instructions to the council of clergy about the importance and responsibilities of the clergy. Turning again to all Christians, he denounces the friends of ignorance who did not consider it necessary to study the Holy Scriptures. At the end he speaks of the final judgment: “They say that after seven thousand years the coming of Christ will take place.” Let us finally note that if in the Word on the Archangel the image of the ordeals is similar to what we see in the Word of St. Cyril about the ordeals (§ 51); then it could not be otherwise due to the essence of the subject; however, there are differences between one and the other, indicating a difference in the writers, not only in what precedes the depiction of the ordeals and what follows, but also in the depiction of the ordeals itself. According to some lists of the Helmsman (Rumyants. 231, 232 opis. pp. 281, 296, Brailovsky, Imperial publ. bib.), after the Instruction to the priests there follows an Epistle to the prince, the son of Grand Duke Alexander, where, firstly, by the example of the ancestors of the princes, they convince the prince to take care of the restoration of the disturbed Vladimir Church. “And now I am writing something else,” that is, about another subject, the mentor continues: “Church courts in all Christian people - abbots, priests, deacons,” etc. After calculating the subjects of the spiritual court, it is said about the purpose given by the rules to the income of the metropolitan; The church statutes of Vladimir and Yaroslav are also given here (see Kalachev about Kormcha, pp. 122, 123, 125). Both in terms of the connection of the Epistle with the Instruction to the Priests, and in the contemporaneity of Metropolitan Kirill with the Grand Duke Alexander and his sons, there is no doubt that this Epistle was also written by Blessed Metropolitan Kirill, who was concerned about the improvement of the church. As for the fact that the author of the Epistle calls himself the Bishop of Vladimir, Metropolitan Kirill could call himself that, not only out of humility, but also because before the dedication of Serapion, he actually ruled the Vladimir diocese and lived in Vladimir for entire years. (See The Life of Metropolitan Kirill in the Appendix to the Works of the Fathers, 1843). Known now from lists of the 14th and 15th centuries. “The Righteous Standard” begins with a rather extensive teaching to Grand Duke Vasily. “Seek to begin from God - this is how the teaching begins - and end in God: begin good from God to God’s servant, the great prince... Against this great ship of the whole world, guardian Christ stands for you, our wise helmsman, pious Prince Vasily, intercessor in the truth.” Next, it talks about the duties of the “Grand Duke” and “all the sons of his Russian princes in relation to their subjects. At the end we read: “Has God not scattered us over the face of all the earth? Shouldn't our Bysha city be taken? Did not our mighty princes fall with the edge of the sword? Have our children been taken into captivity? Will not the saints of God desolate the Church? Are we not tormented by filth every day? All this happens to us; we do not keep our Savior’s commandments. And they bow.” This complaint against the filthy is obviously the same one that we read in the Rule of Metropolitan Kirill, proposed at the council of 1274. The antiquity of the lists and language indicates an ancient author of the teaching; and the tone of the teaching shows the metropolitan in the teacher. So, in terms of content and language, it must be taken for granted that Grand Duke Vasily, to whom the teaching is offered, is the son of the blessed Prince Alexander Nevsky, and the author of the teaching is Metropolitan Kirill. This teaching is quite lengthy. Most of it was published by Rosenkampf; but, as usual with Rosenkampf, it is not working properly. (About the Helmsman pp. 202–266). The teaching to the prince is followed in Meril by extracts from the Holy Scriptures, from the Bee, from the Russian chronicler; then the articles are read: a) A word on unmerciful princes; b) A word about the pride of rulers; c) The Word about judges and rulers who receive bribes; d) A word about judges and slander. In the latter we read: “Izh bo without righteousness Tivun, having condemned everyone, sells and with those kuns he will buy food and drink and clothing for himself, and with those kuns they will buy dinners and feasts for you: behold, like a river, the flock of Christ in the distance is a victim and a robber.” Next we read several Russian proverbs. Part of the last Word was published in Part II. Ven. Dubensky. All these four articles are, without a doubt, Russian compositions. And that they belong to Metropolitan Kirill is proven by their connection with the teachings of the Grand Duke, the sameness of language and structure, and the fact that they are also included in the Helmsman of Kirill’s category. (Kalachova about Merila, in the Archives of Legal Information I, 30, 37, 38). Due to a lack of data, we do not undertake to decide whether the entire Standard of Righteousness belongs to Metropolitan Kirill - a useful legal collection, or only what serves as an introduction to the Meril? The latter is more likely, since the instruction to the prince with the extracts and articles shown in itself constitutes a whole - an instruction to the judge-prince. 53. St. Serapion, abbot of the Pechersk monastery, and from 1274 Bishop of Vladimir, according to the chronicle “very teaching and strong in the Divine Scripture”, who died in 1275 (Dobrokhotov Memorial in Vladimir, pp. 110, 111. M. 1849). Nowadays he is no longer known only by the chronicle’s review of his spiritual education. His Words have recently been found, breathing with the power of heartfelt eloquence and resplendent in the clear understanding of the Gospel teaching. His four Words were published in Prib. to creativity father M. 1848. The fifth was found and published. Shevyrev (Trip to Kirillov Monastery II, 36. Izvestia. 2nd Department. Academician III, 90–96). His third Word is deeply touching. "Children! I feel deep sorrow for you in my heart. For I do not at all see your conversion from lawless deeds. A mother does not grieve when she sees her children sick, as I, your sinful father, grieve when I see you sick with lawless deeds. I have talked with you many times, wanting to turn you away from bad habits; but I don’t see any change in you. Is any of you a robber, keeping up with the robbery? whoever is a thief will not miss an opportunity to steal; If anyone has hatred for his neighbor, he has no peace from enmity; whether someone offends another, seizing someone else’s property, is not satisfied with robbery; Whether someone is covetous, does not stop taking bribes: “poor, he will not think that just as he was born naked, he will die, having nothing but eternal damnation... I beg you, brothers, let everyone delve into his thoughts, consider his deeds with the eyes of his heart, hate them and abandon them.” 54. Peter, Bishop of Galich, is known for conveying important news about the Tatars, recorded by Matthew of Paris. Here is what Matthew wrote in his Chronicle in 1244: “While fate was bringing all these incidents with it, the famous Russian Archbishop Peter, a man, as far as anyone could judge him at that time, was venerable and worthy of trust, having been expelled by the Tatars from his archdiocese, and even from his country, he went in fear to places on this side of the Alps. He hoped to find help and consolation here, if, by the grace of God, the Roman Church or the favor of the sovereigns would provide assistance. When he was asked about the Tatars, he answered this: “I think that these are the descendants of the Midianites... they had 12 leaders, of which the main one was Tatar Khan, which gave them the name Tatars... Tatar Khan had a descendant of Khiarkhaia (Genghis Khan), who had three sons: the eldest was called Fezir Khan, the second Khuri Khan, the third Bathatar Khan. Although they were born in high and inaccessible mountains, they were rude, without laws and education; although they were in caves and gorges; but they languished with a thirst to own the best lands. Therefore, father and son, accompanied by countless people and armed in their own way, came out of their mountains and began to besiege the vast city of Ernak (Karakorum?), took it and killed its owner, and pursued his fleeing nephew Kurzeusam, devastating the places where they gave him refuge. Among others, most of Russia was devastated, about 26 years ago 2 . After the death of their father, the three brothers separated. For a long time they remained shepherds of the flocks they plundered, defeated and killed neighboring shepherds, or subjugated them to their power. Having become more populous and stronger, these peoples elected leaders, undertook campaigns, and conquered cities with their inhabitants. Fezir Khan went against the Babylonians, Khuri Khan against the Turks, Batkhatar Khan remained in Ornahi and sent his commanders to devastate Russia, Poland, Hungary, and other places 3. These three brothers, with their countless hordes, launched an attack on the neighboring countries of Syria. They say that thirty-three years have already passed since they first left the Etrev desert... They believe that there is only one ruler of the world; when they sent an embassy to the Russians, they began their speech like this: “God and His Son are in heaven, and Khiar Khan is on earth.” They eat the flesh of horses, dogs and other unclean animals; if necessary, they even eat human flesh; however, the meat is consumed not raw, but boiled. They drink blood, water, and milk. They punish severely, especially for adultery, theft, deception and murder. They do not shy away from polygamy. People of other nations are not allowed to have close relations with themselves, especially to conversations when they talk about their affairs... Every morning they raise their hands to the sky and worship the Creator. When they eat, the first piece is thrown into the air, and when they drink, they pour a few drops onto the ground, in honor of the Creator. Celebrated on new moon. They are stronger and more agile than us; more capable of enduring labor; so are their horses and herds. Their women are warlike and shoot arrows with amazing dexterity. For defense they use leather shields, almost impenetrable; and for attack - an iron and poisoned weapon. They have machines that throw straight and with force. They sleep in the open air, not caring about the harshness of the air. They brought with them many different nations and different sects. They intend to conquer the whole world, and they think that, by divine definition, they must devastate the universe within thirty-nine years. They think and assure that a terrible struggle will take place between them and the Romans... They quite strictly observe treaties with those who voluntarily submit to them, and take from them the best warriors, whom they put in front in battles. They take care of artisans. But they are merciless towards those who rebel against them, neglect their authority, or expect their attack. They welcome ambassadors well and release them... They cross rivers on horses and furs. The Tatar chief Kalaladin, Khir Khan’s son-in-law, was expelled to Russia for being caught in a lie, and only out of respect for his wife did his Tatar chiefs agree to grant him life” 4 . This is the information about the Tatars conveyed by a poor exile of Russia to a Western chronicler. Matthew adds only the following from himself: “In the same year (1244), at the end of it, the chief Tatar king, through messengers, twice let the prince of Antioch know that he would fulfill his three orders; otherwise the bloody sword will make him feel the effects of anger. The first order was that the prince tear down the walls of his castles and cities; second - that he send all the income received in silver and gold from his possessions; third - to send 3000 girls. Hearing this, the prince took a deep breath and said: God lives and His saints live; I will never agree to any of these demands; let a war of destruction open; let the judgment of God decide the matter between us. Those sent with threats returned to their sovereign. The Tatars sent the same demands to the Armenian king and to other strong Saracen emirs; but we don’t know what they answered.” (Grande Chronique de Matthieu Paris., t. VI. Par., 1840. Historia major Matthieu Parisini. Paris, 1644). 55. An unknown-by-name biographer of the blessed prince Alexander Nevsky († 1263) writes at the beginning of his biography: “I have heard from my father and am a witness of his age”; talking about the victory on the Neva, he says: “I heard everything from my master, Prince Alexander Yaroslavich, and from others who were found in that battle”; about the war of 1242 to say: “I heard it from a self-witness.” All these reviews show in the writer a contemporary of the noble prince and a person close to the prince. He writes about the prince with reverent love, understanding his loss for the then unfortunate Russia. His story is included in the chronicles, and in some it is placed without any interpolated news taken from other sources, but with the loss of many expressions of the narrator (Collected Let. V, 2-6), in others it is fragmented by year, but has largely preserved the ancient appearance of its parts (Collected Let. V, 176-180). 56. The laudatory word of Father Andrei about the martyrdom of the blessed Prince Mikhail and the boyar Theodore († 1246) depicts the event in such detail that it shows in the writer at least a listener of eyewitnesses. It is located in Novgor. handwritten XIV century (Collected years. I, XVII) and in the Bible. total ist. No. 50–56; it was also included in the first Novg. letop. (Collected years. III, 52) and in the Sophia Chronicle (Collected years. V, 182–186). 57. Damian, confessor of the Hilendar monastery, composed the Life of St. around 1270. Sava of Serbia (Exarch of Kalajdovich, pp. 164–166). In the Sergius Lavra there is a list of the Life of the 15th century; the other was brought to Moscow in 1577 (Tsarskogo No. 111). Since the memory of St. Sava was recorded on January 14 in the Psalter of Metropolitan Cyprian, then, in all likelihood, under Metropolitan Cyprian, Damian’s composition was already known in Russia. 58. Simeon, from the princes of Polotsk, from 1271 the first bishop of Tver; according to the chronicle, “he was virtuous and teaching and strong in the books of divine scripture” (Tatishcheva Ist. IV, 70). He died in 1289. Nowadays only his instructions to Prince Constantine are known (Karamz. IV, pr. 178), placed, by the way, in Meril the Righteous of the 15th century. (Kalacheva Archive, part I). The description of the life of Cyril, Bishop of Turov dates back to his time. The writer prays to the Lord to deliver “from the godless Hagarians who constantly torment us.” The biography was published in the Prologue on April 28, but with the omission of some news about the works. (Mus. Roman. p. 457). 59. Maxim, Metropolitan of Kiev, consecrated in 1284, continued the concerns of his predecessor about the deanery of the church. His rule about fasting with an exhortation to live with wives in a legal marriage, and not without a wedding, was included in the Helmsman of the so-called Kirillov category (Description of music 304–321). 60. Theognostus, Bishop of Sarai, in 1301 proposed questions to the Council of Constantinople and recorded its answers, mainly according to the needs of the Sarai Church. The presentation of Theognostus contains a lot of important information about the state of the modern Russian Church (Ist. Russian ts. II, 80–84). The best lists of it are hand-written by Tolstoy. XV century II, No. 243, in the Kirillovsky Monastery. The rules concern baptism (Rev. 2, 22–24), liturgy and Eucharist (Rev. 3, 6, 7, 11, 17, 20, 21, 29, 32, 33), ordination (Rev. 4, 5, 31), service of abbots (Rev. 8, 14, 16, 18), tonsure in monasticism (pr. 9, 10, 15), bishop (pr. 1, 27), burial (pr. 12, 13, 25), fasting on Wednesday and Fridays (pr. 19), eating strangled meat (pr. 26) and marriage (pr. 30). 61. According to the Volyn Chronicle (p. 222), the Galician prince Mstislav placed in the Galich monastery the “Great Collection of his father” (Prince Vladimir, † 1284), and also the “Collection of his father” in the Kamenets church. The same chronicler, counting the offerings of the pious Prince Vladimir to various churches, shows between his donations the following books: Prologue for 12 months, Life of the Great Martyr. Demetrius, 12 books of service Menaion, Triodion, Octoechos, Irmolog, Service Book, Prayer Book with only morning and evening prayers. The words of the chronicle: “the list (prince) of St. Demetrius of everything” show that the life was extensive; and in Greek there is indeed a lengthy biography of the great martyr. Demetrius, remarkable in that the Slavs are very often mentioned in the descriptions of miracles. This description, but with omissions found in the manuscript, was published by the Bollandists ad 26 oktob. Based on this biography, an article was written: “The Holy Great Martyr Demetrius and the Slavs,” published on Thursday. General ist. 1846 For the history of the Slavs, one cannot help but wish that an ancient Slavic translation of the complete life of the great martyr would be published. In the Menaion, Metropolitan. Macarius under October 26 placed the story of John Archbishop of Thessalonica about the miracles of the great martyr. Demetrius, where about Prince Prebud; there is a Life with miracles. Nowadays the list of Words of St. Ephraim the Syrian, written under Prince Vladimir; a list from Pogodin's afterword in Obraztsy, M., 1840. In all likelihood, from among the books written by the pious Prince Vladimir, or at his will, some were either completely or in parts translated by the prince himself, or, at his request, by someone else. The chronicle speaks about him: “Volodimer (be) understood a parable and a dark word, and having told a lot from books with the bishop (he often talked with the bishop from books), he became a great scribe and philosopher... Also often appearing with bishops and abbots, with much humility you talked from books about the life of this perishable light... Rejoice, our teacher and mentor of good faith..." (Volynsk. chronicle 218, 219, 223). Based on this review of the chronicle, one can hope that time will reveal the works of Prince Vladimir. Based on the review that Vladimir “without understanding the parable and the dark word,” we consider it probable that this prince owned two Russian works, ancient in language: a) “The Punishment of the Father to the Son,” in the style of Solomon’s parables, in Rumyants. handwritten XV century, No. 27, 358; b) “Punishment for every peasant,” also in the vein of Solomon’s parables, in Rumyantsov No. 359. Two of his spiritual letters of 1284 were published in the Collection. state gram. Vol. II. 62. In the Laurentian list of the chronicle, ending in 1305 (in the first volume of the Collected Chronicles), from 1210 to 1240 we see a chronicler contemporary with the events, and, moreover, a monk of the Rostov St. Gregory Monastery (see years 1220, 1222, 1227, 1230, 1237, 1239). The latter is most clearly indicated by his words about himself in 1231. Signs of the Rostov chronicler are visible in the news of the arrival of Prince Alexander Nevsky in Rostov in 1260 and in the news of Bishop Kirill and Archimandrite Pachomius in 1266. But from 1285 the narrative exposes the narrator as a resident of Tver: Tver events are in the foreground and are described in detail. Thus, the chronicle of 1208–1305 of the Laurentian list was written in the north, and it included notes partly from Rostov, partly from Tver. 63. The Ipatievo list of the chronicle ends with the year 1292 (vol. II Collected chronicles). Since 1202, it contains the Volyn Chronicle itself, which is precious especially because without it the Volyn events would have remained unknown. Its author put as much effort into the chronological order as he did into the connection of events. “The chronograph needs to write everything and everything that happened, sometimes write in the front, sometimes go to the back,” he says under 1254. This means that, according to his concept, sometimes it is necessary to conduct a story over several years, so as not to interrupt the connection of events, and then go back. The chronicle was written under Prince Mstislav, the successor of Prince Vladimir, as can be seen from the words about the death of Vladimir. 64. The so-called first Novgorod Chronicle, according to the lists starting in 1016, ends in 1333. Based on the difference in language and spelling noted in the Synodal list, it is concluded that this chronicle was compiled in the 13th century. and supplemented around 1335 (Collected Chronicles III, No. 1). The same can be seen from the content of the chronicle. Under 1252, the contemporary chronicler is clearly visible, and he makes himself known that he belongs to the side of the lesser. “And when Mikhalko ran, how could he have destroyed our side with his regiment.” 65. St. Peter, metropolitan 1308–1326, wrote a sermon or district epistle to the clergy. It was published in Prib. to creativity father 1844 Another similar message was written before the onset of Lent. The saint urges everyone, and especially the clergy, to spend the time of fasting in strict abstinence and sobriety. “Teach your spiritual children - tell them to come to the divine church - cry about their sins to God... And whoever does not eat the holy gifts, do not bless those people like the priest - that is, not a peasant... Children of your father and mother will honor and you will live a long life, but barking at the father or mother or beating, she will die an evil, cruel death... Perform baptism according to the tradition of St. Apostle, do not pour water on it, but immerse it in water three times...” Prohibits the clergy from engaging in trade and giving money at interest; gives instructions about marriage; strictly prohibits fights: “and whoever kills someone in the field is called a murderer... Having entered the church, stand honestly, with fear, listen to the readings of the Apostle and the Gospel and all the singing; and whoever speaks in church, the devil whispers in your ears... Woe to the ungodly! What are you hoping for!... And whoever priested the holy liturgy, then the king is more honorable...” Both messages of the saint are found in Volokol. Collection of “Leonid of the Ryazan Bishop” 282), from the abbot of Volokolamsk, who was appointed bishop around 1569 and was at the council of 1570 (Volokolamsk manuscripts No. 92 and 197). At the council of 1503, they witnessed the teaching of Metropolitan Peter that widowed priests and deacons should not officiate (Ak. E. I, pp. 485, 486). The contents of the teaching are placed in the Stoglavnik (chapter 77). 66. Prokhor, Bishop of Rostov († 1327), composed the Canon of St. Peter Metropolitan. The story of the martyrdom of Prince Mikhail Tverskoy († 1318) was written from the words of eyewitnesses. “She confessed to us,” says the narrator, with tears and with many oaths (the faithful inhabitants of the horde)... From him (the Bezdezh priest) we heard and wrote.” (Collected chronicles. V, 207–215. Soph. times. 1. 299–313). According to this Tale, along with Prince Mikhail were in the horde - his confessor, Abbot Alexander, and two priests, several boyars and servants, and his son Konstantin. The description itself shows that it was written by an eyewitness, and most likely by Abbot Alexander. The story of Prince Dovmont, distinguished by its simplicity, was written shortly after the death of St. prince († 1299); it is included in the Pskov Chronicle (Collected Chronicles. IV, 180–183). 67. Vasily, Archbishop of Novgorod 1331–1352, wrote a letter to Theodore Bishop of Tver about the paradise that survived on earth (ed. Step. Book I, 480; Collected Years. VI, 78, 89) - an essay that speaks little in favor of Vasily’s prudence; eg he writes: “Moislav the Novgorodian found that place of holy paradise... brought them to the high mountains and saw on that mountain the Deesis written in a wonderful azure... And there was light in that place... And it was as if he had ascended (alone) to that mountain, and had clasped his hands and laughed and ran from his friends to the present voice.” The proof is too simple-minded! The strongest supports for him are the apocryphal tales of prologues and collections. Since the opinion of paradise as a whole on earth is still taken for granted by the Jacobites and Nestorians in the east, with whom Slavic pilgrims so often communicated at that time; Then from there it passed to Russia along with the Bulgarian collections of apocryphal tales. This is undoubtedly especially because the legend about Macarius, to which Vasily refers, according to the Cyprian rule about forbidden books, was transferred from the east precisely by pilgrims: “about Macarius Rimstem, that three chernorisci went to the east.” 68. Stefan Novgorod, around 1350, described his journey to Constantinople. The description was published by Sakharov in Volume II of Legends. The Novgorodian was greatly amazed by the monuments of Byzantine art and solid buildings made of stone; The statue of Justinian seemed to him “very wonderful, as if he were alive, it was menacing to see him... The essence is that there are many other pillars standing like stones of marble, and there is a lot of writing on them from top to bottom, written by great digging. There is so much to marvel at and the mind cannot say how many years this stone has nothing.” The Novgorodian himself says that you enter Constantinople as if you were entering a forest and you cannot walk without a good guide. From now on, what the guide told him, he wrote down. So he wrote about a toad that seemed to devour people while walking through the streets, or about brooms that seemed to sweep the streets themselves. Most important of all is Stephen's news that many books, statutes, and triodes were sent to Rus' from the Studite Monastery, and that he found two Novgorodians there who were copying books. “When St. saw us. Patriarch of Constantinople, his name is Isidore.” This is Isidore, who was Patriarch 1347–1350. and known for his love of church singing and for composing akathists. 69. St. Moses, Archbishop of Novgorod. The son of rich parents, he loved the Lord from his youth; Having learned to read and write, he diligently attended church, and secretly from his parents retired to the Otroch Monastery, where he took monastic vows. At the request of his parents, he later moved to the Kolmov Monastery to the pious abbot Macarius. In 1325 he was elected archbishop. In 1329 he retired; but in 1352 they begged him to take over control of the diocese again. He founded several monasteries: in 1335 Derevyanitsky, in 1351 Uspensky on Volotovo, in 1355 Mikhailov on Skovorodka, in 1357 the female Holy Spirit and in Radokovitsy the Mother of God. (Collected chronicles. III, 73, 74, 77, 85, 86, 1 80). In 1359 he again retired and died in 1360, having matured in spiritual life. The chronicle says about him: “He tended his flock well, finding many scribes and writing many books... establishing many with his teaching; I came to him, learning from him day and night... Having died, leaving much writing behind” (ibid., 182). Unfortunately, the edifying instructions of the saint are not known today. Only the Gospel is known, written according to his will in 1355 (Synod. Bible). For the text of this Gospel, see Description. Slav. handwritten Synod. bibl., M., 1855, pp. 221–223, 235, 251, 252, and in Buslaev (Materials for the history of writing, M., 1855), pp. 32-38. In the Pskov Chronicle, at the end of the description of the pestilence, under 1352, we read: “I have written a lot, but my mind is bad, and my memory is bad.” Obviously, this is said by a contemporary of the pestilence, but he speaks from memory, and therefore after the pestilence. Under 1360, 1368 and 1369 we also see an eyewitness to the events. Based on these signs, it can be assumed that in 1370 the Pskov Chronicle of that contemporary St. ended. Moses, who described in detail the pestilence of 1352. This is also confirmed by the fact that around the same time, differences began between the Synodal and other copies of the Pskov Chronicle (Collected Chronicles, vol. V, preface). 70. St. Alexey, Metropolitan of All Russia 1354–1377 Son of the boyar Bakont (ancestor of the Pleshcheevs); from the age of 18 he was a monk at the Epiphany Monastery in Moscow, where he received his spiritual education. From 1350 he was Bishop of Vladimir and assistant to Metropolitan Theognostus in managing the metropolis. With the prayer of his faith he healed Queen Taidula and with the power of words he humiliated the proud defender of the Mohammedan faith (Description of music 275). Died in 1378 The saint's teaching to all classes (published in the Appendices to the Creative Fathers, 1849) is distinguished by the fact that every thought is supported by a saying of Holy Scripture. “For now, children, I must shepherd you and teach the flock entrusted to me”: this is how the saint begins his Teaching; and then offers with his explanations the Savior’s parables about the seed and the vineyard; gives general instructions to everyone about the love and fear of God, specific instructions to bosses and judges about justice, and to the people about obedience. He says to everyone: “Leaving all your work, flock to church prayer without laziness and don’t shout like this: let’s sing at home. Just as a church cannot be warmed by smoke without fire, so is that prayer without church prayer. The Church will be called the earthly heaven, in which the Lamb, the Son, the Word of God is slain.” He teaches how to stand in church and urges you not to miss the time of fasting without communion with St. secret Judging by this content of the Teaching, it is clear that it was written in the form of a district message to the flock at the beginning of Lent. Certificate of St. Alexei on Khoper, with all the particularity of the main subject (it defines the boundaries of the Ryazan diocese), contains excellent instructions about faith, about the pastoral title, about a life worthy of Christians (Hist. Act. II No. 3). The New Testament of the saint, kept in the Chudov Monastery, is extremely important. In the news about the translation of the Bible by Slavenitsky they wrote: “The First Slavic had a translation of this translation and the manuscript of St. Alexei, Metropolitan of All Russia, miracle worker, written in the summer of 6863 (1355).” So this Slavic copy of the New Testament a) not only in writing, but also in translation, is the fruit of the saint’s labors; b) it was written in 1355, while the saint was in Constantinople, and therefore had the convenience of seeing the best copies of the Greek text for translation; c) is it surprising that when correcting the New Testament, it was taken into account as a guide before all other Slavic copies? We offer from the saint's manuscript a reading of the parable of the talents (Matt. XXV, 14-30) in comparison with the Greek text and with the Slavic copies that preceded the saint's manuscript, from which the readings were printed by Kalaidovich (Exarch, pp. 29-31. M. 1824). Thus, when comparing the text of St. Alexei with the original and with the ancient Slavic copies, the following turns out to be undoubted: a) the text of the saint is in many ways not similar to the copies that preceded it; b) its text contains not only corrections of errors made by Slavic scribes, but also a new translation from the original; c) the difference between its translation is its literal proximity to the Greek text. So this feat of the saint tells us that correcting errors in church books and improving the good in them is a holy matter, and that faith is not at all in the letter. Let us take another look at the saint’s precious writings. The manuscript, entirely written by one hand, contains: a) the Four Gospels, in the order of the evangelists; b) after the Gospels, the chapter “On the installation of rulers, as God does not put everything in power, but acts on everyone; and for those who are worthy, as those who are worthy are appointed, but those who are not worthy are shown to those who have sinned and to conversion, and as we are the tongue of those who are weighed according to the rightful judgment of God’s tradition”; c) followed by the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of the Apostles and the Apocalypse; d) in addition, the table of contents of the Gospel and Apostolic Readings; On the side of the text itself there is another count of chapters, of which, for example. in Matthew 335; this is the oldest division of the text into chapters. There is also a Monthly Book of Saints, but in which there are no names of Russian Saints. 71. St. Dionysius, archpastor of Suzdal and Nizhny Novgorod. In his youth, he dug himself a cave on the banks of the Volga; Little by little, zealots of piety gathered to him, and he was made their archimandrite. In 1364, he was consecrated bishop of Suzdal by Saint Alexei, in the voice of Venerable. Sergius, we recognize that he was worthy of the rank of metropolitan. But the favorite of the Grand Duke Mityai, and uninitiated, began to proudly rule the metropolis, and even demanded honors from the bishops, as a metropolitan. Dionysius retired to Constantinople. Here the cathedral honored him with the rank of archbishop; in 1382 he sent him to Pskov to admonish the Strigolniks; “Let you see from us,” said the Council to the Pskovites, and teach and show and unite the councils of the apostles of the church.” (Hist. Act. I, No. 6). The Grand Duke, on the one hand, enlightened by the death of Mityai and the deception of Pimen, and on the other, dissatisfied with Metropolitan Cyprian, wanted to see Dionysius as Metropolitan; but Dionysius was detained in Kyiv by Prince Vladimir, and died here in 1385. The charter of his Pskov Snetogorsk monastery on hostel life is known, which he gave as an authorized representative of the patriarch in 1382 (Ist. ac. I, no. 5). From the words of Metropolitan Cyprian it is clear that Dionysius at the same time gave Pskov another Letter of Judgment, in place of the Letter of Judgment of Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky; but Metropolitan Cyprian destroyed this charter as it was given illegally. (Ist. Act. 1, No. 10). It is more than likely that the message of Rev. Nile, 1382, with a denunciation of the Strigolniki and with an instruction to Dionysius to return them to the church, if not composed, then translated by St. Dionysius. (Hist. Act. I, No. 4). 72. Pavel Vysoky, an elder of the Nizhny Novgorod monastery, according to the chronicle, “a great book magnate and a great philosopher and a man of many names for silence; Whenever he had time to talk, he was wise and very useful, and his word was dissolved in divine salt... and he wrote many teaching books and sent them to the bishop.” He died in 1382. Works with his name have not yet been found. Meanwhile, the following Russian teachings are found in the manuscripts, contemporary in language and content to the teacher Paul: a) “The teachings were chosen from books on how to live as a peasant. Singers, brothers, have the fear of God... Be not lazy towards the church, for there is cleansing of our sin... Accept your prince with all your heart and with your sword and with your head... Do not let go of the naim kun: for Saint Paul imputes the covetous with the fornication...” The writer is a monk; “Forgive me, brother,” he says in conclusion, “I wrote these words.” Ed. in J. M. Nar. Enlightenment 1854, December; is in the Rumyants.manuscript of the 15th century. No. 435 and XVI century. No. 181, 182. b) “A lesson to all Orthodox Christians. Woe to that man who adds every evil creation to God; God will reward nothing evil.” (Tsarsky No. 179, 369 manuscripts of the 16th century). c) “A word to the whole world,” by the way, against coldness towards the poor. “Why do you close the gates from the poor?... You shook the earth, and so did not believe in you, Ishmaelites attacked you and thus shed your blood.” d) “The teachings of the spiritual father to children. I wish, my beloved, your salvation,” etc. d) “Teaching from a certain spiritual father to his son on how to give alms.” All three instructions in Rumyants. handwritten 1555 No. 182). f) Teaching about covetousness and drunkenness; g) Teaching about spiritual celebration and drunkenness. Both hand-in-hand. XIV century, at Rumyants. No. 186. h) A Word about the Dead, handwritten. XV century, at Rumyants. No. 358. i) “A word about peasantry. Hear now: many of them are peasants by reputation, but their customs and deeds are like unbelief, the habit of Hellenistic deati... Increasingly, filthy deeds, dancing, splashing of hands, satanic songs... then teach shame that is ridiculous and blasphemers and disgraces and games. Ed. in J. M. Nar. Enlightenment 1854, December; is in hand. Tsarsky XVI century No. 369–179; in the language of the 14th century. 73. Stefan, enlightener and bishop of Perm 1378–1396 “Still young” was tonsured “in the monastery in the city of Rostov by St. Gregory the Theologian in a monastery called a seclusion, near the bishop’s, as if there were many books there.” The rich episcopal library supplied food for his love of enlightenment. From the life of Peter Tsarevich it is known that under Bishop Kirill in Rostov “in the Church of the Holy Mother of God, the left choir is Greek, and the right is Russian.” Therefore, Stefan had ways to become well acquainted with the Greek language and Greek education. (Step. book I, 524). His biographer Epiphanius recalls with consolation how they used to argue among themselves “about some adventures,” or about some word, about a verse, about a line. “By being able to speak three languages ​​– Russian, Greek and Permian.” Having prepared himself by life and teaching for the title of preacher of the faith, Stefan went to the rude Zyryans to perform the apostolic feat. He endured a lot of work, dangers, and sorrows along this path; but the grace of God was with him and his successes were brilliant. For the success of faith, “Russian books are translated into Permian; Teach the Perm people to read and write, commanding them to learn the Book of Hours and the Octopus and the Song of David... And the priest will serve Mass in the Perm language, and Matins and Vespers, and his canonarchs according to the Perm books of the Cononarch, and the singers will proclaim all the singing in Perm.” From these words of a contemporary we see that St. Stephen translated into Perm the book of hours, the Psalter, selected readings from the Gospel and the Apostle, proverbs, sticherion, octoechos, liturgy and several services. Unfortunately, very few of his works have survived to our time. The Zyryan liturgy has been preserved, but only in those parts that are sung by the clergy. (In the third volume of Zap. Lepekhin, another copy in the library. Moscow. General. Source No. 99). The names of Zyryan letters in Vostokov, in the Description. music No. 459; at Karamz. V, pr. 125. The legend of the ancient Prologue, speaking about Stephen’s stay in Rostov, announces: “this blessed one. Our father Stefan interpreted many of your poems... he wrote many books with his own hands, which he testifies to this day.” According to the inventory of 1636, the Cathedral of Stephen of Perm is shown in the Khutyn Monastery, at noon.” (Description of books of step. mon. No. 1886. M. 1848). In Moskvityanin (book I, 1847, pp. 121–128) a message to Grand Duke Dimitri Ivanovich Donskoy was published with the name of Stefan of Perm. But this message is word for word similar to the message that makes up the preface to Meril the Righteous, with the message that is known from the lists of earlier St. Stephen (see § 50); therefore Stefan could only rewrite this work for himself and others. 74. St. Cyprian, Metropolitan of All Russia 1376–1406, an educated pastor who cared a lot about the restoration of fallen enlightenment in Russia, a Serb by birth. His works: a) Epistles on worship and deanery. Of these, the extensive epistle to Abbot Athanasius is especially distinguished by its knowledge of the spirit of faith and piety. (Act. I, No. 7, 11, 252, 253, 255. Act. Exp. I, No. 11). b) Life of St. Metropolitan Peter, the fruit of gratitude for deliverance from death at sea. (Step. book. I, 404–424). c) Spiritual testament, which Cyprian’s successors then ordered to be read at their burial. (Collected years. V, 254, 256). d) He instructed Spassky Archimandrite Ignatius to complete the chronicle written by him. The Trinity Chronicle, completed in 1408 (in extracts from Karamz.) and written in the spirit of the Moscow government, in all likelihood, is the fruit of the labors of St. Cyprian. e) Tatishchev’s chronicle says that Cyprian described “the degrees of the Russian great princes.” And now the list of the Degree Book is known, which is much shorter than the printed one and reaches the 13th degree of modern Cyprian. (Rumyantsev music. No. 415). There is also a known list of the Degree without Lives and Words (Moskvityanin, 1845, No. 12, p. 154), and of course in this form the Degree was compiled by Metropolitan Cyprian. f) In the Psalter of Metropolitan Daniel (Volokol. manuscript No. 50) there is a “Prayer for the release of the king and the prince and every Christian - the creation of Mr. Cyprian, Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus', and copied in Luzt over the tomb of the princes Dimitriev.” It begins like this: “Sovereign God, Father Almighty, who created man in his own image and likeness,” etc. Its translations: Psalter (autograph in the library. Moscow Spiritual Academician); Ladder with interpretations: “in the summer of 6895 - 1387 April. 24 days were celebrated in the Studite monastery by Cyprian, the humble Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'” (autograph in Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 152); Works of Dionysius the Areopogite (autograph in Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 144); A missal with a signature on sheet 72: “this Missal was written from Greek books into Russian by his hand Cyprian, the humble Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'” (in the Synod. Bible No. 601, and a photograph from a page from Pogodin in Obraztsy, M., 1840); Canon Rev. Philotheus in case of internecine warfare (in the Lavra Psalter of Abbot Pamva); Canon of Gregory the Sinaite St. to the fathers (in the Psalter of Cyprian himself). In the Volokolamsk Trebnik (No. 98) “copied from Greek books by the humble Metropolitan Cyprian - the rite of washing the relics of saints or praying (blessing) the cross.” According to the preface to the Catechism of Zizanius, Metropolitan Cyprian brought the Greek nomocanon from Constantinople “and translated it into the Slavic language.” This translation of the Helmsman is to Moscow. Assumption Cathedral. Rosenkampf mistakes the Consolidated Helmsman of the Laptev List for the Helmsman of Metropolitan Cyprian. Often encountering the work of Rosenkampf, it is difficult not to say that this work is a strange phenomenon! How can one undertake to write about the Slavic Helmsman, knowing almost nothing even the Russian language, not only Orthodoxy! But a book came out that neither the Chukhonian nor the Russian could understand. It is difficult to find in this book not a page, but a line where there is not some error. “Translate many holy books from Greek into Russian,” says the ancient news about Metropolitan Cyprian (Step. Book I, 588). It would be necessary to honor Metropolitan Cyprian for choosing the subject for translation, if it were undoubtedly known that by his will or by him the Interpretation of the Gospel of Luke and John, known from the Kiev-Pechersk list of 1434 (Tolstoy), was translated. “Metropolitan Cyprian, writes Nil Kurlyatev, a student of Maxim, did not understand much Greek and did not know much of our language (even if our language is the same with them, that is, Slovenian, but we speak our language clearly and noisily, but they speak youthfully, and in the scriptures our speeches do not agree with them), and he imagined that he corrected the psalms according to ours, and wrote greater foolishness in them, in speeches and I wrote everything in Serbian.” (Tsarsky No. 327). This review can fairly be applied to all translations of Metropolitan Cyprian. In a letter to Abbot Athanasius, Metropolitan Cyprian wrote: “The Gospel is interpretable in the church of honor, and at the meal they honor the Patericon and St. Ephraim and St. Dorooya; and if some have left over the festive reading for the holiday and do not have time to read it at Matins, then they will read it at the meal and also the Six Days of St. Basil and St. Ivan Chrysostom." (Hist. act. I, 478). These are the books that were read in church in the Slavic language under Metropolitan Cyprian! Weekly and holiday teachings, selected mainly from St. Chrysostom by St. Philotheus and Callistus, were translated into Slavic first in 1343, then in 1407 (Tolstoy, I, no. 101; Tsarsky, no. 178); these are those that were printed with some changes in Zabludov in 1569 and in Moscow in 1652. 75. In his Prayer Book, Metropolitan Cyprian placed an article about prohibited books. Among such books are the following books: “Adam, Enoch, Lamech, Patriarchs, the prayer of Joseph... John the Evangelist’s questions... about the tree of the cross... The Virgin Mary’s journey through torment... about the whale race... about the 12 Jacob’s Ladder.” Here Cyprian wrote that “in the thick rural collections” there is a lot of falsehood, “sown by heretics to spoil the ignoramuses, priests and deacons, in the prayer books there are false prayers about the shakers and the ill-natured” (Description of the museum, 717. Kalaidovich Exarch, 210). From current manuscripts we see that many apocryphal and fabulous works were then transferred from Bulgaria and Serbia to Russia, for example: The Testament of the 12 Patriarchs is seen in the list of the chronicle of Malala in 1261 (Obolensky's preface to the Pereyaslavl Chronicle 22:29); The Walk of the Mother of God is in hands. Sergius Lavra of the 14th century; Jacob's Ladder, The Tale of Kitovras, The Life of Moses - in the chronograph of 1494, in Rumyantsev No. 494. (Description 726, 727); Conversation between John the Theologian and the Mother of God (ibid., p. 671); The Walk of John, described by Prokhor, and the Tale of the Tree of the Cross - handwritten. 1419 (Rumyantseva, No. 451, p. 722, 723); The Tale of Aphrodite the Persian - hand-drawn. XIII century (Tolstoy, I, No. 8, 195). The chronicle records (Tatishcheva Ist. IV, 313) that in 1384 Demetrius Zoograph translated “from Greek into Russian” the work of George Pisida - Praise to the Creator of the World. This work is quite worthy of translation; it is written in verse and does not degrade the lofty subject. Transfer lists from Tsarsky No. 404; in the Bible General Source No. 194, 197; in Tolstoy I, no. 144. 76. Zephaniah, a Ryazan priest, wrote “The Story of the Finding of Mamai.” This Narration, although it bears the character of the importance inherent in history, is nothing more than a historical and poetic depiction of the famous Battle of Kulikovo in 1380. The truth is brought to life here by pictures of the imagination. The narrator based his information on the stories of eyewitnesses: “what I heard from a true eyewitness,” he says. Anachronisms and other deviations from the truth found in the copies of the Povedia forced some to attribute the work and the author to the end of the 15th century; but a) the writer of the Word led. Prince Dimitri and about the victory over Mamai already wrote: “I will remember Zephanius of Ryazan and praise him”; b) the errors of the Story against history belong not to Zephaniah, but to the scribes who changed the story with insertions and amendments at their own discretion. How many changes and additions the scribes made, this was shown by Mr. Snegirev in his clear edition of the Povedeniya (Hist. collection. vol. III, M., 1838). Another story about the Battle of Kulikovo, distinguished by its simplicity and included in the chronicles (Collected years. IV, 75; VI, 90), written probably by the same Zephaniah: some of its expressions and passages are very similar to the Account of the Finding of Mamai. “The Tale of the Life and Presentation of Grand Duke Dimitri Ivanovich Donskoy” (published by Snegirev in the III volume of the Historical collection and in the VI volume of the collected years. 104–111), is distinguished by brilliant eloquence. It consists of two parts: the first is a touching story about the life and death of the Grand Duke; in the second - praise to the prince. It was written shortly after the death of the famous prince; but whether it is the same Zephaniah is not known. On the contrary, “The Tale of the Grand Duke Dimitri and the Victory over Mamai” (ed. in the XIV volume of the Vremennik obshch. ist., M., 1852), constituting an imitation of the Story of Zephaniah, was, without a doubt, written not before the end of the 15th century. It depicts its subject with greater poetic freedom than the Narration of Zephaniah, but in very incorrect language. 77. Soon after the great events, the following were written: A simple but detailed legend, “about the Moscow capture from Takhtamysh” in 1382 (Collected years. VI, 93, 108); The story of the glorious miracle of the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God, or the salvation of Moscow from Tamerlane in 1395 (ed. Nikon. Chronicle VI, 258). 78. Venerable Athanasius, student of Rev. Sergius, Abbot Vysotsky. “Leave the monastery,” says his disciple, and who is in it both dear in the flesh and honest and kinsman, and departed for the city of Kostentin and remained as one from the poor... Metropolitan Cyprian prayed that he might go to Rus' to accept the honest one, and not without desire (Description of music. 517). According to the chronicle, Rev. Athanasius retired from the Vysotsky monastery to Kyiv and Constantinople in 1382 (Karamz. V, pr. 122); since we see him in Constantinople not only in 1392, but also in 1401, it means that he labored here for about 20 years. In 1401, in the Tsaregrad monastery of Iperivleto, he wrote the church “Charter” (Description of Music. No. 445, p. 711), which later served as a model from which the statutes in Russia were copied (Tolstoy I, No. 11). In 1392, with his blessing, a Collection of Fatherly Works: 400 chapters by St. Maxim, head Rev. Mark, the words of Simeon the new theologian, several words of Chrysostom and Isaac the Syrian (Description of music, pp. 516–517). It is more than likely that the extensive message of Patr. Anthony in Pskov with a denunciation of the Strigolniki (Historical Act. I, No. 6), delivered to Novgorod by the Bishop of Bethlehem Misail in 1394 (Nikon. years. IV, 255), composed by Ven. Afanasy. The words of the message speak about the Russian origin of the message: “His metropolitan will be sanctified by the patriarch, whom we all honor as Christ’s vicar. And in the Kiev Pechera Anthony, the only one who died in his sins... an evil stench emanated from him... his evil, melting stench was quickly sent away” - the story of the Pechersk Patericon, of course unknown to the Greek. At the beginning it says: “The great council of the God-loving Archbishop Dionysius of Suzdal has sent to you with letters.” According to these words, they thought that the message of Patr. Anthony composed by Archbishop Dionysius; but he died back in 1385, and the words mentioned recall a past event, the departure of Dionysius to Russia by the Venerable. Neil. Taking into account both the Russian origin of the message and the fact that Rev. Athanasius enjoyed the special favor of Metropolitan Cyprian and, therefore, fame among the patriarch, and he lived with his disciples in the royal Forerunner Monastery, we consider it certain that the epistle was written on behalf of the patriarchs. Anthony Rev. Afanasy. From here, of course, the idea arose that Rev. Athanasius was the patriarch of Constantinople. 79. In 1397, John, an Athonite monk, translated “The Captivity of Jerusalem” and the History of the Maccabees (Stroys). Gabriel, a Hilendar monk, in 1412 translated Olympiodorus's interpretation of the book of Job and wrote an article on the burial of monks. Below will be mentioned (No. 87) the name of the Athonite monk Jacob, as a translator of the words of Maximus the Confessor. 80. St. Cyril, abbot of Belozersky. Born in Moscow from noble parents, he was accepted into the Simonov monastery by its founder, Rev. Theodore. Rev. Sergius, visiting the monastery, distinguished it with his attention. After Theodore, he was also the abbot of his monastery. But, striving with his soul for quiet solitude, he, according to a special vision, secretly (in 1390) retired to the Belozersk country. Here, in an uninhabited place, he founded a monastery for himself and was the planter of spiritual life in a deaf country. Having formed many disciples - devotees of piety, he died in 1427. Rev. Kirill loved book learning. Until now, 17 manuscripts are intact in his monastery - “the books of the wonderworker Cyril: 7 Gospels, Apostle, Psalter, 3 books of Rules, Ladder, 4 Canon. The two Gospels were written by the hand of Christopher, a disciple of St. Kirill; one Canon was written in 1405 and another in 1423 “with the blessing of Elder Cyril the Abbot”, by the hand of “Martinian with the lie of the monk, and not with the truth”, i.e. Rev. Martinian, a student of Kirillov. Very remarkable are the two books of rules, written by the hand of the Venerable himself. Kirill. One contains rules about whether a monk is allowed to receive Holy Communion. Eucharist without a priest? In the other, in addition to answers to questions from Theognostus of Sarai, in addition to the Russian rule against superstitious signs, there are extracts from Galen about the origin of thunder and lightning, about falling stars, about the structure of the earth, about earthquakes, about the four elements, about the seas. It is clear that Rev. Kirill read and studied books about the laws of visible nature, acquired knowledge about it, verified by experience and prudence, and thereby dispelled the prejudices of the people. Three messages from Rev. Kirill, distinguished by the simplicity of presentation and the sincerity of a pious soul, are deeply edifying. His message to the Grand Duke is especially excellent. “As on a ship, if a hired oarsman makes a mistake, the harm from it is unimportant; but if the helmsman makes a mistake, then the whole ship is destroyed; So, sir, it happens with princes too. If a boyar sins, he inflicts a dirty trick on himself, and not on all people; but if the prince himself sins, he causes harm to all those subordinate to him. Do not be puffed up by temporary glory, because of the vacillation of vanity... I heard that you, Grand Duke, are in great turmoil with your relatives, the princes of Suzdal, and that is why blood is flowing between Christians... For God’s sake, show them love and compassion so that they do not perish in the Tatar countries.” (Hist. Act. I, No. 12, 16, 17). Its charter is abbreviated in the Chetya Menea. “Spiritual Testament”, his ed. in I volume. Ist. act. No. 32, and the handwritten one is kept in the monastery. His deed of purchase is also curious (Legal Act No. 72). In relation to the zealots of antiquity, two wooden crosses are worthy of attention, built by the hands of the monk and hitherto intact in the monastery: one is four-pointed, the other is octagonal. Once, tired from his labors, the monk fell asleep under a tree and heard a voice: “Run, Cyril.” He barely had time to jump away from the tree before it collapsed. From this tree he made a four-pointed cross, a fathom high, and believers receive healing from it, as from the octagonal one. 81. Epiphanius, student of Rev. Sergius, and after him the confessor of his monastery, called “wise” by his contemporaries. According to his own words, he lived for some time with Blessed Stefan of Perm, when he was still living in Rostov, and together with him he was engaged in acquiring book education. “Are there certain needs,” he says about the Rev. Sergius, did not seek the reigning city, nor St. mountains, nor Jerusalem, as if I were accursed and devoid of reason, I was fiercely crawling here and there and swimming here and there, and passing from place to place.” This shows that Epiphanius was on Athos, Constantinople and Jerusalem. But when? Most likely, after the death of Rev. Sergius, to whom he came from Rostov 14 years before the death of Sergius. Blessed Epiphanius died around 1420. Description of the life of Rev. He graduated from Sergius and handed it over to others for edification, 26 years after the death of St. Sergius, and therefore in 1418. So he himself writes and says that 20 years earlier he already had “scrolls, in which the beyahu wrote certain chapters about the life of the elders, ova in scrolls, ova in notebooks, even if not in a row, but the front one is behind, and the back one is in front.” In addition to what he himself knew about his teacher, he collected information about him from others, including from Sergiev’s elder brother, Stefan, and other elders who knew the circumstances of Sergius’s childhood life and first desert exploits. Epiphanius' Life of Sergius was published in Moscow in 1647, but already changed by Pachomius. Its true form must be sought in manuscripts. “The Eulogy to Sergius”, like the life, does not mention the discovery of the relics of Sergius (1422), and therefore was written by Epiphanius around 1418. It was also published in 1647. "The Life of St. Stefan of Perm” he described, a year after the death of Stefan; and the “Lamentation of the Church of Perm” about Stephen was written a little later, for it laments the disorder and misfortunes that befell it after Stephen: “the sheep are spoiled, and the wolves are advancing and there is no one to whistle, so as to rinse and disperse the wolves carried by the shepherds... Foreign-pagan Vogulichs attack.” All four of these works by Blessed Epiphanius are in manuscript. Sergius Lavra, Moscow. Spirit. Acad., Tsarskogo No. 132, Tolstoy I, No. 304; II, no. 245. Epiphanius the Wise, in all likelihood, owns the “Tale of Epiphanius Mnich about the path to St. city ​​of Jerusalem." (Bibliography of general history No. 214). The path starts from Novgorod and goes through the Lithuanian possessions. Let us also note that when Rev. Nikon, in 1414, the teachings of Abba Dorotheus with the words of Simeon the new Theologian were copied in the Lavra; in 1412 two staircases; and in 1381, still under the Rev. Sergius, the words of Isaac the Syrian were copied. 82. Ignatius, hierodeacon of Smolensk, then archimandrite, described a trip to Constantinople and Jerusalem in 1389–1391. He was in Constantinople with Metropolitan Pimen, and went to Jerusalem alone. The journey was published in Nick. years. IV, 158, and Sakharov in Tale. Russian people 97–107. He also wrote a short chronicler of 1254–1423. 83. Venerable Lazarus, founder of the Assumption Monastery on Murmansk Island, 650 versts from Novgorod, educator of many wild Lapps, who died in 1391, left a “spiritual testament”, very interesting, but, unfortunately, spoiled by scribes. (Ed. in Ist. Jer. V, 115 129. In it he talks about the foundation of his monastery, about the suffering that he endured from the Lapps, and about how, having healed a blind child - the son of one of their elders, he forced them to stop the oppression. (Tsarsky, No. 137, 408). 84. Photius, metropolitan 1410–1431, raised by the strict ascetic Bishop Akakios and himself a strict monk and zealot of Orthodoxy. a) Of the 15 so-called teachings of Photius from the manuscripts, five have been published so far: a) on the dignity of the priesthood and its duties - with dogmatic thoughts about the priesthood, about the Eucharist, about confession, about marriage, about the blessing of oil, and with edifying rules; b) on the Feast of the Annunciation - about the dignity of the Christian church; c) teaching upon the second entry into the management of the southern flock, with a call to repentance at the call of God in executions; d) two teachings to the Pechersk monks - about the duties of monks. (Don. to the source. 1 book. 180–183). Not published: 1) for the Presentation of the Lord; 2) on meat-eating week - about the Last Judgment; 3) on the week of Orthodoxy - about fasting; 4) on the week of the prodigal son - about God’s long-suffering; 5) and 6) teaching during rainlessness; 7–9) during an ulcer; 10) message to the Pechersk Lavra about the life of St. Anthony and Theodosius (K. p. Yarosl. bib. and Soph. bib. V, 594), Were these teachings spoken from the pulpit, or were they all sent out as district messages; in any case, it is clear that Blessed Photius was attentive to the ways of Providence and drew the attention of his flock to them; He was also attentive to when his flock might be especially disposed to listen to the instructions of the shepherd. b) His messages were written partly on the occasion of the separation of the Lithuanian Metropolitanate, partly against the unrest left by the Strigolniks, partly against the superstitions and self-will of the people. 13 messages were published (Act. I, No. 19–23, 26, 30, 33–35, 256, 257. Act. Exp. I, No. 369). Two messages to Grand Duke Vasily, with an exhortation to return to the church the estates taken from it by willfulness (Volok. hand. No. 414) are known from extracts (Addendum to the creative fathers XI, 223–256). Of his 9 letters to Pskov, placed in the Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius on the 31st of June, the message that “priests are judged by a company, and wives from their husbands have their hair cut secretly from the maidens” is not printed. (Tsarsky No. 425; in Description of Music. p. 273). Also not published were messages to Pskov: a) about marriages and the baptism of children (Description of music, p. 272); b) about the lamb, about alleluia and about the crosses of 1419 (Description of music. gr. 512), otherwise “Charter on the holy service” (Synod. bib. No. 562, p. 197); c) about disorders of widowed priests and marriages (Synod. Bible No. 562, p. 181). The message to Pskov (August 1419) about singing alleluia later acquired particular importance. In the letter “to Athanasius, ktitor of the great Lavra of St. Nicholas,” wrote: “It is fitting for you, father, to listen, like Christ himself, to the Metropolitan of Kyiv, Moscow and All Russia, Photius, who wrote to us in the house of St. Trinity in Pskov, - she sent a letter - it also says: alleluia, alleluia, alleluia. Glory to You God." (Syn. Bible, No. 460; Menaion of Macarius, August 31). Regarding the Strigolniki, Photius wrote in three epistles (Hist. Act. I, No. 21, 33, 34). In one he said: “If the rules of St. Apostles and Ecumenical Saints Councils prohibit, with the threat of damnation, the priestly rank from forming separate meetings; much less do they forbid a layman to dare to do anything like that. A layman is not invested with holy orders; he is a verbal sheep and is obliged to obey church order. And so, you expose yourself to greater punishment. Let them speak blasphemy against a bishop or a priest: one should not be excommunicated from communication with him until a trial is carried out and he is deprived of his title.” Addressing the priests, he says: “Admonish them with all your attention. If they do not convert, excommunicate them from the Orthodox faith, so that they are not among you like tares among the wheat.” In another he wrote: “I hear that some of you, neglecting their Christian name, value God’s great priesthood and monasticism at nothing. The Christian faith was established by the instructions and authority of the Apostles, and the same authority, according to the commandment of Christ, is given to the hierarchical and priestly rank. The priesthood of God has been given the power to forgive sins. If they do not convert, cut them off like rotten members from the healthy body of the Church of Christ.” Having received the news that, by measures of the city authorities, some of the Strigolniks were removed from Pskov, the blessed shepherd praises the zeal of the authorities, and regarding those who remained, repeating the previous rule - to withdraw from communication with them, he ordered that they be admonished with punishments, but not mortal ones. In Pskov, many had the opportunity to enter into close relations with the papists. Photius ordered the Pskovites to beware of people who neglect the traditions and rules of the saints; but he made it a rule that the Orthodox should be received with cordiality, who, being persecuted for their faith, seek refuge with them (Ist. Act. I, No. 20). In another message he instructs everyone: “correct yourself carefully in everything, so that you are not Christians in words alone, but strive in the deeds of Orthodox Christianity; resort to the churches of God; honor the priests of God; Conduct your fasts purely and honestly, in repentance and confession, in tears and warm faith.” Then he reproaches the Pskov clergy for unworthy service to their Lord and orders not to use the Latin world and not to pour on babies (Hist. Act. I, No. 35). In the third letter, having taught instructions about St. Eucharist and fasting, to the bewilderment of the Pskovites: should they eat bread and other products brought from the German land, the answer is: eat, having cleansed the priests with prayer (Ist. Act. 1, No. 82). In a message to the Novgorodians, he prescribed to the clergy: “whoever lives with his wife not according to the law, having united without the blessing of the priest, will receive penance for three years, and then combine them; instruct them in Orthodoxy, so that they take wives with blessings.” He commanded to teach to refrain from foul language, not to listen to and not to accept sorcerers; gave instructions on baptism and confirmation. “In which monastery, he wrote, the monks live, the monks should not live there; they should be in a special monastery... where the monasteries will live, elect priests with their wives, and there should not be a widow priest there. If someone, before going out into the field (for a judicial duel), asked for communion with the holy mysteries, do not give it to him; and whoever is killed will not be buried and the killer will be excommunicated from the church for 18 years (Act. Exp. I, 369). c) The spiritual testament of Photius - a report on the anxious management of the flock (Collected Chronicles VI. 147–155). “Do not despise my humility, for I am not skillful in your writing and language,” - this is what Photius himself wrote, ten years later after his arrival in Russia (Hist. Act. I, 323). And all the works of Photius show that they were not written by a natural Russian shepherd. – Two messages to Grand Duke Vasily are very dark; all others, in terms of language, are distinguished by artificiality. In endings and changes in words, there is often a mixture of Church Slavonic with Russian, with a violation of the correctness of Russian speech; the combination of words is a product of one’s own thought, the periods are long and confusing with introductory sentences. This is why thoughts are unclear. A correct Russian translation is absolutely necessary for the works of Photius. 85. Gregory Tsamblak wrote about Metropolitan Cyprian: “he has worn out our fatherland... God bless him to become famous in his fatherland - to see the great Euthymius (Patriarch of Ternovsky); “We are inspired by the Scripture to reach your country, so that we may see the shepherd.” He further says that he did not find Cyprian alive. According to these words, Gregory was a Serb by birth from the Ternovsk Patriarchate and was summoned to Russia by Metropolitan Cyprian, whom, however, he no longer saw in Kyiv († 1406). In the inscriptions of his works he is called the abbot of the Serbian Decani monastery, and more often the presbyter and abbot of the monastery of Pandocrator, or the presbyter of the Moldovlachia church. In November 1416, Vytautas, who wanted to have a special metropolitan in the southwest, insisted that Gregory be ordained by the Russian bishops as metropolitan of Kyiv. Not without reason, Blessed Photius feared the consequences, detrimental to Orthodoxy, from the existence of a new metropolis in Lithuania, under the rule of a papist prince. But Gregory himself was not suspected by Photius of any inclination towards papism. Gregory, both by teaching and deeds, proved that he was a sincere son of Orthodoxy and a firm confessor of it. He proved this at the Council of Kostnitsa. To the Synod. handwritten (No. 384) 21 of his words are placed (and not 27, as the Dictionary shows, I, 103) on the Lord's holidays and on the days of saints. Of these, the following words are named with the words “Gregory the monk and presbyter”, or “Gregory the abbot of the monastery of Pandocrator, the presbyter of the great Church of Moldovalachia”: 1) about St. communion on the Sunday before Christmas; 2) about the deceased; 3) about monastic life; 4) a word of praise to the reverend fathers, where he mentions his word about monasticism; 5) a word of praise to the 40 martyrs; 6) on Maundy Thursday at the hours about the Jews and those bringing unleavened bread; 7) on Great Friday on the clock; 8) on the Nativity of John the Baptist; 9) a word of praise to the apostles Peter and Paul; 10) a commendable word from Rev. Elijah; 11) for the Nativity of the Mother of God; 12) about the torment of the new martyr John of Belgrade; 13) a word of praise to Metropolitan Cyprian. With the name of “Gregory Archbishop of Russia” the words are placed: 1) on Palm Week; 2) for the Ascension of the Lord; 3) for transformation; 4) for the Dormition of the Mother of God; 5) to behead the head of the Predtecheva; 6) to erect an honorable cross; 7) a word of praise to the Great Martyr Demetrius; 8) a word of praise to the Great Martyr George. But there is no doubt that some of the first 13 words were spoken in Russia. This shows their style and language; this shows the subject of some, what is the word of praise for Metropolitan Cyprian. Moreover, according to other manuscripts, the words for the Nativity of the Baptist and for the day of the apostles Peter and Paul are called the words of Gregory, Archbishop of Russia (Tolstoy II, No. 205; I, No. 106; Description of music. pp. 693, 700, 702, 704); and Medvedev includes among the words of Gregory the Bishop of Russia the word on the Nativity of the Virgin Mary. In the Menea of ​​Macarius, under July 31, there is a “book of Gregory Samblok” with 19 words. The following works by Gregory are also known from manuscripts: a) “Grigory, Archbishop of Russia, speech on the erection of the Cross of the Lord” (Tsarsky No. 411); b) the praise of St. Euthymius Patr. Ternovsky (Tolstoy No. 205); c) the legend about the transfer of the relics of St. Paraskeva (Op. manuscript of the Tsar. p. 71); d) in the prologue of May 5, a story about the Serbian Tsar Stefan Dečanski, written by Grigory Abbot Dečanski (lyrics by Grigorovich Travel, p. 33. Kazan, 1848). The educated shepherd was also a spiritual poet and an expert in singing. His melodies are found in handwritten song books, and in some there is a “kissing verse” on the feast of the Dormition of the Virgin Mary, “the creation of Cyrus Gregory of Russia, Tsamblak.” The verse consists of 8 stichera, breathing with living feelings and intelligent thoughts. It was published by Mr. Undolsky in Notes for the history of church singing, M., 1846, pp. 4–6. 86. Simeon, Archbishop of Novgorod 1416–1431, famous for the holiness of his life, wrote a message to the Svyatogorsk Monastery on observing the communal charter (Ist. Act. I, No. 24). His message to Pskov, preserved in the chronicle, is especially remarkable (Nick. V, 72. Zhuravleva Ist. schismatic, p. 20). “Noble and Christ-loving men of Pskov! You yourself know that whoever gives honor to his saint, this honor goes to Christ himself. Therefore, honor, my children, with all humility and love, your spiritual fathers and the shepherds of your souls. Don't test them; do not say anything bad about them; but look after yourselves, mourn your sins, take care of the healing of your illnesses... Do not be arrogant, but patiently obey your spiritual fathers, as Orthodox Christians, obedient to the word of God, should. Do not offend the Church of God - do not get involved in any church affairs... Everyone should fear God’s judgment and try to be worthy of God’s mercy.” 87. Zosima, hierodeacon of the Sergius Monastery, wrote Xenos, or a description of his wanderings, 1420, through Constantinople to Jerusalem. This description of the sacred places of Athos, Constantinople and Jerusalem is worth attention. It also applies to some modern events. The disposition with which Xenos is written: “May a blessing descend on those who read this scripture from God and from the holy tomb and from the holy places! They can truly receive a reward equal to those who went to Jerusalem and saw the holy places.” Xenos was published by Sakharov in Volume II of Legends, St. Petersburg, 1849. Jacob, a monk, in 1426 translated from Greek “into Russian” the fasting word of St. Maxim (Tsarsky, No. 720). “In the summer of 1426 (transferred) the chickens by Jacob the good scribe to the wretched Eusebius, the obscene Ephraim Rusin,” so it is said in the manuscript. Kirillov Monastery. It is clear that the book was translated for Russia, for Russian pilgrims. But who was Jacob? Most likely, he was a Bulgarian or Russian, who lived for a long time on Athos, so that he earned himself the honorary title of kir - master. 88. Euthymius Bradaty, Archbishop of Novgorod, until 1424 Emelian, monk of the Derevyanitsky monastery and spiritual father of the bishop; in 1424 he was elected archbishop, but due to the troubles of Novgorod he was consecrated by Metropolitan Photius with the name Euthymius in 1425, and died in 1428, shortly before his death he ransomed the prisoners of Lithuania with his own money - for 6000 rubles (Collected years. III, 183, 238). He left a “Confession of Faith”, written when he was appointed archbishop, where he promises to “keep the peace of the church... in the passion of God and with a God-loving disposition, to preserve the flock entrusted to him”; obey the metropolitan in everything, regardless of the threats of the prince and boyars; not to accept another metropolitan except the one installed in Constantinople; do not allow Orthodox Christians to marry either Armenians or Lithuanians. (Act. Ek. I, No. 371). In 1426, in a letter to the Pskov clergy, he ordered not to allow priests who came from another diocese to serve in his place without a letter of release and leave, and to take care of educating parishioners in the fear of God. (Hist. Act. I, No. 31). The manuscript, written in 1431 in the Novgorod monastery on Fox Hill, contains “Interpretation of inconveniences by means of speech cognizable in scripture” - an experience of a church dictionary (ed. by Kalandovich in Exarch, appendix, No. 13). 89. Abraham, Bishop of Suzdal, who was with Metropolitan Isidore in Florence in 1438, described the stage performance of the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary, which he saw in Florence (printed in the 17th part of Dr. Russian Vivliof.). Abraham’s companion says: “Take notice that the Pope has sent his bishop Christopher, so that he (Abraham) also signs; But I don’t want to do this to him, Metropolitan Isidore took him and put him in prison, and he sat for a week, and he signed it.” A photograph of Avraamieva’s signature under the Florentine Cathedral in the Rumyantsev Museum. Simeon, hieromonk of Suzdal, in 1437 accompanied his archpastor Abraham and Metropolitan Isidore on their journey to Italy for the Council of Florence. He compiled a description of this journey, remarkable for historical geography and not without information about the cathedral (edited by Sakharov in the second volume of Tale. Russian Narod. St. Petersburg. 1849). More important is the Tale of Simeon of Suzdal about the Eighth Council (in the Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, No. 10); Synod. bib., no. 389; Uvarova, No. 408; Tolstoy, II, No. 436). It was published in Part VI of Vivliof, but is mixed here with Simeon’s Travels. In the Tale, Simeon writes: “Metropolitan Isidore remained in Venice and communicated with the pope and, walking around the shrines, “cursed” (crouched) in French and ordered us to do the same; but I argued with him many times; That's why he kept me locked up. The envoy Thomas decided to leave Venice, and I, seeing such a great heresy, set off with the envoy on December 9, and came to Novgorod, where I spent the summer with Bishop Euthymius; From there I went to Smolensk.” The Smolensk prince handed him over to Isidore, and he put him in prison, chained in iron; Here he sat all winter in one scroll, on his bare feet; then they took him from Smolensk to Moscow. 90. Isidore, Metropolitan of Russia 1437–1442, who gained notoriety for his attempt to introduce union into Russia. It is quite likely that ancient news that calls him a Slovak: he knew the Slavic language well. Educated in Constantinople, he was familiar with Greek and Latin learning. The proximity of his homeland to Rome taught him the idea of ​​​​respecting Rome, with all its depravity in life and thoughts; That’s why, even at the Basel Council, he allowed the Greek faith to be called the “old heresy,” although he was here among the representatives of the Greek Church. Emperor John Palaiologos, who hoped to support the falling empire through union with Rome, elected Isidore as Metropolitan of Russia, without relations with Russia, in fact, according to his own views for the union. It is known how Isidore was received in Moscow, upon his return from Florence, with the title of papal legate (Ist. Russian ts. III, 94, 99). Works of Isidore: a) Epistle to Russia (from Budin, March 5, 1440), where, informing the flock about the union of churches, he called on Christians of the Greek and Roman confessions to go to Greek and Latin churches without any difference, to partake of the Eucharist from Greek and Latin priests (Soph. Temp. II, 33-42). b) Letter dated July 27, 1440 in defense of the priest Stolpinsky, whom the Kholmlyans, for his praise of the union, expelled from the parish (Read. General history I, 12–25). c) “His appeal to all Christians” of Europe to rebel against Mohammed, the son of Satan, did not find any response in the West; and this served as an unrequited reproach to Isidore, and as a justification for Blessed Mark and Blessed. Gennady Scholarius, who did not believe in the promises of the West to help Constantinople against the Turks, and even less willing to exchange the purity of faith for political benefits. The appeal was written in Latin and printed by Reisner: Epistolae Turciae, 1598. Its Italian translation was published in Hist. universale dell'origin, guerre et imperio di Turchi, Fran. Sansovino. Venet. 1654. 91. In 1439, Saint John-Elijah of Novgorod († 1186) appeared to the pious Novgorod shepherd Euthymius II (1429–1458), and announcing that he was the same Archbishop John, whose tomb was suddenly opened with an incorrupt body, in the name of God he ordered the commemoration of the Novgorod princes, archpastors and for all Orthodox Christians, and he himself promised to pray for all the living. Blessed Euthymius then established the celebration of the memory of St. John (Collected Chronicles III, 112, 113, 183). Then they collected what news they could about the life of St. John. Thus, two words appeared about his life, placed in the Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius (on September 7) and in another manuscript. Naturally, not all the news collected more than 200 years after the death of St. John, were accurate and true. So in the first word it says that John, even before his ordination to the rank of archpastor, built the Annunciation Monastery; but according to the true chronicles this was not the case (§ 36). The affairs of earthly people are weakness; the appearance of the celestial being was fruitful: first of all, it was a strong warning against the worshipers of the West with his pope, such as Isidore; it also forced us to pay attention to the exploits of the great men of the Russian Church. Pitirim, Bishop of Perm († 1445), according to the Degree Book (I, 445), composed “A Brief Description of the Life of St. Alexei" and the Canon for the discovery of his relics; the last one in Menaion on May 20. Macarius, abbot of Prilutsk, described the life of St. Demetrius of Prilutsk († 1392). The writer writes: “Pachomius (the saint’s disciple and his successor in the management of the monastery) and we have much testimony about the life and miracles of the saint”; therefore, Abbot Macarius wrote about the monk no later than 1440. This is the life of Tsarsky (No. 131) in the list of 1547, and of Rumyantsev in the early 16th century. (No. 96, 153); it is also in the Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius on February 11. The last one also contains: Praise to St. Demetrius and the Word are commendable about his miracles, without the name of the author. The latter is rich in various news, among other things about the Vyatichi attack on Vologda and the plunder of the Demetrius Monastery, and a miracle happened over the Vyatichi who wanted to steal the shrouds from the saint’s tomb. The writer cites a similar miracle that took place at the tomb of Stephen of Sourozh. Alexey, after the Monk Paul († 1429) abbot of Obnorsky, left notes about the life of his first mentor, the Rev. Sergius of Obnorsky, who died in 1413. 92. St. Jonah, metropolitan 1448–1461, guardian of the fatherland and visionary shepherd of Orthodoxy. From the age of 12 a monk, he received the education of his mind and heart in the monastery. Saint Photius, seeing the monk Jonah, sleeping peacefully after labors and holding his right hand on his head, “bent, as if blessing with it,” said: “Know, children, this monk will be a great saint in the Russian land” (Step. book). There were many sorrows for Jonah during his pastoral service, and this elevated his spirit. The Pope wrote about him to King Casimir: “to catch and bind the wicked apostate Jonah”; and the Lord had already glorified him with the gift of miracles. The spirit of his rule is visible, among other things, in the fact that he even put Paphnutius of Borovsky on trial, who allegedly did not want to recognize his hierarchal authority. (Last. of St. Joseph Vol. to Kutuzov and Tretyakov). In the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, written by the saint himself, the “Cell Gospel” is kept. Of his 35 printed messages, some relate to the protection of the welfare of Russia (Ist. Act. Vol. I, No. 40, 43, 51, 53, 56, 60, 262; Act. Exp. I, No. 49); others to protect Orthodoxy, endangered by the pope’s lust for power (Act. Ist. I, No. 45, 47, 51, 52, 60, 62, 63, 65 in 260, 273, 275; Add. to Ist. Act. I, No. 13); others either console those who are grieving or admonish those who are inattentive to their salvation (Ist. Act. Vol. I, No. 37, 44, 46, 50, 265,267; Add. to Ist. Act. I, No. 11); finally, some protect the order of internal government (Ist. Act. Vol. I, No. 45, 67, 266, 268–271). In addition, there are still unpublished edifying messages from him (in Tsarsky’s Description, pp. 366, 499, 500). The rite for the installation of a bishop in 1456, compiled, of course, by Saint Jonah (Act. Exp. I, No. 375) is remarkable. In Volokol. bib. No. 293 his permissive prayer for the deceased: “In the name of the Holy Life-Giving Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. This humble (name) Metropolitan of All Rus', praying to You, Christ my Master, I forgive and give permission to the name,” etc. His signature is from Pogodin in the Album, M., 1853. One cannot deny oneself the consolation of listening to at least some of the instructions of the great saint. In a letter to the Vyatichi people, he wrote: “I hear, children, that in Vyatka you have a lot of things going on in Vyatka that are disgusting and hateful to God, to the destruction of Christians: many Christians live with their wives illegally, without getting married... I remind you and write with bitter sobs... I beg you to show pure repentance... I beg you, priests of the Lord, to look around in every possible way and shudder... Look also, into what mouth does the immortal body and the honorable blood of the Lord enter. If you dare to approach or allow anyone to approach those immortal and life-giving mysteries with unclean and vile lips, you are like grass touching fire” (Ist. Act. I, No. 267). To the Novgorodians, after offering instructions about enmity, he wrote: “How sweet, my children, repentance! It is the root of life. Sweet and kind, kind and generous, the humane God and builder of our salvation constantly thirsts for our repentance, rejoices at the tears of the repentant and rejoices at our confession; He waits with great patience for our conversion, and does not leave the latter, begging, watching, calling each of us to turn to Him from hostile deeds... It’s good, my children, to obey the Divine Scripture. Just as obedience, my children, is life, so disobedience is death. The witness to my words is the first man created by God: if he had not transgressed the commandments of the Creator, he would not have lost the tree of life; and he was expelled from paradise, condemned to death, both himself and his descendants... I also bless you, my children, so that in everything you will be obedient to our son and brother, and to your father and teacher, the God-loving Archbishop Euthymius, according to the word of the Lord. He said: listen to you, He listens to Me, but reject you, He will reject Me and Him who sent Me... He, children, was appointed by God as a saint, teacher and shepherd of Christian souls, he is the vicar of our Lord Christ himself and a prayer book for human souls; the authority of the apostles was given to him: whoever is permitted on earth is also permitted in heaven” (Hist. Act. 1, No. 45). He consoled Prince Yuri Semenovich in his grief over the death of his wife, and wrote: “You did very well, my son, in ordering her to be placed in your home, in your city. It is not the place, as you know, my son, that saves or condemns a person, but our deeds: whatever deeds we do, we will receive such a reward for our deeds. Now, my son, she is always here before your eyes, and you can benefit her soul with the prayers and prayers of the priests, constant obedience, drinking from the cup, alms and generosity to the poor” (Ist. Act I, No. 46). Excellent is his instruction to children who disobey their mother (Addition to the historical act. I, No. 11). He wrote to the monks: “Your abbot Veniamin complained to me, children, and said that you do not obey him in anything... It is, children, that out of the original pride of our common enemy the devil, rebellions are raised for disobedience and disobedience. You know that you have died to the world and submitted the temporary to the future; therefore, you, children, must obey in everything your spiritual superior, Abbot Veniamin, but your vow given before God. I am writing to you, children, so that you force yourself to strictly follow the rules of a God-loving common life... Regarding those who will disobey the abbot, contrary to the divine and sacred rules, and begin to disturb the sacred monastery, I gave the order to the abbot to admonish such people with love, spiritually; if anyone does not listen, then I ordered him to be expelled from the monastery, like every violator of God’s law - such a one expelled himself from the flock of Christ” (Ist. Act. I, No. 265). 93. Theodosius Byvaltsev, Chudovsky archimandrite, since 1454 Archbishop of Rostov. In 1458, he convened the clergy of his diocese for a council, “so that the affairs of the church and all Orthodox Christianity might be corrected,” and complained bitterly about the negligence of the clergy about their duty. Saint Jonah, during his lifetime, chose and blessed him in his place, “and he also placed his blessed letter in his name ... under his seal on the throne” (Ist. act. I, no. 69, p. 121). Having entered the metropolitan department (1461), here too he tried with all zeal to correct the clergy. But in 1465 he gave up control, and in the Chudov Monastery he labored secretly in works of mercy, and spent his last days in the monastery of Sergius, where he died in 1474. The saint, educated and passionate about his calling, wrote: an eloquent word of praise to the apostles Peter and Paul (ed. in Izvestia Academician Sciences III, 322-328); a word about the miracle of St. Alexis (Collected chronicles VI, 326–330); an excellent message to the clergy of the Belozersk country, denouncing their negligence towards the title (Hist. Act. I, No. 64); five other epistles (Hist. act. I, no. 13, 78, 275–277); confession (Vol. I, No. 57), and letters (Act. Exp. I, No. 54, 75; Act. Exp. I, No. 77). Pogodin has his signature in the Album. Herodion, clerk of Metropolitan Theodosius, by his will, wrote two legends: one about the miracle of St. Varlaam, another about the earthquake (Collected chronicles vol. 182–184, 321–325). 94. Gelasius, abbot, in 1464 described the life of St. Savva Vishersky (Tsarsky. No. 133) and then wrote a word of praise. The description and word are known from the manuscript. 1514 (Tsarskogo No. 381; Moscow spiritual academician No. 73). Under the Rostov Archbishop Tryphon (1462–1467), the miracles of St. Leonty of Rostov. The description of the last miracle, contemporary with Tryphon, was published in Reading. total ist. about Rostov, pp. 61, 62. In the Collection of 1514 (Tsar's No. 381) and in the Menea of ​​Macarius under May 23, along with a description of miracles, praise of St. is placed. Leonty. Probably at the same time the life of Peter Tsarevich was described. The description speaks of the grandson of Peter, and the description ends like this: “Lord grant to this family of Peter the preservation and multiplication,” therefore this was written during the time of the descendants of St. Petra. This life is placed in the Menaion of Macarius under June 29, in the manuscript. Moscow spirit. acad. No. 63, Tsarskogo No. 378, 743. 95. Pachomius Logofet, “who came from the Serbian land to the Grand Duke Vasily Vasilyevich” (Tsarsky XX, p. 51), by order of St. Jonah, Archbishop of Novgorod (1458–1471), wrote: a) Lives of St. Varlaam of Khutyn, Archbishops Moses († 1362) and Euthymius († 1458), Venerable. Savva Vishersky, correcting Gelasie's description (Tolstoy II, 364; III, 59; Tsarsky No. 103, 132, 133, 326). b) Canons and stichera for Princess Olga, St. Euthymius, Rev. Savva, the Chir Icon of the Mother of God, John the Baptist (Description of music. 592:593); Rev. Onuphrius the Great, for whom the Novgorod shepherd created a church, wrote a service. c) Words of praise: Rev. Varlaam, “there is something about Judea in him” and the Intercession of the Virgin Mary (Tolstoy II, L No. 264; Description of music. 206, 704; Tsar’s No. 98, 379)). “With the blessing of the Most Reverend Archbishop Jonah, Metropolitan of All Rus', and through the deliberations of the honorable council about him,” the life of the saint was written in 1460. Alexei (Description of music. p. 761; Tolstoy I, no. 292, p. 185), and at the same time he wrote the canon of the saint. Alexey. Probably, according to the same definition, he composed the life of St. Prince Mikhail of Chernigov, hand-in-hand. “the work of Hieromonk Pachomius St. mountains”, with the following beginning: “What river or what will I say”? From Novgorod Pachomius moved to the monastery of St. Sergius of Radonezh. Here he wrote: canon with akathist St. Sergius of Radonezh and the canon of St. Nikon (as he speaks about in the life of St. Kirill); here he supplemented Epiphanius’s description of the life of St. Sergius with a description of the miracles of the monk that took place after the discovery of his relics; but at the same time he shortened the Epiphanius life of Sergius; then he described the life of Rev. Nikon (Tsarsky No. 131, 132, 112; General history No. 56; Description of music. 204, 209, 593, 673). “When I came to the monastery of the saint, the humble Taha Ermonakh Pachomiye saw the miracles that happened from the shrine of the God-bearing father, having seen from the very disciple of Blessed Epiphanius (i.e. from his book) ... having seen them with my own eyes, I dared to write, as I heard or saw.” This is what Pachomius says about his work for the life of Sergiev. In 1472 the relics of St. Metropolitan Peter to the new cathedral church and the relics of St. Metropolitan Jonah. Pachomius, on behalf of his superiors, wrote a service for the transfer of the relics of St. Peter, canon of St. Jonah and the word on the discovery of their relics (Collected years. VI, 196). The word on the discovery of the relics and the word of praise of St. Metropolitan Peter - in the Menaion of Macarius, on August 24; canon by Rumyantsev (Description of music. 204:295). In the Kirillov Monastery, by the will of the Grand Duke, he described the life of St. Kirill Belozersky, and in Ustyug, “by order of Bishop Philotheus” (1472–1501), wrote the canon of St. Stefan of Perm (Tolstoy I, No. 192, 306; Tsarsky No. 103; Description of music. pp. 199, 205, 208, 595; Menaion of the Moscow Spiritual Academy for May and June 1558). About the life of Cyril he writes: “who would think that the earth is dry from another and ignorant of danger, even about the holy... But I was still far away, hearing about the holy... I would have been commanded by the Grand Duke to come to the monastery of the saint, I saw there the rector of that monastery Kasian... I began to tell many things about the holy, whom I Having heard from a self-witness of such a life, moreover, the most reliable from that very disciple Martinian in the name of the former abbot of the namesake (?) monastery, the Call of Sergius, who from a small age lived with St. Kirill." 96. Philip I, Metropolitan of Moscow 1464–1474 When the pope’s legate wanted to have a ceremonial entry into Moscow, the saint said to the Grand Duke: “The Roman legate is going with the roof to one gate, and I, your spiritual father, will go to another. He who gives honor to someone else’s faith humiliates his own.” The Grand Duke forbade the legate to enter before the Kryzh. (Pskov years. 125–127). The Pope, having sent Sofia to Moscow to marry the Grand Duke, hoped for much for himself. The legate, after the marriage, proposed to the metropolitan to unite the churches. According to the chronicle, “Metropolitan Philip studied a lot, from the books of words and the scribe Nikita Popovich, calling on him, he himself spoke with the legatos, and commanded him (Nikita) to speak with him. He won’t give a single word of answer, but he will say: “I have no books with me.” (Collected years. VI, 197). All this intercourse, no doubt, was described, but the description is now unknown. The five letters of Metropolitan Philip, written in correct Church Slavonic language, lively and with inspiration, are distinguished by the strength of thoughts and feelings. His convictions to the Novgorodians to submit to the Grand Duke and his exhortation to the prince to forgive the rebellious Novgorodians if they repent are excellent. (Ist. Act. I, No. 280, 281, 282). His exhortation to the Novgorodians not to do violence to monasteries and churches for the estates denied to them breathes meekness (ibid., No. 82). The same is his admonition to the abbot and elders of the Sergius monastery to forgive Elder Pamva, who sinned against them (ibid. No. 1, 278). His letter of commendation from Ivanov (Description of the archive, p. 210. M. 1848). Pogodin's signature of the Metropolitan in the Album. M. 1853 The story of the Grand Duke's campaign against Novgorod in 1471, written in the spirit of the Moscow government, was written by a contemporary and zealot of Orthodoxy; its language and style are similar to what we see in the letters of Metropolitan Philip; because, probably, if it was not entirely composed by Metropolitan Philip, then, without a doubt, it was written under his supervision and corrected by him. It was published in the VI volume of the collection. years. 1–45. Sl. vol. III, 242. 97. By the will of Metropolitan Philip, Theodore, a newly baptized Jew, translated the Psalter and the Book of Esther from the Jewish original - a very remarkable phenomenon. The beginning of Esther: “It came to pass in the days of Ahazberosov, who reigned from Udu until Hus seventh and two decades. In those days, when Ahazveros sat on the table of his kingdom, and created peace for his nobles and his servants, for the power of the Farcists and the Medeites, for the countries and bolyars of the earth and those like them about him.” Here the words are found: tivun and headman, raspolon instead of plunder. The words aba - to (2:10), priklyakaa - crouching (3:5, 5:3), willing heart - cheerful heart (5:9), hunting (8:16), valnik (10:3), make it possible to see in the translator a person who lived for a long time in the Russian south, but not a Pole. (Description of the manuscript. Synod. Bible, pp. 53, 57, 181). Gennady Novgor. in 1489 he wrote that among the Judaizers the Russian translation of not only the Psalter, but also the Prophets is respected. “The Jews of today hold heretical traditions, the psalms of David, or the prophecies have been distorted.” (Epistle to Joasaph). Nowadays, translation lists of the 15th century are not known. from Hebrew neither the Psalms nor the Prophets. Gennady's review of the translations does not prevent them from being recognized, especially given the lack of other people familiar with the Hebrew text, as the work of the newly baptized Jew Theodore. Amendments to the ancient Slavic text of the Pentateuch of Moses (Description of music. No. 27, 28; handwritten in the 15th century by Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 12), exposing not only the Russian corrector, but also a person familiar with the Jewish text, probably belonged to the same pupil of Metropolitan Theodore. The differences in numbers indicated by Vostokov. 20, 27, I went up instead and 23 and went up the mountain correspond to the Hebrew text. The division of the book of Genesis into 12 sections, and the other four books into 40, corresponds to the Jewish division of the Pentateuch, not only in number, but also in the very beginning and end of the sections. After this, Russian phrases and words of the 15th century, included in the translation, bearing, according to Vostokov, all the signs of the Bulgarian language of the 10th and 11th centuries, should be recognized not only as the work of copyists, but as the work of the corrector. However, there are few such changes in the ancient Slavic text of the Pentateuch. The most remarkable thing is the division of the Pentateuch into parasis - Saturday readings. It is not known in the Greek copies of the Pentateuch. 98. “In the summer of 6958 (1450), this book was written, the Chronicler of the servant of God, the deacon and monk Gerontius,” as it reads in the middle of the now famous second Novgorod Chronicle (Collected Let. III, 141). Elsewhere, under 1572, we read the remark: “look (of course, the author of the second chronicle) at the monasteries (on Lysya Mountain) of the book of the Church Chronicler, and having said that the Chronicler of Lisitskaya is good enough; even if not completely, the development is written in the Chronicler of Lesitsky from the lords of Novgorod to the lord Euthymius of Novgorod” † 1458 (Collected years. III, 169). Based on both these notes, there is no doubt that there was a special Novgorod Lesitsky chronicler. At one time it was famous for the completeness of its news and ended in 1450. Probably its news dates from 911–1015 and 1334–1450. placed in the second Novgorod Chronicle, where we often see double news about the same incident. The author of the Lithuanian Chronicle, when describing the death of Prince Svidrigaila, says: “I don’t know that, I was young then; but they say that Thomas gave Prince Skirigail a poisonous potion to drink.” since Svidrigailo died in 1394, the chronicler wrote the mentioned words, of course, no later than 1440, and therefore the first chronicler about the events of Lithuanian Rus wrote his notes around 1440. And the handwritten chronicle has reached us. XV century It was published in the Notes of the 2nd Branch of the Academy, St. Petersburg, 1854, and before that by Danilovich in the Vilna Diary of 1823 separately: Latopisiec Litwy I Krodika Ruska. Wilno. 1827. 99. In 1466, Vasily, a Moscow guest, described his journey to Palestine; and Afanasy Nikitin wrote a legend about his journey to India, which lasted four years (1468–1472); the story is very wonderful. Published by Sakharov in Volume II. Tale. 170–182; the best edition is in the Collection. years. VI, 330–358; in the last place with an explanation of the words. Detailed explanations by I. I. Sreznevsky see. in the 2nd volume of Notes of the 2nd Department. Academy. The lengthy story about the capture of Constantinople by the Turks (1453) was written, in all likelihood, when her father Thomas Paleologus, brother of the unfortunate Emperor Constantine, Cassian, Prince of Mavnuk (§ 116) and others arrived in Moscow with Sophia in 1472. This story depicts a great event in such detail, it presents so many individuals and private circumstances that one cannot help but see in its composition the participation of eyewitnesses to the great event, especially since it contains news that Franza and other modern narrators do not have; Another remarkable feature of it is that it does not say a word about the Mohammedan fleet, but only battles with the ground army are depicted. This means that they are obviously telling about the event in good faith, who are saying what they saw and about which they collected correct and accurate information. The story was published, but not correctly, in Kingdoms. letop., St. Petersburg, 1779, and in Nikon. years. V, 222–277. A review of its content, with historical and philological comments by I. I. Sreznevsky, in the 1st volume of Scientific Notes of the 2nd Branch of the Academy. SPb. 1854 100. Anthony, hieromonk of the Spassky Monastery under Metropolitan Philip and Grand Duke John, as he says, described the lives of the noble princes of Yaroslavl Theodore († 1299), Constantine and David. In the chronicle we read: “in 1463, in the city of Yaroslavl, in the monastery of St. Savior, the relics of Prince Theodore of Yaroslavl and his sons Konstantin and David were found, under his church in the basement,” and miracles followed at the grand opening (Let. in Karamz. VI, pr. 629). After this, there is no doubt that Anthony compiled his description no later than 1465. His narrative, with several changes, was placed in Step. book I, 392–397, and in the Nikon Chronicle. III, 62; and in its original form it is preserved in hand. bib. General ist. No. 196; Tsarskogo No. 111, 388; on Thursday Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius on September 19. Karamzin looked at Step's news incredulously. book about Prince Theodore (IV, 110): but he did not know the ancient biography and allowed arbitrary guesses into history. Anthony's news is justified by the ancient chronicles - Trinity and Resurrection. 101. Misail, Bishop of Smolensk, since 1474 Metropolitan of Kyiv, descended from the family of princes Babili-Sokolinsky (Act. Zap. Ross. III, No. 101; IV, No. 136), is attributed to the chronicle of 1254–1425 (Rukop. Imp. Acad. Sciences). His “Listen” is also known, with which he transfers the Trinity Monastery he founded on his estate Cherey to the care of his niece and her husband Bogdan Sapieha (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, 233, 234). The letter to the pope, which was issued under his name by the Jesuit disciple Hypatius Potsey, has long been exposed as a forgery. (Act. zap. Ross. IV, 229). The Monk Ephrosynus, in the world Eleazar, who founded a monastery near Lake Pskov and died in 1481, left a will (ed. in Act. Exp. I, No. 108) and a community charter. The latter, in 30 chapters, is placed in the Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius on May 15. His will was written in the correct Church Slavonic language, without allowing the turns and expressions of simple Russian; This is the first example of strict church writing. As for the fact that the Monk Euphrosynus defended a special alleluia; Then the talkative Vasily himself let it slip that the first biographer of the monk doubted whether the monk went to Constantinople with questions about the special alleluia. And that the stories of Vasily himself about the Monk Euphrosynus are not worthy of trust, due to the obvious contradictions of his history and common sense, this is shown in detail in Ist. Russian c. III, 180–187, and in Christ. Thurs. 1853 St. Demetrius sacredly judged: “Holy Euphrosynus is holy, but I don’t think their alleluia was holy, the most dreamlike, as anyone wanted, they raved, crazy.” (Letter 6 Synod.). 1 02. Gerontius, Metropolitan of Moscow 1475–1488, wrote letters to: a) the Vyatka clergy, with the order to persuade the Vyatka people to submit to the Grand Duke (Ist. Act. I, No. 97); b) to the Grand Duke on the Ugra, with an exhortation to courageously fight the Tatars (ibid. No. 92); c) Novgorod Archbishop Gennady, with a decision on heretics (ibid. No. 285). His messages are written in simple language, where many inaccuracies were made both against the Slavic and Russian languages. Signature of Metropolitan Gerontius in Pogodin’s Album, M., 1853. 103. Vassian Rylo, student of Rev. Paphnutius of Borovsky, from 1455 hegumen of the Trinity Monastery, was sent to St. twice (1455 and 1460). Jonah to the south to the princes, bishops and people, to confirm their loyalty to Orthodoxy, and, to the consolation of the saint, he fulfilled this assignment with complete success (Ist. Act. I, No. 45, 62, 63, 65, 66, pp. 110, 117.) In 1468 he was consecrated to the rank of Archbishop of Rostov, and This rank reconciled Grand Duke John with his brothers. He died in 1481. His description of the life of St. Paphnutius, written by him shortly after his death († 1477 May 1); it is placed in the Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius and abbreviated by St. Dimitri. Vassian wanted to present edifying reading in the biography of the monk and achieved his goal. “Luminous and very pleasant,” he says, in the eyes of spectators and those living together is the one who strives for virtue; he can excite them to imitate, lead them even after death. It is the most gratifying and sweetest of all earthly things if someone tries to depict in writing the life of that ascetic; He does not in a short time, but he can always excite others to imitate him, he can inspire with zeal for virtue. That is why we decided, briefly, without excess, to outline the virtuous life of a godly man, perfect in virtues.” Vassian describes in detail the life of his mentor, following a chronological order. His description is animated by love for his pious mentor. The flow of thoughts is not always accompanied by the correct combination of words, as it seems from trying to speak eloquently. Between the biographical information there is several information about general events. He mentions the invasion of “King Mamotyak (Ulu Mahmet of Kazan) with many godless Hagarians.” The following news is especially remarkable: “A certain man named Ivan, who, according to the teaching of certain people in the great Novgorod, served with a certain pious prince, killed his master with poison, and then, having matured, put on himself a monastic image and came to the monastery of the saint; Having seen him coming, he spoke to his disciples: see this man, as though he were a monk, cleanse himself from blood for the sake of an image?.. Then the blessed one told one disciple: kill Prince Dimitri Shemyaka with poison.” Karamzin and Polevoy were at a loss about Shemyaka’s death. The source of information about the teacher. Paphnutius for Vassian, in addition to personal observations, no doubt, also served as a note about the Venerable. Paphnutius, compiled by an unknown person from the words of the priest Nikita, who was at the funeral of Paphnutius, and the students of Paphnutius; in the Lavra collection (No. 8) it precedes Vassian’s description. Since she describes in detail the last days of the monk, which Vassian was not an eyewitness and about which he, of course, wanted to know; It was almost by the will of Vassian that this story was written. Vassian's eloquent message to Grand Duke John on the Ugra, with the conviction to courageously stand against the Tatars, is placed in Step. book II, 140–149; in Sof. 2 years old. vol. VI, 225–230, 218. His administrative letter in Vol. I. Act. exp. No. 85. 104. Irinarch, a monk, in 1492 wrote the life of St. Dionysius of Glushitsky († 1437) and a word of praise to him, hiding his name in an anagram. (Rumyantsev No. 397; Bibl. General history No. 321; Tsarsky No. 134,372), “Not from Jerusalem and not from Sinai, he says, this lamp shone for us, but from our native land, and in our times it appeared and... I dared to write about it what I heard from the blessed Amphilochius, Macarius and Michael, who lived under St. Dionysius, may the memory of the saint of God be unforgettable. I myself saw miracles taking place at his tomb.” Probably the same biographer also wrote the life of St. Gregory of Pelshem († 1442), friend of the Rev. Dionysius. The writer says that he listened to the story about St. Gregory from the monk Tikhon, who served the monk. (Lavra Menaion for September, No. 1; Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius for September 31.). 105. Theodosius, hieromonk of the Yellow Nicholas Monastery, in 1483 composed the canon of St. Arseny Bishop of Tver. The canon is also read in the printed Menea, but without the name of the author (East. Description of music. 594). The same Theodosius also wrote the life of St. Arseny (Tsarsky No. 123; Tolstoy II, No. 76). He should also be credited with “The Word of how Volodimer was baptized, lifting Korsun,” taken by the monk Theodosius almost literally from the Nestor Chronicle (for example, in Chron. Ch. 1852), as well as the list of the Patericon of the 15th century, where “the sinful Theodosius, an unworthy priest,” writes his name instead of the bishop. Simon, then instead of Polycarp. (Collection of Novg. Soph. bib. No. 578; Izv. Acad. IV, 114, 115). 106. Paisiy Yaroslavov, tonsured at the Spassky monastery, which is on the stone, elder of the Kirillov Monastery, for a short time (1479–1482) abbot of the Sergius Lavra. Grand Duke John wanted to see him as metropolitan when Gerontius retired to Simonov; but he refused. The famous denouncer of the Judaizers, Gennady, asked the Rostov Archbishop Joasaph to consult with Paisius, what should one think about the opinion that confused many then regarding the coming of Christ, which was attributed to the end of the seventh thousand years (1492)? At the Council of 1503, Paisius was one of the main ones among those who considered the possession of villages not useful for monasteries. Blessed Paisius rested in the monastery of his vow. From his works the following are known: a) The Legend of the Spasokamensky Monastery, written in 1481, after the fire of 1476 devastated the Kamensky monastery (Tolstoy II, No. 195, 282, 362). This legend, for which Paisius’s source was the surviving notes and traditions of the monastery, contains precious information not only about the Kamenskaya monastery, but also about the gradual enlightenment of the surrounding country with the light of Christianity. Paisiy speaks in some detail about St. Dionysius, later Bishop of Rostov; There is also some information about Shemyak here. b) Another work by Paisius is the story of the second marriage of Grand Duke Vasily in 1526, published from an incomplete list in Thu. General ist. 1847, Tsarsky has No. 134. 107. St. Gennady, famous protector and defender of Orthodoxy against the Judaizers. “Savvaty was always on Valaam, I was his student, and he was an elder to me,” he himself said to Abbot Dositheus, forcing him to compile notes about the lives of the Solovetsky chiefs Zosima and Savvaty. In 1485, from the Chudovsky archimandrite, he was elevated to the see of the Novgorod archbishop, and in this rank he acted for the benefit of St. church with apostolic zeal and selflessness. His actions against the Judaizers, clear from his writings, place his name among the great shepherds of the church. Such was his zeal to honor the priesthood of people who understood the faith and the title of the priesthood. How much grief he suffered from the Pskovites alone! In 1485 he sent them a “blessed letter” and gifts of pastoral love. But when in the same year he sent his boyar to make an inventory of churches and monasteries, the Pskovites “did not comply with his will.” After that they rebelled against the Grand Duke himself. Gennady was forced to go to them, and “having come to the meeting, the people blessed and spread out a lot of teaching words to give a certificate.” In 1495 he stayed in Pskov for a whole month. But when, out of duty, he again arrived in Pskov: “and they did not order their priests to serve with him, but the marshmallows to open the ovens.” (Pskov and Rostov years). There were a lot of dissatisfied people, or more precisely, guilty people, against the zealous saint. They reported that he was defrocking some priests without guilt, and installing others for bribes. This was nothing more than slander, which they used to cover up their guilt. But the saint (June 24, 1504) refused the see (Act. Exp. I, No. 489), and (in 1506) died in the Chudov Monastery. Here he received the honor of being laid in the very place where the relics of St. Alexei rested. His writings, as well as his pastoral activities, are directed primarily against the Judaizers. His messages on this subject: a) To Niphon, Bishop of Suzdal (in January 1488), outlining the investigation about heretics (Karamz. VI, pr. 3 2 4; Tolstoy II, no. 341). b) An extensive message to Metropolitan Zosima (1490), with a request to take appropriate measures against the Judaizers and with an explanation of the outrageousness of their actions (Act. Exp. I. No. 380). c) Epistle (dated February 25, 1489) to Joasaph, the former Archbishop of Rostov, to the one for whom the Explanatory Apostle of the Bible was written. Tsarsky No. 13. In the message, Gennady proves that the Judaizers only hide behind the name of the Jews, but they are heretics. “I found here Novgorod heretics Judaizing, but they were subject to the curse pronounced on the heretics, Marcionites and Messalians. Ask - and everyone says: I am an Orthodox Christian and have locked myself in a bad business. No, there is not only Judaism in them, but it is mixed with the heresy of the Messalians, which you will find in your rules. Priest Naum revealed this to me in detail... No matter what the Messalian errors are, they accept everything, they only deceive people with the Jewish decalogue, presenting themselves as pious. He asks to send to him the elders Paisius and Nil and books for advice about heretics, and speaks of the Easter number of years; in conclusion he again gives love advice to Joasaph. (Published in Reading General History, 1847). d) Regarding the same heretics, Gennady compiled an Easter calendar of holidays for 70 years, and sent it out during a district message to his flock (Tolstoy II, no. 195, 254; I, no. 63); He wrote a message about the same thing to the Council. (Tolstoy II, no. 254). d) Handwritten there remains a letter from Gennady, regarding the case of the Judaizers, to Prokhor, Bishop of Sarsk. (Description of Tolstoy’s manuscript, p. 261). f) The same heretics, as can be seen from the letter to Bishop Joasaph, prompted Gennady to take care of compiling a complete list of the Bible. His precious Bible, written in 1499 - to the Synod. bibliography; an excellent bibliographical and critical-philological review of it is in the Description. handwritten Synod. bib. M., 1855, pp. 1–164. Mr. Buslaev's grammatical review (Materials for historical writing, Moscow, 1855) included errors due to oversight. In Gennady's Bible we see: aa) in the ancient translation from Greek the New Testament, the Pentateuch, the books of Joshua, Judges, the books of the Kings, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job, 16 Prophets; the last three, starting with the Song of Songs, are extracted from the interpretations of the saints. text, although another equally ancient text of the Song of Songs is now known (Description of manuscript. Synod. pp. 197–199); bb) translated from Hebrew - the book of Esther; c) translated from the Vulgate - the books of Chronicles, three books of Ezra, the books of Nehemiah, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, two books of Maccabees; omissions in the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Esther, and Proverbs were translated from the same Vulgate; the prefaces to the books were also translated from Jerome's Vulgate, and some from the German Bible; d) the books are arranged in Vulgate order. Of Gennady's collaborators in this holy work, the translator Dmitry Gerasimov (§ 111) and the Dominican Veniamin (§ 108) are now known. g) Gennady’s letter to Metropolitan is a monument to pastoral zeal for spiritual enlightenment. Simon with the conviction of the need to establish theological schools (Historical Act. I, No. 104). h) The certificates issued to his sexton and sexton (in Legal Act No. 387, 388) are a monument to the deanery. With complete freedom of spirit, he objected to the opinion of Metropolitan Zosima about the bigamist cleric (Hist. Act. I, No. 101). i) His prayer to the saint is also known. Theotokos, compiled in 1497 (Canon of Serg. Lavra, No. 43). The Synodal Library contains his “Charter and other stories.” All the writings of St. Gennady's letters are distinguished by the peculiarity that, contrary to modern epistles, they are written in simple Russian speech, with the slightest admixture of church language. The difference between the nominative plural and the accusative is almost always observed; there are no forms of past Church Slavonic; expressions everywhere are simple - folk; “But clerks are stupid guys,” etc.; speech is interrupted by conversations. 108. Under Archbishop Gennady, the so-called fourth Novgorod Chronicle was compiled, ending in 1496 (Collected Chronicle IV, 1–165). Under 1384 a contemporary is visible in it, and under 1418 a contemporary speaks again; therefore, the fourth chronicle was compiled from notes from earlier times, with the addition of news from later ones. The same thing is shown in it by the fact that there are two pieces of news about many events. The synodal list of the Pskov Chronicle dates back to the same time, stopping at 1488. From the 15th century it contains news that is not in other lists of the Pskov Chronicle (Collected Chronicles V, 1–45). At the same time - a brief description of the Novgorod churches, published. in Description museum pp. 41–42. In 1491, Philip Petrov, a clerk, wrote a report to Archbishop Gennady about the arrival of Latin monks in Pskov and about the dispute between the Pskov priests and them (Ist. Act. I, No. 286). His essay on the Eighth Council, which he presented to the same archpastor, was published in the XIV volume of Ancient. vivliof. Probably at the end of 1490, together with the brother of Grand Duchess Sophia, Andrei, and with the ambassadors of the Grand Duke, who brought with them various artists from the southwest (Continued by Nestor, p. 317), Veniamin, a Slav by birth, an educated Dominican, arrived in Russia. In one note from 1491 it was noted: “and the priest Veniamin, who was a Slovenian by birth and a Latin by faith, spoke (about the time of the capture of Tsaryagrad)” (Description of music, p. 164). In 1493, Benjamin already lived in Novgorod and contributed to St. with his information. Gennady for the benefit of the church. In the complete list of the Pogodin Bible of the 15th century. at the end of the Books of Maccabees it is noted: “this book of Maccabees was translated from Latin into Russian in the first year of seven thousand (7001 = 1493) by the command of the lord, Rev. archbishop Gennadia from a certain husband is honest, a presbyter more than the number of the monastery of St. Domnika, named Veniamin, is a Slovenian by birth, teaches the Latin language and grammar, and partly teaches the Greek language and Fryazhsk” (Description of the manuscript. Synod. Bibl. p. 128). 109. Simon, Metropolitan of Moscow 1496–1511, two of his edifying messages to Perm are known - one to the clergy, with the conviction to fulfill the duties of the title, the other to the laity, against the superstitions of paganism (Ist. Act. No. 212), - and a message to Pskov with a definition about widowed priests (Act. Exp. I, No. 383). He also owns an excellent teaching to the clergy (Ist. Act. I, No. 109), written around 1499 in pure Church Slavonic language. He also wrote a farewell letter (Act. Exp. No. 346); but it is not known now. The certificate awarded to his reverend. Cornelius of Komelsky was published by Muravyov (Russian Thebaid, pp. 60, 61). His signature is in Pogodin's Album. M. 1856. Sergius the Old, an elder of the Sergius Monastery, in 1498 wrote a prayer to St. Sergius of Radonezh (Tsar's No. 112). 110. Georgy Skripitsa, a Rostov priest, submitted a written objection to the cathedral in 1503 against the prohibition of widowed priests from officiating (published in Reading General History, 1847) - a thorough objection. “Let those who do not keep their widowhood be subject to prohibition,” he wrote. Why excommunicate without guilt those who are already punished by the judgment of God? Is it correct that a widowed priest, having taken monastic vows, serves in cities and villages, but the same priest, without having taken monastic vows, cannot serve either in the desert or in the city? George points out to the cathedral another subject to which more and more strict attention should be paid. “Gentlemen, priests! Faithful people are not governed spiritually: you supervise the church according to the custom of earthly rulers, through boyars, butlers, tiuns, week workers, and porters, and this is for your own profit, and not according to the rank of priesthood. It is worthy for you to shepherd the church with prudent priests, and not with worldly armies.” This last vote was not without consequences. At the Council of 1551 Significant restrictions were made on the power of secular officials in spiritual affairs and clergy were introduced to participate in spiritual management. 111. Dimitri Gerasimov, translator of the embassy court, who was ambassador to Rome in 1526. According to Jovius (De legatione Basilii magni principis Moscoviae), with whom Gerasimov spoke in Rome and with whom he arrived in Moscow, Demetrius studied in Livonia, knew the Latin language well, was sent by his sovereign to Sweden, Denmark, Prussia and Vienna, had a lot of information, a sound mind and pleasant manners. In 1526 he was 60 years old. Gerasimov was a translator under Maxim the Greek when he translated the Greek interpretation into the psalter. He himself translated from Latin: in 1501, the work of Nicholas Delira against Jewish unbelief (Tsarsky No. 461); in 1503: reproof against the Jews (ibid.). The translation of these two works was useful during the turmoil caused by the Judaizers. It is likely that Gerasimov himself translated the work of Joseph, a baptized Jew, about the Jews who were baptized in Africa, known from the lists of the 16th century (Tolstoy II, no. 68; Tsarsky, no. 169). In 1502, Gerasimov translated the inscriptions of the psalms from German, as Pogodin’s Psalter says (Moskvityanin 1850, No. 9). Given Gerasimov’s knowledge and his closeness to Archbishop Gennady, it is more than likely that he was the most active collaborator with the saint in compiling a complete list of the Bible (§ 107). Translations from Latin of some biblical books and prefaces by Jerome, of course, belong to him. In 1535, already in old age, he completed the translation from Latin of the Explanatory Psalter of Brunon (ruler of the Sergius Lavra). All these works of his for the Holy Scripture served as a defense for the Orthodox against the Judaizers, who boasted before the Orthodox of their best knowledge of the Holy Scripture according to its best copies. Translation of Brunon's interpretation, or actually a selection of interpretations from Jerome, Augustine, Cassiodorus, St. Gregory and Bede, was also important because it introduced him to the best interpreters of the Western Church. The interpretation of the psalms is followed by a notice about the ancient translators of the Bible, where it is noted: “The leader, even in the books of the Old Testament (i.e., in translations) lies are revealed, the mother-in-law belongs to the ancient Hebrew books, because the Old Testament was first written in the Hebrew language. Ashe ubo in the books of the New Testament, - mother-in-law befits the books of the Greek.” Gerasimov is known for two more messages to Archbishop Gennady - about alleluia and about the white hood (Description of music 166:779). Regarding his letter about the white hood, the council of 1667 determined: “by command the scripture was written from Rome to Gennady, Archbishop of Novgorod from Demetrius the interpreter about the white hood and about others, but no one has faith in this scripture, even if it is false and wrong.” However, the council declares false only that the white hood was given to the Roman Bishop Sylvester by Emperor Constantine. 112. Dosifei, the Solovetsky abbot, according to him, came to the Solovetsky monastery during the life of the Venerable. Zosima and lived with Rev. Herman. At the request of Archbishop Gennady, he wrote notes on the lives of the reverend fathers. This is what he says in the afterword to the notes. Rev. Maxim the Greek writes that Dositheus “wrote not cleverly, but with kind words, but as if for the sake of remembrance... as if it were possible for those living there to speak and read” (Bible. General history 46, M., 1846, No. 12, p. 185). In addition to his life, Dositheus wrote a word of praise to St. Zosima (Tsarsky No. 96, 180). The books donated to us are still intact in the Solovetsky Monastery: Apostle (No. 27), Prophetic books (No. 694), Commentary on the Psalter (No. 1044), Service Book (No. 1024), Catechumen of Cyril of Jerusalem 1493 (No. 478), Margaret 1491 (No. 491), Kozma of the presbyter against the word Bogomilov (No. 856), Collection written in Novgorod according to his will (No. 858). 113. “In the summer of 7011 (1503), the lives of the founder of the Solovetsky Zosima and Savvaty were written down by Metropolitan of All Rus' Spiridon: I was then executed in the country of Bela Ozero, in the monastery of the Most Rev. Mother of God of Ferapontovo, I was forced to dry land by a certain monk in the name of the Solovetsky monastery. Dosithea, former abbot. And I will give all the confessions in detail and the written information for my memory; “And this gathering, as much as possible, helps God” (Tsarsky No. 96 “80; Tolstoy II, No. 67, 221). In 1538, Abbot Vassian supplemented the lives of Zosima and Savvaty with a description of miracles, and in 1548, Abbot Philip, later St. Metropolitan, recorded more new miracles (Bible. General history No. 43 Tsarsk No. 130). 114. Pamphilus, abbot of the Elizarov Monastery, in 1505, in a letter to the Pskovites, describes disorderly festivities - remnants of paganism, and reproaches the authorities for allowing them (ed. in Reading General History 1846, mixed 4 No.). 115. Joseph Soltan, Archimandrite of Slutsk, 1494–1498 Bishop of Smolensk, from 1499 Metropolitan of Kiev († 1519), wrote the rules of the cathedral of 1509 (ed. in 1 volume. Historical act. No. 289). His inventory of the Slutsk Monastery is interesting (Act. Zap. R. I, No. 115). His farewell letter is from Tolstoy, 11, No. 68). 116. Rev. Nil Maikov, hermit Sorsky. In the Cyril monastery, he used the instructions of the intelligent and strict elder Paisius Yaroslavov. Then he traveled to the east to see spiritual life in experiments, and was, in his words, “on St. Mount Athos, in the countries of Constantinople and other places.” In 1490, upon returning from the east, he was present at the council against the Judaizing heretics (Soph. vrem. II. 237), and in the case of the same St. Gennady, in 1492, wanted to talk with him personally (§ 106). One contemporary writes: “Nile was in the Holy Mountain; the great prince held them (Paisius and Nila) in great honor. And when was the council on widow priests and deacons (1503) held? Elder Nil began to say that there would be no villages near the monasteries, but that the monks would live in the deserts and feed on handicrafts, and with him the Belozersk hermits.” Volokolamsk abbot Joseph was of a contrary opinion and his voice was respected by the Grand Duke. For these discussions, Rev. Neil came to Moscow from the Sorsk Hermitage, where from his own experience he learned the high advantages of a serene life in a hermitage, far from the heavy worries of earthly property. He partly reveals the history of his inner life in a letter to the prince monk Cassian, at the latter’s urgent request: “Now I am writing to you, showing myself; Your love according to God compels me to do this and makes me crazy to write to you about myself. When we lived together with you in the monastery, you yourself learned that I was moving away from worldly connections and, as much as I could, according to my strength, I acted according to the divine scripture, although due to my laziness I did not have time. But we need to act simply and not according to chance, but according to divine scripture and the tradition of the holy fathers. Wasn’t my departure from the monastery (Kirillov) for the sake of spiritual benefit? By her, for her sake... After my departure (to Palestine) and wandering, I returned to the monastery (Kirillov), and outside it, setting up a cell for myself, I lived as long as I could. And now he has moved far from the monastery (15 miles away); By the grace of God I found a place in my thoughts that was not very accessible to people, as you yourself saw. Now I am especially engaged in testing the spiritual scriptures, and first of all I test the commandments of the Lord and their interpretation and traditions of the apostles, then the lives and instructions of the holy fathers; I think about all this, and what, according to my reasoning, I find that is pleasing to God and useful for my soul, I copy it for myself, thereby I learn, and in that I find life and breath for myself... If it happens to me that I should do something: when I don’t find it in scripture, I put it aside for a while until I find it. I don’t dare do anything of my own free will and according to my own reasoning. And if anyone cleaves to me through love, I advise him to do the same.” In his dying testament, commanding his disciples to throw his body in the desert, to be devoured by wild beasts, “having sinned much before God,” or to bury it in a pit of dishonor, the monk says: “It is a shame for me, as great as my strength is, to be unequal to the honor and glory of this age, as in this life, so in death.” “In the summer of May 7016 (1508), on the 7th day, the Nile, the elder of the Soloar desert, passed away”: this is how to say the ancient news, instructed after the writings of St. Nila. How is the life of Rev. Nile’s life was special; until then there had never been such a work in the Russian Church as the Rules of the monastery life of St. Nila. The Rule, which consists of: a preface, eleven instructions and an afterword, is an excellent work for its deep understanding of the innermost spiritual life, where trust in the instructions of ascetics is preceded by trust in the word of God and thoughts flow, tested by long life experience. Here is the content of the Charter: preface on mental activity; Chapter 1: about the difference in mental warfare; 2nd: about the fight against thoughts; 3rd: how to strengthen yourself in feat against thoughts; 4th: the content of the entire feat; 5th: about eight thoughts; 6th: fight with each of them; 7th: the meaning of remembering death and judgment; 8th: about tears; 9th: about keeping contrition; 10th: about death for the world; 11th: do everything in due time. In the afterword, Rev. Neil says with what intentions he proposed his Charter. The predominant subject of instruction by Rev. The Nile serves the innermost spiritual life. Mental prayer, he says, is higher than physical prayer; bodily work is a leaf, and internal, mental work is the fruit. He who prays only with his lips, but neglects his mind, prays to the air, for God listens to the mind. Exercise in inner prayer brings a person to a higher spiritual state, in which the spirit does not even have prayer, movement, or autocracy, but is guided by another force. On this path, in addition to prayer, a struggle with thoughts is necessary. Rev.'s instructions The Nile about thoughts contains deep psychological observations of the actions of the soul. He decomposes the work of the soul into the smallest, barely perceptible parts; shows how a thought gradually passes from a sinless thought into an action that is more and more guilty. Regarding external activities, Rev. The Nile prescribes complete non-covetousness for the hermit, simplicity in everything, so that he does not allow him to have silver items or jewelry in the church; He orders us to acquire what is necessary for life only through the labor of our hands and repeats the words of the Apostle: if anyone does not want to do it, let him eat. Rev. Neil often cites the words of the fathers, but more often than others the words of Gregory of Sinai and Simeon the New Theologian; about the first time he says: “Behold, this blessed father of all spiritual people, following their order of prayer, commands us to take diligent care.” Charter Rev. Nila published in Part V. East. Hier. pp. 214–336, but faulty; somewhat more serviceable recent edition: Rev. Our father Nil of Sorsky is said to have been a disciple.” M. 1849 Other works of the great father of the Russian Church remain in manuscript. These are: a) “Message from the great elder Nile the hermit to his brother, Prince Cassian, who asked him about his thoughts. This, of course, is the Prince of Mavnuksky, who arrived in Russia with Sophia, was a boyar under the Rostov Archbishop Joasaph, then lived with him in the Ferapontov Monastery and finally died in his Uglich monastery in 1504. The letter to him begins like this: “You have inspired a commendable desire, O beloved.” b) The same elder’s 2nd message to the monk about benefits.” It begins: “Your shrine speaks mouth to mouth.” Contains answers to four questions. c) “The message of the same great elder Nile to his brother who asked him to “write to him for the benefit of the soul.” It begins: “Your Scripture, O Father, you wrote to me.” This is the same message from which we quoted the saint’s words about himself. Handwritten Moscow spirit. Academy, No. 175, called Eldership, in addition to these three messages, we also find d) “Message from the Divine Scriptures in a father to a grieving brother.” It begins: “For the last time I imagine your brother, I pray for Christ.” The epistle was written to a foreigner who came “from parents honored by the lordship of the rank” and who took monastic orders in the Belozersk monastery, but who fell under persecution along with his mentor: “then bring sin upon us for the sake of our temptation and sorrow and imprisonment.” This was written to the same Prince Cassian, to whom the first letter was written, and not to Prince Vassian Patrikeev: the latter lived permanently in the Simonov Monastery and was exiled from Simonov in 1531 to the Joseph Monastery, where he died. f) In the same hand. The messages are followed by the will of the Rev. Nila. The first three messages were written after the Nilov Charter in handwritten form. Sergius Lavra (No. 2), painted by Suhonov, and hand-drawn. Tolstoy (II, 341). Handwritten Tsarsky (No. 274), in addition to the first three epistles, it is written: No. “The same Elder Nile about the monks circling for the sake of acquisitions.” The same instruction is in Rumyants. museum (Description p. 628). It is very unfortunate that the messages of Rev. Nila remain unreleased. 117. Innokenty, from the family of boyars Okhlebinny, together with Rev. Nilom traveled around the east and lived with him in a hermitage on the Sora River, and then, with the blessing of St. elder, founded a hostel in honor of the Forerunner in the dense Komelsky forest. Died after 1508, St. The ascetic left behind a “Testament of the Brethren.” It was not fully published in East. Hier. IV, 30; more fully in Tsarsky No. 277. His Canon is Rev. Neil (Description of music. 595). Brief notes about Rev. Nile, together with the Testament of Innocent, is in hand. Moscow spiritual acad. No. 175. 118. Gregory, monk of the Suzdal monastery, Venerable. Euphemia, lives and services were written in memory of St. Euthymius of Suzdal († 1407), Rev. Euphrosyne of Suzdal († around 1250), St. John Bishop of Suzdal (1374). This is what the cleric Anania says in his notes. In the life of St. John Gregory says: “I began to test and question diligently those who lead about the life of the saint; “Behold, when I heard and understood from those who told me, my father told me the truth.” These words show that Gregory wrote about John when he could still hear oral traditions about him. Varlaam, bishop since 1577. Suzdal, in the description of miracles by St. Euphrosyne says that he found in the Makhritsky monastery the life of Euphrosyne, “written by a certain monk Gregory obit. Mil. Spasa Evfimieva, after the death of the former abbot Savvaty; The abbot of the city of Suzdal is of the same age and has been obstinate for many years to record miracles.” If the life lay for many years before 1577. in the Makhritsa monastery, with Savvaty and after him; it is clear that it was compiled long before 1577; Moreover, Bishop Varlaam of Suzdal calls Gregory “a certain monk,” but this is not what they call a modern compatriot. Therefore, it must be assumed that Gregory wrote no later than 1510. Stroev dates the monk’s works to 1558, solely on the basis that in the description of the miracles of St. Euphrosyne had one miracle in 1558; but this circumstance serves as new confirmation that Gregory wrote his life earlier than this year; otherwise he himself would have recorded the miracle of 1558, while the miracles of St. Euphrosyne is described by a different hand. Stroev’s mistake is due to the fact that he did not see to whom the description of the miracles of St. Euphrosyne. To the Synod. bib. There is also an essay by the same monk Gregory: the life of St. Kozma, who founded at the end of the 15th century. monastery on the river Yakhroma. 119. Joseph, in the world Ivan Sanin, from the age of twenty a novice of St. Paphnutia and then his successor, but not for long; leaving the Borovskaya monastery, where they did not want to accept hostels, he travels to study spiritual life through monasteries and monasteries; in 1479 he founded the Volokolamsk monastery and left it blooming with spiritual life († September 9, 1515). Rev. Joseph was gifted with an extensive and strong memory: in the Cyril Monastery, not having a single book in his cell, he performed the monastic rule from memory for a year and a half, read the Psalter, the Gospel, the Apostle, as prescribed in the charter. Hence, with a bright mind, he possessed extensive information. His writings against heretics, his charter, his epistles, represent his mind as an extensive living library of fathers, cathedral rules, historical monuments. He loved enlightenment both for himself and for others: manuscripts written by himself, manuscripts written on his orders, are distinguished by their inner dignity; some of them are still intact. In his monastery there are kept the following written by him: “The Skete Collection”, with paternal instructions on spiritual life (No. 94), the Lenten Triodion of 1490 (No. 65), the Psalter (No. 47); according to the inventory of 1573, his own letters were also shown: Climacus, Gregory the Theologian, two Gospels. According to his will, the following were written: in 1490, Teachings on Sundays and holidays (No. 7), Interpretation of the Gospel of Luke and John (No. 8), The Pentateuch of 1494. (No. 385), books of Joshua, Judges, Kings, Esther, Chronicles, Judith (No. 401, 387), where the text of the book of Esther follows the Hebrew text, and not the translation of 70 interpretations; Ladder 1510 (No. 43), Isaac the Syrian 1513 (No. 40), Interpretation 1514 (No. 14). To the Synod. bib. there is a complete copy of the Bible written in the Joseph Monastery (No. 21). In the Bible Sergius Lavra 16 Prophets with interpretation: “You have vouchsafed me to write books in Cyrillic... by the will of our honest father, Abbot Joseph... In the summer of 6697 (1489).” From the works of Rev. Joseph, without a doubt, the most important of all are his writings related to the denunciation of the Judaizers. Such is his Enlightener. Here is its content: in the preface the history of heresy; 1st word about the Holy Trinity; 2nd, about the coming of the Messiah in the person of Jesus Christ; 3rd, about the meaning of the law of Moses; 4th, about the incarnation of the Son of God, as possible, necessary and worthy of divinity; 5th – 7th, about icon veneration; 8th - 10th, about the second coming of Christ, or that the time of coming is unknown to anyone, and if there are assumptions about this, then these are the arbitrariness of human thought, and not the teaching of the church; 11th, word on monasticism; 12th, about the fact that the heretical curse is not valid: 13th – 16th, about how to deal with heretics. The 15th word begins like this: “Many words have been spoken before about the Novgorod herits; Now you need to impute and decide about this.” The 16th word mentions the conciliar definition of 1504. This shows that the Enlightener wrote in parts; and this can be seen even more clearly from the fact that three words about icon veneration, or the 5th - 7th, of the Enlightener were sent in a letter to a certain monk icon painter and were originally written for him (letter published in the Reading General History of 1847). The Enlightener of Joseph is an excellent essay. In the words about the Messiah and the Holy Trinity, thoughts are expressed as clearly as they are thoughtful; the words of Holy Scripture are cited and explained so thoroughly that the most captious criticism should be silent. The presentation of the Enlightener is lively, animated by piety and bright thoughts; the syllable is clean and correct. Unfortunately, the Enlightener still remains in manuscript (Tolstoy II, no. 254). Quite a detailed presentation of Joseph's dogmatic thoughts in Ist. heresies pp. 145–170, in Add. to creativity father 1849 pp. 287–307. b) In the case of the Judaizers. Joseph wrote several letters. Two epistles (one to Niphon, Bishop Suzd., and the other to Archimander Mitrofan) were recently published on Thursday. General ist. 1847; excellent message to the archimandrite. Vassian published in the XIV part. Dr. vivliof.; message to Grand Duke Vasily in Dr. vivliof. (Part XVI, p. 523, 524; Tolstoy II, No. 68; another to him against heretics (Tolstoy II, No. 68, 341; Zvenigor. mon. No. 84); letter to monks about the punishment of heretics in the Bible. Moscow. spirit. acad. No. 171; message to Grand Duke John. In the latter he writes: “For God’s sake, sir, and the Most Pure Mother of God, perhaps, take care and providence for the divine churches and for the Orthodox faith of Christians.” Then he shows in examples how relief for heretics entailed the spread of heresies and unrest in the state. “We rejoiced,” he says here, at your pious zeal against the heretics; but by sending them to monasteries, you only bring benefit to the laity and cause disorder to the monks. At all, sir, councils, after the curse, heretics were sent to prison and imprisoned. Whoever would like to repent can repent in prison: in sorrows, in troubles, in bonds, God especially hears those who repent” (Tolstoy II, no. 68). St. Joseph wanted to protect his monastery with certain rules, so that self-will would not introduce his customs into it, to the detriment of spiritual life. In this spirit he wrote: “The Rules of the Monastery”, in 14 chapters. According to the Volokol list. Abbot Nifont, the first 9 chapters, after the preface, contain the Charter in the form in which it was given in the first years of Joseph’s management of the monastery; Chapter 10 is a response to those who said why the Charter was written? The beautiful description of monastic life placed here, as Joseph saw it, during his travels in various Russian monasteries, was published in Readings. General ist. 1848 Chapter 11 that the abbot must be a teacher; 12–14 ch. contain: a) a spiritual letter from “the sinful and evil abbot Joseph to his father and brothers who want to hear briefly about everything written here”; b) rules, which, as can be seen from the content, were written in the last years of Joseph’s life, in addition to the previous ones (Tolstoy II, No. 68; Tsar’s No. 185; Volokol. manuscript. II). This also includes: a) St. Joseph’s order to the elder about the monastery charter; b) An order to the monastery elders not to hold intoxicating drinks. (Ed. in Additional documents to the historical act. No. 211, 212.) Rev. Joseph wrote many edifying messages to various people. These are his two messages to Prince Yuri Ivanovich Dmitrovsky: one with the conviction to feed the people during famine (Addition to the historical act. I, No. 216), the other about the same thing and against carnal uncleanness (Volok. No. 118); to the nobleman who starves and strips his slaves (Addition to the historical act. I, No. 213); four messages about penances to the nobles of his spiritual children; an extensive message about a young man who took off his hair, with rules; message to the archimandrite Macarius about the monk Guria; a message to the widow princess, who gave a donation for the 40-day commemoration of her children and then complained; a message to a certain brother about keeping the commandments for the kingdom of Christ; message about nobles; a message to a nobleman prohibiting the tonsure of his slaves; prayer before the prince for his servant who took monastic vows (Tolstoy II, No. 68; Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 171). Let us write out his beautiful and unpublished message to the nobleman. “Divine Scripture, writes the venerable one, commands everyone who loves Christ to take care of their servants, as well as their children, and to always discipline them to do good deeds, to follow God’s saved path... Since we are all created by the hand of God, and we are all one flesh, and we have all been baptized with one baptism, we have all been redeemed by the blood of Christ, and we are all in the hand of the Lord... The Divine Scripture commands, sir, every God-loving person to give tithes to God from their property and from their children and slaves, if anyone desires to work for the Lord God, to leave worldly delights. Otherwise, sir, out of many slaves among you for many years, only one wanted to work for the Lord God. And that’s insulting to you too, sir. But you know, sir, even if we live, if we dominate, if we enjoy, we will die little by little and the imams will give an answer about deeds and about words and about thoughts. And you, sir, even if you yourself do not want this path, do not forbid him who wants it, especially his slave, but force him and teach him to do good deeds, especially to live as a monk. And for this sake, receive from the Lord forgiveness of sins and the enjoyment of the kingdom of heaven. If he gives perishable wealth to the Lord God, he will receive the kingdom of heaven for this: how much more if he brings an immortal soul to the Lord God, the whole world is not worthy of it. And you will think something, sir, that having taken monastic vows, they will begin to live differently from the way the monk was commanded to live: but, sir, for this you will not only be untormented by God, but you will also receive a perfect reward, the Lord God will impute it to you as a fragrant sacrifice. Otherwise, sir, if you think of not being baptized by anyone else, you won’t have to cut your hair. That, sir, started from the beginning. The Savior had 12 disciples, 72 good ones, and many disciples who followed Him and ran away from Him, saying: His word is cruel, who can listen to Him? And Judas will betray Him to Judea”... The oppression and violence done by the Volokolamsk prince to the monastery of St. Joseph, they lured the Rev. Joseph had an unpleasant relationship with the Novgorod Archbishop Serapion. Due to these troubles, Joseph had to write messages to various people to explain the actual course of the matter. the correctness of their actions and the definition of conciliar. These are the messages: a) “to M. Simon, if Archbishop Serapion excommunicates him”; b) a message to a nobleman (Ivan Ivanovich Golovin), condemning him for his quarrel with the archbishop. Serapion; hand-drawn Tolstoy II, No. 68, Golovin’s message to which Joseph responded is also preserved; c) message to Ivan Ivanovich Tretyakov; the contents of this message, showing the matter from both the historical and legal sides, are described in detail in Reading. General ist. 1847; d) to Boris Vasilievich Kutuzov (ed. in the XIV part. Vivliof.); e) a letter to Vasily Andreevich Chelyadin, written under Metropolitan Varlaam; in it, Joseph asks Chelyadin to protect him from accusations of Novatianism, proposed in writing by the elder Prince Vassian; f) a message to the Grand Duke Vasily, where he writes that the Grand Duke proposed to him through a monk about reconciliation with Serapion: “and now, sir, my thought: how God and the Most Pure Mother of God will put into your mind, sir: as you, sir, command, and so I hit with my forehead.” When was this message written? Is it at the beginning of the unhappy dispute with Serapion, or at the end? Metropolitan Simon, before his death in 1511, summoned Archbishop Serapion to Moscow and asked for his forgiveness; and the Grand Duke did the same in 1516 (Karamz. VI, pr. 383,370). In the life of Joseph it is said: “Then Joseph was informed to Serapion and, having learned the truth, he increased his venerable humility and multiplied his first love.” Dositheus says: “When you come,” Joseph reconciled with Serapion. But from the letter to Chelyadin we see that even after Simon († 1511), under Metropolitan Varlaam, there were still displeasures. It remains to be assumed that reconciliation did not occur before 1512. All these messages can be seen in Volok. handwritten XVI century, now Tolstoy, II, No. 68. In conclusion, we note that since the Monk Joseph did not know the Greek language, and yet in his writings he cites passages from almost all the great teachers of the Greek Church, and even from many not very important writers; then his works testify to how rich Slavic literature was in his time with translated works. In his letter to Tretyakov, he cites, among other things, words from Nikon the Montenegrin, calling him “St. Nikon." But Nikon the Montenegrin, who lived in the 11th century, was not canonized by the church, and Rev. Joseph probably took him for the same person as St. Nikon the Armenian, who was confused with Montenegrin by some of the critics of the West. 120. Dosifei Toporkov, brother of the famous Vassian Bishop of Kolomna, monk and nephew of the Venerable. Joseph, wrote the funeral eulogy for St. Joseph. The Word was written shortly after the death of St. Joseph, about whom he says: “in our days came into existence.” Its beginning: “Elma is surrounded by every verbal nature.” (Synod. Bible No. 927). In the inventory of 1652 in the Joseph Monastery, the “Psalter letter of the monk Dosifei Josephov brother” is shown (Description of books of degrees. mon. No. 2138. M. 1848). Savva Cherny, monk Volok. and from 1546 Bishop of Krutitsky, a student of Rev. Joseph, described the life of his mentor Joseph in somewhat more detail than Dosifei. “And all is not from the glorious ones, in the borders and in the city of Volok Lamsky,” this is how Savva begins his description. (Tsarsky No. 125). There is also a third description of Joseph’s life, also compiled shortly after the death of the Venerable. Joseph. It is not known who wrote it, but the writer knew Joseph well, and although his description is shorter than Sava’s, it introduces him closer to the spirit and monastic exploits of Joseph. The author writes, among other things: “They decorated the monasteries with good customs, just as the great Sergius became friends with himself, and with his disciples. And Paphnutius studied with Nikita, who was also a student of that Sergius. But according to Father Sergius, little by little the company began to tend towards Lavra as usual. The Kirilov Monastery is the only society that has given its charter to itself without neglecting, thinking that I loved Joseph dearly.” This life is placed in the Menea of ​​Macarius on September 9th. and in Volok. handwritten Nil Polenov, a descendant of the princes of Smolensk, who served at the court of Prince Volotsky and then Prince George of Dmitrov, became a monk at the monastery of St. Joseph (ruler of the life of Joseph); but soon, out of love for solitude, he retired to Sorsky for a hermitage life. The enmity that the strong monk, Prince Vassian, harbored against Joseph's disciples based on his convictions regarding the monastic estates and other objects, exposed Nile and his desert comrade Dionysius of Zvenigorod to various troubles. Things got to the point that, by order of the Grand Duke, the monastery cells of Nil and Dionysius were broken, and Nil and Dionysius were forced to live in the Cyril Monastery. This was around 1509. “When Elder No. Dionysius, Prince Zvenigorodsky and Elder Nil Polev were in Kirilov in disgrace: she told us that then in great need she endured much sorrow,” writes the author of the letter about enmity. During these sorrows, Neil wrote two letters to Elder Herman in defense of Joseph and his own. “You say,” Neil wrote, that we must humble ourselves and ask for forgiveness from our Archbishop Serapion... But think that the matter was done by our father abbot not in a corner, but in the capital - the mother of cities - before the patriarchal throne of the entire Russian Metropolis... If you say that the patriarch and the entire cathedral, out of fear of the tsar, allowed weakness and judged wrongly - go and denounce the tsar and the entire cathedral. If you, my lord, are trying to drive us out of these holy places: then when God is with us, who is against us?.. We left our fatherland, our land, in the spirit of our father and brothers and peace, and instead of Egypt we settled in the Belozersk country, deciding to endure in an unknown land all the sorrows and troubles from unknown people. And now we are ready to endure, with trust in God, if, moreover, arm yourself with us. We see and understand that for this reason you are torturing our father Gennady, our confessor; you say to him: your communion is not theirs. Think, my lord, what kind of fire you kindle on your head: you judge priests, teach them in such things that you and I should not even talk about...” In the second letter, responding to the apology of Herman, who felt his injustice, he adds: “I write to you so strictly out of respect for your spiritual father and my sincere mentor, for his life, exploits, right and pure faith: I cannot tolerate either from you or from your advisers, such a hiss (Add. to the creative father. X, 524–526). 121. Serapion, from 1506 hegumen of the Sergius Lavra, archbishop of Novgorod. Because Abbot Joseph of Volokolamsk, who was in the Novgorod diocese, without his knowledge and permission transferred his monastery to the jurisdiction of the Grand Duke and Metropolitan, he excommunicated Joseph from the church. Grand Duke John took this as an insult to his power, and Serapion, summoned to Moscow in May 1509, was imprisoned in the Androniyev Monastery, and was even banned; but then he was allowed to live in peace in the Sergius Lavra. Purified by sorrows and deeds, he reposed holy here in 1516. In his justification, he wrote a letter to the Metropolitan. Simon, where he boldly defended his cause and proved the injustice of others by the rules of the church. Message to Novgorod. Soph. bib. The life of Saint Serapion was described, in all likelihood, by his disciple, the abbot of the Sergius Lavra (1515–1520) Jacob (ruler of the Sergius Lavra). Nile, Bishop of Tver († 1521), there is a known letter to a nobleman about panagia and artos (Description of music. 520) - an insignificant composition. Some interest is found in his letter to Vasily Andreevich Korobov, who was going to Constantinople, where the donations assigned for Patriarch Pachomius are named (Vivliof. VI). 122. Philotheus, an elder of the Pskov Eleazar Monastery, wrote two letters to Pskov to the pious and intelligent clerk Misyur Munekhin, the governor of Pskov (1510–1528). In one thing he denounced the belief in the influence of the stars, which came from the dark west, under the guise of the tempting science of astronomy: God, he says, controls the fate of the world and people, not the stars; otherwise why would evil people who do evil under the influence of the stars be subjected to torment in eternity? He further notes that there is no difference in counting the years from the creation of the world or from the birth of Christ, and turning to the Latins, he says that in vain they are confusing the fate of Constantinople: two Romes have fallen, but there is a third Rome, faithful to Christ - Moscow, and it will not fall as long as it is faithful. In another letter, dated 1522, he reproaches the Pskov leaders for not allowing priests to confess and commune with St. secrets of those dying from ulcers (Addition to the historical act. I, No. 23). He also wrote the story about the Chira Icon of the Mother of God, a canon for this icon and another canon for Gabriel, Prince of Pskov (Description of music 593:597). 123. Doctor Francis Skaryna, a native of Polotsk, translated into Lithuanian-Russian from the Vulgate and published the Old Testament in Bohemian Prague 1517–1519, at the expense of the Vilna councilor Bogdan Onkov. In the afterword to the book of Esther, he says: “the holy priest Jerome or Erasim the presbyter, who was after the incarnation of the Word of God 400 years ago, put it into Latin from the Chaldean, Hebrew and Greek in full; what he does not write in the Jewish books, he put to the end, without disturbing them, especially, and divided them into chapters. I will inherit the same man of light.” That Skaryna translated the Bible from the Vulgate is easy to notice when comparing his text with the text of the Vulgate, to which he is faithful throughout, while differing from the Greek text (see Sakharov let. No. 10). Pogodin has books of the Prophets that hitherto remained unknown (Moskvit. 1844, No. 5). Skaryna published the Old Testament in parts, each book separately, for example. the book of Job, Proverbs, etc., and to each he added his own preface, afterword, and contents of the chapters. The same (based on the Vulgate text) translation of the Apostle was published by him in Vilna in 1525. In the preface to the Monthly Book, which was added, together with the regulations for the readings of the Gospel and the Apostle, to the publication of the Apostle, Skaryna writes that he translated “all the books of the Bible of the Old and New Testaments.” But his printed Gospel has not yet been found. The psalter, book of hours, 7 canons, 8 akathists, six days (services for the six days of the week), short calendars and Paschal were published by him in Vilna in 1525, in his own translation (Sakharov let. No. 13, 14). These books constituted one in the publication - the first printing attempt of the following Psalter. The table of contents of the book says: “in this small travel book, the essence is briefly laid out in a row: the Psalter... The Book of Hours, having a night and day service, Matins, Hours, Mass, Great and Small Compline... Akathists, the Sixth Day... Secular... Paschal." 124. Alexander, founder and abbot of the Svirsky monastery, saint († 1533). His spiritual charter in I volume Ist. act. 195, 196. No later than 1515, the life of St. Martinian Belozersky. Description, with a lot of information about modern teachers. Martinian events, ends with information about the discovery of the relics of the monk in 1514 (director Serg. Lavra). 125. Arkady, an elder, in 1538 wrote an essay against the Latins, where he spoke about the Council of Florence and Metropolitan Isidore. It is placed in the Metropolitan's Menaion. Macarius on July 31st and at Tsarskoye No. 425. 126. Daniel, during his lifetime, Rev. Joseph was elected abbot of Volokolamsk. The life of St. John speaks about his election. Joseph: “having loved everything in the elder’s advice, loving poverty and being in work and fasting and in prayers and not loving idle talk, she is called Daniel, according to the advert of the Ryazan man, who told about him that he wants to enter another monastery to become an abbess.” From this description it is clear that Karamzin erroneously said that Daniil was about 30 years old when he was elected metropolitan. But from this same image one can also see a weak side in Daniel’s soul - the search for power and primacy, which harmed him so much in governing the church. Daniel was metropolitan 1522–1539, and, having abandoned the see, lived in the Volokolamsk monastery, where he died. His works are known: a) Collection of moral instructions in 16 words (manufactured by Tsarsky No. 676; Moscow Spiritual Academician). Here Daniel owns only the beginnings and endings of words; everything else is taken from various Greek works, sometimes forged. b) Messages: from the abbot to Prince Yuri Ivanovich (Tolstoy II, No. 68); Metropolitan - to Dionysius of Zvenigorod about the benefits of sorrows (ed. in I volume. Historical act. No. 293); a message about love and humility, written in January 1539 in Moscow (Volok. manuscript No. 290); message about unclean thoughts (Volok. No. 118); answer to the one who asked about his health: “You have known from many years and time my weakness... but now I am especially weak in three ways: in my head, in my insides, in my legs, and from these there is much pain and sadness and oppression, impoverishment of meaning and tooth disease and exhaustion and the light of the eyes, diminishment of strength, exhaustion and impoverishment of faithful friends, the strength of faith has disappeared, my relatives have become estranged, my family various slander and enmity have multiplied” (Volok. 290). In his teaching to the Moscow cathedral clergy, among other things, he reproaches the clergy for participating in secular pleasures: “they mock and play the gusli, zomra and relish, and to the same grain also makhmits (chess) and tavlesma” (Volok. No. 283). Of the 13 moralizing messages located in Novgorod. Sofiysk bib. and in Rumyantsev (No. 89), the latter, to the Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich, praising the prince, strongly reproaches his servants for various vices, and especially for sodomy; in one of two letters to a certain bishop (2 and 3), the metropolitan says: “we, beloved ones, have been chosen for a good deed: to give the hungry and thirsty the bread of the teachings of divine words, but not to compose them from our own mind, but as we received them from Christ God, the saving commandments, from His holy apostles of tradition, from the God-bearing father teachers of our teaching and instruction... For everything that you do and say, have testimony from St. scriptures." It is a pity that Daniel’s debates with Elder Vassian and with Maxim the Greek (ed. in Reading General History, 1847, No. 7 and 9) do not confirm that Daniel always correctly understood Holy Scripture and the spirit of the teachers of the church. This debate is a sad monument to the short-sighted understanding of faith and passions that decided, at all costs, to accuse their accusers. Daniel’s signature in Pogodin’s Album, M., 1853. 127. Rev. Corniliy, the son of a court boyar, in the 13th year retired to the Belozersky monastery, where, after labors of obedience, he was engaged in copying books; then he wandered around Russia and spent some time with the wise Archbishop Gennady. In the dense Komel forest he lived alone for a long time, until little by little zealots of piety began to gather to him. Already in the 19th year of his stay in forest solitude, the first church was erected. Strict with himself, the reverend, teaching the brethren, did not denounce anyone personally, but spoke only as if about himself. The feeder of an entire country during a famine, he, while everyone was in a hurry to hide from the Tatar raid, said to the brethren: “We too will create human things in order to evade pride; and no one should be exposed to danger unnecessarily.” The holy ascetic died in 1537. The charter he gave for the Komel hostel and consisting of 15 chapters was published in East. Hier. IV, 661, and then especially in 1812. “With the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, so the saint writes in the preface, and with the help of His Most Pure Mother, I wrote this edifying message for myself and for my brothers and sisters about the Lord, who are like me in everything... I tremble at the words of the prophet, who proclaims that the abbot will be tortured for all those subordinate to him. If he can remove them from evil and does not remove them, God will exact their blood from his hand and he will die for negligence. If he convicts them, but they do not move away from evil, he will at least deliver his soul, but they will die in their sin.” After the preface, 1st chapter. talks about church deanery; 2nd: about the decorum of the meal; 3rd: about food and drink; 4th: about not eating or drinking anywhere other than at a common meal; 5th: about clothes; 6th: do not ask anyone for anything; 7th: have no property; 8th: do not take anything without the blessing of the abbot; 9th: do not go to meals untimely; 10th: in common work, work in silence and with prayer; 11th: do not visit relatives or strangers without reason; 12th: do not accept alms for yourself; 13th: do not tolerate intoxicating drinks in the monastery; 14th: about those who come to the monastery with property; 15th: about those leaving the monastery. “All this,” says the monk in conclusion, I, the unworthy and sinful monk Cornelius, wrote with my own hand and betrayed to my brethren; I wish that both during my life and after death, this tradition will be observed and read often as a reminder for spiritual benefit; Let these words not be used as condemnation on the day of judgment.” According to the inventory of 1630, the Cornelius Monastery shows: a) “The Psalter followed by St. Cornelia Pisma"; b) “letter of the miracle worker Cornilius”; c) “the legend of the wonderworker Cornelius” (Description of the book of step. mon. No. 1276, 1287, 1288. M. 1848). Nowadays we know the Fasting Rules of Vasily, written in 1536 by the disciple of Cornelius Artemy in the Porfiry Desert (Tsarsky No. 25). 128. Agathon, priest of Novgorod in 1540, compiled Paschal for 532 years (Tsarsky, No. 289; Tolstoy, No. 17). He was guided by the work of St. Archpastor Gennady (§ 107); but in Agathon’s work there are many explanations showing his familiarity with ancient works. 129. Chroniclers: 1) An unknown author of a chronograph containing biblical and universal history before the capture of Constantinople by the Turks (1453). Here, before 990, is placed the work of Cyrus Theodore, who selected “from many books the most necessary and kindest”; further, up to 1350, the story is presented according to Siverian of Gebal and according to the chronicle of Manasseh; from 1350, the events of the kingdoms of Bulgarian, Serbian and Russian events are described in quite some detail; the short list of years ends with 1492, and the Russian review of the chronograph was compiled in 1512. This chronograph is also remarkable in that it served as a source for the Nikon Chronicle (Description of Music No. 454, pp. 735–753; Tsar’s No. 371; Bibl. General History No. 282, and the Undol Biblical Search, pp. 217–219), 2) George the Monk, wrote the chronicle before 1533. (Synod. bib.). 3) Katavasya-Yuryev, a monk, composed “a chronicle from the beginning of the nickname of the Russian land until 1544,” according to Shcherbatov, in quite detail and quite regularly (in the Synod. bib.). 4) Theodore, Prince of Kem, monk Theodosius, composed an abbreviated Russian history up to 1549 (Synod. bib.). Of course, the same hieromonk Theodosius wrote the life of the Venerable, described in 1567. Alexander Oshevensky. (Tsarsky 125; Tolstoy II, No. 62, 174). 5) Varlaam Palitsyn, cellarer of the Chudov Monastery, described: a) the siege of Kyiv by the Tatars; b) about three princes; c) Synopsis of Russian history from 859 to 1562, with annex of treaties of the 10th century (Imperial publ. library. General history No. 210). Kulchinsky also knew his list of metropolitans. 6) John Glazaty, a priest, in his own words, who lived in captivity for 20 years among the Kazan Tatars and was freed when Kazan was captured by Tsar John, wrote “The History of the Kazan Kingdom.” His story, published in St. Petersburg. 1791, requires a new and better edition: the 1791 edition contains omissions and errors. Lists in the Bible. General ist. No. 76, 77, 178. 7) The Nizhny Novgorod chronicler was written by an unknown person from 1221 to 1556 (Tolstoy No. 358), according to another list continued until 1745 (Tolstoy IV, No. 65). 8) The Vyatsky chronicler, ending in 1553, was compiled by an unknown person (Tolstoy II, No. 432). 9) Around 1550, the Pskov Chronicle was compiled, ending in 1547 according to four lists (Collected years. IV, 170–308). 10) Someone “from the weight of the Rostov regions” wrote a Composite chronicler “from the beginning of the Russian land to the reign of Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich of Moscow... I assumed his reign after his father, Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich”; track. the chronicle was written around 1535. The collection contains “news about the Tver Principality” (Manuscript of the Imperial Publ. Bibl.). 11) Detailed description of the conquest of Kazan by Tsar John in 1552 (Collected years. VI, 303–315); it ends like this: “If only we could see the sovereign in Kyiv, the Orthodox Tsar, Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich of All Russia. Glory to God the Accomplisher! Amen"; that is, it was obviously written by a contemporary, not after 1560. 12) Boyar Alexei Adashev, famous for his kindness, kept notes for compiling a chronicler of new years (Act. Exp. I, 354). They were included in the so-called “Royal Book” of 1534–1553 (Published in St. Petersburg, 1769). 13) The Lithuanian Chronicle of Bychowiec, written in the Lithuanian-Russian dialect, also dates back to the beginning of the 16th century, since it was already known to Strynkovsky in the form of the Berestovitsa Lithuanian Chronicle (Kronica Polska, Litewska, p. 46). It was published by Narbut: Pomniki do dziejow Litewskich. Wilno, 1846 This is the same chronicle as according to the list of the Poznań Bible. called “The Chronicler of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Zhomont.” Extracts from the Poznan list were published by Bodyansky on Thursday. M. General ist. I, no. 1, pp. 1–45. 130. Rev. Maxim the Greek, great teacher of the Russian Church and sufferer for the truths of the Gospel. Nil Kurlyatev, in the preface to the translation of the Psalter, dictated by Maxim in 1552, says about Maxim: “Elder Maxim was a Greek by birth, learned philosophy in his language and knew the second Roman language and knew how to read and write, knew our third language and knew how to read and write very intelligently. But the previous translators did not know our language, and they translated another Greek, another Slovenian, and another Serbian and another Bulgarian, which they were not satisfied with adding to the Russian language” (Tsarsky No. 327). According to the preface to Chrysostom’s conversations on the Gospel of Matthew, published in 1664, Maxim is “greatly wise in Hellenic, Roman and Russian not only to translate, but also to create in the measure of the Iroic and Yamvinian.” Life and works of Rev. Maxim was described in detail by me in the Moskvitian of 1842, in the History of Russian. c. III, 142–144, 156–167. It will be enough here if we present a list of the undoubted scientific works of Maxim. 1. Works for the interpretation of Holy Scripture: translation of the Psalter; translations of commentaries on the Psalter and the book of Acts; translation of Chrysostom's conversations on the Gospel of Matthew and on the Evangelist John (ed. M. 1665); interpretations of particular passages of Holy Scripture: statements of certain sayings of those who are perplexed in Scripture; the legend of the line: your youth will be renewed like an eagle; the story of Psalm 89 and 18; the story of the gospel according to John; interpretation of Paul's words about himself as a Roman and about the unknown God; translations of some prophetic passages; legends about the tawny owl bird; answer to Karpov about leviathan; about the names of stones; about biblical names. 2. Works for correcting church books and for explaining rituals: correcting the triodion and many other books; the story of Judas the traitor; that the sun did not set throughout Bright Week; against the story of Aphrodite; about the ordination of Christ as a priest; that the creed should not be changed (printed in Skryzhal 1656); explanation of some parts of the liturgy; explanation of the proclamation: about the world above; about the consecration of water for Epiphany; about wedding crowns; about the Savior's crown; about the inscription: M.R.F.U. (This is “not Martha or Mirpha, as the nets and the nemeses do not feast in vain”); about placing a cross over the moon; about the installation of a hierarch on the eagle; message about fasting Monday; about the strophocamilus egg; explanation of some sayings of the Theologian. This also includes: confession of faith (printed in Part II of Ist. Plato, 300); response to the council of 1537 (ed. in Moskvityanin 1842); letter to Metropolitan Daniel, 1539 (ed. in the Journal of Min. People's Education, 1834); a disclaimer about the correction of books to Metropolitan Joasaph (ed. in Part II of Ist. Plato); disclaimer about the correction of books to the boyars (ed. ibid.); another letter to Metropolitan Joasaph, 1541 (ed. in Moskvityanin 1842); to the ruler of the earth (King John); “message to the master and brother George” (Tsarsky No. 244), where, according to Kurbsky (Description of music, p. 555), “warns against corrupt letters that affirm orthodox dogma.” This also includes: an essay on grammar with a preface (Description of music, p. 370); a test for a supposed expert in the Greek language. 3. Polemic-dogmatic works: a) 12 arguments against the preachers of papism: a word in Latynov about the unchanged symbol of faith (printed in 1618 in Pochaev; in the book on faith, K., 1625" in the White Russian dialect; in the book of Kirillova, M., 1643); a word against the blasphemy of the German Nicholas about the Holy Spirit (printed in the book on faith, K., 1625; in the book of Kirillova, M., 1643); a word against the insight of astrologers and about free will; the word that everything is arranged not by the stars or the wheel of happiness, but by Providence; message to the prince about astrologers; message about the promises of the Latin sage; message to Theodore Karpov, 1524, denouncing the heads of Nicholas, in 5 sections (Prochet, hedgehog); response to Nikolai Latinin; message to the scientist Nicholas; a word against the seducer Nikolai Nemchin, against the three main Latin errors with praise to the apostles Peter and Paul; message to the abbot about Fortune. b) Against Luther: about the worship of St. icons; about those who blaspheme the Mother of God; what is the first sin in nature? about the handwriting that was given to the devil; that the human race would have multiplied through carnal birth, even if Adam had not sinned. c) A word on Armenian evil. d) The Word against the Jews and about the birth of Christ; Advice about Isaac Zhidovin; against the heads of the Jew Samuel, in 7 sections. e) Against Mohammedanism: against Hagaryan delusion; against the vile dog Magomed; a word of thanks about the Crimean dog; answers to Mohammedan blasphemies. f) Against paganism: against Hellenic charm. g) Against superstitions: against the opinion that harmful weather occurs for a drowned person and a murdered person who remains unburied; holy places and things are not desecrated because they are owned by infidels; denunciation of those who take an oath not to accept the priesthood from the Constantinople Patriarch. 4. For moral teaching: a) instructions: about monastic life - a conversation between a covetous person and a non-covetous person; conversation between the mind and the soul about covetousness - against those covetous; conversation between mind and soul about passions; in reality it is necessary to fulfill vows; What is the power of the great schema? against the insatiable belly - to the monk; a message to the nuns that one can be saved in the world; message to those who are hesitating to go to the monastery; to those who leave their wives without guilt and go to the monastery; two words to those who think to be saved only by reading the canons; the words of the monk to himself in prison; instructive chapters for those in authority; about disorder and lawlessness of rulers; the cry of Peter who denied; a word about repentance; another word about repentance; about sleepy dreams; about fasting, to the lady; about internal fasting; a word from the bishop of Tver about the fire; about the former fire and gratitude for the restoration of the church; letter to Metropolitan Macarius, 1542; message to Prince Pyotr Ivanovich Shuisky; message to the young man Mikhail Vasilyevich, son of Prince Peter Shuisky; message to the prudent Alexy Adashev about tafiyas; message to the saint Sylvester. b) Songs and prayers: a hymn to the Holy Trinity on Easter Sunday; prayer of the Mother of God during the suffering of Christ; canon to the Paraclete with prayer (ed. in spiritual Vertograd, Vilna, 1620, in the Canon of K. 1739); hymn to the great martyr John; song of the blessed Fomaide; hymn to the martyr Potamia; hymn to the martyr; hymn for the Dormition of the Virgin Mary. 5. Historical works: about Patr. Gennady; about the council that wanted to establish the wifelessness of priests; a story about a monastic life - a story about some Western monks; the story of a new martyr; notes on the lives of Zosima and Savvaty; Metaphrostic words: about the miracles of the Archangel Michael (Minea Macarius, September 6); about the life of Dionysius the Areopagite (ibid., Oct. 5). 131. Sylvester, priest of Novgorod, in 1547 summoned by Metropolitan Macarius to Moscow as a man of strict piety and enlightened. On the advice of the Metropolitan, Tsar John accepted him as his advisor. Sylvester soon managed to turn the ruler, spoiled by his upbringing, onto the good path, and all of John’s affairs took on a different form (Tales of Kurbsk. 9–12, 68, 187, 230). For six years Sylvester was in such power at court that everything obeyed him. “You gave instructions to both the metropolitan and the rulers,” says the modern chronicle (Royal Book, pp. 342, 343. St. Petersburg, 1769). The meeting about the heir to the throne, which took place during the tsar’s serious illness (1553), produced a cooling in the tsar towards Sylvester (Royal book 343). Those who were burdened by Sylvester's power took advantage of this. Deacon Viskovatyi publicly accused Sylvester of incorrectly painting icons in the court Annunciation Church, where Sylvester was in charge, and even of communicating with the heretic Bashkin. The Council acquitted Sylvester (Ist. Russian ts. III, 196–200). Nevertheless, the king began to show more and more inattention to his advice. Sylvester saw that he was already becoming useless for the king, and the enmity of envious people was becoming stronger; and therefore he retired to the Cyril Monastery, where he took monasticism and the name of Spiridon. But since here they showed him respect, and his enemies feared that the king would return him to himself again; Then, after the death of Queen Anastasia (1560), they slandered him, as if Anastasia died from his spell. Superstitious John believed, and Father Spiridon was imprisoned in the Solovetsky Monastery, where he died (Tale. Kurbsk. 79–82,188–192). According to the inventory of 1635, the library of the Kirillov Monastery shows the following books by Father Sylvester: the Apostle in Greek, the Psalter in Greek, the book of Joshua, the book of St. Joseph of Volotsky against the Novgorod heretics, The Ladder of John, The Teachings of Abba Dorotheus, Margaret (Inventory of books of the step. mon. No. 731, 732, 812, 825, 827, 978, 1001, 1124. M. 1848). It is not known whether all these books remain in the Kirillov Monastery; but there are still intact: a) the Psalter, with the inscription: “the book is a state gift - the explanatory Psalter of the Annunciation priest Sylvester, in the foreign workshop of Spiridon and his son Anfim; Heraklian interpretation"; b) Trebnik, with the inscription: “Selverstskaya Required, Ivan said Mikhailovich (Secretary Viskovaty, Sylvester’s accuser) that that consumer is from Blagoveshchensk.” From here it is clear that Father Sylvester loved education and was so educated that he was even familiar with the Greek language. His composition is Domostroy with a letter to his son (ed. in the first book of the Vremnik of general history, 1849). At the beginning of Domostroy he writes: “I bless the sinful Sylvester and teach, punish and admonish my only son Anthimus and his wife Pelageya and their household,” and so on. (Vremennik, book V, M., 1850). Therefore, Domostroy was written as an instruction to his son. The Domostroy contains, after the introduction, in the first 20 chapters instructions in faith and piety; in the other 43 - instructions on worldly wisdom, especially on household savings. The letter to his son, which makes up the last chapter of Domostroy, all consists of excellent moral instructions and breathes the love of a kind, intelligent father for his son. His “petition” to the council, written on the occasion of his accusation by Viskovaty, was written in a calm spirit and with bright thoughts. It was published in Volume I. Ist. act. 328. “Message” to Prince Shuisky-Gorbaty in Kazan with excellent instructions to the prince and the army - in hand. Sofia Bible 132. Macarius, from 1526 from Archimandrite Luzhetsky, Archbishop of Novgorod, 1542–1564 Metropolitan of Moscow. His concern for reducing errors and superstitions among the people and for spreading enlightenment alone gives him an honorable place among the great teachers of the church. At the council of 1551, he determined: archpriests and deans should observe that books that were written incorrectly were not used in the churches; and if damaged books are sold at auction, take them away for fear of ignorant scribes (pr. 27 and 28). As a result of this, when they began to revise the books in order to replace faulty ones with serviceable ones, “little was found in need, but the rest were all corruptions from those who were prescriptive, unlearned, and unskilled in the mind, and those who wrote incorrectly and uncorrected.” (Afterword of the Apostle, 1564). For Metropolitan Macarius, who had long been diligently engaged in revising manuscripts and had long been able to see the complaints of the zealots of enlightenment who preceded him about the pathetic defects of the books, such a consequence of the conciliar definition was not news. The council's resolution on the revision of books was decreed by the enlightened archpastor so that the majority of people would learn from experience what a sad situation Christian books are in. After such an experience, people who were pleased with themselves had to agree that not everything was good with them, that against the book infection it was necessary to use the means that had long been used in the southern Russian metropolis - it was necessary to introduce the printing of books. At the request of the formidable king, a printer was sent (1552) from Denmark. But Metropolitan. Macarius also found people in Moscow capable of printing books. And why was there a foreigner here? How could a Dane regularly print Slavic books when he did not know even the basics of Slavic? He could only spoil books and interfere with the very progress of things. The latter turned out to be true. A whole ten years passed before they managed to print one book, the Apostle (1564). She came out when Macarius died a few months before. When printing the Apostle, they did not use the Greek text. Sylvester, who knew any Greek, was removed from Moscow; and the publishers of the Apostle call the text of the New Testament the text of 70 interpreters. It cannot be said that the Slavic copy from which the Apostle was printed was the best of the modern ones; but it was possible to choose the best one from those spoiled by the scribes only by comparing it with the Greek text; which, as we said, there was no one to do. For the first time, it also meant a lot that the printed Apostle put a limit on the mistakes and self-will of the scribes in relation to this book. And the Apostle’s afterword says that they wanted to achieve only this goal. “I commanded the compilation of printed books for the purification and correction of untrained and unskilled book-writers.” We repeat that achieving this goal meant a lot. This was revealed in practice. People deceived by their passions, and among them first those who fed on copying damaged books, were not slow to rebel against Makariev’s cause. They began to shout that they were introducing something new, starting a heresy - new followers of Bashkin appeared. Deacon John Fedorov and Peter Mstislavets, who were involved in printing the Apostle, barely had time to print the 1565 Psalter when they were forced to flee from Moscow abroad. The people, excited by rumors of heresy, burned down the printing house itself (Ist. Russian ts. III, 170–173). But the holy principle of Macarius could not be destroyed; it continued. Let us turn to the verbal works of Macarius. a) Macarius had a brilliant gift of eloquence. Three speeches to the king - a speech at his marriage (Vivl. vol. XIV, p. 227); speech before the Tsar’s campaign against Kazan (Tsar’s Book); speech on the return of the happy king from Kazan (ibid.) - written with animation and eloquence. Such are his admonishing message to the army in Sviyazhsk dated March 25, 1552 (Hist. Act I, No. 159) and his lengthy message to the Tsar dated July 17, 1552 with an exhortation to go boldly against the enemies of Christ (Historical Act I, No. 160). True, in these experiments of eloquence there is some kind of studied form; what speaks in them is not so much a living and free soul as a spirit oppressed by external legality; nevertheless, they contain purity of expression, picturesque images, and bright thoughts; they reveal a speaker with a rich gift of speech. b) Teaching messages of Macarius: to the Vodskaya Pyatina (dated March 25, 1534) on the eradication of pagan monuments (Addition to the historical act. 1, No. 28); a message with a definition against Artemiev’s freethinking (Act. Exp. I, No. 239); acts of the council against Bashkin (Cht. Obsh. ist. 1847 No. 3), which Macarius wrote with his own hand (Act. exp. 1:349). The first letter is a monument to the apostolic labors of Macarius to spread the light of Christ among the remaining pagans. History honors the name of Macarius as a zealous preacher of the faith among Chud (Ist. Russian ts. III. 58). She cannot forget his labors to suppress heresies that arose in the north as a result of the unrest of the Reformation (Ist. Russian ts. III, 121–126). c) Edifying writings: statutes for the Spiritual Monastery according to the rules of community life (Hist. Act. I, No. 292); about the saintly court (Ist. Act. 155): statutory charters of 1551 (in the Vremennik General History Book XIV, M., 1852). His spiritual testament is deeply touching (Ist. Act. I, No. 172). His Helmsman is also known - a collection of all canonical articles, including those that only seemed canonical. Contents from Snegirev in Monuments pp. 45–48. For worship: a document establishing the celebration of saints (Act. Exp. I, No. 213); a document on the performance of prayers on the occasion of famine (Addition to the historical act. I, No. 221); letter with permission for two cases (Act. Exp. 1, No. 253). In 1527, he compiled the “Great Book of the Rules of Cell and Travel.” d) His works for history: a) the eloquent style with which the 26 years of John’s reign are described in the Degree Book, the modesty with which the Metropolitan’s actions were touched here. Macarius and omitted his speeches and messages to the king, show that the work of the Metropolitan. Cyprian's work in compiling the Degree Books was continued by the Metropolitan. Makariy. Contemporary of the Metropolitan. Macarius Vasily in his biography of St. Prince Alexander says: “them (some of the acts of the holy prince) are subsequently spoken about in the Power Book.” The life of Prince Alexander, described by Tuchkov, is indeed included in the Degree Book (§ 127). Thus, it is certain not only that Metropolitan Macarius, after Cyprian, set out history according to the degrees of princes, but also that he supplemented Cyprian’s work by introducing the lives of the saints. b) The Great Book of Menaion-Chetya is a brilliant monument to the works of Macarius and the richest gift for history. This is a whole library of historical, instructive and edifying works. It took twelve years to compile it. The synaxari, or as they were unfairly called, prologues, were taken as the basis; then not only complete biographies are placed, not only words for saints' days and holidays, but also entire extensive works of church teachers; for example: the January book contains interpretations of the prophets Micah, Zechariah, Jonah; a significant part of the works of Basil the Great; 26 words of Gregory the Theologian; in the March book you will find Gregory Dvoeslov's conversations about the lives of the saints, all the catechumens of Cyril of Jerusalem and the entire Ladder of John. “I wrote (says Macarius himself) these books in the great Novgorod, as I was an archbishop there, and I wrote and collected them and collected them in one place for twelve years, with many estates and many different clerks, not sparing silver and all sorts of honors, especially many works and feats of effort from correcting foreign and ancient proverbs, translating to Russian speech... there is another uncorrected persistence in them to this day, and this has been left to us who are able to correct it with God’s help.” Prince Obolensky found the August month of the Great Mena with the handwritten amendments and comments of Macarius (Moscow, 1850, V, 7–9). Both according to Macarius and this August Menaion, it is clear that the final revision and formation of the Great Menaion took place already in Moscow. A complete copy with the signature of Metropolitan Macarius himself in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral. Incomplete lists in the Synodal Library, in Novgorod. Soph. bibliography, in the Chudov Monastery. About the origin of Stoglav’s book, with which the honor of the Metropolitan is humiliated. Makaria, view. my article in Moskvityanin 1845, 12: A few words about Stoglav, and Ist.Russk. c. IV, 193, 194, also Christ. Thurs. 1854, No. 24–64. 133. Macarius, even then, as Archbishop of Novgorod, really wanted the lives of Russian saints to be worthily described. In 1547 it was established: a) to celebrate throughout Russia the memory of 12 days in honor of Russian saints, including St. Macarius Kolyazinsky, Mikhail Klonsky, Pavel Obnorsky, Dionisy Glushitsky, blessed. Prince Alexander Nevsky, Rev. Alexander Svirsky; b) to honor locally: in Moscow Blessed. Maxim the Fool; in Murom book. Peter and Fevronia, book. Constantine and his children; in Tver Arsenia bishop. Tverskoy; in Ustyug Procopius and John (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 201, 202). At the same time, it is necessary to compile the services and lives of Russian saints, unless they were compiled for others (Vasily’s life of Prince Alexander Nevsky). As a result, biographers and hymns of saints appeared, and, as is clear, not all with the same talents and methods. a) Hegumen Roman around 1530 described the life of his mentor, St. Ephraim of Perekom or Verendovsky († 1492); its description in the Bible. General ist. No. 45; at Tsarskoye No. 136; review of the description in East. Hier. V, 467. b) Mikhail Tuchkov, boyar, in monasticism Elijah, by the will of Archbishop Macarius, composed in 1537 the life of St. Mikhail Klopsky and his canon; in 1539 - the life of the martyr George of Bulgaria; under Metropolitan Macarius he wrote the Life of the Blessed. Prince Alexander Nevsky and his service (Description of music. 526, 527, 593, 400). In the life of the blessed Michael's biographer says that under the Grand Duchess Elena and the young John, he was sent to Novgorod to gather troops against the Tatars, and that then Archbishop Macarius instructed him to describe the life of St. Michael according to old notes (Mineaion of Macarius, January 11, Nov. 3 and 4 years old). c) Herodion, student of Rev. Alexander of Svirsky and the abbot of his monastery, in 1545, by the will of Metropolitan. Macarius, described the life of his teacher (Tolstoy II, No. 112; Tsarsky No. 78; Menaion of Macarius for August). The writer mentions the guest Bogdan, who was in Novgorod on behalf of Grand Duke John as an overseer of money making. Service of St. Alexander - probably the work of the same abbot. The life and service were published along with a description of the monastery, M., 1848. d) Macarius, a monk, in 1540 composed the life of St. Macarius of Kolyazinsky (Tolstoy III, No. 7; in the Menaion, Metropolitan. Macarius on March 17th). e) After in 1546, when digging ditches for the church, the saints were found. Paul of Obnor († 1429), his life was composed (Tsarsky No. 109; Menaion of Macarius under January 10). It says here: “In the summer of 7046 (1538) January 14, the Kazan people came to Rus' and did a lot of evil; The governors stood on Voloka on the forest and came to the Innocent Hermitage unknown, burned the church and cells and flogged three elders.” The writer says that he writes what he heard from reliable people, and what he found in notes compiled by eyewitnesses. f) Vasily, priest, in monasticism Varlaam, a Pskovite, composed: in 1547 the life of St. Alexander Nevsky and Rev. Euphrosynus of Pskov, then Arseny Konevsky and Savva Krypetsky; the legend of the discovery of the relics of Prince Vsevolod; in 1558 he composed the life of Nikita and Niphon of Novgorod; Isidor Yuryevsky; services to Euphrosynus of Pskov, Prince Vsevolod, Savva Kryp., George the Martyr of Bulgaria (Description of music. pp. 596, 597, 602; Tsarsky No. 133, 136, 378; Tolstoy II, No. 279). In the service to Euphrosynus, in addition to praising the alleluia, Prince John and Bishop Macarius are mentioned; therefore, its author is the same cleric Vasily, who also wrote the life. This service is not included in the Menaion. Life of Rev. Savva is written in a book about the beginning of the Pechersky Monastery, M., 1801. Vasiliev’s works are mostly useless for history. The cleric’s courage in making up inventions that offend history, chronology, common sense and holy faith is amazing. It is clear from everything that Vasily was eager to talk, but he was a man limited in meaning and poor in knowledge, and, moreover, a man who allowed himself to tell all kinds of lies, just to sanctify his favorite thought. For an analysis of his story about Euphrosyne, see the Christian reading of 1853. His story about St. Alexander Nevsky considered it necessary to redo it under Patriarch Job (Tsarsky No. 411, 614, 729), and his tale about the murder of Batu in Hungary was thrown out. g) At the same time, “the great-sinful slave Pachomius composed a story” about the Yaroslavl princes Vasily and Constantine (Undolsky manuscript No. 144). According to this story, Batu stood near Yaroslavl for 2 years and 6 months, looking for his father: “For that accursed Tsar Batu, who came from the city of Yaroslavl, from the village of Cheremozhsk, and having reached his father in the summer of 6745, the city of Yaroslavl was quickly taken.” From Russia, Batu, says Pachomius, went to the Bulgarian land and was killed in a battle with King Vladislav. From this story it is clear that the sinful Pachomius was related to the stupid Vasily. h) Hegumen of the Khutyn Monastery Markell Besborody, living in retirement in the Anthony Monastery, according to the chronicle (Karamz. VIII, note 587), in 1557 he wrote a life and two canons of St. Nikita of Novgorod, after which he went to Moscow, and at his petition, on April 30, the relics of the saint were opened. Life of Tsarsky No. 137; canons in the oven Less than January 31st. The life of St. St. belongs to him. Savva of Storozhevsky (General history No. 305; Tsarsky No. 135, 264), which is also included in the Menaion of Macarius. Marcellus was also famous in his time as an expert in hook singing; he put the Psalter on hook notes (Undolsky's Notes on Church Singing, pp. 6, 22. M. 1846). According to the inventory of 1636, in the Suzdal Evfimievsky Monastery the “Znamenny Psalter - on the Haratya” is shown (Description of the book of step. mon. No. 1177. M. 1848). Nowadays, in the Resurrection Monastery, the canons for the twelfth feasts are preserved, set on hook notes, in handwritten form. XVII century No. 70–74. i) Joasaph, abbot, since 1560 Bishop of Vologda, in 1551 he composed the lives of: Rev. Stefan Makhritsky († 1406), Gregory and Cassian of Avnezh († 1392) and Nikita Bishop of Novgorod. i) Loggin, monk of the Prilutsky Monastery, under Metropolitan. Makariye described the life of St. the monk Prince Ignatius, who suffered for a long time in prison, in 1522 he died in the monastery of Prilutsk and at his very death became famous for miracles (Tsarsky No. 134; Tolstoy II, No. 140). j) Mikhail, monk of the Vladimir Nativity Monastery, under Metropolitan. Macarius wrote the canon of blessings. Prince Alexander Nevsky, and another prince. Peter and Fevronia of Murom (Description of music, pp. 593, 596). Probably, he also wrote the life of the book. Peter and Fevronia (Tsarskogo No. 129, 132, 135, 396, 411; Rumyants. No. 163). Life of blessings. Murom Prince Konstantin and his children were written after the discovery of the relics, which took place in 1553, therefore in 1554. It is curious in its description of pagan customs, but compiled by an unskillful hand; written with obvious imitation of the Metropolitan’s Praise. Hilarion and the Word of Jacob about Prince Vladimir, from which the beginning and end of it are literally taken. The writer did not know enough about the history and chronology of Russia. - With the Metropolitan. Macarius. in 1554, the life of Procopius and John of Ustyug is described (Description of music No. 261, p. 518). Around the same time it was written, with the blessing of the Metropolitan. Macarius, life of the righteous Artemy (Tsar No. 127). Writer of Life and Miracles Rev. Prince Joasaph Kamensky, who died in 1453, says that for 85 years no one recorded the miracles of the monk, and he is the first to record according to legend; Therefore, the work was written no earlier than 1538. From the manuscripts, in addition to the life, the service and the laudatory speech of the prince are also known. Joasaph, probably the work of the same unknown writer (Tsarsky No. 124; Tolstoy II, No. 168; III, No. 53). Life of the Blessed Isidore of Rostov († 1474) is also known by hand. XVI century (Tolstoy I, No. 292, 306; Roman. music. 600, 675; General history No. 196; Tsarsky No. 382). In 1564, a rather lengthy description of the life of St. Nikita Pereyaslavsky (Tsarsky No. 127); but we see the brief life of the Stylite and the words of praise to him in hand. XV century (Tsarsky No. 368, 373). Since Rev. Cornilius of Komel († 1537) became famous for his miracles during his lifetime; it is likely that his life was described by one of his disciples, shortly after his death, around 1560 (Tsarsky No. 134). It is shown in the Cornelius Monastery according to the inventory of 1630 (Op. books of the steppe monastery No. 1306. M. 1848). 134. Photius, the ascetic of Volokolamsk, a student of Cassian Bosogo, Joseph’s associate, wrote: a) against foul language; b) the life of his mentor Cassian; c) letter to Elder Alexandra (Vol. manuscript No. 92, 281; Tolstoy II, No. 237). In the latter he answers the question: what will happen to a monk or nun who dies outside the schema? The destinies of God are inscrutable, he writes; for the weak, even a small virtue is counted as a great merit by the Lord. “If someone lives in this world of vanity, neglecting his salvation and in fearlessness and carelessness about the affairs of Mnishe’s life, even if he dies in the schema, his schema tonsure will benefit nothing.” In the inventory of books of 1652 we see between the Volokolamsk books “Collection of Photius’s letters” (Description of the book of step. mon. No. 2267; Moscow 1848). The life of his elder Photius was described by his disciple Vassian, Archimandrite Vozmitsky (Tolstoy II, 68), who also wrote “about the enmity against the Josephites.” In the aforementioned inventory we see “two more books of the rule, a letter from Vasyan, Photius’s student” (No. 2195, 2196). 135. Rev. Theodosius of Totemsky († 1568) spiritual testament is kept handwritten in his monastery. 136. Rev. Korniliy, since 1529 hegumen of Pskov-Pechersk, educator of poor Chud. He helped the border Chudians in their needs with a generous hand and, joining them to St. Orthodox faith, built several churches for them, among other things in Neuhausen (The Tale of the Pskov Monastery. M. 1831). He wrote “The Tale of the Pskov Pechersk Monastery.” It was supplemented by: in 1585 the monk Gregory, in 1587 abbot Meletius, in 1601 Joachim (Moskvit. 1843 No. 9, p. 139); the first to introduce Serapion's story about the siege of the monastery by Bathory into the work of Cornelius (§ 147). Rev. Cornelius died a martyr in 1570, crushed, together with his disciple Vassian, by the will of the Terrible Tsar. (Kurbsky 124). 137. Theodosius, abbot of Khutyn and 1542–1551 archbishop of Novgorod, then lived in the Volokolamsk monastery, where he was tonsured a monk. † 1563 Theodosius, says his disciple Abbot Euthymius, made himself a coffin long before his death, lay down in it and loved to talk about death. The Tsar, going “to Nemchiki” (near Polotsk), took abbot Leonid with him, and Theodosius, saying goodbye to Leonid, said that he would not see him again. Polotsk was taken on February 20; Theodosius announced this in his cell on the same day and died at 26 o'clock (Volokol. manuscript No. 412). His messages are known: from Abbot Khutynsky to Boyar Shigone in 1533, on the occasion of the death of the Grand Duke (Hist. Act. I, No. 292); archbishop: to the Karelian country (January 15, 1543) about religious processions; Pechersk Abbot Cornelius about Elder Savvaty (February 24, 1543); to Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich about the robberies and murders taking place in Novgorod (printed in Ancient History, XIV part, p. 238); the spiritual authorities of Ustyuzhna Zheleznaya (in August 1545) accusatory for abuses in spiritual matters (ed. in Ist. Act. 1, No. 297); consoling message (Sept. 1545) to Prince Andrei Dmitrievich; in the Vodskaya Pyatina (June 8, 1548) about the extermination of paganism (eg in Ancient Hebrew XIV, 167); two messages of gratitude to the boyar; to King John, blessed for the kingdom and for marriage; Blessed to him for a campaign in Kazan (eg in Ancient History XIV, 263); message from a dying man to all Christians. All these messages are hand-drawn. Volokolamskaya (Tolstoy II, No. 341). In the Rumyantsev Museum there is also a letter dated June 30, 1550 to the abbot with an exhortation to “get away from drunken drinking,” written on the occasion of famine (Description of music, p. 43). A short chronicler, signed by his hand in 1543 - in the Synodal Library No. 253. 138. Zinovy, monk of Oten, disciple of Maxim the Greek, after 1526 he was exiled to the poor Oten hermitage, but here he complacently labored for the Lord († 1568). His work “Demonstration of Truth” amazes with the thoroughness of his reasoning and deep knowledge of Holy Scripture. It was written against the rationalistic teaching of Theodosius Kosy. “A new teaching has appeared and many are praising this teaching. Is it from God? And should we follow it? “We don’t know,” according to Zinovy, this is what the Kriloshans of the Moscow Spassky Monastery Gerasim and Afanasy said, and demanded instruction from Zinovy. From subsequent conversations we see that this teaching was spread in 1552 by Theodosius Kosoy, a runaway servant who robbed his master and took monastic vows at the Belozersk monastery. Although he himself hid from the conciliar punishment to Moscow; but the thoughts he sowed in the north disturbed many. His teaching was as follows: a) he rejected the tradition of the church (Zinovy’s work according to the list of the Moscow Spiritual Academician, pp. 13, 16, 163); b) rejected the secret of St. Trinity, indicating that the law recognizes one God; c) did not believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (170–190, 198, 217–220); did not recognize the redemption of people by the death of Jesus Christ (194–226); e) rejected the veneration of icons and saints of God (307–313, 333 334 342, 375, 382, ​​383), and mocked the fasts and prayers of the church (364–394, 428, 431, 725). Zinovy ​​refutes every point of Feodosiev’s teaching with honesty for himself and for the saint. truth. He considers Kosoy’s thoughts in the order in which the choir members conveyed them to him, adding their opinions in places. His reasoning is calm, his answers are thoughtful, his refutations are clear, his information is amazing in its breadth. Zinovy ​​knew Joseph the Illuminator, and his work shows that he did his job far better than his predecessor, as it should: he revealed the principles of Christian philosophy more deeply and clearly than Joseph. Zinovy’s work, consisting of 56 conversations, fully deserves to have been published long ago in its entirety (autograph from Tolstoy III, No. 64). One conversation about the worship of icons was published in the Collection, M., 1642, and another about the symbol of faith in the Tablets, M., 1656. The praiseworthy word of St. Zenobius is also known. to Prince Mikhail and boyar Theodore of Chernigov (Lavra Chet-Mineaion on September 20, part No. 1). 139. Sylvester Belkevich, Metropolitan of Kiev 1556–1568, according to Polish writers, did not allow Russians to be deceived by the opinions of Socinus and Calvin, while these opinions, under the protection of magnates, captured the minds of not only the Polish-Lithuanian nobility but also the Roman clergy itself (Naramovsky - Facies rer. Sarmat. I, 222). The teaching of this archpastor to a newly ordained priest is excellent (Act. Zap. Ross. III, No. 31). Under him, Archimandrite Gregory of Peresopitsa translated 1556–1561 from the Bulgarian (church) dialect into the Russian Four Gospels (Maksimovich Kievlyanin, 1840, p. 251). A little later (about 1570) the Old Testament was translated in Lvov from Hebrew into Slavonic-Russian (Maksimovich there; I. I. Sreznevsky in Zh. M. People's Enlightenment 1843). At the same time, the Psalter (Mus. Roman. No. 335) was translated from Slavic into Polish-Russian. . John Alexandrov, monk. In the Moscow library. prof. Bauza had his Latin-Russian dictionary, composed by him in 1560 at the University of Tübingen (Chertkova B. II, 443); but the work, along with the library, was destroyed in a fire in 1812. 140. Theodoret, enlightener of the Lapps. He translated the Gospel into their language. Expelled from the Kola Trinity monastery he founded, from 1547 he was abbot of the poor Novgorod monastery, then for about five years archimandrite of Suzdal. Slandered (1554) in agreement with Bashkin, he was imprisoned in the Kirillov Monastery; but, released by Metropolitan Macarius, in 1557 he was sent to Constantinople, and from there he brought the blessing of the council of 1561 to Ivan the Terrible for the royal title with the book “Weddings to the Kingdom.” Then he retired to the Prilutsky monastery, and from there he visited the kind children of his Lapps twice. (Ist. Russian ts. III, 55, 56, 122, 123). The conciliar charter of 1561 and the order to Theodoret were issued by Prince Obolensky. Moskvit. 1853 141. Andrei Mikhailovich Prince Kurbsky, a descendant of the princes of Yaroslavl, the happy commander of the Moscow troops, passed to the Polish king in 1563. He passionately loved Orthodoxy, which in the southwest was endangered by the Reformation, and even more so by the machinations of the Jesuits. To protect Orthodoxy, Kurbsky with all zeal translated and distributed the works of teachers of the Orthodox Church. He wrote messages to Prince Ostrozhsky and others. His well-known history of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, several letters and the history of the Florence Cathedral, published by Ustryalov, St. Petersburg. 1842. His judicial correspondence on estates and marriage was published by Mr. Ivanitsky (The Life of Prince Kurbsky in Lithuania, Kyiv, 1850). His unpublished works: two letters to the elder in the Pechersk Monastery about false writings; writes here; “I resist the false talkers who transform themselves into devout false teachers and write a story contrary to the words of the Gospel and hide their names, so that they will not be exposed and sign them in holy names, so that their writing is conveniently accepted by the simple and untaught,” Review of Skaryna’s books: “And this will not be hidden from you, my dear friend, the books are found in our land The Old and New Testaments and all the prophetic ones, and the translation of Skaryna of Polotsk was translated in recent years, like 50 years or less from the spoiled books of the Jews.” He further says that Skaryna took his translation from Luther’s Bible (Tsar’s No. 461; Pogodin’s manuscript 208). But the latter is completely unfair (see Art. 123). Kurbsky translated the entire Theology of Damascus, Dialectics and up to 12 of his minor works. In the preface to the translation of the Theology, he complains that many teaching books have not yet been translated into the Slavic language, or have been translated, but incorrectly, or “they have been completely spoiled by those who prescribe.” Here he writes: “with rebuke they command with the verb: do not read books and point to those who have lost their minds and who have become obsessed with books, and who have fallen into heresy. Oh trouble! From which demons run and disappear, and from which heretics are exposed, and some are corrected, these are the weapons they take away.” In his afterword to Damascene’s article on heresies, he writes: “the present age’s imaginary teachers (sin for our sake) are more interested in Bulgarian fables, or even more so in women’s nonsense, practicing, reading and praising them, rather than enjoying the understanding of great teachers.” In addition to Damascus, Kurbsky translated some works of Chrysostom, Basil the Great and others (Ist. Russian ts. III, 88, 1 43,145). He called the collection of words of Chrysostom the New Margaret, writing an interesting preface (ed. Ivanitsky: The Life of Prince Kurbsky in Lithuania, Kyiv, 1850). Among Chrysostom's Conversations on the Gospel of John, published in Moscow in 1665, Conversations 44–47 were translated by Prince Kurbsky. In terms of language, some of Kurbsky’s works and translations are written in fairly correct Church Slavonic language, with a slight admixture of Russian figures of speech; others in the Volyn-Russian dialect, dotted with Polish and Latin words. 142. Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible († 1584) letters: to Kurbsky (ed. by Ustryalov), to the Kirillov Monastery (ed. in Ist. Jer. IV, 421–479), to Archbishop. Guria (Tatishchev Code of Laws), to Maxim the Greek on the heresy of Bashkin (Hist. Act. I, No. 161), are written very eloquently and show the author’s extensive familiarity with the works and lives of St. fathers; but together they expose an anxious spirit and a lack of spiritual warmth - a companion to pious sincerity. Of much greater moral value are: John’s speech to the people at the place of execution (Royal Prince of St. Petersburg, 1768); speeches and questions to his council in 1551 (in Stoglavnik). Other works: competition with Possevin (Russian Bulletin, 1842, No. 11, 12); prayer to Prince Mikhail of Chernigov (Snegirev’s Memory. add. pp. 4, 5); spiritual testament. The latter is written in an elegant style, from the soul of a man who is not thinking about death, but about how to live longer at the mercy of passions, without any hindrance. “Due to the multitude of my iniquities, I prostrate myself to God’s wrath, I am expelled from the boyars, for their self-will, from my property, and I wander around the countries, and when God will instruct.” The last words show that the will was written when John showed to others that he wanted to flee abroad. In his will, he lavishes lessons of peace and love on his sons, and yet soon after that he killed the eldest of them. Such, unfortunately for himself and others, was John! The will is important mainly as a geographical picture of Russia in the 16th century. (ed. in Add. to the source act. 1, No. 222). Code of Law of Tsar John - a monument to the legislative mind - ed. Kalaidovich: Laws of Grand Duke John and his grandson Tsar John. M. 1 819. This is the best edition in comparison with the editions of Tatishchev, M., 1768, and Bashilov, St. Petersburg, 1768. On the contents of the Code of Laws, see Kalachov: On the Code of Laws of Tsar John in Volume I. Legal. collection M. 1841 143. Athanasius, metropolitan 1565–1568, “collected” the Degree Book (Snegir. Monument of Moscow, p. 147); this means that he supplemented the Degree Book, just as they did the same after him. The list of the Academy of Sciences was brought up to 1630, and in Tolstoy’s list the 18th degree was added, and the story ended with the death of Tsar Alexei. Two administrative letters from the Metropolitan. Athanasius in A. e. I, No. 266, 267. His signature in Pogodin’s Album, M., 1853. With him, Cosmography and the Polish Chronicle were translated from Latin (A. e. I, 353). St. Philip, abbot of Solovetsky, 1567–1568, metropolitan of Moscow and martyr (Ist. Russian ts. III, 49–51). His letter to the Cyril Monastery in 1567 is very remarkable for his judgment on the reform of the Germans: “The Lithuanian king Zhigimont Augustus and the filthy Germans, who fell into many heresies, especially Luther’s delusion, quarreled with the holy and honest icons and henceforth put their evil advice in unity on St. churches and honest icons and our holy and pious Christian faith of the Greek law." Notifying then that an army has been sent against the enemies of Orthodoxy, he orders to serve prayer services and pray in cells for the success of the Orthodox army (Act. Exp. I, No. 275). Having been abbot, he described the miracles of the Solovetsky saints (§ 113). While in the rank of abbot, he wrote several statutory charters for the management of monastic estates (Act. Exp. I, No. 221, 258, 269) - charters showing as much kindness to subordinates as prudence. In the Solovetsky Monastery, his manuscripts, two psalters and a book of hours (No. 711 and 1146), are preserved; for zealots of imaginary antiquity, they are remarkable in that on the hours, after the usual psalms, they everywhere say “Alleluia three times.” 144. Macarius, Bishop of Vologda, known for his participation in the council of 1572, wrote a charter of administration (Act. exp. I, M 287, 284). The charter for the cathedral service is attributed to him. Prince Georgy Ivanovich Tokmakov, in 1570 the governor of Pskov, who saved Pskov from the atrocities of John, wrote the story of the Vydrupus Icon of the Mother of God (Tsar's No. 135, 401; Tolstoy II, No. 277). In the description of the life of St. Alexander Kushtsky († 1439) the last miracle dates back to 1575 (Tsarsky No. 124). 145. Jonah, tonsure of Siya and abbot of Glushitsky, in 1578, with the blessing of Bishop Varlaam of Vologda, wrote the life of St. Anthony of Siya; in 1584 he composed the life of Sergius of Obnorsky, and in 1589 - of Varlaam Vazhesky (Tsarsky No. 85, 88, 134–137, 678). 146. Tsarevich John, son of Ivan the Terrible. Back in 1570, he seemed to have a presentiment that he would not live long under such a father as the Terrible Tsar, and he “granted a thousand rubles to the house of the Most Pure One and the Wonderworker Kirill... if he wants to take a haircut, Prince Ivan will be given a haircut for that contribution, and if the prince is no longer alive due to his sins, then he will be commemorated.” On November 19, 1582, he was killed by his father. Handwritten Tolstoy II, No. 344; III, 31; Tsarskogo No. 86, and Bibl. General ist. No. 39, 40, placed: a) service of Rev. Anthony of Siysky, “described by Ivan Rusin, from the family of Varangian in the summer of 7086=1578”; b) the life and exploits of Abba Anthony the Wonderworker... was prescribed by the great sinner Ivan in the second to the first writers"; c) a commendable word from Rev. Anthony by the same author, Tsarevich John, written in 1580. In the afterword, the Tsarevich writes that under Metropolitan Anthony of Siysk, Abbot Pitirim and student Rev. Anthony Philotheus came to Moscow to ask for the establishment of the celebration of St. Anthony († 1557), and the cathedral ordered to celebrate, and that at the same time the abbot and the disciple of the Monk Philotheus, as well as the Novgorod Archbishop Alexander, also a disciple of the reverend, asked his prince to write the canon of the Venerable. Anthony. Further, the prince calls Philotheus the first writer of the life of St. Antonia remarks about this biography: “Great things are written in ease.” After the canon, he says, I wrote the life; and finally the archbishop. Alexander convinced me to write a word of praise. The prince also mentions that Rev. Anthony, as Philotheus said, came to Moscow to his parents and loved them very much in spirit; The parents also told the prince, adding that the reverend. Anthony especially loved his mother, that is, the virtuous Anastasia. It was this love of the saint, more than anything else, that made him describe his life. Both from the monk’s disciples and from his parents, he tried to select the correct information about the monk, even about his very appearance, and finally ordered an exact image of him to be painted. Thus, Tsarevich John composed the service and the eulogy of St. Anthony. As for the life, when composing it, did he have in mind the biography of Hieromonk Jonah in 1579? He does not talk about that, but writes that he supplemented the short notes and in relation to them he says: “in the second after the first he copied.” 147. Serapion, an elder of the Pskov Elizarov Monastery, wrote “The Tale of the Coming of King Stephen of Poland to Pskov and the Pechersk Monastery” in 1581. An interesting story ed. on Thursday General ist. 1847 Evfimy Turkov, student of the ascetic Archbishop Theodosius, since 1573 hegumen of Volokolamsk, deceased. in 1586 He left: a) a spiritual letter (Volokol. manuscript No. 155); b) The daily routine of Joseph’s monastery, or the regulations on memorial services and prayer services according to the tradition of Joseph (Volok. manuscript No. 197), where, among other things, he writes that the celebration of St. Joseph in his monastery was established by the council of 1578; c) a note about the death of Archbishop Theodosius. (Volok. manuscript No. 134). 148. Trifon Korobeinikov “travel in 1583 to Jerusalem, Egypt and to Mount Sinai”, ed. Sakharov in Volume II of Tales; with several differences - in the General Temporary. East. The journey was made at the behest of Tsar John to commemorate the murdered Tsarevich John. The notes speak of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, Mount Sinai and Alexandria. The description is simple-minded. Even less remarkable is the journey of Vasily Pozdnyakoa to the east, made at the behest of the Terrible Tsar in 1552 (Bible. General history No. 214). Much more important for information about Russian churches, clergy, schools, almshouses and monasteries are Scribe books compiled at the will of the government. Hitherto published (by Mr. Nevolin in an essay about the Pyatina and Pogosts of Novgorod, St. Petersburg, 1853): a) The Book of the Votskaya Pyatina, compiled by Dimitri Kitaev in 1499. The same Pyatina, written by Elizar the Old in 1581–1582 b) The Book of the Shelonskaya Pyatina, written by Grigory Bundov in 1584 c) Two books of the Obonezh Pyatina, Andrei Pleshcheev, 1582 d) Book of the Derevskaya Pyatina, written around 1495. The same Pyatina by Dmitry Zamytsky, 1581. Two books of the same Pyatina by Kozma Kartsov and Fyodor Shipimarev, 1581 e) Book of the Bezhetsk Pyatina, written by Feodor Laskarev in 1582 149. Alexei, abbot, around 1580, composed the life of St. Gennady Lyubomirsky, who died in 1565 (Bible. General history No. 42). In 1588, the following were composed: the life of Blessed Basil and a word of praise to him (Tsarsky No. 128). 150. Paphnutius, monk of Solovetsky, knows the letter to Abbot Iyakov about alleluia (Tolstoy II, no. 276; I, no. 116). Without a doubt, he also described the life of St. Philip (Tolstoy II, No. 45, 112; Tsarskogo No. 115, 116). A detailed and interesting description was compiled after the relics of the saint were transferred from the Otroch Monastery to Solovetsky in 1584, which happened under Abbot Iyakov. The author says in the preface: “The present of the monastery and the foreigners who are with him... as the dreams of his disciple forced me to be less rude... Since no one else has written about him, leave us, and even from others who have reliably told us what we heard about him, we will write down his grateful upbringing in the blessed age, and in the royal chambers of growth... and the rejection of the world... considerate obedience to all and well-ordered abbotship in the monastery and in the capital city, holiness and patient sacramental suffering according to God and departure to the Lord.” 151. Around 1588, the second Novgorod Chronicle was compiled, describing the years 911–1587. In it, the events of 911–1335 are described according to the first Novgorod Chronicle, with additions from other sources; incidents of 1334–1450 are described according to the Lissitzky chronicler; and the description of the 16th century constitutes an original work (Collected Chronicles III, 117–119). Around the same time, the story of the execution of the Novgorodians by Tsar the Terrible was written (ed. in Collected Let. III, 254–262; coll. p. 206). 152. Gideon Balaban, Bishop of Galicia and Lvov, or, as he sometimes signed himself, Bishop of the Galician Metropolis, who ruled the flock 1569–1606. - a whole 37 years. After the alarming entry into the department (Additional to foreign act. No. 160–176), the last years of his reign were very restless and difficult for him. He had to fight both the violence of insidious papism and the machinations of the Reformation. Lvov Brotherhood, established in 1586 according to patriarchal charters (Act. Zap. Ross. 157). sought complete independence from the diocesan authorities even for its priests and churches. In this action of the brotherhood one cannot fail to recognize the Protestant principle, supported by the trade calculations of the merchant brothers. Gideon, opposing the Protestant principle, which in some extended to contempt for St. icons, in 1591 he excommunicated four members of the brotherhood (Addition to foreign act No. 182–184). He reported this to the Patriarch, to whom he also complained about Metropolitan Mikhail Rogoza, who had taken over the willful brotherhood. The Patriarch severely reprimanded Rogoza and invested Gideon with the title of his exarch. The brotherhood sent (1592) two complaints one after another to the patriarch. These slander did not remain without effect on the patriarch: he sent a threat of excommunication to Gideon (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 33, p. 242). But the rich brotherhood acted especially successfully against Gideon before the Polish-Russian government. In 1594, Metropolitan Rogoza with Bishop Kirill at the cathedral excommunicated Gideon, in absentia, without hearing his answers (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 51; Add. to Foreign Act. p. 474). Terletsky and the Jesuits made the best use of Gideon’s dispute with the brotherhood. On the one hand, they used everything to aggravate Gideon’s situation, on the other, they told Gideon that the patriarch had abandoned him, the patriarch was unfair to him. Gideon hesitated (Addition to foreign act. p. 474); he also persuaded many of the clergy, including several Greeks, to recognize the power of the pope over themselves (Hist. Act. IV, No. 54). “Vladyka Lvovsky, wrote one contemporary, being in extreme embarrassment from the brotherhood, not only could rush into apostasy, but I believe that he was glad to call upon his spiritual enemy to help him; This is what he proved and attracted others with him.” Act. zap. Ross. IV, no. 61). But this unfaithfulness of conscience was temporary in Gideon. In 1596, Gideon solemnly rebelled against the union adopted at the Brest Council (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 113, 157), and until his death (February 1607) he was a zealous champion of Orthodoxy. The following written works of his are now known: a) Announcement in court (1584) about the forcible sealing of Orthodox churches in Lvov at the will of the papal archbishop (Addition to foreign act. No. 59; Act. zap. Russia IV, No. 40). b) Message to the Orthodox clergy in 1591 with the conviction to live shamelessly and zealously fulfill the duties of the title, with permission to follow local customs, but not in the spirit of superstition (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 29). c) Letter of 1591 with the excommunication of four members of the brotherhood: “they, Gideon wrote, are entering into spiritual rights not assigned to them by God, starting a new sect, not listening to their shepherds, throwing out the image from the church” (Additional to foreign act. No. 182–184). d) Council charter 1596 Oct. 8th about the deposition of Rogoza and his accomplices from the cathedral sees, as apostates from St. churches (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 104). e) Cathedral Charter of 1596 on the acquittal of Stefan Zizania (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 105). Gideon zealously took care of the distribution and correction of books necessary for the Orthodox Church. At his own expense and at the expense of his nephew Theodore Balaban, he opened a printing house and a school attached to it in Stryatin. In 1604, he published the Service Book, having previously compared the Slavic text with ancient Slavic copies and the Greek text. The enlightened shepherd himself appreciated the merit of this correction, saying in his preface: “If the corrector of this book, or the printer, has sinned, we pray, grant forgiveness, brethren; There’s usually something ugly about something like this, especially at the beginning.” In the preface to the Trebnik, published in 1606 in Stryatin, the archpastor wrote: “about 10 years before this, when under the Kiev Metropolitan Mikhail Rogoz there was a council in Brest of Lithuania and other bishops were gathered there, then all of one holy catholic Eastern Apostolic Church, there was a search and consideration of differences in church actions... At this council, after deliberations, they instructed me, the humble Bishop of Lvov, to make every effort to correct the book of Trebnik.” He further says that, having collected the lists of the missal, he “found great disagreement between them,” and this greatly saddened him. He wrote to Meletius, Patriarch of Alexandria, who then ruled the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and, informing him “about the differences and defects of the Slavic books,” begged him to send the Greek Euchologium. The Patriarch sent a service book and missal, the latter verified with the ancient lists of the Holy Mount Athos, and blessed it to be printed. Gideon then gathered experienced priests to a council and discussed with them the publication of a missal. At this meeting, it was decided to transfer the necessary rites from the Slavic breviaries to the new breviary, although those ranks were not on the patriarchal list; are as follows: “the order of how to receive those converting from heresies”, “the order of the consecration of the mur”, etc. (Preface by Gideon in Moskvityanin 1844, No. 8). “Read about this in the Slovenian breviary, translated from Gretsky, from the Stryatinskaya drukarny in the river. 1606 issued,” wrote Zakhary Kopystensky in Palinodia, showing that the missal was again translated by Gideon and that this work was respected. The title of the missal also says: “Prayer book or Trebnik, from Greek into Slovenian translated and researched.” In addition, through the efforts of Gideon, the translation of the Teaching Gospel was corrected and published in 1606 in Krylos, a suburban Galich town that belonged to Gideon’s department. The archpastor also took care that the works of Chrysostom were translated from the Greek: On the Priesthood and Discourses on the Acts; “these books were translated during his lifetime”; but death prevented them from being published. This is what Alexander Balaban writes in the preface to the book on the priesthood, published by him in Lvov in 1614. The conversations on the Acts were translated by the Lvov teacher Gavriil Dorofeevich and published in K. 1624 (see preface). 153. Prince Konstantin Const. Ostrozhsky, pious in life and educated in mind. He used all measures in his power to spread enlightenment. He opened the first higher school in Ostrog, which under him was called an academy 6. He opened a printing house at the school, which produced many liturgical and teaching books 7 . When the Jesuits decided to introduce a union, he used all measures to destroy their disastrous plans, and then defended the Orthodox from persecution raised in favor of the union. Died 8 Feb. 1608 and was buried in Ostrog in the Castle Church. The Bible, published by him in 1580 and 1581 in Ostrog, constitutes a brilliant monument to his piety and Christian bright mind. Here one preface was written by him. In the preface, he says that with the publication he wishes “to leave behind a certain spiritual gift to piety. Who is there of the pious, he continues, who is not moved by pity, seeing the decay of the Church of Christ and tending to fall? The wicked wolves are mercilessly plundering and dispersing the sheep flock of Christ.” He also lacked, he says, people capable of publishing the Bible and complete copies of the Bible. The envoy Garaburda received a complete list from Moscow. This was around 1575. Poe discovered in the Slavic text not only “differences, but also corruption.” It was necessary to send to the patriarch, to the Greek and Bulgarian monasteries, for the best copies of the Bible. When publishing, it is customary to follow the Greek text. The zeal of the pious prince is worthy of all praise. And his Bible, as his first experience, in any case was an expensive gift for the Orthodox Church. This gift was especially dear when, on the one hand, the proud reformation, on the other, insidious papism, pricked the eyes of the Orthodox with every lack of education, especially since the Orthodox do not even have the Bible. But, while honoring the feat of the pious prince, we must also note that his Bible required many, many amendments. Even the scribe's errors are not always corrected in it, and the words are often not separated from one another. In the amendments they tried to be intelligible, but, rarely coping with the Greek text, they often moved away from it. (Ist. R. ts. III. § 13). The letters of Prince Ostrozhsky are important for history. When Hypatius Pocenus, who seemed to be a zealous shepherd for St. church, let the prince know with hints about the planned union, showing its plausible side; the prince, in a letter to Potsey in 1593, wrote that, according to his conviction, the southern Russian Church was partly upset by internal unrest, and especially by oppression from the papists, and therefore requires help; and according to his conviction, in order to protect the Orthodox from persecution, it is necessary to enter into relations with the pope. But how to do this? The prince wrote instructions, which stipulated that it was necessary to enter into relations with the pope only in conjunction with the patriarchs of Constantinople and Moscow. It is clear that this was not at all the union that the Jesuits wanted (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 45). The district message of the pious prince, written on June 24, 1595, contains an excellent admonition to stand firmly in the Orthodox faith and not to be deceived by the newly invented union. It was published at the same time, along with the message of the patriarchs. Meletia (Ostrog, 1596; new edition in volume IV. Act. Zap. Ross. No. 71). A protest against the Union of Brest, presented in 1596 at the Warsaw Sejm, was published in Apocrisis, Vilna, 1597. His response to his pope, who invited him to the union, was published in Add. to foreign act. pp. 155–157. His two letters to the Lvov brotherhood, with the conviction to reconcile with their shepherd Bishop Gideon, show that the prince clearly saw how the Protestant principle, unconsciously accepted by the brotherhood, was detrimental to St. churches (one in Supplem. ad hist. Rus. monum. p. 468; the other, in Vol. IV. Act. Zap. Ross. No. 72). His third letter to the Lvov brotherhood, with the conviction to postpone until time his complaint about oppression, is a monument to his prudence (Act. Zap. Ross. vol. IV, No. 152). His fourth letter to the brotherhood, with a request to send Greek letters, is an experience of concern for the spread of education (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 148). 154. Gerasim Danilovich Smotritsky, treasurer of Prince Ostrog, wrote the preface and verses for the Ostrog Bible of 1581. His preface speaks of the usefulness and holiness of the books of Holy Scripture. In 1581, his essay on the Roman calendar was published in Ostrog. Vasily, priest of Ostrog, archpriest in 1603, active assistant to Prince Ostrog in his affairs for the benefit of Orthodoxy, member of the Vilna brotherhood, who suffered together with Stefan Zizaniy in 1595. “This little book was written not out of wickedness, nor out of vanity, but out of love for Christian duties, having chosen from the divine scriptures, directly and without caressing your love, especially as Christians... Who will not be offended and will not regret the falling away of such a great multitude of people from the true faith?... The light of this wisdom and perishing glory has been deceived and rejected by many they are forced into their malice.” So he wrote in the afterword to the book published in Ostrog in 1588. This book has six sections: 1) about the one, true, Orthodox faith; 2) about the procession of the Holy Spirit; 3) about the Roman primacy; 4) about unleavened bread; 5) about the change in the celebration of Easter (about the calendar); 6) about St. churches and veneration of St. icons (Description of music. No. 295. pp. 415–418; Sakharova Bibliography No. 80). According to the thoughts of the Jesuit Possevin (Comm. de reb. Mosc. p. 10; Suppl. ad hist. R. mon. p. 39), in order to attract Russians to papism, several books about faith were then published in the Slavic language, in the spirit of papism, for example. Catechism of Alexander Kamulovich, in Slavic language in Latin letters, Romae, 1582; The Science of Christian Teaching by Peter Canisius, a translation of priest Shimon Budny Zadranich (that is, a native of Zaria), published in Rome, 1583. Protestants also seduced the Slavs with their writings, for example. Budny's catechism, published in Nesvizh, 1562. Father Vasily opposed these machinations of papism and reformation. The Moscow archpriest Mikhail Rogov, with others like himself, published his work in Church Slavonic, under the name of the Book of Cyril, adding at the beginning the teaching of Cyril of Jerusalem about the Antichrist (ed. in Vilna 1596) and something else, and spoiling the text with his erroneous opinions (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 218). To the same zealot of Orthodoxy, Vasily, for whom St. jealousy in 1596 expelled from Vilna, it is necessary to attribute the answer to the sheet of Hypatius Popeius, written by “the least cleric of the Ostroz Church” and published in Ostrog in 1598; as well as the “true story about Florensky’s collection,” published along with the transcript, although it was written before that, while still in the rank of Vilna subdeacon, so Kurbsky read it. Under his supervision, the Followed Psalter was published in Ostrog in 1598, where, after the calendar, his article on the calendar, then the psalter, canons, akathists, prayers, rules (Tolstoy p. 85). 155. Damian, a presbyter, published in Ostrog in 1607, in the Lithuanian-Russian dialect, “Medicine for the Severe Intention.” Here a) Chrysostom’s epistles to Theodore the fallen and the Word - everyone is troubled in vain; b) testament of Emperor Vasily; c) poems and premise by Damian. Probably he also translated the Bee of Anthony and Maxim, translated at the Derman Monastery in 1599 (Tsarsky No. 347; Medvedev No. 174). His afterword to Octoechos, published in Dermani in 1604, says: “in the summer of 603 December. 2 days ago, Prince Alexander, the governor of Volyn, the son of Prince Constantine, died: leave great tears and pity for your father and children, especially Christians, for all you hope for help in the troubles and persecutions of those who hold the church.” Yuri Rohatynets, a senior member of the Lviv brotherhood, wrote (November 19, 1599) to the Vilna brotherhood a letter, where he said about himself: “if it is heard about me that I have relations with Hypatius and receive letters from him, how to close that hellish stench of Rome with Curtius and reach church peace: then this is not a basis for suspicion, but respect for rights. I have relations with enemies, but I do not keep to their side, and I act with the wisdom of a serpent and with the purity of a dove, as Christ commanded. This can be seen from my letter, which I wrote today on November 1st to Jan Potey, his son (Ipatia)... I am sending a copy of another letter, which I now sent to Rohatyn, on the occasion of the burial of my sister Anastasia, who died from the oppression of the Bolobanovs, from which you will understand what our business is with Bishop Boloban” (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 146). From this it is clear that Yuri Rohatynets wrote a lot during the opening union. He should be credited with two complaints in 1592 about beatings inflicted on students of the fraternity by the pupils of papism (Addition to foreign act No. 62). The two acts of reconciliation between the brotherhood and Bishop Gideon were, of course, drawn up under his supervision, if not written by him; in one he is named as a trustee of the brotherhood (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 113, 157). Probably, he also wrote two letters from the brotherhood to the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1592 with complaints about Bishop Gideon (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 33). 156. Leonty Karpovich, founder and first archimandrite of the Vilna Spiritual Monastery (Vilna gram. II, 124), bishop of Vladimir and Brest. He was one of the most active defenders of Orthodoxy, and, moreover, distinguished by his holy life. In 1633 the Metropolitan wrote this way. The grave is grateful to his benefits to the church: “if you had now decided to go to Vilna and to the borders of the Russians, with what joy they would have met you and escorted you to their leader in patience, a predecessor in piety, similar to Chrysostom in orbit, Leonty Karpovich, a few years before this deceased archimandrite, so that you, having looked at his incorruptible remains and bonds, endured by him for his faith, I could feel what a great deed you have done for our unfortunate people” (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 114). Blazh. Leonty died in 1620, and his death was mourned in a wonderful conversation, “The execution of the honest cellar of Father Leonty Karpovich, Bishop of Volodymyr and Berestensky,” Vilna, 1620. His two sermons: “The execution of two rivers.” 1615 friends. in Evyi,” written with a masterful hand and reveal a gifted speaker in the writer. One of them is in Mayak 1843, where it is disassembled in some detail. In 1619, he spoke the funeral oration at the burial of Prince Vasily Vasilyevich Golitsyn, which was published at the same time in Vilna in Polish and Russian. His message on behalf of the Vilna brotherhood to the Lvov brotherhood is written in pure Church Slavonic and contains an eloquent conviction to be faithful to Orthodoxy, a notice about the construction of a stone school house and a request to send teachers and useful books (ed. in IV vol. Act. Western Ross., 217). In the rank of Pechersk hierodeacon, he wrote in 1608 denouncing the union, as an eyewitness of the Brest Cathedral (in Tolstoy II, No. 398). Without a doubt, he, as the first abbot of the Spiritual fraternal monastery, composed “Kinovion or the image of the monastic common life” of the Vilna church brotherhood, published in Evia in 1618. In 1616 in Evia, a translation of the weekly teachings of St. Callistus from Slavic into the commonly used Russian (Belarusian) language, compiled by the monks of the Vilna fraternal monastery of St. Spirit, and above all by the blessed Archimandrite Leonty, repeated with a few changes in the edition of Peter Mogila, K., 1637. In 1617, a service book, remarkable in its content, was printed in the Vilna fraternal printing house, and in 1618 a missal. In 1620, the “exposition of the prayer: Our Father,” a work by Chrysostom, translated from Greek by Leonty Karpovich, was published; and at the same time Fekara’s “Heartless Vertograd” was published there, with a foreword by Leonty Karpovich (Sakharov no. 166, 171, 174, 186, 187; Undolsky no. 91, 100, 107). 157. Christopher Bronsky wrote, under the name of Christopher Philalethes, the Apocrisis or response to Potsey's essay on the Brest Cathedral (Defense of the Brest Cathedral, Vilna, 1596), which at the same time (Vilno, 1597) was published both in Polish and in the Lithuanian-Russian language - an excellent work in terms of the thoroughness of its thoughts and interesting in terms of the multitude of historical documents, on which thoughts are based on. A contemporary says that Potsey, in response to this work (Potsey’s objection to the Apocrisis, published in Ostrog in 1599), threatened Philalethes with a “cue”. (Prestorog, in Act. Zap. Ross. IV, 225). “Christopher the monk, Rusin, wandering in Athos,” wrote a response to two articles of Skarga’s book on union. (Unia, Vilna, 1595) Uniat Stebelsky writes that the Apocrisis was written at the request of Prince Ostrozhsky by Christopher Bronsky, that Bronsky received money from the prince for this work, and that, however, he was an Arian; and the apostate Smotritsky says that “Christopher Philalethes, the first to write against the union, was a Calvinist.” We do not dispute the first two news about Bronsky; but the reviews of Stebelsky and Smotritsky about the faith of Philaletus destroy themselves with their contradiction and express only the anger of apostates against the intelligent defender of Orthodoxy. Meanwhile, the second work of Christopher shows him as an ascetic of Athos, while neither Calvinists nor Unitarians were hunters before the Athos fast. 158. John Vishnevsky, or from Vishnevts, a monk and zealot of Orthodoxy, labored in Mount Athos, in the Zograf monastery. How the southern Russian Church respected him and how much he valued him, we see from the resolution of the council of 1621. It says here: “send to St. Mount Athos, to call and bring the venerable Russian men, including blessed Cyprian and John, nicknamed Vishnevsky, and others who are there, flourishing in life and theology.” (Monuments of Kiev. comm. vol. I, K., 1848, p. 247). It is not known whether blessed John came to Russia to share her sufferings. But the council, in making its review of John, of course, had in mind his experiments in theology. Nowadays the following are known, written from Mount Athos by Blessed John: a) a message to Prince Ostrog and to all Orthodox Christians with an exhortation to stand in Orthodoxy; b) to the Lviv brotherhood and to Father Job the hermit of the Markova Hermitage - about the same thing. c) Strict reproof for the apostates from Orthodoxy Cyril, Ipatius and Rogoza. All these messages were sent to Russia, together with the message of the Athonite elders, published in the Collection of 1597 in Ostrog, and therefore in 1596. From the Unevsky Monastery, Father John wrote to Elder Domnika an instruction in piety. His essay, written in the Athos cave, has the same content: “A mental disgrace.” (Rukop. Tsarsky No. 486). 159. An unknown-named priest of the Lvov brotherhood, around 1606, in his essay “Prestorog” wrote: “Whoever writes against you, and does not dare to write his name greedily in his books, lest misfortune befalls (overtakes) him, like Stefan the priest, who was drowned in the Lutsk river, who promised to stand against you and confessed” (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, 225). Therefore, the writer hid his name in Prestorog. Prestoroga is a historical and dogmatic work on the union, written by an eyewitness of the Brest Cathedral and the Warsaw Sejm (it was published in the IV volume. Act. Zap. Ross. 149). His study of the Roman bishopric by the ap. Petra is amazing in its clarity and extensive information. His historical information about the course of the union is extremely important for the historian. Ioannikiy Volkovich, Lviv priest, is known: Meditation “on the martyr of Christ,” in verse, Lvov, 1631. Probably, he also translated the tragedy of Gregory the Theologian about the suffering of the Savior, published in Lvov in 1630. 160. Stefan Zizanius, one of the ardent defenders of Orthodoxy and a sufferer for Orthodoxy. In 1591, Metropolitan Michael wrote in his charter: “In the name of God we bless the capable teachers of the Lviv fraternal school Stefan (Zizaniy) and Kirill (Lukar) to preach and evangelize the word of God, and by the authority of our shepherd we declare that they can do this, upon receiving a blessing from the rector, both in the fraternal church of the Dormition of the Mother of God in Lvov, and and in other places" (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 27). And next year we see Stefan as a teacher and preacher in Lvov (Act. Zap. Ross. No. 33). But then an unhappy union opened. Stefan appears in Vilna, no doubt summoned by the brotherhood. He boldly preaches against union. He composes and publishes the “Book of the Roman Church”. The priests of the brotherhood Vasily and Gerasim Pokryalo participate in the affairs of his jealousy. Metropolitan. Rogoza, in order to make it safer to make a hypocritical union with the church, assures the Russian nobles that he is not thinking about union. He has already sent Potsey and Cyril to the king and the pope, and yet he still wants to seem like a shepherd of Orthodoxy. It is clear that Stefan, who publicly revealed to everyone who Rogoza was, was too unpleasant for Rogoza. This is what the metropolitan wrote (dated July 5, 1595): “To the inhabitants of Vilna, especially to Stefan the school didaskal: unpleasant rumors have reached us, and you are in great alarm about us, thinking and holding an indecent thought in your heart, disseminating it among the people, that we sold Orthodoxy to the Eastern Church for the Roman faith... In his sermons, Stefan speaks of this, the same one who, with his accomplices, sowed bloodshed in Lvov, and wants the same in the Principality of Lithuania.” In conclusion, he threatens the brave preacher of the truth with excommunication. At the end of the same year, Michael forbade all Vilna priests from performing priestly services, and forbade Stefan Zizaniy to preach, until his case was considered at the council (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 73, 84, 88). By a conciliar resolution of January 27, 1597, Rogosa declared Stefan Zizanius deprived of the right to preach the word of God and placed him among the catechumens. For what? for the fact, says Rogoza’s definition, that he a) in his teaching did not recognize Jesus Christ as an intercessor; b) “gave a book to the Roman Church.” Stephen's priestly friends were forbidden to perform priestly duties for their participation in matters of his jealousy. Stefan filed (February 1) a protest to the Novogrodsk court, where he wrote that he did not recognize Rogoza’s definition as legal, because his council was not a cathedral, but confusion; no one from the spiritual city of Vilna was there; they tried and convicted in absentia, without requiring any explanation from the person being judged, which the rules of the fathers do not allow; finally, His Grace Rogoza himself became one of the enemies of the Orthodox Church, therefore he cannot be a judge over the Orthodox (Act. Zap. Ross. vol. IV, No. 91,92). Nevertheless, the king, by a district charter dated May 28, 1596, orders that Stefan Zizanius and his priest friends be seized and thrown into prison wherever they are found (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 96). A contemporary, depicting the violence of the Uniates, says: “And Stefan Zizaniy, a school teacher and preacher, who preached against you and clearly published books, you put to shame and risked his life, so that he barely escaped from Vilna, crawling out of a chimney.” (Act. Western Russia. IV, 225). Orthodox Council, chaired by Lviv Bishop Gideon Boloban, October 8. 1596, compiled and published the following definition: “the so-called Metropolitan Michael did not have the right to judge and condemn the teacher Stefan Zizaniy and the priests Vasily and Gerasim. - he is a renegade from St. church, as was revealed at the council." According to the decree, he condemned him “for a book written for the Roman Church,” and Orthodox pastors do not condemn him for this. The accused offered us thoughts, says the council, outlined and printed in a book, and it turned out that his faith in everything agreed with the Eastern Orthodox Church. Therefore, Stefan Zizanius can preach as he preaches, and let the priests officiate without hindrance (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 106). After the death of Rogoza, the zealot of Orthodoxy hastened to appear again at the Vilna fraternal school, so that, as he said, the enemies of Orthodoxy would not take the teaching position. He began to preach here against the union, but as before. According to Potsey, as soon as he was named metropolitan, he raised a storm against Zizaniy. He ordered the Vilna archpriest to expel Stefan from the fraternal monastery, and to report whether Stefan appeared at the fraternal church either on his own or at the invitation of the brotherhood. Stefan replied that he was living in the monastery not at the invitation of the brotherhood, but with the permission of the abbot. The king ordered the magistrate to expel Stefan from Vilna and not let him in in the future. (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 142, 144, 146). Nowadays, his book “against the Roman Church”, which caused so much trouble against him, is unknown. The apostate Smotritsky attacked the works of Zizanius with the most caustic anger, and among other things wrote: “unity will not follow as long as such writers as Stefan Zizanius, Christopher Philalethes and Theophilus Orthologus continue to spoil everything here.” This is the best praise for the learned works of Zizanius. And from it, as well as from official acts, it is clear that Stephen wrote more than one essay against the union. Nowadays only the following scientific works of his are known: a) Exposition of the Faith (printed at ABC, in Vilna, 1596), where he writes that you need to create a cross on yourself with three fingers; b) Kazan St. Cyril about the Antichrist and his signs, with the expansion of science (teaching) against rogue heresies” (published in Vilna, 1596, in Lithuanian-Russian and Polish) with dedication to Prince Ostrog. 161. Lavrentiy Zizaniy Tustanovsky, Archpriest of Koretsky, according to the preface to the Conversations of Chrysostom in 1623, a holy confessor and preacher of the Orthodox faith, a reverent man, didaskal and vitiia, who acquired a good knowledge of the Greek language.” He wrote: a) A grammar of the Slavic language, which was then necessary for schools and published in Vilna in 1596. At the same time he published the ABC with a brief vocabulary. The latter was published by Sakharov in Volume II of Tales of the Russian People. b) Interpretation of the prayer - Our Father, published in Vilna in 1596 c) Catechism, which was subjected to a strict revision in 1627 in Moscow, but published, according to the testimony of Father Sylvester, in Moscow, in fol. without a preface and indication of the year of publication (Tolstoy's manuscript II, No. 226, 285; Table of contents of books § 113). Father Sylvester says that this Moscow edition “has 346 sheets, 67 chapters”; and in the schismatic Grodno editions of 1783–1787, the Catechism already has 80 chapters; this means that the schismatics added their wisdom to the Moscow edition of the Catechism. Lawrence's response in defense of his Catechism in Tolstoy II, no. 226. d) Lawrence participated in the translation of Chrysostom's Conversations on the Epistles of the Apostle Paul, ed. K., 1623 Nestor Kozmenich, according to a charter of 1594, the Orthodox “archpriest of Podchaetsky, named abbot of the Minensky monastery, in 1595, “marshal of the spiritual stake and exarch of the Kiev metropolis,” agreed. together with Gideon, to be under the authority of the pope, but then abandoned that, in 1609 “Archpriest of Podlaskiy and Exarch of the Metropolis of Kiev” (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, 67, 85, 314), dated January 4. In 1609, he wrote a district letter from Zabludov to the Orthodox of Lithuania, where he presented them as an example of the firmness of the Vilna Orthodox residents, who with disgust rejected the cunning proposals of Hypatius Potsey, “cursed by Satan himself,” and urged them to follow their example (Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 179). 162. Zecharia Kopystensky, a student of Volyn schools, governor of the Pechersk Lavra, since November 20, 1624 its archimandrite. “In monasticism, Zechariah Kopystensky, confessor, hating evil and clinging to good, I accept and kiss the brotherhood established in the city of Kyiv, obeying the Apostle, who says: “By brotherly love be kind to one another,” he wrote in 1616 in his signature under the list of members of the brotherhood. In 1615 he wrote “On the Faith of the One Apostolic Church.” The author, hiding from the anger of the papists, wrote in it: “create Hieromonk Azarias X., servant of Jesus Christ,” and did not indicate either the year or place of publication. The word Azarias x, when translated, is: Zechariah. However, the author more than once calls himself Zechariah in the book. In another essay, Father Zacharias writes: “read about this in the book of Azarias L. 246, 1619 issued,” or: “read the book about the Holy Spirit recently issued through Hieromonk Azaria.” Consequently, the work was published in 1619, and its font was Kyiv. The Dictionary (I, 21, 187) in vain divides Azariah into two persons. The work was written mainly against the papists, but the Reformation was not left without attention. In the preface, the writer says: “We, the faithful, are consumed by fiery love and zeal for the house of our God, when we hear, see, read, the uprising of enemies against the dogmas of the Eastern Church and curses against its lawful shepherds. and for the true believers, anxiety... We published the book, keeping in mind that, appearing from different sides with different faiths, they outrage you with depraved words and writings; and by reading this book, you can beware of flattery.” The writer discusses: “about icons, about invoking saints, about commemorating the dead, against the cleansing fire, about fasting, about the pope.” Then placed in the Polish-Russian dialect, in which the entire work is written, the word of Maximus the Greek against the Latins. This essay on faith was transferred to Moscow and entered into northern manuscripts, either in its Polish-Russian dialect or in translation. We see the latter in the manuscript written by the priest John Nasedka, who, of course, was also its translator (Royal manuscript No. 392, 394). Several chapters of this work were included in the book about the united faith, published in Moscow in 1648, but with changes in the arbitrariness of the unreasonable (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 218). More important is the Palinodia of Father Zechariah, or “Defense of St. Catholic Church,” written in 1621, but, unfortunately, still remains in manuscripts (in the Kyiv Lavra; in Tolstoy I, No. 397; in Tsarsky, No. 287). This essay was written in refutation of the Defense of the Union by Lev Krevza, Uniate abbot, ed. in 1618. Here Father Zacharias, with the power of thought and warmth of feeling, amazes the enemy at every step and offers a lot of interesting things about the state of the Orthodox Church. And from this book they transferred several articles to the Moscow Book on the One Faith, published in 1648, spoiling the original text with the nonsense of superstition (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 218). Kopystensky’s work on the truthful unity of Orthodox Christians, divided into three parts and forty chapters, in the original serves as a supplement to Palinodia (in the Lavra library; in Tsarsky No. 286). Two more sermons of Father Zechariah are known: one delivered at the burial of Archimandrite. Elisha of Pletenetsky, the other - at the annual commemoration of him. Both were published in Kyiv in 1625. The latter discusses at length the commemoration of the dead; and a) shows that prayers for the dead were established in apostolic times; b) explains the reasons why they pray for the deceased on the third, sixth, ninth and fortieth days after their death; c) finally arouses contrition for the dead with the memory of judgment. A lengthy preface to Chrysostom’s Conversations on the Epistles of the Apostle Paul, published in K. 1623, was written by “the least of all hieromonk Zacharias Kopystensky.” He also published Chrysostom’s Conversations on the Acts, K., 1624. The preface and dedication of the book to Prince Chetveretinsky are his works. In the preface, Hieromonk Zechariah offers an excellent exhortation to clergy and laity to study the sacred books. Here he writes that at first the translator of the Conversations was “Kir-Gavriil Dorofeevich, cleric of the Lvov church and primikiry of Pechersk,” who was engaged in this translation, as can be seen from the preface to the Lvov edition of the book on the priesthood in 1614, back in Lvov, at the will of Bishop Gideon Boloban; Dorofeevich’s translation, Zechariah further says, was verified according to the Etonian edition by the Svyatogorsk hieromonk Joseph, protosyncellus of the Patriarch of Alexandria; and may God write the rest of the workers in the book of life.” According to the last words, it can be assumed that the modest father Zacharias also participated in the final revision of the translation. “By the will, diligence and blessing of Kir-Zacharia Kopystensky, Archimandrite St. Laurels" translated the interpretation of Andrew of Caesarea on the apocalypse, published together with the Word of Ephraim Sir. on the Transfiguration of the Lord, with the Conversation of Chrysostom, K., 1625. The preface to the second edition of the Nomocanon, K. 1624, written by “hieromonk Zacharias,” speaks of the purpose and benefits of the Nomocanon. This Nomocanon does not show in its author either extensive knowledge of the rules or sufficient prudence. It was compiled on Mount Athos no earlier than the 16th century, that is, at the saddest time. The original was published by Cotelier (Monum. eccl. Gr. I, 68–158, Lutetiae Par. 1677); but the difference in the Greek copies of this Nomocanon shows that even in Greece they were dissatisfied with this bad collection. Father Zacharias, of course, cannot be blamed for choosing a bad subject for translation. The translation was already published in K. 1620. His edition “represented with a large correction”, even when Father Zacharias was an archdeacon, he published in K. 1617 a book of hours with two prefaces: the first - an interpretation of the services, the second talks about the composition and use of the book. “A monk’s salvation is through prayer and work,” says the good monk. 163. Job Boretsky, from 1620 Metropolitan of Kiev (+ 1631). “This metropolitan,” says Saint Demetrius, was pious and wise, skilled in the divine scripture, well-versed in Greek and Latin and taught other languages ​​in schools” (Katikh.). The latter was in the Lvov school, where he studied and taught, even when he was a priest in Kyiv, he was distinguished by his piety and especially by his deeds of mercy. In the rank of abbot of the St. Michael's Monastery, “a pious and knowledgeable teacher in the divine scripture” carefully verified and corrected the Anthologion according to the correct Greek text, and, supplementing it with short lives and services of Russian saints, published it in Kyiv in 1619; and even before that translated by him: the message of Patr. Meletia to the apostate Hypatius Potsey, published in Dermani in 1605, and his Dialogue on the Orthodox Faith, Ostrog, 1606 (Sakharova Bibliography No. 125–129, 178). The fruit of his pastoral zeal for Orthodoxy is “Apollia” (destruction) of the Apology of Meletius Smotrytsky, printed. in Kyiv in 1628. And the following year a district letter was printed, calling for a council, for advice on calming the church. “In the courtyard of Job Boretsky, Metropolitan of Kyiv,” was printed by Spiridon Sobol Dimonar, that is, a flower garden, 1628, translated by the blessed teacher himself. Limonar, in content, is the same as the Patericon of Sinai, and the only difference between them is that the first is divided into 269 chapters, and the last into 333 chapters (Medvedeva, g. 166:184). But the translation of the Patericon is different. The courtyard of Metropolitan Job, where the Limonar was printed, was in vain indicated in the St. Michael's Monastery. This was Job's own house, which he bought in 1616, while still “priest John,” as stated in the deed of October 8. 1616 “Advice on Piety” 1621, without a doubt, was written by the chairman of the spiritual council, Blessed. Metropolitan Job (ed. in the first volume. Pamyatn. Kievsk., K., 1848, pp. 224–251). This work is so excellent that it takes the reader with it to the times of the apostolic men. Here are some of its rules: “To excite and prepare for St. martyrdom - both ourselves, remembering the words of Christ: the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep - and the hearts of the people, and so that they would joyfully endure the plunder and plunder of their property, and would endure, as if for guilt, oppression from the authorities, as well as shackles; finally, willingly, martyrically, accept every death, following the example of the Lord... Write and print books in defense of piety. Basil the Great moaned that they did not write or denounce heresies... There should be a sermon in churches every Sunday and holiday. Establish schools in cities... Do not be angry with the junior and lower ranks if they reminded the bishops and other superiors of something, or warned them against something; on the contrary, allow them to do this, remembering that both kings and patriarchs were warned and denounced, and the patriarchs appointed a special dignitary for this purpose, listed in the catalog of patriarchal dignitaries and called in Greek ὑπομνήστης, and in Slavic a remembrance, to secretly remind the saint...” Then giving other justifications rule, says: “Do not follow the godless papal rule, for which the Most Blessed Patriarch of Alexandria Meletius condemns the pope and his servants. The Roman court dared to establish such a rule that even if the pope dragged tons of people with him to hell, no one should tell him: stop, what are you doing! If bishops and other superiors lovingly allow themselves to make comments and fulfill everything prescribed, then fathers will remain in sons, and sons will remain in fathers, and thus the people’s consent and commitment to them will follow.” “Job the humble Metropolitan of Kiev with his powerful hand”, so signed himself, in beautiful handwriting, blessed. Job (Pogodin Album, No. 128). 164. Isaiah Kopinsky, a student of the Ostrog schools, an ascetic from his youth until his grave, blessed. Metropolitan of Kyiv. He spent 14 years in Anthony's Cave and was its abbot. In 1615, he briefly headed the Epiphany Brotherhood, and under him, the devout Gugulevicheva donated several buildings and a courtyard in Podol for the premises of the fraternal school (Kiev. Mon. vol. II, 17). At the request of the elders, he took upon himself the care of setting up the new Gustinsky monastery, and at his request, Prince Mikhail Vishnevetsky secured the existence of the new monastery with his orders; At his own request, Princess Irina Vishnevetskaya appointed a site for both the Mgarsky Lubensky monastery that he founded and the new Ladinsky monastery, so that the latter would be for women, and the abbess would be the sister of Father Isaiah Alexandra (Gram. ed. in IV vol. Act. Zap. Ross. No. 182, 214–216). From the abbots of the Mezhigorsky monastery, he was dedicated in 1620 to Patr. Feofan as Bishop of Przemysl. The persecution caused by the Jesuits and Uniates forced him to leave Przemysl. He began to live in Mezhygorye as its abbot, but some restless monks forced him to move to poor Gustynya, where 12 of the best monks moved with him from Mezhyhirya. In the Ladinsky skete with the novice Gennady, he dug a cave with his own hands, built cells and other accessories; built and consecrated churches in Gustyn and Mgar. His favorite place to stay was the Ladinsky monastery. “There, it is especially common to live in solitude; “We didn’t want to burden the (Gustinskaya) brethren in any way with our choir and ourselves,” says the Gustinskaya Chronicle. From a secluded monastery, he jealously monitored the successes of spiritual life in the monasteries he established at Gustinskaya, Mgarskaya and Ladinskaya (Letop. Gust. mon., ed. in Cht. Moscow. General history. 1848). When Meletius Smotritsky, returning from the east, settled in the Uniate Dermansky monastery, the management of the Smolensk and Chernigov flock was entrusted to the blessed one. Isaiah. With the title of Archbishop of Smolensk and Chernigov, he was present at the council of 1628, which called Meletius to repentance. In the same rank, he was present at the council when the Service Book, published in Kyiv in 1629, was corrected. After the death of Metropolitan Job of Boretsky, in 1631, he ascended to the department of Metropolitan of Kyiv. “Having sat on the metropolis for two years with all kinds of distress and left the throne by the judgment of some God, he was weakened by old age,” says the humble chronicler, making it clear that Peter (Mogila), whom Isaiah instructed to intercede on his behalf about the affairs of Orthodoxy before the new king, accepted the title of metropolitan not without insulting the truth and the blessed elder, who died in seclusion in 1634. (Gram. about his election in the Act. Zap. Ross. No. 231). Blessed Isaiah lent the church an excellent edifying work: The Spiritual Ladder. This work is published between the works of St. Demetrius of Rostov, but he only owns the translation of the work into the Slavic language. In the Synodal handbook. (No. 146), which belonged to St. himself. Demetrius, the title of the work says: “The ladder of spiritual life according to God was written by Father Isaiah Kopytensky (read: Kopinsky), who was later a metropolitan.” We also see it in other lists (in Tsarsky, No. 229; in Tolstoy II, No. 305). The work of Isaiah consists of a preface, an alphabet or moral sayings arranged in alphabetical order (pp. 4-8), a table of contents, and the ladder itself, which contains 33 chapters. “in the image of the Lord on the earth according to the life of the flesh” (pp. 13–215). Then (pp. 216–260) there are verses: a) diligent invocation to God; b) talking to God; c) speak to God; d) exclamations to God; d) thanksgiving. In the rank of metropolitan, he wrote and sent out “priest clauses,” or brief rules for parish pastors (ed. in Vol. IV. Act. Zap. Ross. IV. 525), and a wonderful “message” to the younger brethren of the Lutsk brotherhood (ed. in Kiev. Pam. I, pp. 112–131). Particularly important in both content and spirit is the saint’s “message” to Prince Jeremiah Vishnevetsky, with an exhortation to return to the ancestral faith. (Ed. in Vol. IV. Act. Zap. Ross. IV, No. 233). 165. Meletiy Smotrytsky, Archbishop of Polotsk, the son of noble and Orthodox parents, gifted, very educated, but ambitious and weak-hearted. Having received his education at the Vilna Jesuit College, he still spoiled himself here with the Jesuit rules, for which neither lies nor the crime of an oath were worth anything. He left the Jesuits with dreams of ambition, albeit with zeal for Orthodoxy. Around 1610, he went abroad with the children of the Lithuanian Volmozhi, as their mentor, to visit German universities. Listening to the lessons of German rationalism, disguised in the name of the Bible, also helped to have a beneficial effect on him. He himself later said about himself that he was imbued with Lutheranism (Apology for Travel). Upon returning to his homeland, he was a teacher at the Iva school, as he says in the preface to the grammar; and before that he became a monk. Having connections with strong zealots of Orthodoxy, he ardently acted for the benefit of Orthodoxy. In this arrangement he wrote in Polish: “The New Roman Calendar”, published in Ostrog in 1597: “Versha on the Apostates”, published in Ostrog in 1598; “A rebuke to caustic writings published by apostates,” Vilna, 1608 (Medvedev, § 12); “The Lamentation of Orthodoxy about the retreat of some from the Apostolic Church,” published in Vilna in 1610 in Polish under the name of Theophilus Orthologus, is an essay written with the power of thought and animation; Greek grammar in Latin. published by Coloniae, 1615; an excellent Slavic grammar for its time, published in Evia in 1619, in Vilna in 1629, in Moscow in 1648 (with omissions and additions); “Kazan to the honest cellar of Leonty Karpovich”, Vilna, 1620. All these works presented Smotritsky to the Orthodox as a zealous teacher of Orthodoxy. That's why the Orthodox asked for patriarchs. Feofan to consecrate him as Bishop of Polotsk and Mogilev. The Patriarch fulfilled their request; but when, during the dedication, Meletius dropped the Gospel, the patriarch, amazed at this incident, said to the metropolitan: “How long will he stay with you?.. he will turn out to be an apostate” (Chronicle of Gustiv Monastery, pp. 14, 15). When the Jesuits and the fanatic Rutsky, the Uniate metropolitan, launched a cruel persecution against the bishops consecrated by the patriarch, Meletius, in 1620, wrote an essay in Polish: “Justification of innocence and refutation of opinions that humiliate the Russian people.” Here he argued that “perfect freedom of religion was given to the Russians by the Grand Dukes of Lithuania, for which the grateful Russian people always tried to seem worthy of the benefits of their monarchs.” Rutsky wrote an argument against this work, “Double Guilt.” Smotrytsky published “Defense of Justification” in Vilna in 1621. When the “Criticism of Defense” was published in the same year, Smotritsky responded with two arguments: “Adding justification to defense” and “Reproaching (Elenchus) caustic writings” of 1622. In November 1623, the Vitebsk Uniate Bishop Josaphat Kuntsevich, who embittered some by inhuman persecution of them for Orthodoxy, was killed. The Uniates and Jesuits did not fail to declare Meletius a participant in the murder. The king ordered the murderers to be executed by death. Meletius lost heart. Rutsky wrote in his “Double Guilt” (1621): “I know a lot about Smotritsky and I’ll say something: he communicated with our (Uniate) leaders for a long time, and some secular people were witnesses; he promised to come over to us himself and to bring his flock into agreement with us.” Although the opinion of such a person as Rutsky does not inspire much confidence in himself; but the subsequent deeds of the weak-hearted seeker of honor lead us to believe that Smotritsky, even before 1623, was not averse to selling his conscience for peace and earthly honors. Be that as it may, Kuntsevich’s formidable history did not find in him a worthy pet of Orthodoxy; he hastened to retire to the east, where he stayed for about three years. On his way back from the east, he appeared in Rome and there he threw himself at the feet of the pope, who by bull declared him archbishop of Hieropolis (titular). This is what the Jesuit Cortispius said in his funeral homily on January 29, 1634, who knew well what was happening in Rome. Returning to Russia, Meletius in 1627 settled in the Derman Monastery without declaring himself a Uniate. But no matter how much he hid himself, they soon noticed a change in him; and both Orthodox and Papists called his removal from Russia the work of a weak soul. Meletius wrote “Protection for travel through the eastern lands”, published in 1628 in the Derman monastery. In this apology, he not only expressed the desire for “the Eastern Church to unite with the Western,” but also wrote offensive slander against the Eastern Church and Russian defenders of Orthodoxy. Here he wrote: “I do not mention Justification, Defense, Exposure and similar works, in which the further I went, the less often I attacked the true dogmas”; that is, he already accused his own writings, written in defense of Orthodoxy. Summoned to the court of the cathedral, although he refused to sign the proposed condemnation of his apology, however, in the sight of everyone, in the cathedral church, he trampled the apology with his feet, as a sign of its solemn condemnation (Ἀπόλλεια 8 apology, Kyiv, 1628). However, after that, he wrote “Protest” with a review, as if against his will he condemned the apology, whose thoughts he recognized and recognizes as completely true, and also published “Letters to Father Boretsky and others, in Derman, 1628.” Then the council solemnly pronounced a condemnation against him, condemning his slander, K., 1628. Meletius issued an appeal to the union, “Admonition (Paraenesis) to the Russian people” (Krakow, 1629), where, among other things, he condemns his own words, which were written in the Lamentation of the Orthologist; then he wrote an essay: “The reprisal between apology and antidote,” Derman, 1629, where he spoke out with all his anger against his former co-religionists and showered them with rude abuse of blind passion. This was the last work of the unfortunate ambitious man. Tormented by his conscience, he died of inflammation of the entrails at the end of 1633, as the mentioned funeral homily of the Jesuit says, and not in January 1663, as the Dictionary says on the contrary (II, 52). 166. Andrei Muzhilovsky, Archpriest of Slutsky, wrote against Meletius' Apology Antidote, published. 1629, the same one that caused the bilious “Massacre” of Meletius. In 1631, under the act of establishing a school in the Lavra, he signed: “Antony Muzhilovsky hieromonk and elder of the Pechersk monastery, moreover, ready to shed his blood.” Eustathius Kisel, having abandoned the union, which offended the rights of conscience and honor, in 1630, wrote under the name of Gelasius Diplitz an Antapology against the same Meletian Apology. 167. Kirill Tranquillion-Stavrovetsky, teacher (didaskal) of the Lviv brotherhood and preacher of the word of God, and finally Archimandrite of Chernigov. His works: a) Teaching Gospel, or words for Sundays and holidays, including the days of famous saints (published in Rakhmanov 1619 and 1668, in Unevsky Monastery 1696). In the dedication to Prince Czartoryski, the writer says that he used the Gospel conversations (Pat. Philotheus), translated from Greek by Princess Sophia Czartoryski, and theological works. In the preface to the reader he writes: “The Vertograd of Christ is overgrown with wild plants; under its shadow snakes crawl, foxes, onagers and wild donkeys jump; its green branches are broken. I saw with my eyes among my fellow tribesmen many such people, both secular and clergy, who were chasing after foreign sciences, after positions contrary to the Church of God, Arian, Lutheran and Calvin, and drowned in honey in these tempting, but destructive for salvation, writings, filling their souls and the souls of others with poison. That is why I became jealous of my brothers, and decided to make a choice from various pious works, first of all from the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, also from holy theologians and teachers, especially from the Gospel conversations (Philotheus).” He goes on to say that he wrote his work not only at the request of pious nobles, but also with the blessing of two exarchs of the east, including the Lvov archpastor Jeremiah of Tissarov. But “the hater of all good things,” says Cyril, raised a cruel war against me from everywhere through some meaningless and absurd people from my family, sharpened their tongue with blasphemy against the holy; Moreover, they were planning to kill me for this book. The Lord did not allow them to do this. And may the Lord my protector not put them into sin. The rotten word of a blasphemous tongue, full of lies and the poison of the hellish serpent, rushed throughout the entire Russian land, confusing the cities and inciting the common people against me; scattered with reproaches, reproaches, ridicule, slander. But the Lord will reveal my innocence.” (The table of contents of words is given by Medvedev in the Table of Contents of Books, No. 124). In Moscow, this work of Cyril, in the opinion of the priest John Nasedka, was recognized as papistic, and by royal decree it was ordered to destroy copies of it (Collected state grams. III, no. 77, p. 298; Palace resolution. vol. I, pp. 980–982; g. II, 821–822). b) The Mirror of Theology, written by didaskal Hieromonk Kirill, was published in the Pochaev Monastery in 1618, in the Unevsky Monastery in 1692. c) Archimandrite of Chernigov composed a valuable pearl - praises to the Mother of God, angels, apostles, also a medicine against the 7 sins, about the Last Judgment and the end of the world. The work was written in verse and prose and published in Chernigov in 1646, in Mogilev in 1690. On the first page “composer or put together these verses Kirill the old Tranquillios Stavrovetsky, Archimandrite Chernegovsky.” The dictionary also distinguishes the praiseworthy words of Cyril, published in Chernigov in 1646; but this is also a valuable Pearl, and the Dictionary did not understand the quotes from the patriarchs. Joachim. on which it was based. 168. Pamva Berynda, hieromonk of Pechersk and protosyncellus of the Jerusalem Church, arch-typographer of Kiev. He previously translated and published books in Lvov, where he lived “in the house of the bright and pious master Theodore Boloban” (preface to the lexicon). There he published Chrysostom's book on the priesthood (Lvov, 1614). There he also wrote and published “Vershe for the Nativity of Christ” (Lvov, 1616). According to his thoughts, Patr. Theophan, during his stay in the south of Russia, had a beneficial effect on the brotherhoods (Act. zap. Ross. IV, 508), and the patriarch’s letters to the brotherhoods of Kyiv, Vilna, Lvov, Minsk were written, no doubt, by Father Pamvo (Act. zap. Ross. vol. IV, no. 219, 220; Kiev. Pam. vol. I). Berynda’s essay “Slavic-Russian Lexicon, Interpretation of Names” ed. in Kyiv 1627, in Kuteinsk. mon. 1653, from Sakharov in Skaz. Russian adv. T. II, 1849. Berynda’s dictionary also lists the sources (various manuscripts and books) from which he borrows words and explanations of words; therefore, for ancient philology it is a treasure. Sakharov excluded all references to sources from his publication, did not act as an accurate publisher, and deprived critics of the means to verify the merits of the dictionary. Berynda did his job with honor. Sakharov misunderstood the meaning of the ancient dictionary, demanding from him the merits of a philosopher and historian, mythologist and theologian, while the job of the author of an ancient dictionary is to present the words in the meaning in which they were taken in the old days; otherwise: to present a faithful collection of thoughts from the old time; this is what Berynda did. 169. Lavrentiy Drevinsky, “the cup maker of his cor. mercy of the land of Volyn"; This is how he signed in 1617 in the list of founders of the Lutsk brotherhood; and we read the same signature under the sheet of Volyn nobles, given in 1619 to the Lutsk townspeople to protect the brotherhood. He was also the elder brother of the Vilensky brotherhood. For the persecuted Orthodox Church, he was in his time the same as Prince Ostrogsky was before him - the most zealous defender of its rights before the government; why in the old Lutsk monument it is called “the pillar of Eastern Orthodoxy.” His “speech,” delivered at the Warsaw Sejm in 1620 in the face of Sigismund and his senators, is extremely touching both in its subject and in its depiction (it was published in the Eastern Union, pp. 69, 731). His Protestation in 1630 to the Starostinsky court about the theft by the Uniates of the property of the Vilensky brotherhood, unfortunately, not all survived (ed. in IV volume. Act. Zap. Ross. No. 229). Based on the content of the work, it is very likely that he also owned the “Synopsis”, printed in Vilna in 1632 and presented that same year on September 27 to the new king Vladislav. A historically valuable work, written in Polish, contains the privileges given by the Polish government to the Russian Orthodox people, and an image of the terrible oppression that they endure for their faith. In Kyiv, says the Synopsis, the St. Sophia Cathedral and other churches are devastated, the Vydubitsky Monastery is the same; in Lutsk, Orthodox churches have been converted into drinking houses; in Helm, Lvov and other cities it is forbidden to openly wear St. secrets to the sick and to bury the dead; in Vilna the churches are occupied by taverns and hotels. Officials and guild people are deprived of the right to command ranks and positions and are locked in prisons; court and other courts torment the Orthodox with continuous calls to court and unconscionable decisions. It is prohibited to accept donations for churches under spiritual wills and to build stone churches. In Minsk, church land was given over to a mosque. In Polotsk, those who did not want union were imprisoned and expelled from the city. In Turov, churches with their property were taken away and the bishop was expelled. In Minsk, priests were imprisoned in barrels and tortured. In Orsha, Mogilev, Mstislavl and in all the surrounding towns, churches were sealed and Orthodox Christians were forbidden to gather for prayer even in country huts. In Kovna, the church was plundered and its land was taken away. In Belzhsk it was determined: anyone who does not go with the Uniates in the procession to the church will be executed by death. In Mätzel, those who did not agree to the union were expelled from their place of residence. Monasteries: Lavrashev, Grodno and others were devastated. With such widespread persecution against Orthodoxy, bishops visited their flock in no other way than secretly. (See Vilna Act. Vol. II, No. 42. Vilna, 1843). Tarasy Zemka, hieromonk of Pechersk, according to Kalnofoysky’s epitaph, “the manager of the printing house, the Pechersk preacher, who knows the languages ​​Greek, Latin, Slavic and Russian” († 1632). His study of the liturgy was published in the Service Book, K., 1628. It says: a) about the names of the liturgy; b) about the importance of the liturgy and worthy preparation for it; c) from whom was it installed and transmitted? There is no shortage of information about the beginning of church hymns and about church hymns in his preface to the Colored Triodion (ed. K. 1631), where he signed as follows: “hieromonk Tarasy Levkovich Zemka, preacher of the word of God and proofreader in the printing house of the Kyiv Pechersk Monastery.” He translated the Synaxari Callista, ed., into the then-used Russian language. in Lenten Triodion, K., 1627 170. Peter (Mogila), originally from the princes of Moldova, educated in Paris, from 1626, Archimandrite of the Pechersk Lavra, from 1631, Metropolitan of Kiev, famous for his concern for improving the Kyiv Collegium, where he introduced the teaching of philosophy and theology, and for the establishment of Vinnitsa and Goisky schools; a zealous and active shepherd. He died in 1646 (about his life, see his Addendum to the works of Fathers IV, 22–76). The handwritten Notes of the Graves, snoring in the Sofia Library, are unfortunately lost. (About Soph. Sob. 180). In 1632, his teaching “about the cross of our Lord and every Christian” was published in Kyiv. In the Russian translation, part of it is in Christian Reading, 1837. Another experience of his preaching was the word on marriage of Janusz Radziwił (Mowa duchowa, published in K. 1645), where he speaks about the dignity and responsibilities of the marriage union. Monuments of his piety when recording the establishment of a school in the Lavra, ed. in Description K. Laurels No. 4–6. “The Vow to Establish Schools” and “Spiritual Testament” – ed. in the II volume. Kievsk. Pam. pp. 93–99, 149–181. Certificate to the Lviv brotherhood, affirming piety, in Kiev. Pam. III, pp. 86–89. Certificate to Belsky citizens with a blessing for the establishment of a brotherhood, with a school - in the Act. zap. Ross. V, No. 9. The best essay of the Mogila is an essay against the union: Λίθος or a stone to crush the slander of Kassiyan Sakovich" (Ayo; abo kamien z rgosu prawdy cerkwie swietey prawoslawney Ruskiey. Kiow. 1644. 4. 423). Russian translation of the essay in handwritten form. Tolstoy II, No. 172; to Moscow spirit. acad. No. 83. On this last one one can read the inscription: “This book, having corrected the typos, is worthy to be printed; for the objections of the Uniyats against our Orthodox Church have been thoroughly refuted. Metropolitan Plato Moscow 1805. Oct. 21 days.” Eusebius Pimin signed the preface of this book. But Golyatovsky, in his essay: Foundations of the Union, wrote: “if Mogila is a Uniate, then why did he issue the book: Λίθος albo stone”? Sakovich, in his work: Perspectiva, Cracoviae, 1642, accused the Orthodox of the south of assimilating the opinions of the Reformation, of corrupting sacred rites, and of ignorance of the clergy. Mogila examines Sakovich's accusations in detail, showing everyone that all his accusations are nothing more than slander. Between the followers of the Reformation and the Orthodox, says Mogila, despite their occasional rapprochement with each other, there was and is no agreement in faith, while “in Vilna, near Krakow, Poznan, and in other cities there are many Lutherans, Calvinists and Socinians, both among nobles and among ordinary people, not from the Orthodox, but from those who belonged to the Roman Church.” The picture representing the state of the monasteries captured by the union is striking (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 314, 315). In 1640, the Metropolitan, in a district message, explained the oppression that the Orthodox suffered, invited zealots of Orthodoxy to a council for a meeting on spiritual matters (Last ed. in Reading General History, 1847). The assembled learned abbots of the monasteries discussed the objects of faith, which were attacked either by the papists or by the followers of the Reformation (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 146–152). The council lasted a long time. Then the Confession of Faith of the Russians was proposed for consideration. In the Discourse on the book: Orthodox Confession of Faith, St. Petersburg, 1808, it was written that this Confession was composed by Metropolitan Peter Mogila. But the author of the Discourse in his later works - in the Description of the St. Sophia Cathedral (p. 176, published in 1825) and in the Dictionary of Writers (II, 159) already said that at the cathedral “the Catechism was heard, composed by the Kiev-Nicholas Monastery by Abbot Isaiah Trofimovich.” This Catechism, in a Greek translation compiled in Kyiv, was sent to the shepherds of the east for consideration, where it remained for a long time (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 149–152). In 1643, the apostate Feodor Skuminovich, in justifying his apostasy (Reasons for leaving the union § 3, 4), wrote that the three-year council (1640–1642) did not justify Russian Orthodoxy; the ambassadors returned from Iasi without success; the Greeks said that the Russians did not have to teach them; Russian scientists do not know how to answer the simplest questions. The Metropolitan, in refutation of the slander, ordered that the Short Catechism of the Orthodox Faith be printed (published in Kyiv in 1645, in Leo in 1646, in Kuteinsk monastery in 1686, in Chernigov in 1707 and 1715). In the Kiev edition the title of the Catechism is: “A collection of short science about the articles of the Orthodox-Catholic Christian faith, knowledge (according to) knowledge (teaching) and science of the Church of St. eastern cathedral apostolic, for the flowering (enlightenment) and science of all the flowering (enlightened) Christians in its schools. Orthodox children. For the story (with permission) and the blessing of the elders, first in the Polish language, and now in the Russian dialect, given out of hand.” If a book is approved by the “elders” and is published with their blessing, then the author of the book, of course, is not the metropolitan, but someone junior. This catechism, translated into the Slavic language, and spoiled by the arbitrariness of superstition, was published in Moscow in 1649 (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 219). With special attention, the blessed metropolitan occupied himself with the revision and publication of liturgical books. Thus, he published a service book (K. 1639 and 1629) and a Euchologion (K. 1646). In the latter there is a remarkable preface by Mogila with comments on previous editions of the breviary and showing what he has done to improve the breviary. In the preface to the service book of 1639, he wrote: “No blessing was given out to those who, from the flock of our service book to the friend of Lvovsky, named the liturgiary, covered and liturgisated on them, as if the wider sheets issued were chanting within themselves.” Such a district charter of his has not yet been found. The prohibition probably referred to Slozka's service book, ed. in Lviv in 1637. For schools, the guardian metropolitan published in K. 1636 Anthologion - a collection of reflections and prayers borrowed from church books. The publisher of the Lvov Color Triod of 1642, addressing Metropolitan Mohyla, says: “Your Eminence has determined that not a single book translated from Greek into the Slavic language should be published without your consideration. Your other labors are not enough for you: you are working on revising St. Bible, wanting to publish it at his own expense.” We don’t know what and how much the hardworking shepherd managed to accomplish in revising the Bible; but it is known that he did not publish the Bible. St. Demetrius, in the preface to the September quarter, Menaeus writes that he is blessed. Peter Mogila began to try to restore the memory of the saints, copied Simeon’s metaphrases from Athos and wanted to print them in translation, but death prevented him from fulfilling his intention. 171. Joseph Trizna, a pupil of the Kyiv school, abbot of the Vilna Spiritual Monastery, since 1647 archimandrite of Pechersk, in 1649 he was sent as metropolitan to the Sejm in Warsaw along with the deputies of Khmelnytsky. He died in 1656. He wrote the preface to the service book (published in Kyiv, 1653) about the importance and use of this book. He also revised and supplemented the Pechersk Patericon; this work of his is known by hand. Contents of the Patericon Trizny printed. on Thursday M. General ist. 1846 Joachim Ierlich, Kiev gentry, a contemporary of Trizna, wrote home notes in Polish, where he described the management of the church by Metropolitan Peter Mogila (rukop) 172. Sylvester Kossov, teacher of Lvov, prefect of the Kyiv Collegium, Bishop of Mogilev and from 1647 Metropolitan of Kiev, who died in 1657. Jesuits and Uniates, out of anger at the successes of the Kyiv Collegium, disseminated slander among the people, as if its sciences were heretical sciences, and its teachers were Calviists or Socinians. The simpleton priests and Cossacks, deceived by them, made a noise: why are they starting a Latin and Polish school? and once “they wanted to beat Peter Mogila himself and the teachers to death: they were barely persuaded” (Dometsky). Under these circumstances, Sylvester Kossov, “Elect Bishop of Mogilev,” wrote an Apology for the Schools (Elegesis abo danie sprawy o szkolach Kiowskich i Winnickich, w Lawrse, 1635). In it, he, having explained the difference between the confessions of the Arian (Socinian), Calvin and Luther, from the Orthodox confession, writes that the teachers of the college firmly follow the teachings of the Orthodox Church; Latin is taught in the college because it is necessary for Russians in Polish courts, where paperwork is carried out in Latin or with Latin terms and expressions; the Greek language is not neglected in the college; In addition, Russians have been studying Latin for a long time in schools in Lvov and Vilna, and others abroad. In the same 1635, Sylvester published the Pechersk Patericon in Polish in an abbreviated form, but with his own comments and a list of metropolitans (printed in Kyiv, 1635). In the preface, Sylvester writes: “Visiting the Kyiv caves and the tombs of St. fathers and marveling at the incorruption of their holy bodies, more than once I cried bitterly that an unhappy and envious time had not yet revealed to the light the elect of God, whom God himself glorified. When our current archpastor (Peter Mogila) expressed his care and will that the lives of the saints be cleansed of dust and published; Then I willingly delved into the chronicles and annals of Greek, Slavic, Latin, Russian and Polish in order to find out who these chosen ones of God were and when they lived.” From here it is clear what the work of the translator for the Paterik consisted of. Essay by archpast. Sylvester about the seven sacraments, which he read in 1637 before a meeting of priests, was published in Kuteinsk in the same year. monastery, then in Kremenets in 1638, with the book: “Lutsk Cathedral”, then in Kutein 1653, in Kyiv 1657, in Chernigov 1716 “Look at the book about the seven sacraments of His Grace Father Bishop of Mstislavsky, glorious in God, and then printed in Russian with the name of His Grace Father Bishop Lutsky": this is what Mogila wrote in his book: Stone, published in 1644. Signature of Sylvester in Pogodin’s Album. M. 1853 173. Athanasius of Kalnofoisky, a monk of the Caves Monastery, composed in Polish “Teraturgima or miracles, both in the Caves Monastery itself and in both St. caves", with historical comments about the monastery. The pious narrator counts up to 64 miracles contemporary to him (1594–1638), adding an oath from each person who announced a miracle that happened to him. This entire description was undertaken and completed in order to refute the malicious slander of the Uniates and Jesuits, as if there were no more miracles in the Orthodox Church. With the same intention, together with the work of Kalnofoysky, published in Kyiv in 1638, the work of Hilarion Denisovich, abbot of Kupyatitsky was published: Description of the miracles of the Kupyatitsky Icon of the Mother of God. 174. Ignatius Oksenovich-Starushich, rector and abbot of the Kyiv fraternal monastery, the tombstone of the prince is known. Ilya Chetvertinsky, ed. in Kyiv 1841 (Bible. Chertkova). The first part of the word shows in a continuous line the origin of the Chetvertinsky princes from ancient times; the second talks about the military exploits of the prince. Elijah, the third is about his Christian virtues. At the same time, the Chronicle of 1498–1648 was written in Lvov, at first brief, then with many interesting eyewitness reports. Towards 1621, the writer remarked: “My father died the same way. I brought a fever into the house from school and everyone in the house was worried.” Letop. ed. in 111 t. East. collection M. 1838 175. Meletius Syrigus, originally from Crete, studied in the west, teacher and protosyncellus of Constant. church, who gained great fame for his criticism of the Confession of Faith, published in the name of Patr. Kirill Lukaris. This criticism is also known in the modern Slavic translation: “Meletius Siriga is a counterverb to the stated confession of faith” (Tsarsky No. 246). At the Council of Iasi in 1643, Meletius, as the patriarchal plenipotentiary, considered the “Confession of Faith of the Rosses,” sent by Metropolitan Peter Mogila; The confession was corrected and, approved, sent to the patriarch; and Meletius arrived in Kyiv in 1643 and then was in Moscow. The library of the New Jerusalem Monastery preserves the works of Meletius of Crete, written in 1643: a) “the legend of St. to the Portaitskaya icon, when I arrived at the Iveron monastery"; b) about St. Iverskaya monastery; c) the legend of St. Mount Athos; d) “memory of Rev. the father of our laborers in the Kyiv cave.” His canon to the Pechersk Fathers, corrected here and there, is still printed in Kyiv. In the Synodal Library, in addition to this service, there is Meletius’ service to the position of the Savior’s tunic. 176. Afanasy (Prince Alexander) Puzina, Lutsk bishop 1633–1649 (Addition to foreign act. No. 69), zealous shepherd. In 1638, at the local Lutsk cathedral, he approved Bishop Sylvester’s “Instruction on the Mysteries” for his clergy, and the act of the council, together with the instruction, was then published in Kremenets, where a brief Slavic grammar was also published. (Temporary General History 1849 I, mixture, p. 10). He signed the Patriarchal Council of 1642, which justified the memory of the patriarch. Kirill Lukaris (East Russian ts. IV, 151). In 1648, when Khmelnytsky rebelled to defend the faith and freedom of the Cossacks, Vladyka Lutsky sent money, gunpowder, cannons and bullets to help Khmelnytsky’s army (Kiev. Pam. 1, 60–63). His district charter dated October 12, 1647 is curious. The archpastor wrote: “An honest cleric in the Lord, Herodeacon St. By the grace of Father Arseny Zheliborsky, Bishop of Lvov, Mikhail Gunashevsky, a former student of the glorious Zamoysk Academy, a pious zealot of theological science, brought a complaint to his bishop and pastor about the atrocities of Mark Yansevich, the Zamoysky tradesman, and his like-minded people... the disorderly brothers of the Zamoyski Brotherhood of the Church of St. Nicholas; they, having forgotten the fear of God, violate the ancient customs of church deanery, throw out the offertory from the Church of God, that is, offerings on the feasts of the Lord and on the days of deliberate saints.” For this, the archpastor excommunicates the guilty from the church. The action of the Zamoyski brothers echoed the same spirit of Lutheranism that the Lviv brotherhood was carried away by (§ 154). We have testimony from another contemporary about the Zamoyska Academy as a place of education for many Orthodox Christians. Peter Mohyla, dedicating the Triodion of the 1631 year to Vice-Chancellor Thomas Zamoyski, wrote: “I cannot remain silent about that beneficial deed, the perpetrators of which are also members of your famous Family - about the Zamoyska Academy, which has brought so much benefit to our people in that many learned, active and important people have come out of it, and very useful for our Orthodox Church.” The complaint of Bishop Athanasius, filed in court in 1634 against the Jesuits, who attacked the Orthodox Christians with weapons in their hands, is mentioned in the Protest (Kiev. Memorial I, 204, 205, 216). Arseny Zheliborsky, Bishop of Lvov 1641–1650, who signed the definitions of the Patriarchal Council of 1642 on the Calvinists (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 199). To distribute books needed in the church, he, following the example of his predecessor Gideon Boloban, opened a printing house in Lvov at his expense. This is what he writes in the preface to the missal he published in 1645. His prefaces to those published by him in his printing house are known: the missal of 1646, the catechism of 1646, the nomocanon of 1646. The short catechism, published by him in Lvov in 1646, was published in a new translation. In the Kiev edition the language is scholarly Little Russian, in the Lvov edition the language of Galician Rus. Here is the title of the Lvov Catechism: “A collection of a short science about the articles of the Orthodox-Catholic Christian faith, as the emerging apostolic church teaches; and for the celebration of young people, it was given in Lvov, at the capital’s church of St. great martyr George." Joel Trutsevich, abbot of the Orsha Kuteinsky Monastery, invited by Patriarch Nikon to the Iversky Monastery in 1654, fell ill on the road and asked that his bones be moved to the place where his soul, which honored the great Nikon, longed: “I,” he said, “I will preserve my obedience to the shepherd even after death” (Ist. Russian. IV, 44). In the southwest he was known for his zeal for the publication of useful books. He wrote intelligent prefaces to the books he published in the Kuteinsky monastery: to the Spiritual Book, that is, the Psalms, 1639, to the Trefology of 1647, to the Diopter of 1651, to the Psalms and the New Testament of 1652, to the Berynda Lexicon of 1653. Preface to the Trephology, abridged against Lvovsky, depicts the disasters of the church oppressed by papism (book of Tolstoy, pp. 237, 238). 177. Zinovy ​​Bogdan Khmelnitsky, the famous hetman of the Cossacks, is as brave and intelligent as he is famous for his love for St. faith. He received an excellent education: he knew the languages ​​Greek, Latin, Polish, Tatar; first he attended lessons at the Kyiv school, then in Yaroslavl with the Jesuits; served at court; fought with the Turks and was captured by them. When the suffering of Little Russia reached its extreme, he took it upon himself to save it from imminent destruction and saved it. He died in 1657, bitterly mourned by the people, grateful to him for their freedom. His letters from 1647–1648 are to Kievsk. Pam. I, 1–5, 47 49, 77–81, 118–131, 162, 212, 307: in Add. to foreign act. pp. 175–178; in Wieliczka I, 32–43, 75, 80–89. Letters and universals 1649–1653 – to Kievsk. Memorial I, 377–395, 462; vol. II, dep. I, 210–212; dept. III, 9–18, 57–63, 148–162, 211; Vol. III. 31–35, 53–58; in Additional to foreign act. 188; in Wieliczka I, 139–143; in Markevich III, 77–79; On Thu. General ist. 1 8 4 8 , No. 8; in the Act. zap. Ross. V, 25–35. Letters and universals 1654–1657 – to Kievsk. Pam. III, 116–120, 128–152; in the Act. zap. Ross. V, no. 36–49; in Additional to foreign act. 192–195, 198, 201, 203, 205, 206; in Wieliczka 1, 167, 188; at Grebenka 127; in Markevich III, 92–94, 99–102. The most remarkable of them: a) a letter, dated December 29, 1647, to Pototsky, with a calculation of the insults inflicted on the Cossacks, especially by faith (Velichko I, 36–69; Kiev. Pam. I, 1–5); b) universal to all of Ukraine, dated May 28, 1648, where he vividly depicts the cruel oppression of the Poles to the Cossacks in faith, honor, property, life itself, and convinces them to rebel. to protect their rights; this is an animated and masterfully written speech (Act. zap. Ross. 23; Velichko I, 81–89; Markevich 1, 175–186; III, 36–43); c) a letter to the king, dated July 2, 1648, with complaints about “unbearable grievances” and with a promise to make amends to the king with services if fair defense is provided (Kiev. Pa. I, 118–131; Act. zap. Ross. V, no. 24); d) message to Patriarch Nikon (March 27, 1657), with a request to petition the Tsar, so that the Metropolitan and all the clergy of Little Russia would be approved of their ancient advantages (Act. Zap. Ross. V, No. 48). Adam Methodius Kisel, senator, governor of Bratslav and then Kiev, very educated and pious. The publisher of the colored triodion (Lvov, 1642), dedicating the triodion to him, wrote: “Your nobleness loves to read St. writing and singing church hymns, for which purpose keep the spiritual fathers of strict monks with you and build comfortable monasteries for them.” (Tolstoy No. 96). The senator-voivode used everything to maintain the integrity of the kingdom, which he served by oath, and to defend Orthodoxy, which he did not want to change for any benefit of the earth. “You and the entire army know well,” he wrote to Khmelnitsky, that I am one of the Christians of the Russian people, serving as a senator in the Polish crown, wearing St. our churches and antiquities and inviolably preserved my faith until my gray hairs, and, God willing, I will preserve them until my death” (Kiev. Pam. I, 144). He kept St. faith to the grave, while all other Russian magnates retreated to papism; but his efforts for the integrity of the kingdom, due to the actions of the Jesuits and selfish magnates, remained fruitless, which, however, he did not live to see, dying in 1653. Of his letters that have reached us (ed. in Kiev. Pam. 1, 27–42, 89–92, 141–148, 190–198, 202–211, 216–225, 239–247), the most remarkable is his letter to the senator Archbishop of Gnieznensky (1648), where he describes the plight kingdoms and depicts the exploits of the Cossacks, trying to bring the distraught magnates and fanatics to reason (Kiev. Pam. I, 27–42). 178. Joseph Nelyubovich-Tukalsky, from 1661 Archbishop of Mogilev, from 1663 Metropolitan of Kiev, suffering shepherd. Elected metropolitan by the clergy and people, he was captured by the Poles in 1664 and imprisoned in Marienburg; Here he languished for more than two years. Released in 1667 by Doroshenko, in 1668 he received confirmation from the patriarch of the rank of metropolitan with the title of exarch. Not trusting Poland in anything, with which Russia was then reconciled, giving it the right bank of the Dnieper, Nelyubovich remained in Chigirish under Doroshenka; but he strictly condemned the deeds of his benefactor. Ukraine was favored to him by the fact that in the conditions with Hetman Demyan it was supposed to keep Kyiv for Russia: “Kyiv should not be given to the Poles: at the Sejm they decided to give all Orthodox churches to churches and they want to distribute the relics throughout Poland” (Markevich II, 184). Unable to do anything more for the freedom of the church, Nelyubovich suffered in his soul for his suffering flock, who highly revered him, and died (1676) in Chigirin, far from his pulpit. Baranovich honored his memory with a beautiful funeral song (Velichko II, 384–388; Ist. Russian ts. IV, 75, 76). In response to Ordyn-Nashchokin, he wrote (August 9, 1670): “Because of my iniquities, which are countless, I do not recognize myself as a suffering soul for piety... My soul is in sorrow. How can I call myself a shepherd when the flock is confused! ABOUT! may He who created and redeemed him with his blood gather him together! (Bant. Kamensky II, pr. 193, 195). His two letters to the prince. Yuri Trubetskoy, Kiev voivode - in the Simbirsk Collection 111, pp. 32, 54). Letter (1669) by which he cedes the town of Stayki, donated to him by Doroshenko, in favor of Kievsk. collegium - in Kievsk. Pam. II, 232–237. His teachings are hand-drawn. Kyiv Lavra (Description of Sofiysk. Sob. p. 196). 179. Theodosius Safonovich, teacher and preacher of Kiev, since 1665 abbot of the Golden-Domed St. Michael's Monastery, wrote: “Exposition” or teaching “about the church and its secrets,” ex. in Kyiv 1666, 1668, in the Unevsky monastery. 1674, and was exposed in Moscow under Patr. Joachim was severely criticized for his doctrine of the Eucharist. “Speech” to his Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich ex. at Bant. Kamensky in East. Malor. II, pr. 179. His “Chronicle” about the events of Russia before 1290 was taken from the Kyiv and Volyn Chronicles; to this were added some fragmentary news about subsequent events in Russia, and then a brief chronicle of Poland and Lithuania, taken from Stryjkovsky (Starczewsky in Ist. ist. lit. 73–82). Mikhail Lositsky, hieromonk of the Gustinsky Hermitage, in 1674 wrote the “Chronicle” of southwestern Russia (ed. in the II volume. Collected Years) and around the same time - the Chronicle of the Gustinsky Monastery. Both contain a lot of rare and important news for church history. The Chronicle describes the events of 840–1597. Its news is important especially since 1300. 180. Innocent Gisel, was sent, as Dometsky writes, among others to foreign schools for education; in 1648–1650 he was rector of the college, and from 1656 he was promoted from abbot of Nikolaevsky to archimandrite of the Pechersk Lavra and in this rank was respected in the south. He died in 1684. He wrote: a) “The peace of man with God,” or about the power of repentance, for example. K. 1669, 1671, the essay is not strong; b) “On the True Faith,” or the answer to the Jesuit Boyme about the power of the pope, is a weak essay; c) “Synopsis” of Russian history before Tsar Feodor Alekseevich - a translation of the Chronicle of Safonovich, supplemented with something, weak, but the first, experience of history, for example. in K. 1674, 1676, 1678, 1680 Before the history of Lomonosov. this book, in the absence of others, was a classic. The fruit of Gisel's zeal for St. Lavra - edition of the Patericon of Pechersk, K., 1661, where, unfortunately, the text of the ancient narrators is greatly damaged. His letter to Tsar Alexei in Opis. Pechersk Laurel. K., 1847, p. 172. 181. Ioannikiy Golyagovsky, who studied and taught at the Kyiv Collegium, abbot Kupyatitsky, 1659–1662 rector of the college, since 1672 archimandrite of the Seversky Monastery, gifted and knowledgeable. † 1688. 1. As a preacher, Golyatovsky wrote: a) The Key of Understanding - Teachings for All Holidays, ed. in Kyiv 1659. In the second edition (Kyiv, 1660) there are two additions: a) a very remarkable science of composing sermons, and b) several new words. The Lvov edition of 1665 contains some more additions (Tolstoy No. 123, 135). b) The Tale of the Miracles of the Mother of God under the name: “The New Heaven, Created with New Stars,” ed. in Lvov 1665, in Chernigov 1677, in Mogilev 1699. Russian translation into handwritten version. Tolstoy II, No. 352; new translation in M. 1851. Even with the Key of Understanding, according to Kievsk. ed. 1659, a description of 100 miracles of the Mother of God was added. c) In 1671, summoned to Moscow as a famous scientist, he spoke at court on the 20th week. and speech to the king. His word and nine letters to the kings are in the Bible. General ist. No. 98. d) Description of the miracles of the Chernigov Yelets Icon of the Mother of God, with words of praise and verses to the same icon, printed. in 1676 in Novgorod. under the name of the Skarbnitsa (Tolstoy No. 156). 2. In Ioannicia we also see a Christian apologist. a) His essay The Truthful Messiah, or a conversation between a Christian and a Jew about the true Messiah, in Polish, ed. to Novgorod. North 1668, in southern Russian - in Kyiv 1669 and 1672. The preface describes the case on which this essay was written: a remarkable case. “Orthodox Christian people! write on your heart the sins of the Jews... Write firmly in your memory how, in recent times, in 1660, in Volyn, in Podolia, throughout Little Russia, in the entire Principality of Lithuania and in the Kingdom of Poland and in other border countries, the unpiety of the Jews raised the horns of its pride, spread its self-will and began to trumpet for its glorification that it appeared in on the eastern side, in Smyrna, someone called Sebeth, who pretends to be the Jewish Messiah, calls and attracts Jews to himself with false miracles, promises the Jews to return Jerusalem and Palestine - their homeland, to free them from the bondage in which they find themselves, scattered among the nations. The stupid Jews, having been deceived, celebrated, had fun, rejoiced that the Messiah would take them to Jerusalem on a cloud and see them off on a cloud. And wherever the cloud appears, the Messiah will take them to Jerusalem on it. Then the Jews abandoned their houses and estates and did not want to do anything; Here the Messiah, they said, would immediately lead them to Palestine, to Jerusalem. They fasted for their Messiah for several days, even the children were not allowed to eat for the whole day; in winter, in the severe cold, they washed themselves under the ice, reading a newly composed prayer. And many Jews died from the severe cold, swimming in cold water under the ice. Every day and night they went to their houses of prayer, and there they shouted, performing their unclean services; They prayed to God that the Messiah would come to them soon and accompany them to their homeland. Then they greatly exalted themselves before the Christians, laughed at them, composed boasts, threatened their false Messiahs, promised to take revenge on the Christians who ruled over them: behold, they said, we will be your lords, hetmans, governors, senators; all Christian lords, princes and kings will be coachmen, shepherds, farmers, reapers among the Jews... This false Jewish Messiah, called Nathan Levi, will be found by everyone in this book between the false Messiahs and the false prophets of the Jews... Some of the Christians, being cowardly, hearing about the miracles of the false Messiah, seeing the self-praise of the Jews, began to worry about Christ, whether he was the true Messiah, and began to incline their thoughts towards the false Jewish Messiah. That's why we wrote the book. Let them not worry about the false Messiah, let them firmly believe that our Christ is the true Messiah.” The work was written by “the unworthy hieromonk Ioaniy Golyatovsky, Archimandrite of Chernigov” (Description of Tolstoy’s book No. 142; Tsar’s No. 198). In 1672, this book was presented to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (Molodik 1844, p. 287). b) The Swan, or the reasons for the spread of Mohammedanism, in Polish. language to Novgorod. North 1679 Translation from Tolstoy II, 26. Refutation of Alkoran Magometov - Alkoran Magometov from the Kohelet of Christ destroyed, published in Polish. language in Chernigov in 1688. The work is dedicated to Tsars John and Peter Alekseevich. The translator of the embassy order, Gadzelovsky, translated it into Russian (Description of the manuscript of Tolstoy I, No. 236). c) The filthy gods, ed. in Polish-Russian. in Chernigov, in 1686. The essay is dedicated to Princess Sophia. 3. Ioannikios was especially famous, and was worth his fame as a polemicist. No one has ever denounced the Jesuits with such dexterity and such knowledge of the matter; no one has remained victorious over them with such triumph as Golyatovsky. Even the Uniates were in a hurry to read his works. a) The Belotserkovskaya conversation was the first and brilliant experience of Ioannikiev’s polemic with the Jesuits. In the middle of the 17th century, the Jesuits and Uniates, in words and on paper, carried out the dirtiest blasphemies against the Eastern Church, calling it new, Aryan, schismatic. “From the Little Russian Church,” writes Gabriel Dometsky, in a letter of 1706, “famous theologians Archbishop Lazar of Chernigov and Archimandrite Ioannikiy Golyatovsky were chosen to answer the Fanatics.” The Belotserkovskaya conversation is the same conversation that Ioannikiy had in 1663 with the Jesuit Pekarsky in the town of Belaya Tserkov. The subject of the conversation was the church hierarchy. The conversation was published in Polish, together with Skarbnitsa, in Chernigov, in 1676; it is also included in the Wieliczka Chronicle II, 42–76. The Russian translation of the Conversation remains in hand. libraries of the Patriarchs, Sofia, Rumyantsev (No. 376. Description p. 555). b) The old eastern church of the new western church shows the procession of the Holy Spirit from the one Father. The work was written in refutation of two works: against the work of Nikolai Tsikhovich on the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son (published in Krakow 1659) and against the book of the Jesuit Bened. Boyms - about the power of the pope and the procession of the Holy Spirit (published in Vilna 1668). Golyatovsky in his essay 1) gives positive arguments regarding the origin of the Holy Spirit from the Father, arguments from Holy Scripture, teachers of the Eastern Church, teachers of the West; 2) analyzes and refutes the arguments of the Roman Church about the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son, arguments borrowed from Holy Scripture, from the teachers of the church, from the decisions of councils, from reason; 3) in particular, examines those passages of teachers where the text is damaged or taken from forged works. The essay is written in Polish and ed. in Novgorod Seversk. 1678 82 and 102 pp. c) Answer to the Romans on their book: Fundamentals of Faith (Union). This is a response to a book written by the clever arch-Jesuit Skarga. Essay by Ioannikis in Polish. ed. in Chernigov 1683 d) Souls of dead people, or a study of the state of souls after death in heaven, hell, and ordeals, with comments against the purgatory of the papists and against the opinion of the Reformation about the unconscious sleep of souls; ed. in Polish-Russian language in Chernigov 1687 e) The alphabet of heretics, as a warning to the Orthodox, is printed in Polish. in Chernigov 1681, p. 362. f) Wisdom performing miracles in her house against the Aryans and heretics, ed. in Polish in Chernigov 1686. 182. Lazar Baranovich, rector of the college, from 1657 Archbishop of Chernigov, † 1694. One essay serves as an example of his polemics with the Jesuits, to which he was called by the church: A new measure of the old faith (Nowa miara starey wiary, w Nowgrudku, 1676, in 4., 354; Czernihow, 1679). This essay, written against the book of the Jesuit Boima, on the primacy of the pope and the procession of the Holy Spirit (published in Vilna 1668), examines both controversial subjects: in the first part, it refutes the procession of the Holy Spirit and from the Son; the second examines the primacy of the pope. His essay “On the Florence Cathedral,” written at the call of Patr. Joachim 1688, was sent to the patriarch in a letter (Tsarsky No. 456 and 551; Rumyantsev No. 97). Lazarus was especially famous as a preacher and loved moral edification. Collections of his sermons: The Sword of the Spirit, printed. to Kyiv. 1666, 1686. Trumpets of words, ed. in K. 1674, 1679. Two of his words (one commendable to Tsar John and Peter, the other grateful) were printed separately, M., 1680. Edifying works: Lives of the Saints, in Polish, printed. in Kyiv in 1670. Written in verse: Lament for the death of Tsar Alexei and greetings to Tsar Theodore, ed. in Kyiv 1676 About incidents of human life, in Polish, are published. in Chernigov 1678. Tombstone of the Metropolitan. Joseph Tukalsky, in Polish. in Years Wieliczka, II, 384–388. Lyra Apollonova, in Polish, ed. in Kyiv 1671 “The Most Bright Queen of Heaven and Earth, Lady, Mother Mary,” partly in prose, partly in verse, ed. in Chernigov in 1683. According to the 1690 inventory of the books of the Zaikonospassky school monastery, the book “On the Five Wounds of Christ” is listed, in Polish, “the work of Lazar Baranovich” (No. 195, 223, 236, 254; Vremnik General history 7, 16). District letters of Lazarus (one dated May 4, 1677, the other 1678, with an exhortation for war with the Turks) - in Vol. V. Act. zap. Ross. No. 105. His letter to Tsar Alexei, in whose presence he forwarded the Trumpet of Words to the Synod for consideration. bib. No. 130; in the Bulletin of Europe 1828; another letter to him is from Ivanov, in Description. archive, pp. 373–375. Letter to the Tsar. Sofia 1682 - on Thu. General ist. 1847 No. 4. 183. Ivan Dmitrievich Sirko, ataman of the Zaporozhye Kosh, who was educated, in all likelihood, at the Kyiv College; a brilliant warrior, brave and compassionate, truthful and selfless, intelligent and simple-hearted, an enemy of Islam and an ardent Christian. † 1680. Of his letters, the most remarkable are: a) to Doroshenko, dated October 1. 1673, with sharp reproaches for his connection with the enemies of the name of Christ - the Mohammedans, which brought devastation to Ukraine (in Wieliczka II, 343-345); b) to the Crimean Khan in 1679, written after Sirko paid for the khan’s insidious attack on the kosh (at night on Christmas Day) with the open devastation of the Crimea. Sirko shows the khan what kind of Cossack warriors are, and advises the khan to imitate the honesty of the Cossacks (in Rigelman II, 167–170; in Markevich II, 265–267; III, 220–223). Other three letters in Wieliczka II, 394–396, 469–472, 492–493. His signature is in Pogodin's Album. Daniil Perekrestovich has a famous book: “The Gifts of the Holy Spirit,” published in Chernigov in 1688. Anthony Radivilovsky, in 1687 hegumen of the Kiev-Nicholas Monastery, wrote “Teachings on the Lord’s holidays and Sundays.” They were first published in K., 1676, with the name: “The Fence of Mary the Mother of God” and with a dedication to the Mother of God. In the second edition, K., 1688, they are dedicated to the “Lord Creator” and are called: “The Crown of Christ.” The dictionary considers these two editions to be two different works; but this is his mistake (Description of the Kharkiv diocese, Kharkiv, 1852, p. 67). “Oration” of Anthony to Peter I by Tolstoy (II, no. 220; I, no. 329). 184. Adam Zernikov, more than any of his contemporaries, worthy of respect, but in his time barely noticed. Born and raised in Lutheranism, Adam himself felt dissatisfaction with Lutheranism. Reading the book of Kritopoulos: “Confession of the Greek Church” turned his thoughts to the Orthodox Church. The main subject of the dispute between Orthodoxy and Rome - the procession of the Holy Spirit - attracted all his attention. He visited the libraries of Oxford, Cambridge, Paris and Rome in order to see the teaching of the fathers on this subject in the ancient and best copies of his fathers' works. The consequence of this was complete confidence in the correctness of the Orthodox Church. He arrived to Lazar, Archbishop of Chernigov, and announced to him his desire to unite with the Orthodox Church. Instead of a verbal renunciation of Lutheranism, he presented on paper a refutation of the Lutheran faith. Then the hetman received him with honor in Baturyn, as a good engineer; but he, having accepted monasticism, began collecting his research in libraries. Around 1682, he completed his extensive treatise on the procession of the Holy Spirit from the one Father. This was an exemplary work, the likes of which had never before been written in the east. “About 20 years before this he found the heavenly fatherland, to which he was chosen by God here in Little Russia”: this is what Rector Prokopovich wrote around 1713. Zernikov rested in the Baturinsky monastery when he ruled this monastery of St. Dimitri; therefore his death must be attributed to 1691 (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 144–146). His excellent treatise on the Holy Spirit, written in Latin, was published in two parts by Archbishop Samuel of Mislavsky in Konigsberg, 1774, 1776. Translation by Arch. Evgeniy Bulgar into Greek, enriched with many comments, published in St. Petersburg in 1797. 185. Varlaam Yasinsky, after completing his studies at the Kyiv College, studied at the Krakow Academy, and there, despite the obstacles, he was crowned with a “philosophical cap”; 1669–1673 he was rector of the college, then hegumen of Pustynno-Nicholas, from 1684 archimandrite of the Lavra, from 1690 metropolitan of Kyiv (Panegyric of Yavorsky, written on the election of Yasinsky to the archimandrite of the Lavra, 1684; words. Description. Roman. musical page. 526, 641). Died in 1707. The district message of the “rector and fraternal abbot” with a complaint about the misfortunes of the brotherhood was published in the II volume. Kievsk. Pam. 256–266. Letter to the Tsars of 1688 about the Kyiv Lavra, ed. in Description K. Lavra, No. 15, K., 1847, p. 207. His “Image of the affairs of the Moscow Patriarchal Cathedral” - to the Synod. bib. His curious letter to the hetman, outlining his thoughts on the occasion of the patriarch’s suspicions. Joachim against the Orthodoxy of Little Russia, ed. in the book: St. Demetrius Rost., M., 1849, pp. 25–28. His letter to the kings in 1691 with a complaint about the self-will of Bishop Joseph of Shumlyansky - handwritten. (Description. Soph. event. 212). Letter to Patr. Adrian, 1693, where he described the state of church affairs in the south and asked for a charter for the college - to the Synod. bib. At his insistence, the Orthodox Confession of Faith was translated into Slavic and published. Translation published 1696 M. 1702 186. Andrei Byalobotsky: a) “Conversation of mercy with truth,” written in 1685 (Tolstoy II. No. 283), according to the Dictionary (I, 70) was published in St. Petersburg. about 1750; only the Dictionary erroneously calls the writer Belogradsky; b) About the last four things in four sections, and the fifth about the vanity of the world; an essay written in syllabic verse (manufactured by Tsarsky No. 268). In all likelihood, this is the same Byalobotsky, who was a Calvinist preacher in Slutsk, in 1681 he came to Moscow with the Orthodox name of Andrei and wanted to take the place of mentor at the Academy here; suspected by Gabriel Dometsky, he was not accepted into it (leader of the Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 68). His treatise “on the indifference of churches” and the dispute with the Likhuds about the time of the transubstantiation of the Eucharist were the beginning of long-term anxieties in Moscow (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 183–184). Pavel Negrebetsky, a student of the Lvov School, wrote: a) Report (May 19, 1681) to the Tsar against Yan Belobodsky, denouncing him as a Calvinist; and he wrote: “And first I informed Prince Vasily Fedorovich Odoevsky about the only constant scholar in philosophy and theology, Elisha Karabchikeyevich, Abbot of Dobromysl; Likewise, I inform you, great sovereign, about that man, who is a very skilled executioner (preacher), and not only the Orthodox, but many who came from the Romans, responded to his teachings, marveling. And in the Great Skete (in Pokuttya - in Bukovina) there is a hieromonk named Gavalevich, a theologian and philosopher, and in competition he is extremely keen and a great zealot for Orthodoxy. Likewise, in teachings similar to these, now a very great defender of Orthodoxy from heresies, who suffered for faith and suffering even to death, the abbot of the Lyublensky Monastery, who, if it would be suitable for your royal majesty, wishes here to your majesty and St. serve the Orthodox faith. He also finds himself in there, a worldly man, a strong pious champion of our faith, Ternovsky” (manufacturer of the Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 68). b) He probably also wrote the “Argument that the Greek-Greek teaching and language are more necessary than the Latin language and teaching,” written before the opening of the Greek School in 1681. The writer points to St. Vladimir, cites the testimony of Possevin, Lipsia, Epiphanius Slavenitsky; uses European universities as an example - Padua, London, Leiden, Paris, Prague. “Although Belarusians study Latin, they are poor for the sake of Greek, except for Lvov, which studies Greek; however, it is necessary to remember that a small part of those do not fall into the union, and even those that do not fall are recognized as esuvian remains in them; For now, the Jezuvits do not teach them high sciences until they promise to hold the Latin religion before God” (manufacturer of the Moscow Spiritual Academician). 187. John Maksimovich, a student of the Kyiv College, in 1680 the Pechersk hieromonk, who came to Moscow with the ancient charters of the Lavra to approve them (Chertkova Bibl. II, 436); from 1697 Chernigov Archbishop, who opened the first seminary in Chernigov; from 1712 Metropolitan of Tobolsk, pious archpastor. He died in 1715. His Latin-Russian dictionary is handwritten. (Tolstoy II, no. 405). Other works of his are of moral content and almost all are written in verse. Written in prose: “A moralizing mirror,” or a statement of the duties of superiors, printed. in Chernigov 1703, 1708; Spiritual Thoughts, ed. in M. 1782; Explanation of greeting: To the Virgin Mary, in verse, ed. to Chernigov. 1707; Reflections on prayer: Our Father, in verse, printed. to Chernigov. 1709; The Eight Gospel Beatitudes, Explained in Poems, published in Chernigov. 1709; Alphabet of saints, verses, printed. in Chern. 1705. He probably also composed the Synaxarion about the victory at Poltava, written in verse and published in Chernigov in 1710. Translations from Latin: The Royal Way of the Cross, ed. in Chern. 1709; Godly Thought, ed. to Chernigov. 1710, 1711; Iliotropion, ed. to Chernigov. 1714 Anthony, the first prefect of Chernigov, is known for the “Mirror from the Scriptures” or reflection on the suffering of the Savior, set out in poetry and ed. to Chernigov. 1705, along with 5 words of Chrysostom. Probably, he also owns the Legend of St. Scriptures, ed. to Chernigov. 1705 188. Athanasius of Miloslavsky, Pechersk archimandrite († 1714), Hieroglyphic Ithica or moral philosophy in symbols, printed. in K. 1712; SPb. 1718 Macarius Osnetsky, hieromonk of Chernigov, translated the words of St. Ephraim and Chrysostom's conversations on the epistles of St. Paul; in 1692 he sent a translation to Patr. Adrian and the translation remains in hand. Synod. librarian Afanasy Zarutsky, Archpriest of Novgorod-Seversky, in 1717 dedicated his interpretation of the Gospel of John to Emperor Peter; handwritten in St. Petersburg Spirit. academy. 189. Joasaph Krokovsky, a student of the Kyiv College, who completed his education in Rome, 1693–1697 rector of the college, from 1697 archimandrite of the Lavra. Being abbot rector, he was sent to Metropolitan. Varlaam to Vilna to arrange church affairs. They wrote from Vilna that while the papists use everything to upset Orthodoxy, not only the Unites, but also the Calvinists desire union with the Orthodox Church. Joasaph successfully fulfilled Metropolitan Varlaam’s instructions, and this drew the attention of Moscow to him. From 1708 he was Metropolitan of Kyiv, and died in 1718. His notes on theology are handwritten. Kyiv Lavra; review of their contents in East. Kievsk. acad. pp. 69–74. He composed an akathist to the great martyr. Varvara, with her life and miracles, for example. in Kyiv in 1698. Under his supervision, an interpretation of 50 psalms was published, K., 1707; the story of the discovery of the relics of St. virgins Juliana, K., 1705. In the missal, K., 1708, his preface on the Eucharist and liturgy. Curious works date back to his time: a) “The Legend of Rome and all of Italy, with some cities in which great academies are known” 1701; b) “The Tale of the Confession of Faith” of the Greco-Russian, Roman, Unite, Lutheran and Calvinist (Tolstoy II, No. 381). 190. Samuil Velichko, a clerk first for Esaul Kochubey, then for the military, wrote a Chronicle, unfortunately not fully preserved (published in K. 1648). The writer had ways to compile a correct chronicle, and his chronicle was compiled conscientiously. It contains quite a bit of information and documents related to the church. Leonty Bobolinsky, tonsured at the Vydubitsky Monastery, hieromonk of the Chernigov Ilyinsky Monastery, in 1699 wrote a Chronicle in Chernigov - a more processed work than the Chronicle of Safonovich (179). First, world history up to 1444; further on the origins of the Ottoman Empire; Then, separately, the history of Poland, Lithuania and southern Russia. The most interesting news concerns the Turkish attack on Chigirin. Extracts from the Chronicle were published in the addition to the chronicle of Grebenki, K., 1854. The chronicle of the self-witness about the wars of Khmelnitsky and the civil strife that took place after him in 1647–1701, continued by another until 1734, is extremely curious both in content and in language, purely Little Russian. She is an ed. General ist., M., 1847 191. Joseph Shumlyansky, in 1667 was consecrated bishop of Lvov by the Greek Metropolitan, like Metropolitan. Joseph Tukalsky, then already a prisoner in Marienburg; but, due to the solicitation of the Lvov brotherhood, Eustathius Svistelnitsky, whom Anthony of Vinnitsa consecrated as bishop, was opposed to him by the Polish authorities (Act. Zap. Ross. V, No. 69, 70,72,76); upon the death of Svistelnitsky, he was recognized by the entire flock as a shepherd, and for a long time he fought against the fanaticism of papism; in order to soften his hatred against Orthodoxy, back in 1673 he secretly promised to accept the union; but finally in 1700 he was forced to accept it openly. (Velichko II, 594; Additional Foreign Act No. 79, 209). Died in 1710 Nowadays we know his: a) An extensive message of 1687 to the diocesan clergy, with exhortations to conscientiously fulfill the duties of the rank and to live piously. This message was printed by Joseph himself in his own printing house in Lvov in 1687 and was titled: “Metrica albo register for the order of the holy church.” It was recently published in Volume V. Act. zap. Ross. V. No. 167. b) Message of 1687 to the diocesan clergy on the celebration of Sundays and holidays, ed. in the Act. zap. Ross. V, no. 169. c) Letter dated January 25, 1701 to Hetman Yablonovsky, where he says that he accepted the union and asks for protection for the offended priest (Addition to the Foreign Act, p. 200). In Shumlyansky's printing house, in addition to the Metrics, only the Psalter of 1688 was published. Then the Lvov brotherhood asked for an order to close his printing house. It is remarkable that the Lvov brotherhood quarreled with all the bishops of Lvov and always tried to present itself as zealous for Orthodoxy, and noticed every stain in its bishops. But in 1704 it saw that the sale of its Orthodox books and under the brand of Orthodoxy no longer promised it the same benefits, and it accepted the union. 192. Maxim Plesko, hieromonk of the Kyiv Florovsky Monastery, wrote the Chronicle of Little Russia for 1708. Extracts from it in Markevich V, 10–83, 92. Grigory Grebenka, a devout judge of Gadyachsky and before his death (in 1730) Gadyachsky colonel, in 1710 composed a very interesting chronicle “The unprecedented battle of Bohdan Khmelnytsky with the Poles, unfinished even 10 years after Khmelnytsky’s death,” described on the basis of “chronicles and diaryush of the war and the testimony of old-timers.” The events of 1665–1709 are described briefly, in a chronological list; First of all, each important event is described separately, with its beginning and consequences. The work was written in Slavic language, mixed with southern folk, and published in K. 1854. This is the same chronicle that Markevich calls, according to its owner, Pisarevskaya (Ist. Mal. V, 92). 193. Job, the first patriarch of Russia, an exile under the impostors, who died in the Staritsky Monastery in 1607. He wrote the service of St. Joseph Volokol., which is still in print. His two speeches to Tsar Boris, letters - one about the election of Godunov to the kingdom and the other on the occasion of the war with Otrepiev (ed. in Vol. II Act. Exp. No. 1, 5, 8, 28) Nisan with living animation, an eloquent pen. In I volume East. act. pp. 429–433 an extensive message to the Georgian Tsar Alexander, where he writes: “We hear that in you the Church of Christ is divided and trampled under corruption... Our Lord Jesus Christ says: zeal for your house will destroy me.” Whoever is from the faithful and prudent, he is not moved by pity, seeing the churches in turmoil and seeing the grapes planted by God, but he is embraced by all passing paths and the monk (read yunok) eats him with wondrous cunning and no one can stand against his rage, poverty for the sake of spiritual ... "In hand. Synod. bib. two extensive instructive messages to Georgia. His letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople is in XII volume. Dr. Vivl. Spiritual testament with a detailed description of his life - in 11 volumes. Collected. state literate Signed in Pogodin's Album. Hegumen Anthony, under Tsar Boris, described the life of St. Nile of Stolbensky († 1555). See Tsarskogo No. 107; Tolstoy II, No. 232. Around the same time, the life of St. Macarius of Unzhensky, and probably in 1594, when the boyar’s son David Khvostov was appointed the builder of the monastery, by the will of Tsar Theodore. The oldest list of his life, currently known, was written in 1602 (Tsarskogo No. 743). 194. Varlaam, from the archimandrites of the Chudov Monastery, Metropolitan of Novgorod 1594–1604, wrote an admonition to the Valaam elders in the Dymsky Monastery - not to violate the Valaam Charter (East. Act. I, p. 236). His administrative documents were published in the same place, pp. 231–235, 237–241, 244. Jonah Dumin, from 1589 from the Archimandrites of Putivil, Archbishop of Vologda, in 1598 signed the letter of election of Tsar Boris, and in 1600 he was at the council establishing the celebration of St. Cornelius of Komel, and confirmed the accuracy of the information about the miracles of the monk (A.E. II, No. 7, 222). He wrote a word of praise to the blessed prince Alexander Nevsky: “God wants to save everyone who wills.” Here he hid his name in an anagram (Zap. Archaeologist. General. III, 149; IV, 141). Without a doubt. He also corrected the description of the life of the blessed Prince Nevsky, composed by poor Vasily (§ 127). His list of works by Maxim the Greek, 82 in total, with the remark: “This book of Maxim the Greek was written from good translations (lists), and a lot of work and sweat was required, as this book was edited by St. book" - from Tsarsky, No. 241, 242. 195. Niphon, a monk of the Anthony Monastery, asked and begged the Tsar and the Patriarch to reveal the relics of St. Anthony the Roman, who had hitherto remained hidden, and in 1598 he described the miracles of St. Sergius Lavra. Anthony 1678–1697, while the miracles of 1648–1678 had already been described before (Tsarsky No. 133, 128; Rumyantsev No. 158). The description of Nifont is also interesting due to the historical and topographical information scattered in it. The zealous Niphon also wrote a word of praise to St. Anthony. Probably, he also wrote: a) the prophecy of St. Varlaam about scum and the memory of that established under Tsar Boris; b) memory of St. Ione Archbishop Novgor. and the story of his miracles, with the service; c) the story about the Alfanov brothers. These works are placed in a row with Nifont’s description of the miracles of St. Anthony - at Rumyantsev No. 154, 158. 196. Hermogenes, Archimandrite Simonovsky, Metropolitan of Kazan, Patriarch from 1607, a man of unshakable firmness, martyred by the Poles in 1612. According to the chronicle, he was wise in words, “ever practiced in divine words and all the books of old and new grace and legal rules to the end from above.” Nowadays we know: a) His story “about the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God” was written with a service. in 1594 (ruled by Tsarsky No. 115). b) Life of St. Guria and Barsanuphia Kazansk. (manuscript of Tsarsky No. 136; in the Bible. General history, No. 43). c) Message to Patr. Job in 1591 with a request to allow the commemoration of those killed during the capture of Kazan and those tortured by the Tatars, with historical information about the latter (ed. in the description of the Zilantov Monastery, Kazan, 1840). d) The collection of Hermogenes, written in 1598 (Biblical General History No. 190), is remarkable for its rites on the admission of Latins, Mohammedans, etc. into the church. e) His patriotic letters breathe ardent love for the fatherland and the Holy. Orthodoxy. They are simple and strong, clear and full of the mind of the Gospel. Without a doubt, many were written. Of the hitherto known two letters, they were sent (November 29-30, 1606) to the same Rostov Metropolitan, and in both the patriarch says the same thing - he orders to pray and die for the king in the fight against the enemies of the fatherland; in both he describes the death of the first impostor, the election of the rightful king and the glorification of the kingdom with miracles from the relics of the prince; but in the second he describes in detail the struggle of the Tverites and Smolnyans for the Tsar (A.E. II, No. 57–58). Of the two letters written in February 1609 during the unrest that arose in Moscow itself against Tsar Vasily, it is worth citing the beginning of one in order to feel the strength of the spirit of the great shepherd: “Former brothers, now we don’t even know what to call you, since our minds cannot accommodate what you have created. Who wouldn't be surprised by this? or who will not weep? etc. (II, No. 169). The second of these charters is very extensive. In addition, the following were published: aa) his wonderful speech at the coronation of Shuisky (by Galakhov in Ist. Christ. I, 364 - 366); bb) an appeal to the entire Russian people about the lawless removal of Tsar Vasily Ioannovich from the throne (ibid., p. 373–375); c) a letter to King Sigismund, where he writes: “Give us your son, God loved him and chose him as king, in our Orthodox Greek faith, which the apostles preached, the holy fathers established, which all Orthodox Christians have maintained blissfully and firmly, and which to this day flaunts and brightens and shines. like the sun” (ibid., pp. 370–373); d) a short document not recognizing the son of Marina Mnishek as sovereign (Act. Exp. II, No. 194). c) In one of the letters of 1609, the patriarch writes: “and we recorded that miracle in the chronicler” (Act. exp. II, 390). And so, he entered modern famous events into the chronicle. If not by him, then by his order the life of Tsarevich Dmitry of Uglich was written. 197. Rev. Dionysius, archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra, guardian of the Orthodox fatherland and the Lavra from the Poles († 1632). He: a) in 1616, according to the tsar’s charter, he was engaged in correcting the Trebnik, and for correcting the book in 1617 he was subjected to trial and condemnation (conciliar resolution on the adjective “and fire” in Tolstoy III, No. 74). For six weeks they kept the monk in a smoky hut, tortured him with hunger, beat him and subjected him to penance with defrocking; but then he was acquitted by the patriarchs. His speech justifies the exclusion of the words from the breviary: and with fire... in the hand. The extent to which the breviaries of that time disagreed with each other can be seen by the curious from a comparison of the three breviaries of the Tsar, contemporary with Dionysius, the contents of which are shown by Stroev (Description No. 617–619). b) Simon writes about St. Dionysius: “The archimandrite sent many epistles throughout the city during the Christian bloodshed, this John (Nestka) having the ability to do this, he gave many good writers to him.” The mother hen writes to cellarer Simon: “in those letters, Dionisiev’s illnesses about the entire Moscow state are countless. And if you, sirs, deign to seek his reason: then in those messages of his, not only near Moscow, but also in many cities, governors and all ranks of many people received great reinforcement of courage from his advice and reason.” (Life of Dionysius, M.. 1824, pp. 40–49). Unfortunately, only two of these charters have been found and published so far (A, e. II, No. 190; Collected grams. II, 577). But among them we must also include the message of the Lavra, calling for the love of princes Trubetskoy and Pozharsky, taken from the archives of the Lavra (vol. II, no. 219); this is one of the messages written, according to Nasedka, near Moscow. It was written with living and deep love; it speaks of Christian love as only a heart experienced in love and knowing love from experience can speak about it. This is an example of Christian eloquence. 198. Arseny Glukhoy, from Selizharovo, monk of the Sergius Monastery, together with Rev. Dionysius, who was engaged in correcting the missal and suffered for it. His message to boyar Saltykov was hand-written. Tolstoy II, no. 264–269. From his preface to the collection of festive canons and from the preface to the canon, it is clear that even after the end of the sad story about the breviary, he was diligently engaged in correcting the liturgical books. In the preface to the canon (Sergius Lavra No. 48), he wrote: “The monk Arseny Selizherovets wrote this book... he wrote from various translations (lists), and in others it was much uncorrected, especially in those that in the Russian land were compiled services and canons by inexperienced creators of grammatical teaching, and corrected as much as possible for my mind.” In the preface to the festive canons (Sergius Lavra No. 3) he says: “I wrote from different lists, trying to find the right one, and found in other lists many that were not corrected.” He further says that aids were provided to him by the rich library of the Lavra and its librarian Anthony, “Orthodox, reverent of the divine scriptures and very careful in correcting them. The sinful Arseny has worked a lot in these times.” He probably owns: a) “A brief grammar and dictionary, compiled at the beginning of the 17th century. (Rum. music. No. 1), since Arseny deeply felt the need to know grammar and the meaning of words; b) “The alphabet, how to speak or write” (for example, in the XII appendix to John the Exarch Kalaidovich): “Tsi of the God-honored ... king and sovereign of ours, Grand Duke Theodore Ivanovich ... and before the former kings and queens write under the wing.” 199. Anthony of Podolsk, or from Podolia, an educated monk, wrote: a) “an edifying word about drunkenness (Tsarsky No. 415); b) about the kingdom of heaven and the glory of the saints (Medvedev); c) on the occasion of a dispute about the correction of the prayer for the blessing of water, he wrote: “about the enlightening fire.” 200. Avramy Palitsyn, in the world Averky Ivanovich, in 1584, having fallen into disgrace, was exiled to the Solovetsky Monastery and tonsured there; in 1594 he was sent to the Trinity Lavra, from 1608 he was its cellarer, in 1609 during the famine he supplied the poor with bread from the Lavra and during the siege of Moscow he delivered lead and gunpowder from the Lavra to the besieged. After the deposition of Tsar Vasily, he was sent among the ambassadors to Sigismund; at the end of 1610, returning to Moscow, he found it given to the Poles, and the boyars were in discord, and took an active part in the suffering fatherland. After the expulsion of the Poles, Avramiy retired to the Solovetsky Monastery “on his promise,” and died there in 1624. He described the events of 1598–1613 with animation and with the accuracy of a historian. “When I was back in the house of the life-giving Trinity, I heard the former great intercession and help over enemies and the miracles of St. Sergius and Nikon... and I tested everything in detail with much fear, before many witnesses of the remaining monks, holy and prudent, and from prudent warriors and from other Christians and this writing about the situation of the Trinity Monastery, all in a row, as much as possible.” About some incidents, especially miracles, he received written accounts from witnesses (see chapters 27–28, 84). His contemporary and eyewitness of the events, Nasedka, reproached him for only one thing, that he spoke about himself, about his participation in the salvation of his homeland, more than the strict truth allowed (Life of St. Dionysius). In the list of books. General ist. No. 84, the afterword of the book says that it was completed in 1620. Avramia’s book was published under the title “The Legend of the Siege of the Trinity Monastery,” M., 1784, and then many times. By hand it is called either “History in memory of the previous generation” (Bible. General history No. 83–85), then the book “The Siege Seat of the Trinity Sergius Monastery” (Inventory of the Lavra’s books of 1642), then the History of the devastation of the Moscow land, which began in 1584 (as in Medvedev’s Table of Contents of Books). Note that published in the XVI part of the Vremennik General. ist. “The Tale of the Impostors from Chronograph” only at the beginning (pp. 81–107) belongs to an unknown compiler, who remade the story in his own way; everything else (pp. 108–146) is literally taken from the Tale of Avramiev, where it makes up chapters 51, 62–85. 201. Filaret, in the world Feodor Nikitich Romanov, from 1605 Metropolitan of Rostov, from 1610 he languished in the custody of Sigismund for nine years, to whom he was sent as ambassador; On June 24, 1619 he was appointed Patriarch. Theophan, and from that time, managing the church, helped his son, the king, manage the state. † 1633 In the Acts of Expedition. 11 of his charters (III, 170–173, 176–178, 196–200, 212–213, 227–228, 240–242, 256, 257–261, 275–277, 284–336). In one, he orders that the Charter, ed., be taken away and sent to the flames. M. 1610, “because those statutes were printed by the hawk moth Login, not according to fatherly tradition, but by his own will.” In the Act. ist. his letters: blessed (II, 136), decreed (111, 230, 319–320), Instruction (IV, 12). For the correction of church books under him, see Ist. Russian c. IV, 210–212. Conciliar action of the patriarch. Philareta 1620, Dec. 16, about Metropolitan Jonah of Sarah, with definitions about the rebaptism of Latins and Belarusians, ed. in the Monastic Potrebnik of 1639, where they make up the 14th chapter, and in the Worldly Potbnik of 1639, where they are contained in the 40th chapter and consist of 21 articles. The rules on non-baptism of Latins were abolished by the Patriarchal Council of 1667 and the decision of Constant. Patr. Jeremiah, 1718. Against the opinion of baptism in 1625. served to the Patr himself. Philaret has an interesting objection from the German Franciscans (Tsarsky No. 461). Under the supervision of Patr. Philaret composed and in some places corrected by his hand “The Tale of the Confusions That Happened After Tsar Boris Before 1613,” ed. M. 1837. From the correspondence of Patr. Philaret with the Tsar (ed. M. 1848) is worth attention letter dated September 3. 1619 about the miracles that followed from the new Wonderworker, Ven. Macarius of Unzhensky (No. 18, 20–22). 202. Sergius, the Solovetsky hieromonk, in 1610 described the life of St. Roman Uglichsky; a little later - the life of St. Paisius of Uglich (Tolstoy II, no. 226), and in 1633 the legend of John and Login Yarensky (Tolstoy II, no. 268). Alexander, a monk of the Rostov Boris and Gleb Monastery, described the life of St. Irinarch of Rostov († 1616), with whom he lived for 30 years. This description contains interesting information about the affairs of the Poles. Several extracts from the life have been printed. in Bibliographer. investigations, M., 1846, pp. 62–68, and in Described. shrines of Rostov, pp. 63–67. Thurs. M. General ist. I 847 No. 2. 203. Elijah, abbot of Moscow. Epiphany Monastery, known for his comments in 1622 on the teaching Gospel of Cyril Tranquillion and for the dispute with Lawrence Zizanius (§ 161) about the latter’s catechism and for the publication of this catechism (M. 1627). This dispute, which lasted three days in the presence of Prince Ivan Cherkassky, and was described in part in the preface to the catechism, is more fully handwritten. Tolstoy II, No. 226, shows that Elijah did not so clearly understand the teaching of St. faith, so as not to be carried away by the opinions of the times. He also pronounced a disapproving judgment on the teaching gospel of Cyril Tranquillion (Tsarsky No. 397). On the handwritten gospel of 1537 (Synod. Bibl.) he wrote: “By order of Patr. Cyrus Philaret, he was ordered to go through and look at the printed books as a reference, the Epiphany Abbot Elijah and his comrades, this written gospel with a printed translation... This gospel is not similar to the printed translation in many articles and there are a lot of shortcomings in it... And for this reason this written gospel will henceforth not be in any church on the throne. Patr. Filaret, confirming this decision, added: “and don’t let it be written off from him.” This is how a strict definition was drawn up about the book, which in fact turns out to be more correct than many others. The reference worker did not consult the Greek copies, nor the ancient Slavic ones, and did not think of verifying the printed gospel with both; on the contrary, for him the recently printed Slavic Gospel was an immutable rule. Prince Simeon Shakhovsky, who was kept in the Chudov Monastery, wrote: a) words of praise - holy. Peter, Alexy and Jonah, Rev. Procopius and John of Ustyug, and the canon to the Moscow miracle workers (Moskvit. 1851, No. 6 and 8); b) the story of St. Tsarevich Dimitri; c) messages (up to 20), including a message to the Shah with gratitude for the Robe of the Lord (in the Synod. Bible); d) notes about his misfortunes 1601–1649 (General history No. 227); e) chronicle about the kings Ivan Vasilyevich, Boris and Mikhail Feodorovich (manufacturer of Tsarskogo No. 501). Theodore Gozvinsky, translator of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, translated in 1609 the Tropic of Pope Innocent (Biblical General History No. 268–269; Tsar's No. 417; Description of Roman Music. 540) and Esop's Parables (Biblical General History No. 115). Probably the Life of Esopus belongs to him (Tsarsky No. 448). 204. Chronicles and notes: a) The story of impostors, completed by a contemporary on the events of 1613, then continued until Tsar Alexei ascended the throne (ed. at 16 hours of the Vremnik General History). New Chronicler ending 1629, ed. book Obolensky, M., 1853, supplemented by inserts - in 8 parts of the Nikon Chronicle, with continuations - known as the chronicle of revolts, M., 1788 b) Ivan Timofeev, clerk of the Metropolitan of Novgorod, Temporary from Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich until 1618 c) Chronicler of Arkhangelsk, graduated 1598 (ed. M. 1718). d) Stroganov Chronicle of Siberia, compiled around 1600 (Tsarskogo No. 245). Savva Esipov, metropolitan clerk, Siberian chronicler, written. 1636 (Tsarskago No. 425, 416). e) The story of the siege of Pskov by Gustav in 1615 (Collected years. V, 66). The story of Pskov’s retreat from the Tsar (Collected years. V, 66–72). The word is “how to deliver the city of Ustyuzhna from the godless Lyakhs and Germans” in 1609 (Rumyants. No. 378). f) Vasily Gagara's journey in 1634 to Palestine and Alexandria (ed. by Sakharov, in the II volume of Legends, and in the X book of the Vremnik General History, M. 1851). Vasily Tyuments notes about the embassy to Mungalia to Altyn Khan (Tsarskogo No. 245). Ivan Petlin's description (1620) of places bordering China and lying along the river. Ob (published in the Siberian Bulletin. St. Petersburg, 1818). g) Bogdana Lykova translation from Latin. (in 1633) Mercator's cosmographies. h) By 1627 there was a renewal of the Great Drawing and a Book or description of the places shown in the drawing or on the map (ed. Yazykovym 1838, Spassky 1848). In the work Descriptio geografica transitus in Chinam et Japoniam ducti, ex officina Hesselii Gerardi, Amsterodami, 1613, there is a description of Siberia, its rivers and roads, and the author of the description, Yakov Maasa, says that he not only talked about Siberia with a Muscovite who visited Siberia, but also received a map from him. The same Maasa says about himself that he was in Moscow under Boris Godunov and collected geographical information. The words “Theodore, son of Boris Godunov” are engraved on the Gessel map. Hessel had no reason to use these names; but Maasa, who was in Moscow, had reason to leave these names on the map; in other words, Maasa took out a map of Russia and handed it to Hessel. On the map of Northern Russia, published by Maasa himself, it is written: Isaac Masa Herlem(ensis). So the Big Drawing, which has never been found in Russia, flew abroad. 205. Biographers: Kallistrat Osorin, Murom labial elder (1625–1640), composed the life of St. Juliania Lazorevskaya and the story of the Unzhensky miraculous cross (Tsarsk. No. 129; Tolstoy II, No. 303); Hilarion, abbot. Kalyazinsky (1640–1642), described the life of St. Irinarch of Solovetsky † 1624 (Tsarsk. No. 744). Around the same time, the lives of St. Tikhon of Lukomsky (Tolstoy III, No. 85) and Euphrosynus of Sinozersky († 1612). Life of Rev. Cyril of Novoezersk († 1532) and miracles are known by hand. XVII century, where the last miracle dates back to 1620 (Tsarsky No. 126, 682; Tolstoy II, No. 123, 249). Around 1640, Hierom. Adrian compiled the life of Ferapont of Monza (Tsar's No. 118). Before 1626, Duma clerk Ivan Gramatin compiled a legend about the icon of the Sign of the Mother of God. Jacob the priest, who was with the ambassador in Crimea in 1634–1635, wrote about the relics of an unknown saint who then rested in the Inkerman church (ed. in Western Odessa. General history II, 685–692). In 1641, the miracles of the Krasnoborsky image of the Savior were described (Tsarsky No. 396). 206. Cyprian, Archimandrite of Khutyn, from 1620 Metropolitan of Siberia, from December 12, 1625 Metropolitan of Krutitsky, and from 1627 of Novgorod, † 1635. In Siberia, he became famous for converting many to the Christian faith and curbing the depraved in life. In Siberia, he compiled Notes on the campaigns of Ermak and his comrades. But the handicraft. His spiritual charter is known (Collected Chronicles IV, 179; III, 188). His administrative documents were published, among other things about the selection of the charter, printed by the charterer Login (A. E. III, No. 186, 221, 228, 333), and its correspondence during relations between Novgorod and Sweden (Addition to the ist. Act. II, No. 13–15). 207. Vasily Burvets-Protopopov, clerk of the patriarchal court, wrote “A Primer of the Slovenian Language”, M., 1634, 1637; in Klintsy 1781. At the beginning there is a preface by Burtsev in verse; after the ABCs, a summary of short answers about faith; then “the legend that St. made up.” Kirill the philosopher ABC"; at the end there is an afterword by Burtsev. Burtsev was involved in printing: the book of hours 1633, 1638, the service book 1637, the apostle 1638, the educational psalter 1634, 1640, the following 1637, the six-day book 1640, the canon 1636, 1641, the teaching gospel 1639, consumer book of 1640. Burtsev's publications are distinguished by a special font. Each book has an afterword by Burtsev; but none of them say that the publications were verified by anyone. What is most remarkable in its content is its canon. Probably, he also owned the Arithmetic of 1645 (Izvestia Akad. IV, 199). 208. Ioann Nasedka (aka Shevel), a priest, is a remarkable person. By a decree of 1616, priest John, who was then a parish priest in the Klementyeva Sloboda of Sergiev Posad, was ordered to participate in correcting the missal. He participated in the amendments. But when the Rev. was received very poorly in Moscow. Dionysius and Arseny with their conscientious work, Mother Hen knew how to deviate from the answers and calmly returned to the house. This is what Arseny wrote about him. Only when Filaret took part in the fate of St. Dionysius, Mother Hen appeared in Moscow with justification for the deeds of Dionysius, and he was then made the keymaster of the Assumption Cathedral. Since that time, he has been a person close to the government. In 1622 he, together with the abbot. Elijah, revises Tranquillion's teaching gospel (Tsar's No. 398); in 1644 he has a dispute with the pastor of Prince Waldsmar. Known: a) His notes about the life of St. Dionysius (eg in the life of Dionysus., M., 1824, pp. 43–54, 56–83). b) Speech to Patr. Filaret, in 30 chapters, in defense of the amendments; denunciation of Anthony of Podolsky about the fires of enlightenment, in 35 chapters; research on the increase “and by fire” in 40 chapters (Synod. manuscript No. 298). c) Notes on the debate with the pastor (Biblical General History No. 13; Tsarskogo No. 398; Rumyants. 207–208) were written by him. The inventory of the patriarchal treasury of 1658 shows: “Notebook of the debate between the keymaster Ivan Nasedka and the prince Voldemar” (in the 16th part of the Vremnik General History, p. 101). But the story about the princess’s failed marriage, added to the debate (Tsarsk. No. 398), was written, it seems, by someone else: “written in 1642 by a monk,” and not by a “hermonk.” d) “Exposition on Luther” was written “1642 by the hand of the much-sinful priest John.” The book consists of 47 chapters and is partly taken from the works of Zakhary Kopystensky, with the translation of the Little Russian dialect into Church Slavic (Tsarsky No. 394, 690; cf. No. 392; in the Bible. General history, list 1644 No. 195). According to Berednikov's list, it can be assumed that this work, having changed some things, was prepared for publication (Izv. Acad. IV, 199). By the time of Patr. Joseph refers to the Russian essay “Son of the Church,” or “Tale of the most necessary customs for the teaching of the Orthodox Christian faith, which is sorely needed for the newly enlightened,” in 100 chapters, with the following beginning: “To Ivan, a new servant in children, a son of the church” (Tsar’s No. 390, 401, 606; Biblical General History No. 214). 209. Simon Azaryin, cellarer of the Sergius Lavra, a) described the life of St. archim. Dionysius, with whom he lived in his cell, and wrote the Canon to him (manufacturer of the Synod of the Bible and the Sergius Lavra, for example in M. 1824 and many times); b) in 1645, by the will of Tsar Alexei, he wrote notes about new miracles of St. Sergius (ruler of the Moscow Spiritual Academician); and in 1647 he published for the first time the life of St. Sergius, described by Epiphanius, supplemented by Pachomius, and then by Simon himself. His curious preface to the description of new miracles, printed. in the 10th book. Vremennika, M., 1851. Here, by the way, he says about those in charge of the printing house that they arbitrarily changed many things in his description of the miracles of Sergius. 210. Nikon Patriarch, great saint, from 1648 Metropolitan of Novgorod, from June 25, 1652 Patriarch, who ruled the church as firmly as he did intelligently and condescendingly, but through the sedition of ambition and superstition he was deprived of the Tsar’s power of attorney, on December 12, 1667 he was also deprived of his dignity, however, he was buried as the Patriarch of 1681 (see. Ist. Russian ts. IV, 39 73, 155–157, 220–241). Proof of his love for education is the fact that he bought many books in Novgorod with his cell money (Vremennik General History, part XVI, pp. 133–134). except for those purchased in the east at the expense of the patriarchal treasury (ibid., pp. 117–131). His works: a) about the transfer of the relics of St. Philip - a letter to the king and two reports, ed. in the Royal Correspondence, pp. 301, 324, 325. M. 1851 b) History of correction of books with conciliar acts, printed. in the Tablet. M. 1656 c) District charter on taking measures against infection, printed. in M. 1656 and in Ancient. Vivl. VI, 162–182. Letter from Patr. about the devastation of Moscow by pestilence. Nikon to the Tsar, from 4 Feb. 1655, published between letters of sovereigns No. 386, M., 1851 d) Several other letters to the Tsar - ibid., 383–385, 387–388. They are the seal of the soul of the great Nikon, always a strict ascetic. The most remarkable of his letters is the one he wrote before his death from the Kirillov Monastery to the brethren of the Resurrection Monastery. “Be aware that I was sick with a serious illness and can no longer get up from my bed, but I lie, like Job, on the rot of my stench. There was once a mercy of the great sovereign, and he wrote to me that he wants to take me from here from prison at your request; and this work has not yet been accomplished, there is no merciful decree of it; I'll have to die here by accident. Please, my children, do not remember my rudeness; Ask the great sovereign for me, don’t let me die in vain. The end of my life is already near. And what I am like, John, the witness of my sorrow, will tell you in detail.” e) The teaching on the sacred rite remains unpublished (Description of the Tsar’s manuscript. p. 814). c) Objections to Paisius Ligarid and boyar Streshnev remain in manuscripts, among other things in the Resurrection Monastery (No. 110). Backmeister made an extract of some passages from the Objections (Beytrage zu Lebensgesch. D. P. Nicons, Riga, 1788). Nikon’s answer was written after the ambassador was sent to Constantinople and after the case of Babarykin’s denunciation, therefore not before 1663. This extensive work shows Nikon’s amazing knowledge of church rules. Despite the fact that it was written in a restless spirit, by a person who was extremely irritated by the intrigues and impudence of small souls, it bears the stamp of a bright and broad mind. The letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, which did not reach its destination, contained a description of the relations of the secular authorities towards him, and is in many ways similar to the Objections. g) The chronicle, known under the name Nikonova, or according to Nikon’s list, signed by Nikon’s hand in 1616, without insulting the truth, can be called Nikon’s work. This chronicle was compiled with the help of many of the manuscripts that Nikon collected in Moscow to correct books and took with him to the Resurrection Monastery, especially the chronicles of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral. It contains precious information about ancient times, taken from manuscripts now lost. It has its own special character, like an essay and not a compilation. Her story is vibrant and animated. Chronicle information is supplemented by messages, teachings, and biographies. Her stories end in 1630. It was published in 8 parts, St. Petersburg, 1767, 1792, but carelessly. h) From the administrative documents of Patriarch Nikon (ed. in Act. Exp. IV, No. 60, 65, 69, 71, 73, 81, 86, 87, 88, 99, 107; Ist. Act. IV, No. 71, 103, 107, 109, 113, 126,156,177) the most remarkable with permission for the boyars guilty before him, ed. at the arch. Apollos in the Life of Patriarch Nikon, M., 1845). Also worthy of attention is the document about the Monastery of the Cross, published in Moscow in 1656 in East. Hier. IV, 831–860. 211. Misail, in 1651 from the hieromonk, Archbishop of Ryazan, educator of the Mordovians, killed for his jealousy in 1655. In a letter to Patriarch Nikon, he wrote that he had baptized up to 4,000 Tatars and Mordovians, and asked the patriarch for his blessing to again go on an apostolic feat (Ryazan Letters. St. Petersburg. 1845). 212. Macarius, Metropolitan of Novgorod 1652–1663, who signed the definitions of the councils of 1654–1656 on the correction of books, wrote letters on the supervision of church deanery (Ist. Act. IV, No. 87, 99; Act. Exp. IV, 331). 213. Arseny Sukhanov, builder of the Kremlin Epiphany Monastery, which belonged to the Lavra. “On the 9th day of the summer of May 7157 (1649), by decree of the sovereign Tsarev and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of All Russia, and with the blessing of the great lord St. Joseph, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, ordered the builder of the Trinity Sergius of the Epiphany Monastery, elder Arseny Sukhanov, to go to Jerusalem to describe St. places and Greek church ranks" (Proskinitarium). It was then, as Patr. Joseph, admonished Metropolitan. Nikon, felt that the people whom he entrusted to print church books used his trust for evil, and introduced into the books opinions and rituals that did not at all belong to the Orthodox Church. Given this state of affairs, they considered it necessary to collect information about Eastern customs and rituals in the east. Arseny left Moscow on June 10; but he returned to Moscow twice from the road, and only on February 28, 1651 he went east. He returned to Russia in June 1652; therefore he spent a year and three months on the eastern journey. Arseny's notes about his journey contain three parts: in the first: an article list - a description of the journey, when he was where; second: about the city of Jerusalem - a description of the holy places; third: tacticon, “how the Greeks maintain church rites and singing.” The schismatics made additions and changes to the lists of the Arseniev Proskinitary to suit their taste for hostility against Orthodoxy. Arseny himself was not able to distinguish that in the modern customs of the East depended on the difficult circumstances of the church, suffering under the yoke and sword of Mohammedanism; and unwisely condemned the Jerusalem church for unimportant features or for private disorders. persons Patriarch Paisius sent a complaint against him to the Tsar in Moscow for the impudent and rude comments that he allowed himself to make in Jerusalem. A correct assessment of the Proscinitary was made by the Sarov hieromonk Meletius, who verified them on the spot (Journey to Jerusalem, M., 1798). Part of the Proscinitary was published by Sakharov (vol. II of Tales of the Russian People. St. Petersburg, 1842). Review of the Proscinitary by Muravyov (in the preface to the 4th edition of His Travels, pp. 38–73). The sowers of schism composed a debate between the cathedral elder Arseny and the Greeks in 158, which, however, differs from the lists. This debate was not written by Sukhanov. In the preface, its author says: “I offer this wondrous story to the great elder Arseny of the cathedral. By command of the Tsar, that long-standing man, Elder Arseny, was sent to Jerusalem.” After this, it is clear that in the debate they speak on behalf of Arseny, what the superstitious writer only wanted to say, and what cannot in any way be agreed with Arseny’s Proscinitary and with history. With the same ignorant impudence, the schismatics spoiled Arseny's Proskinitarium with various inserts. It was more beneficial for St. church Arseny's second journey to the east. 1654 The tsar and Nikon sent Arseny to Athos to acquire Greek books. Arseny brought with him more than 500 manuscripts (preface to the service book, M., 1655). Arseny received up to 150 books from one Iversky monastery (Chertkova Bible II, 434–435). The inventory of 1658 shows 396 works acquired by Sukhanov at the expense of the patriarchal and royal treasury, which the tsar ordered to be sent to Nikon in Voskresensk (Vremennik General. ist. Part XVI, pp. 117–131). Afterwards they entered the patriarchal library again (Evfimiev's inventory of the patriarch's books, ed. Undolsky, M.. 1847). Arseny's petition for compensation for his losses in Volume IV. Ist. act. 180–181. 214. Ignatius Iovlevich, educated Polotsk archimandrite. Known for his: a) review of the Patr. Picona 1660; b) speeches to the king. Both were published in Volume III of Russian. Vivliofiki. Jonah, hierodeacon of the Sergius Lavra, 1649, leaving Moscow with Patr. Paisiy, in 1651 he made his way to Jerusalem and compiled notes about his “journey” to the holy places (ed. by Sakharov in the II volume of Tales, pp. 161–168). Serapion, from the abbots of the Tolgsky monastery, archbishop of Suzdal 1634–1654, active shepherd (clerk Theodore of Suzdal in the Time of General History, books XXII pp. 34, 56, 116, 117, 122, 124, 141. Act. exp. III, 436; IV, 482). His writings: a) Letter of 1636 to the Intercession Monastery on the choice of abbess with an admonition not to quarrel (Act. history III, no. 189). b) Description of the city rampart with a report to the king in 1643. Description in the Act. East. III, No. 224. Report to the king from the sergeant Theodore (Temporary General. XXII, 5. 6). c) Memory of May 1, 1642 to the clergy of the diocese about the observance of church deanery (Tolstoy II, No. 258). d) Certificate issued to the deacon (Act. legal. pp. 408, 409). 215. Savvaty Teishcha, in the world Terenty Vasiliev, clerk of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, 1647–1653 clerk under the ambassadorial governors, since 1654 monk of the Chudov Monastery. It is clear from his letters that, while still a clerk, he loved to read books and acquired a lot of information. In one letter he writes: “he drank divine nectar, for many years in Siberia he read the Bible, also the wise Dionysius the Areopagite... and other divine writings, God forbid from them, he touched a little, and saw in them salvation for sinners, and understood in part the greatness of the Trinity Deity - and the differences of ranks; but I didn’t interfere with the sovereign’s business by reading books, I didn’t get enough sleep at that time.” However, in the same letter he admits that “from time to time he also scooped up strong drink” (his letter: No. 18). In 1660, because he made a noise against the clerks of the printing house and filed a denunciation against them to the tsar, as if they were only spoiling books, he was exiled to the Kirillov Monastery to repent. From the Kirillov Monastery, he again sent a lengthy petition to the Tsar, justifying his previous complaint and asking for his return to Moscow. Here he pointed out errors in the prologue, octoechus, menaeum, triodions, service book, six-day book, psalter and book of hours, ed. 1636, 1658 and 1660; among other things, he accused the investigators of replacing being in the 2nd person with the words was you or was you, or printing Jesus instead of Jesus, etc.; wrote that the inquiry officers wanted to exclude some letters from the Slavic alphabet, trying to bring it closer to the Greek alphabet (Rumyantseva No. 375). His letters, written from Siberia by a clerk, were published in Book IX. Temporary General ist. Mixture. M. 1851 216. Andrei Pleshcheev - at first was carried away by jealousy of the imaginary antiquity, and together with Savin, Grigory and Gerasim Pleshcheev wrote a letter with praise to the rising patriarch. Nikon to his confessor Neronov (correspondence of Neronov); but then he wrote an admonition to Habakkuk himself, so that he would change his mind and come to his senses. Having said that he himself was previously worried by doubts, he says, among other things, to convince Habakkuk: “My spiritual heart aches for you, the one who is tempted. Even if you feel the zeal of God, it is not according to reason, if you are embarrassed by the inexperienced icon writing, as if hindered by negligence. In old written icons there is a lot of fury... howling to know from under the brad, as if the head was cut off... Are the essence of the irmologists undistorted? Don’t we see a lot of fury from non-punishment even in printed publications?... Symbol... where is the right of his writing until now? Stefan Vonifatiev, court archpriest and royal confessor, who was on friendly terms with Neronov and others like him, but did not approve of their insolence and perseverance. From Neronov’s letter to him dated May 2, 1654, it is clear that Vonifatiev wrote letters to Neronov. “You write to us,” says Neronov, because the king is surprised at my stubbornness... Ashe and you have no blasphemy about the patriarch, but I, too, were tempted by the brethren.” It is likely that Vonifatiev’s letters will be found somewhere. Nowadays the collection is known: “The Book of Chrysostom,” with a signature on the sheets: “Stephana Bonifatiev’s cell,” and on the other: “The empress queen of the cell,” no doubt Maria Ilyinichna, nee Miloslavskaya, to whom Nero wrote a letter. From this collection, the most remarkable thing is four words, the content of which is Russian compositions. There are 18 weeks in the word for Wednesday. Ch. 249 says: “Even if we test a faithful king at the present time, then in all languages, except for the Russian language, there is no mention of a faithful king. And if he is right by faith, he deserves to gain not flatteringly, considering, even for the well-being of all those who exist under him. Not only the nobles, who strive for correction, but also to the last.” Then it is said that all attention must be paid to the farmers: “In the Yamsk waste, a lot of silver is wasted. We also harbor many grievances from this, even though the tsar’s land surveyors and clerks go about with the southern deeds, separating the land to the tsar’s warriors in measure... and many of the kingdoms were forgotten and we did not know this custom. oppression of scribes to farmers. The same should be said about pit driving. It is likely that this voice is cast by Tsar Alexei’s confessor. Another word is “St. father" (chapter 204) talks about Russian superstitions. Third (chapter 50) “about taverns and drunkenness.” The fourth - “about the church building” - asking the priest to observe the order and cleanliness in the church, he says: “Even if they did not put worldly property in the churches, no evildoers, thieves and robbers, and warriors and infidels would enter the churches to steal.” Such a remark about the Gentiles could not have been made before the time of Tsar Alexei. Extensive extracts from the words of Zabelchia (Archive of historical legal information, book II, half 2, pp. 46–50), who, however, dates them to the time of the Terrible Tsar, and, as we think, erroneously. 217. Notes and Chronicles: Semyon Remezov's Siberian Kungur Chronicle until 1649 (manufactured by the library of Academician Sciences); from 1678 to 1700, he and his children compiled 24 maps (drawings) of Siberia (Rumyantsev No. 346). Pachomius, Archbishop of Astrakhan, Astrakhan Chronicle, compiled in 1649 (Tsarsky No. 238). Nikifor Tolochanninov’s diary of the 1650 trip to Imereti (in the Synod. bib.). Grigory Koshikhin about Russia during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, ed. SPb. 1840 Moscow Chronicle 1633–1647 (Tsarsky No. 232). Feodor Baykov, Siberian voivode, travel to China in 1654 (ed. in Part IV by Vibl. and Sakharov in Tale. Vol. II, 122–134). Kursk Chronicler, or the story of the Kursk Icon of the Sign of the Mother of God, ending with a miracle in 1646 (Tsar’s No. 548), and according to another list in 1660 (Tolstoy V, No. 13; Bibl. General history No. 130); contents of the story in Moskvityanin 1843, part V, pp. 138, 139. The story of the miracles of the Tikhvin Icon of the Mother of God, with a description of some events of 1393–1648 and with a lengthy description of the siege of the Tikhvin monastery by the Swedes in 1613; a composition attributed to the icon painter Herodion Sergeev; part of the story (about the siege) was published in volume III. Collection. Russian letop. III, 283, and in the Grodno printing house in 1789; whole essay handwritten. Tsarsky No. 233, 549. Peter Zolotarev Notes of 1669 about the Astrakhan revolt of Razin and the murder of Metropolitan. Joseph (in Syn. Bible). The Pskov Chronicle ends in 1650 (Collected years. IV, 169 ff.), its news from 1548 to 1650 should be called the third Pskov Chronicle, where the events before 1547 are presented in abbreviated form (IV, 256–307; see pp. 79, 123). Note from an eyewitness about the Yaroslavl fire, 1658 (Tsarsky No. 415). 218. Biographers: in 1650, priest Vasily described the discovery of the relics of Princess Anna of Kashin. In 1657, under the Vologda archbishop. Markella describes the life and miracles of St. Galaktion († 1611). In 1665, the life of St. Nikander of Pskov († 1582); The author was probably Yakov Matveevich Muravyov, who built a church in the name of St. about 1650. Nikandra in his monastery. The life of Nikodim, the ascetic of Kozheozersky, is known from the list of 1662 (Tsarsky No. 190). With Patr. Nikon in 1657 compiled a book about Russian saints, arranged by day of the month, with a list of Russian miraculous icons (manufactured by Novgorod. Soph. bib.). Priest John compiled a consolidated original of the saints of the entire year, or their true appearance, as a guide to icon painters, comparing the ancient Greek original “with the prologues, with the four menaions, with the Kyiv printed sheets” and with the comments of Russian icon painters; the work is arranged by month and various Greek and Russian articles necessary for icon painters are added to it, including two chapters of the Stoglavnik (Tolstoy of the 17th century. II, no. 65; Tsarsky No. 314, - a list of the famous icon painter Ustyuzhanin Afanasy Petrov Sokolov; sl. Savvaitova described. Ustyuzhsk Monast., St. Petersburg, 1848, p. 22). In 1658, the short original of the saints was arranged alphabetically (Tolstoy II, No. 61; Tsarskogo No. 315; General history No. 315; Sakharov’s words “on Russian iconography” St. Petersburg, 1849). 219. Joasaph II, Patriarch (1667–1672) the following are known: a) conciliar charter on the subjects of the church court of 1667 (Act. IV, No. 155); b) a letter about clergy who have committed criminal offenses (A.E. IV, No. 161). All this was written as a result of the definitions of the Council of Patriarchs of 1667. The definitions of the Patriarchal Council of 1667 were printed in the service book of the 1668 MP and recently in the V volume. Additional. to the source act. pp. 467–477. Several other conciliar acts and definitions of 1667 were published in the Supplements, pp. 477–510. After this council, Patr. Joasaph “a letter of remonstrance” to the superstitious; this letter, as well as the letter to the hetman, written after the troubles of Bryukhovetsky in 1668, are in the Synod. bibliography; His “spiritual testament” is also there. 220. Pitirim, from 1657 from Novospassky Archimandrite, Metropolitan of Sarsky, and from 1664, Metropolitan of Novgorod, from July 6, 1672 to April 12, 1673, Patriarch, who overshadowed his honor with enmity against the patriarchs. Nikon, but worked hard to protect the church from superstitions. His speech upon entering the patriarchal see - in Mt. General ist. 1847 No. 2. Under the chairmanship of Pitirim, Metropolitan. Novgorod, the council of 1666 discussed the correction of errors and shortcomings in the rituals and books of the church. Acts of the Council, in 11 chapters, ed. in V volume. Additional to the source act. pp. 439–467. An extract from them was printed under the Service Book, M., 1668, and especially with the name of the Cathedral Scroll, Moscow, 1667. Remarkable is the extensive order of Metropolitan Pitirim to the dean (1671) to conduct services according to the corrected service book, to use prosphora with a four-pointed cross, to sing unanimously, and for priests not to move from one church to another without decree (Act. e. IV, No. 184). He wrote an order to the Tikhvin archimandrite (1668) to send to the court order the priests who performed the liturgy on prosphora with old crosses, and to send the prosphyren to a nunnery (Ist. Act. IV, No. 203). Two letters were written to the same archimandrite: one (1668) excommunicating the widow Evdokia Kobylina and her children for insulting their spiritual father, the other (1669) with permission from them (ibid., No. 205). A strict prohibition was written to the Iversky Monastery (1668) for monks and nuns to live with lay people (Act. IV, No. 162). In the Tsilov Monastery there was one letter (1667) about the construction of a shrine for the discovered relics of St. Nila (ibid., No. 156), another (1668) with a prohibition for monks to keep intoxicating drink in their cells (No. 165). His spiritual testament to the Synod. bib. 221. Jonah Sysoevich, Metropolitan of Rostov 1652–1691 When Patr. Nikon, confident that the tsar wanted to completely reconcile with him, arrived from Voskresensk for Matins at the Assumption Cathedral (this was on the feast of the wonderworker Peter Metropolitan) and stood in the patriarchal place, Jonah, along with the cathedral members, came up and received the blessing from the patriarch. By the will of Nikon, he went to the king to notify him of the arrival of the patriarch for the festive matins. For this he was deprived of his position as patriarchal locum tenens. In 1657 he founded the Belogostitsky Monastery in Rostov; He also built a huge bishop's house in Rostov. District message from Metropolitan. Jonah Dictionary (I, 304) refers to Met. Jonah II; this is a mistake. An excellent epistle was written in 1652 (ed. in Vol. IV. Historical act. 172–177), et seq. Metropolitan Ionoy Sysoevich. In the letter, the shepherd first exhorts everyone to live Christianly and in obedience to the shepherd. “If you do not accept this from us and do not improve in some way, then the same church that loves will take revenge on you for its dishonor. Then who will help you? Addressing the clergy, he writes: “Diligently admonish the people of God every day, especially those who do not attend the Church of God... The rules say: if a priest or deacon does not teach people, let him be removed from the rank.” Offers rules on church singing, confession, and deanery. “Let it be known to you,” the shepherd continues, that if in a city, or village, or somewhere an opponent of the cause of God appears and rebels against the teaching of Holy Scripture, or begins to revile the lawful shepherd and teacher, whether an archimandrite or abbot, a priest or a deacon, we, with the help of God, are ready against such schismatics, we will begin to catch such wolves; We have a rod ready against them, as against spiritual villains... Treasure your souls. God created us to serve Him. Don’t you dare steal God’s grapes, don’t dare pollute God’s gift.” Having explained the creation and purpose of man, he finally convinces him to live soberly. They breathe the same pastoral zeal: a) his letter to the Kirillov Monastery on the strictest observance of monastic deanery (A. e. t. IV, No. 335); b) about the same to the Solvychegodsky Vvedensky Monastery (ibid., No. 253); c) a letter to Ustyuzhna and Solvychegda, with a ban on buffoons and bear guides to play demonic games and songs (ibid., No. 98). In addition, there are his administrative documents (ibid., No. 80, 229, 333) and a letter (Cht. M. General history, 1847). In 1652, he testified to the relics of St. Daniel of Pereyaslavl and perhaps he described the life and miracles of the saint (Tolstoy II, No. 296. 17th century). 222. Pavel, Metropolitan of Krutitsky 1664–1674, familiar with the Greek language and book education, very reasonable. Under his supervision, the Bible was translated from Greek. Under his supervision, Alexander Mezenets compiled the “Notice to those requiring to learn singing,” after the monk Euphrosynus in 1651 wrote a rather detailed “Tale of various heresies and blasphemies against the Lord God and the Rev. Theotokos, contained from ignorance in znamenny (hook) books" (Undolsky remarks for the history of Russian ts. chant, pp. 12–14, M., 1846. Journal. Min. Nar. Enlightenment. 1849 Feb.). From the works of M. Paul the following are known: a welcoming speech (in Part III of Dr. Vivliof) and a testament (in the Synod. Bibl.). His charter in Kolinikov Hermitage, 1674, ed. in Yarosl. lips Ved. 1853 No. 41; his library in Vremnik General. ist. Part VI, pp. 65–83. 223. Epiphany Slavenitsky, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, according to contemporaries, “in philosophy and theology, an elegant didaskal, most skillful in the Helena-Greek and Slavic dialects” (preface to the words of Gregory the Theologian, M., 1665). He arrived in Moscow in 1649, summoned by the tsar “for rhetorical teaching and for the translation of Greek books” (Description of Little Russian affairs in Molodika, 1844). Smart Patr. Nikon invested Epiphanius with the title of head of the patriarchal school and chief director of books (Molodik, pp. 225–227). He died in 1675. According to the news of his student Euthymius (In a letter to Kiev, pope in Reading. General history 1846), Medvedev (Table of books § 379) and according to other information, the scientific works of Epiphanius were varied. 1) As an interpreter of Holy Scripture, he a) corrected the translation of the New Testament; the translation was completely ready, but the death of Metropolitan. Paul and Epiphanius himself prevented the publication of this translation; b) he also revised the translation of the Old Testament. Between his notebooks there remained a translation of the Pentateuch of Moses and an article about the corruption of the psalms by Apollinaris. A modern note about his works for the Holy Scriptures ex. in Dictionary I, 178–183. 2) He was a preacher. His words: praise to John Chrysostom (1653), praise to the church (1657), praise to Jacob Borovitsky, praise to St. M. Alexy, commendable prophet. Anna; to the words: In his church everyone speaks glory (1662); to the words: I am the good shepherd; receive grace from heaven; remember that death will not delay; Every good tree produces good fruit; my heart is troubled within me; earth-born people; splendid type. Comforting message to the prince. Radzivilova was written by him on behalf of Patriarch Nikon in 1657. Euthymius, having listed these words, adds: “and many others that are not found here.” We can recall that Epiphanius spoke the funeral eulogy to Met. Pavel. In addition, he wrote the canons of Anna Tverskaya in 1650, common to the apostles and martyrs; measured verses Rev. Mother of God; service to Jacob Borovitsky in 1651 3) As a philologist, a) compiled a philological dictionary explaining church words by their use by the church fathers (Bible. General history No. 238); this is the work of several years and the fruit of extensive acquaintance with the literature of the Greek Church. His other lexicon, which also required intensive work and extensive scholarship, is the Greek-Slavic-Latin lexicon, in which up to 7,000 words are explained (manuscript of the Synod. Bible; Undolsky Bibliographic Research p. 10). Epiphanius also wrote instructions on learning the Greek language. b) Translated from Greek: Athanasius Alexander. 4 words against the Arians (ed. M. 1665); his fifth word is against the Arians; his about the Divinity; book answers Antiochus (forged); Gospel parables (also not Athanasian); Gregory the Theologian 50 words (according to the Paris edition of 1630) ed. M. 1665; Basil the Great six-day period (according to the Basel edition of 1551) ed. M. 1665; John Chrysostom's discourse on Pentecost (in 1658) and liturgy (in 1649); Justina the Philosopher against the Greeks (according to Par. ed. 1636); John of Damascus book about faith, ed. in 1656; words about the worship of icons; Armenopulov's syntagma of laws in 1659 (Tsarsky. No. 17); conciliar act on the Russian patriarchate in 1652; finally an irmologist. c) Translated from Latin: Afanasia Alex. about the psalms of 1649 (published under the Moscow Psalter of 1650); three words of Bernard for the Nativity of Christ in 1650 (both Evfimy and Medvedev say so, therefore Metropolitan Eugene erroneously shows that Epiphanius composed the word for the Nativity of Christ); civil laws from Pliny's panegyric to Trajan and Thucydides' history; Geography of Europe and Asia (Bible. General history No. 116); Venelev Anatoly 1658; about the assassination of the King of England in 1649; Lexicon of Kalenin in 1643 (next in Kyiv); the translation of Kalenin's dictionary was corrected and supplemented in Moscow by Epiphanius together with Arseny Satanovsky, in 1650 (see Sergius Stroev Slavic-Russian Monuments in Foreign Libraries No. 57; Tsar's No. 554). In addition, Epiphanius was the chief assistant to the patriarch. Nikon when correcting church books. 4) For history, Euthymius mentions one work by Epiphanius: “On the departure from the throne of Patriarch Nikon.” Probably, this refers to the acts of the council of 1660, which were recorded by Epiphanius, who also gave his special voice about Nikon. Prefaces to books published under the special supervision of Epiphanius were written by Epiphanius; they are written intelligently, in a beautiful style, and are very important for the story. These are the prefaces to the Service Book of 1655, 1656, 1658, to the Tablet of 1656, to the Shestodnev 1650, 1660, Book of Hours 1653, Lenten Triodion 1656, Psalter followed 1653, 1658, Colored Triodion 1658, General Mena 1660, 1663, Canon 1662, Bible 1663, Service Mena for Sept. quarter 1666 In Epiphanius’s own writings, the Slavic language is processed, clear, correct, pure, beautiful church language; but in translations it is completely different - and this is because when translating he is too strict a literalist, first of all and most of all caring about fidelity to the letter of the original. His translations are literally correct, but dark and unintelligible, so that nothing else in them can be understood without the original. 224. Arseny Satanovsky, together with Epiphanius summoned to Moscow and his collaborator in scientific studies. He translated from Greek: George Kodin about the ranks and the “royal city”; from Latin - the third part of the Geography of Asia (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 164; Chertkova Bible II, 436). 225. Arseny the Greek, arrived in Moscow, together with Ierus. Patr. Paisius, and was left by the Tsar in Moscow as a learned man. Patr. Paisius, during his stay in Moscow, made comments to Metropolitan. Nikon on some irregularities in worship that were allowed in Moscow. Arseny spoke the same, and even very sharply, and thus soon aroused superstitions against himself. Patr. Paisiy, for his part, for some reason dissatisfied with Arseny, wrote from the road to the king that although Arseny was a learned man, it was necessary to look after him strictly, since he had been in different faiths. This review, together with the displeasure that Arseny aroused against himself, had the consequence that the tsar sent Arseny to the Solovetsky Monastery, under strict supervision. Here he did not behave according to a monastic conscience; but this was known only in the icy desert. When Patr. Nikon ascended to the patriarchal see, then feeling the need for educated people and regretting Arseny’s hard lot, in 1655 he returned him to Moscow. Arseny was entrusted with translating books and overseeing their printing. The frivolous Greek was not grateful to his benefactor: when a storm of troubles arose against Nikon, he joined his enemies; Already in 1658 we see him among the patriarchs who rewrote the property. Nikon (Temporary General Source Book XV, pp. 131,133). Then he entered into a close relationship with Paisius Ligarid, whose words of gratitude to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich he translated into Russian, for which he received a velvet cassock (On the life of Arseny Solovetsky manuscript. No. 897; lyrics. Pravda Solovetsky Monastery, pp. 14, 16, 174, 187). Arseny translated: a) The work of the monk Nathanael Skryzhal, sent to Nikon by Patr. Paisius in 1653, and his translation, together with the preface by Epiphanius, ex. in M. 1655. Contents Skryzhali from Medvedev § 99. b) Arseny the Greek (and not Arseny Satanovsky) translated the lives of St. Catherine, Theodore Stratilates, right. Alexey and Rev. Maximus the Confessor, also a quatrain of St. Gregory and Rev. Maxim about love, ed. under the name Anfologion, M., 1660, 1661, 1662; Dorotheus of Monemvasia “A historical book, that is, a chronograph, translated from Greek into the Slavic-Russian language by Hieromonk Arseny the Greek, beginning in f. 7163 (1656) and Svyatogorets by Archimandrite Dionysius the Greek took place in f. 1665" (Tolstoy I, no. 77; Rumyantsev no. 97). 226. Paisius Ligarid, who studied in Rome, banned by his patriarch (Isrusalimsky), Metropolitan of Gaza, known for his strong participation in the sad story of Patriarch Nikon. The Patriarch of Constantinople Parthenius, of course not knowing the history of Paisius in Jerusalem, approved him to Moscow as knowing the church rules. In Moscow, Nikon's enemies received him with honor. But, due to reviews from Patr. Nektarios, and in Moscow in 1669 he was put on trial, before whom he was accused of papism, of lies and inventions, for which he received significant sums of money from the tsar, of greed for gain, of neglect of the church charter and of living drunk. He was banned from priesthood. Paisius was Nikon's most arrogant and unscrupulous enemy. His first order of business was to answer Streshnev’s questions about the patriarch in 1661. How frivolous he was in his judgments is shown by the following: proving to Streshnev that Nikon was no longer the patriarch, he wrote: “a wife about whom her husband has not thought at all for more than four years has the right to choose another husband.” In a letter to the tsar, he wrote that it was necessary to communicate with the Patriarch of Constantinople about Nikon (ed. in Sob. gram. IV, no. 28), and prepared 1663 questions for the patriarch about royal and patriarchal power, presenting incidents from the life of Nikon (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 60–64). In the petition to the Tsar dated December 31. 1666, justifying himself against Nikon's denunciations, he insisted on Nikon's immediate deposition (Tsarsk. No. 473). In 1666 he wrote (in Alexiano musaeo) for the Swedish resident in Moscow; an essay “on the faith of the Greeks and Russians” regarding the Eucharist, published by Arnold: De eucharistia, Holmiae, 1667. This is the same essay on faith that Reitenfels mentions. In 1668, on behalf of the tsar, he wrote an extensive refutation of the Solovetsky petition; but given Russia’s well-deserved distrust of him, it could not have force and remained without consequences (Moscow spiritual academic No. 68). Some of his spiritual teachings are from Tolstoy II, No. 220. No matter how hard Nikon’s enemies tried to support Paisius in Moscow, who was dishonored at the council of 1669, he was forced to retire to Kyiv in May 1673. Here he lived in the St. Sophia Monastery, on a royal salary, and volunteered to teach philosophy at the college. His lectures were kept in the papers of Prof. Barsova. But the intrigues he started here made even Prince Trubetskoy want to remove him from Kyiv (Simbirsk collection 47, 73, 193). According to his letters to the Tsar in 1676, it is clear that he again lived in Moscow, and probably died here, since in the east he disgraced himself and could not receive what he received in Moscow. 227. Georgiy Kryzhanich, a priest, a Serb by birth, very educated, arrived in Russia, according to him, 20 years before 1665, therefore around 1645. He was one of Patriarch Nikon’s collaborators in spreading enlightenment between the people and the clergy. The intrigues of the schismatics, who intensified in Moscow during the tsar’s displeasure against Nikon, had the consequence that George was sent to Siberia in 1661, and Avvakum returned to Moscow. The patrons of the schism took advantage of the fact that in relation to Yuri, he boldly spoke against the legality of the rebaptism of Latins, legalized by the patriarch. Filaret, and even wrote an essay about it. Although at the council of 1667 the Eastern patriarchs insisted that Philaret’s definition be cancelled; but no one remembered about poor Yuri. He wrote a request for the return of his innocent to Moscow; “But I couldn’t,” he says, “get hold of the man who sent or conveyed my tears (tears) and petition to the royal majesty.” Thus, he remained in captivity in Siberia for 14 years. His works: a) research on Slavic grammar, completed in 1655. They were published by Mr. Bodyansky on Thursday. M. General ist., M., 1848, with comments on the rules of Yuri’s grammar and about Yuri himself. b) In 1675, Yuri wrote an explanation for the Solovetsky petition. This denunciation of the Solovetsky petition is remarkable, and according to several information about Avvakum, Lazar and the clerk. Theodore, preserved in the Synod. bib. in a manuscript written by the hand of Yuri himself (No. 891); extract from it from Bodyansky, pp. 14,18. c) “On Holy Baptism” in the form of a conversation, where it is proven that a) there is no second baptism, and that b) the rebaptism of Latins is arbitrary, inconsistent with the definitions of the councils. The work is preserved in the Synodal manuscript. under number 826. 228. Schismatic works: 1) John Neronov, archpriest of the Kazan Cathedral, a monk. Gregory, letters of 1653 and 1654 to the Tsar, Tsarina and Vonifatiev (manuscript), after which he returned to the church in 1654, then in 1656 again “the great blasphemer of Byashe”, and in 1666 he again presented a penitential “handwriting” (Additional to “historical act. V, 457. Historical act. V, 480, 481). 2) Epiphany, Chudovsky monk; slandered Nikon in 1660, then wandered around to different places with anger at him, petitioned the tsar in 1667 with abuse of new books (Hist. act. V, 477, 480; handwritten). 3) Theoktist, the former abbot of Chrysostom, a friend of Neronov, “muddled with words and writing” in an essay about the Antichrist (Tolstoy II, No. 366), but who “later brought repentance by handwriting, and having lived for some time in the Pokrovsky monastery, in a wretched house, retired in peace to the Lord” in 1666. (Addition to the historical act. V, 458; Historical act. V, 458). 4) Spiridon Potemkin, Pokrovsky archimandrite, who died in November 1664, 9 words about the right faith (manuscript). 5) Gerasim Firsov, Solovetsky monk, who died in communion with the church in 1666 (Addition to historical act. V, 458) message of 1664 about the sign of the cross (printed in East Solovki). 6) According to modern information, Anthony, former archimandrite of the Murom Spassky Monastery, a friend of Loggin, who repented in 1666, previously “written reproaches” (Additional act. V, 458), but now unknown. 7) Ephraim Potemkin, the Bizyukovsky monk, according to his own consciousness, wrote about the Antichrist, but in 1666 he repented of it (Additional act. V, 452–454); His writings are also not visible now; but Semyon Zhulev's Flower Garden of 1665 is known (manuscript). 8) Nikita Pustotsvet wrote a petition in 1666 in 30 points, after which he submitted a penitential “handwriting” (Additional Act. V, 448,451), and then again rebelled in 1682 and submitted a petition with extracts (Ist. Act. V, 340, 481). 9) Lazarus, defrocked, wrote a petition in 1664 (Additional act. V, 456, 457), then two more: one to the king in paragraph 30. Feb. 1668, another at the same time to Patr. Joasaph in chapter 16. (handwritten). 10) Protop. Avvakum, in his response to Pleshcheev in 1663, wrote: “he prevents her (the church) from sinning not only in faith, but not even the slightest devil of canons and songs” (manuscript). According to modern evidence, Habakkuk 1057–1666 “wrote blasphemy against St. symbol correction" (now invisible); “the addition of three fingers in the imagination of the cross,” or the crucifixion heresy (Collected St. Petersburg. Spiritual Academician. No. 35), where he calls self-immolation a blessed indulgence; “for book correction,” or about the transformation of books (Collected St. Petersburg spiritual academician), “and for correction,” of course, the story about Nikon (ibit.); “to the consent of church singing” (now invisible). Then followed: a letter to Ignatius about the deacon Theodore; message to Morozova and district message of 1677. In the latter he wrote: “Oh! Oh! poor Rus'! Why did you want German actions and customs? And Mikola the Wonderworker’s German name is Nikolai. In the Nemtsy Nemchin there was Nikolai; and under the apostles Nicholas was a heretic. And Nicholas is nowhere to be found among the saints; As soon as things become worse for them, Nikola the Wonderworker endures.” With the same wisdom, his message in 1678 to the king, with a vision about the king, and a legend about his life. 11) Deacon Theodore, former director of books, letter to Orthodox Christians 1665 (Tsar’s No. 430); “penitential scripture” 1666 (Additional act. V, 452); a letter to John Pleshcheev, with rude abuse of the priesthood, approved by the signature of Habakkuk after 1666; answers to Athanasius, Metropolitan of Iconium, 1668 (Tsarsk. No. 662; ref. in Solov. is.); message to Habakkuk; the story of Habakkuk, Lazar and Epiphanius (eg in Solov. is.; in Tolstoy II, No. 273); story about Spiridon. 12) Azariah, monk of Solovetsky, petition of 1667 (eg in Solovetsky is.). 13) Avramiya, Nizhny Novgorod Lyskovsky monk, disciple of Avvakumov (Additional Act. V, 458), petition to the Tsar in 1670 and a message to a certain lover of God (Tsarsky. No. 661, 662). 14) Savva, legend about the cathedral of 1682 (Tsarsky No. 474, 552; Ist. Russian ts. IV, 263–272). 229. Feodor Griboyedov, discharged clerk who served under Tsars Alexei Mikhailovich and Feodor Alekseevich; participated in the composition of the Code (M., 1669); in 1669 he dedicated to Tsar Alexei a short narrative (in 36 chapters) about the events of Russia from Grand Duke Vladimir; subsequently he added 5 chapters about the last years of Tsar Alexei and the accession to the throne of Tsar Theodore. This is an attempt at a systematic presentation of Russian history, but the experience is very unsuccessful (Rom. No. 82–84). The good Tsar Theodore generously rewarded the writer for his work, which was pleasant because it was Russian work. 230. Simeon Setyanovich Polotsk, a gifted student of the Kyiv College, who listened to Lazar Baranovich, arrived in Moscow in 1664 and was the teacher of Tsarevich Feodor Alekseevich. “I have been living according to your decree, great sovereign, in Moscow for seven years,” wrote Simeon in a letter to the Tsar in 1671, complaining about his insufficient salary. Under Tsar Theodore, he enjoyed respect and power. He died in 1682. a) As a dogmatist, he wrote two catechisms: one lengthy - The Crown of Faith, 1670 (in Tsarskogo No. 35; in Tolstoy I, No. 65; II, the other short, in 1671 (Tsarskogo No. 19; Tolstoy I, No. 65). b) As a preacher, he wrote: “The spiritual dinner” - sermons for all Sundays, ed. M., 1681; “Spiritual Supper” - sermons on the feasts of the Savior, the Mother of God and the Sign of the Saints, ed. M., 1683. Medvedev wrote in 1676 about these works to Polotsk: “You finished the weekly and holiday teachings and you began to read them in the church, with the intention of reading them to the people every week and on every holiday.” Consequently, those and other teachings were spoken from the pulpit. He composed three teachings, published on behalf of the patriarchs. Joasafa, M., 1668: a) about listening to the liturgy; b) against games and divination; c) about reverent standing in the church. They were brought into the Spiritual Supper afterwards. Conversations (11 in total) about the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit. souls - to the Synod. handwritten c) As an exposer of the schism, he composed (as he noted in the draft original) from May 18 to July 13, 1666, a response to the petitions of Nikita and Lazarus, which on behalf of Patr. Joasaph was sent out to the churches with the name of the Rod of Government, printed. M., 1666. He translated from Latin into Slavic the Paisievo refutation of the Solovetsky petition (Manuscript M. Spiritual Academician No. 68). d) As a spiritual poet, he wrote in verse the Rhythmologion - a collection of 95 poems: they were written before 1678; including: “Eagle of Russia” - praise to Tsar Alexei; “Elegy” - in the form of a conversation between the deceased Tsar Alexei with God, with the heir and others; “Lament” for Tsar Alexei; comedy - “The Prodigal Son” (ed. in Viv., VIII, 34–40) and tragedy - “Nebuchadnezzar”; Vertograd, composition. 1678; Rhyming Psalter, ed. M., 1680; “The good-voiced gusl” upon the accession of Tsar Theodore to the throne (in Chertkov, p. 524). e) He composed the famous royal Charter about the Moscow Academy, signed by the Tsar after the death of Polotsk: this is what Medvedev says in the dedication of the charter to Sofia (Vivliof. VI, 390). His letters to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich were published in the Bulletin of Europe in 1828. f) Finally, Simeon left many translations from Latin, of which the most remarkable work is the translation (1671) of the pastoral book of St. Patr. Gregory the Interviewer (Synod. Bible No. 662, 663). 231. Misail, Metropolitan of Belogorod 1672–1684 a) an admonishing message on the eradication of seductive games and witchcraft; b) four letters of prayer; all published by Polevoy in Vivliof., pp. 27–32, 34, 49. M., 1834. Simon, from the abbot of Svirsky, archbishop of Vologda 1665–1685, who took part in the councils of 1675 and 1678 (Act. exp. IV, 260, 309), is known: a) from a letter of 1671 to Bishop Alexander of Vyatka (Act. legal. No. 368); b) according to a letter of 1676 to the Krutitsy Metropolitan, which was written upon his return from Moscow (Tsarskogo No. 750, p. 815); his memory of the failure of husbands to tonsure while their wives were alive in the Act. exp. IV, no. 247; letter of notification about Stenka Razin, dated February 8, 1672, Tsarsky No. 750, p. 808; two administrative letters in the Act. exp. IV, no. 170, 185. 232. Nikolai Spafariy, who in 1675 went on an embassy to China, in 1673 dedicated to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich the “Christologion” he translated from Greek, or about the four monarchies of Daniel, with his explanations and notes (Rumyants. manuscript No. 460; Tolstoy I, No. 56). In 1672, he translated Arithmetic and added Iphika, or examples of royal virtues (director Chudova Mon., and in 1675 he translated from Greek a description of the “seven arts” (Tolstoy II, No. 118). Probably, he also wrote a book “about the Sibyls,” prepared for publication, with a dedication to Tsar Alexei, in 1673 (Rumyantsev No. 227). Under Tsar Theodore, Spafariy was accused of witchcraft, and, it seems, shared the fate of the boyar Matveev, to whom he was close, as the mentor of his son, Matveev wrote from captivity to Tsar Theodore: “and even Davidko himself, being in my yard, saw how I, with Stefan the doctor and Spafariy, locked the black book... and Nikolai Spafari taught me and my son Andryushka from that book” (Vivliof. XVIII, 397). For the ignorance and anger of that time, any book like the book about the seven arts is a “black book.” 233. John Shusherin, subdeacon under Nikon, who enjoyed his special favor, after Nikon’s deposition from the department, he was kept in the secret chancellery for 11 days, 3 years in prison and 10 years in captivity in Novgorod, finally released at the request of Princess Tatiana, wrote around 1682. Life of Patr. Nikon, ed. SPb. 1784, M. 1817. The lists of the Life of Rumyantsev (No. 175) and the Society of History (No. 51) talk about the correction of the books of patr. Nikon, but this is not in the printed life; Nikon’s two-time trip to the Iveron Monastery is briefly discussed here, but the printed version talks about it at length; there are no two patriarchal letters included in the printed edition: but the list of Kharkov University contains not only these, but also two other farewell letters and a letter from Nikon himself to the patriarch. Dionysius. 234. Joachim Savelov, patriarch 1673–1690. He was summoned from Kyiv by the patriarch. Nikon in 1657 (Hist. Act. IV, No. 108), and until July 1673 he was Metropolitan of Novgorod (Hist. Act. IV, 501, 503, 513, 515). During his reign over the Russian Church, he almost continuously fought either with schismatics or with the offspring of papism. His works: a) Against schismatics: “notice of a miracle” 1677; “from the addition of three fingers,” M., 1677; “a word of exhortation” to schismatics, printed. 1682; “Spiritual joy”, one of the best works against the schism based on the thoroughness of thoughts, M., 1682; “the word against Nikita Pustosvyat, M., 1684, 1721,1753; “a word of thanks” about the deliverance of the church from apostates, M., 1683. This also includes his essay: “about the correction of certain errors in the sayings of previously printed menaia and about the slander of that correction” (in the Imperial published bibliography). b) Against papism: “the word read at the council of 1690”, or Osten (Tsarsky No. 434; Tolstoy II, No. 86). Here first is a study of the time of the Transubstantiation of the Eucharist; this study is taken word for word from Akos and the Dialogue of the Likhuds; further about Polotsk and Belobodsky, about Medvedev and his like-minded people; a discussion about proskomedia, about Lutherans and papists with their purgatory. This book, consisting of 25 chapters, was called the composition of patras. Joachim (Demidov library No. 624); but, apart from approving its content, little in it belongs to Joachim himself. The collection Shield of Faith contains messages from the patriarchs. Joachim to the south (Rumyants. No. 471). This collection was compiled by one of Likhudov’s students, probably Polikarpov and Semyonov; complementing the acts of Joachim with the acts of Patr. Adrian on the issue of the Eucharist, they solicited the patriarchs. Adrian, so that the Shield could be printed - this is what the preface shows; however, the Shield remained in the manuscript. c) Two teachings on the invasion of barbarians and three prayers for the same case, M., 1683, 1688 d) Government orders: conciliar decision on the spiritual court (Act. exp. IV, 259–263); messages with a request for the archers (Act. exp. IV, 379–380, 387–389); cathedral ruling of 1675 on the diocesan court (Ist. act. IV, 542 – 545); charters: prohibiting trade on holidays (Hist. act. V, 268–270); about the judgment of the spiritual (V, 294–295, 322–325); on monastic deanery (Hist. act. V, 319–320); a letter to the Epiphany Polotsk Monastery (Act. Zap. Ross. V, No. 159; a letter to the Kyiv Metropolitan Gideon (Description of Sophia. Sob. No. 20): a letter to the Kyiv Lavra; about stauropegy (Description of the Kiev Lavra, No. 24). Finally e) his spiritual testament is known (General history No. 225; Synod. Bibl.), where he writes about himself: “I was born into this world by pious parents and was raised in the inviolable piety of the Eastern Churches in the Orthodox faith and grew old by the destinies of God now seventy years old... And when I of the past 7163 years came to the Kiev common life Mezhigorsky monastery and took monastic vows, then I promised and in my great zeal I wished for my evil deeds and many sins, even in worldly life and military cases, regimental deeds, and the wrath of my Creator, the Lord. so that I would not leave that holy monastery in any way and weep for my sins there, either alone in the desert, or in a hermitage, I would end my life and my sinful body in that very promise of my Transfiguration of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Mezhigorsk Monastery. But by the will of God, or by remission for my sins, we do not know this, but rather, as the message of our destinies, allow me to be honored not only with the priesthood, from where I left, but also with the bishopric and the extreme patriarch of the throne and the chairman of all northern countries; and the spiritual leadership and administration in the Church of Christ of many people has been the imam for six and ten years.” The will was written on March 17, 1690. In the postscript to the will, the patriarch asks the sovereigns “to command the icons of the God-man Jesus and the Most Holy Theotokos and all the saints to be written on tablets according to ancient translations from Greek images, as we see the miraculous icons of ancient letters,” etc. 235. Simeon, in monastic Sylvester Medvedev, together with the famous Shaklovity Kursk clerk in the order of secret affairs; dissatisfied with worldly rumors, he entered the Molchansk Hermitage in order to study books more freely. “Most Pure Mr. Father Euthymius! deign to take two of my Aristotelian books from Timofey Dementyanovich Litvinov and send them to me; and I will return his books”; This is how he wrote from the Molchansk desert to Moscow in 1673. He personally met the scientists of Moscow, and especially Simeon of Polotsk, in 1670, when he came to Moscow from the desert with the abbot. Having accepted monasticism in 1674 in the desert, during his visit to Moscow by Tsar Theodore himself (1677), he was left in Moscow in the Zaikonospassky Monastery, and, of course, with plans for the opened school at the printing house. Gifted with happy mental abilities, burning with a thirst for enlightenment, Medvedev collected books everywhere and entered into relations with learned people. From his place of service in Kursk and from his stay in the Putivl hermitage, it is natural that he knew the scholarship of the southwest even without Polotsk; but from his own letter, dated September 27, 1676, it is also clear that he had deep respect for Polotsk and his writings. By the goodwill of Tsar Theodore, having taken the place of the deceased Polotsk abbot of the Zaikonospassky Monastery, he hoped to be the head of the academy that they wanted to open in the Zaikonospassky Monastery. In 1685, Father Sylvester, through his friend Shaklovity, presented a letter to Sophia with his poems for approval, and it was approved: “Januaria was presented on the 25th day in the evening, and it was presented by F. (Theodore) L. (Leontyevich) Sh. (Shaklovity), and signed in the evening,” as it says on Medvedev’s list. But after that (in March) the Likhuds arrived in Moscow, and the academy was put at their complete disposal. Father Sylvester took this indifferently. He was also offended by the humiliation to which scientists from the south were subjected in Moscow, while people from Greece were given unconditional respect. Open quarrels began. The abbot complained about the constraint of the monastery from the Likhuds (Vivliof. XVI, 300). This was not respected. Patr. Joachim, who did not love Polotsk, did not favor his friend Medvedev. Sylvester wrote two essays on the Eucharist, with sharp reproaches to the Likhuds for their unorthodoxy. The trial has begun. His library, which consisted of 603 books, mostly Latin and Polish, some of which were signed by Simeon of Polotsk, was described and taken under supervision (Inventory printed in the 16th part of the Vremnik Ob. history; words. Bulletin of Europe 1827 No. 16). Medvedev was accused of delusion; but, having brought nationwide repentance, Jan. 1690 requested by the church (Hist. act. V, 194); due to his closeness to the princess and the Shaklovites, he was included in the number of state criminals and was executed in 1691 (Collected Laws I, No. 1352; Moskvityanin 1843, No. 9 and 10). His works: a) Historical: about the Streltsy revolt of 1682 (edited by Sakharov in Notes of Russian People, St. Petersburg, 1841) - an essay by an eyewitness, written with the same precision in relation to the truth as Tatishchev was frivolous in relation to Medvedev, who allowed himself to call him a participant in this revolt. “Table of Contents of Books and Who Compiled Them” (ed. Undolsky, M., 1846) - the first attempt at Russian bibliography, very efficient, although not without errors. This also includes his letters (one in Tolstoy, p. 375, others in the Synod. Manuscript No. 346). b) Polemical works against the Likhuds: “Manna of the animal’s bread”, burned according to the definition of Patr. Joachim; “Notebook on Likhudov” (Synod. manuscript No. 546). c) Poems: greetings to Tsar Theodore on the occasion of his marriage, printed. M., 1682; cry about the death of King Theodore (printed in the XIV part of Vivliof); epistole to Princess Sophia when presenting the academy's charter (Vivliof. VI, 391); Epitaph to Simeon of Polotsk. 236. Avramiy Pankratievich Firsov, translator of the embassy order, translated the Psalter into the popular Russian language in 1683. “The Translator’s Explanation” says that his Psalter “is attested to from many printed ancient books,” and then describes the sad state of his time: “Our Russian people are rude and unlearned... they do not look for true knowledge and reason in the Holy Scriptures and they revile learned people and call them heretics; They believe only in the writings that were printed not long ago, about 40, 50 and 70 years ago. And those newly corrected books from old, true, testified, handwritten and printed books were corrected during our lifetime, even better where they were corrected in reason and in the dialect of the literate rank: both of them do not believe it for their ignorance... Many are such simple ignoramuses and stupid are found... they are also called capitons: having gathered, they go into the forests and stay there, abhorring the St. God’s churches... And if anyone from pious and learned people teaches to forbid such an evil deed of the devil... and they gather in one church... they themselves are burned.” “Preface to the Reader” talks about the benefits of reading Holy Scripture; then he notes that the Psalter in its ancient translation cannot be correctly understood “by the multitude of sayings in it from different languages.” In his translation, the translator a) retains the previous Slavic translation in places; but b) more often he corrects the translation according to the Hebrew text, or, more precisely, according to translations from it; sometimes it follows Luther’s translation, but in places it deviates from it, following other manuals (Synod. handicraft,). This translation aroused controversy. Patr. Joachim banned it. In deserted Perm, the priest of the city of Orel in 1684 wrote “Statir”, or Sunday and holiday teachings - a very remarkable work (Rumyants. No. 411). The compiler is responsible for minor changes in expressions in the teachings of Cyril Tranquillion and the application of others to the days, so that “a rare word, as he himself says, passed without his speeches.” The most remarkable thing is the priest’s desire to teach the people through live preaching. “I attempted,” he says, partly after the Divine Liturgy to publish instructive conversations from the divine scriptures every week and apply them with my unreasonable intelligence. I have heard that in many parts of Russia, priests read wisdom from their mouths, not from books, and people listen very kindly, with much surprise. And Cyril of Stavromeniy (Stavrovetsky) in his book highly praises oral teaching, and out of necessity, he says from books that the teachers have become impoverished from the church.” 237. Venedikt Butorin, monk, known from his letter to Patr. Joachim (Tolstoy II, no. 220), relating to modern disputes. It seems they wrote the complete science of Easter (Tolstoy I, No. 199). Cornelius, Abbot of Zelenetsky, Archimandrite of Tikhvin, 1674–1696 Metropolitan of Novgorod, who died in retirement in the Zelenetsky Monastery in 1698. He described the life of St. Martyrius, the founder of the Zelenets monastery († 1603) and composed a canon for him. His letters: a) against drunken clergy (Ist. Act. IV, No. 203); b) on strict supervision of the behavior of all clergy (Act. Exp. IV, No. 22 5); c) on the supervision of the church charter from the monastery (Ist. Act. IV, No. 213); d) on the supervision of deanery in churches (Ist. Act. IV, No. 152); in addition, several administrative documents (Ist. Act. IV, No. 80; Act. Exp. IV, No. 205, 212). 238. Ioannikis and Sophronius Likhud, Greek hieromonks educated at the University of Padua, arrived in Moscow with doctoral diplomas in 1685. They were assigned to teach lessons at the academy here. The noisy controversy they raised about the Eucharist was not as useful for the church as teaching lessons; and he was not disinterested. In 1688, Ioannikis, having begged for the title of ambassador, went on his business to Venice, where he stayed for about four years; Sophrony, in his absence, continued to teach grammar and began to read rhetoric. In 1694, when, after logic, Sophrony began to read physics, due to strong complaints from the Jerusalem patriarch. Dositheus and Likhud were removed from the academy. They were instructed to teach the Italian language at the printing house. They also did private lessons. Patr. Dositheus was not pleased with this; he urgently demanded that the Likhuds be removed from Moscow, as harmful people due to their political intrigues. Although Dosifei's accusations against the Likhuds did not all turn out to be fair in Moscow; but it is true that the Likhuds loved their self-interest very much. 3rd August 1694 they submitted a request for an increase in salary, while they already received a lot. It is also true that Ioannikios did little to teach lessons at the academy; Almost only Sophrony taught at all times. There were reasons in the affairs of the Likhuds to believe that their intrigues in Constantinople could bring disaster not only to the innocent patriarch, but also to Russia. Therefore, at the end of 1701 they were sent to the Ipatsky Monastery under strict supervision. Treasuring their knowledge, Metropolitan. Job of Novgorod, in 1706, asked them to come to Novgorod for himself, where they taught teaching in schools. Sophrony was called again to Moscow in 1709, and was a teacher here until 1712; then he was entrusted with correcting the Bible. Ioannikiy, summoned to Moscow in 1716, died here in 1717; and the younger brother died in 1730. a) Against papism - “Akos”, translated by Semenov and Polikarpov in 1687 (Demidov No. 617; Tsarsky No. 429; Tolstoy II, No. 86); “Demonstration of the Truth” 1689 (Imperial publ. bib. No. 76); “Dialogues with a Jesuit” (ibid., no. 76); The spiritual sword, or a conversation with the Jesuit Rutka in the Polish land, translated into the Slavic language in 1690 (Moscow spiritual academic; Tsar's no. 248; Tolstoy II, no. 63, 127). b) Joannikia and Sophrosyne denouncing the heresies of Luther and Calvin, writing. 1706 (Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 275). Slavic translation in manuscript. Sophia and Synod. bib. c) Against the schismatics: “Colluria from the fierce passion of Kapitonsky’s pain,” a work by Sophronius, known from the catalog of Rev. Damaskina Rudneva. 2. Classical books: a brief Greek grammar of 1687, in Greek and Slavic (Moscow Spiritual Academic No. 331; Tolstoy III, No. 78); extensive Greek grammar Ioannikios and Sophronius (Moscow ecclesiastical academician No. 332); Latin grammar, in Latin and Greek (Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 330); rhetoric of Sophronius, in Greek. and lat. language. (Moscow spiritual academic No. 324–329); this rhetoric was translated into Russian by Afonets Kozma in 1698 (Tsarskago No. 350; Rumyants. No. 245); Sophronia Logic, 1690 (Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 299); Physics, written by Ioannikiy in 1689 in Venice for some Valentin, of course a rich student (Moscow ecclesiastical academician No. 310, 311–316); psychology, written for the same Valentin, 1689 (Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 310,316); Philosophical answers of Sophrony (Moscow spiritual academician No. 302); finally, scholastic theology (Moscow spiritual academician no. 252). 3. A complete list of the Bible, with amendments by Sophronius Likhud, in the Synod. bib. 22). Essay: “against the Bible fortunetellers”, fights for the Greek translation of the Bible (Novgorod. Soph. bib.). Oratorical works: a) Ioanikiia Likhuda: speech to the patriarch upon his return from Venice in 1691; funerary word for the king. Natalia Kirillovna 1694; words of praise to Tsar John 1696; a word of praise to Tsar Peter after the capture of Azov in 1697; a word of praise to him upon his return from Holland in 1698; lesson for the 5th week. of Great Lent, spoken in Moscow in 1701 (Moscow Spiritual Academician No. 19). b) Sophronia Likhuda: a word of praise for her birthday. Tsar Peter Alekseevich “Triumph Muscovites, rejoice Greeks, tremble enemies, fear barbarians, leave Turks.”; the word about Sophia of the Wisdom of God 1708 (Rumyants. No. 244); words of praise from St. Varlaam Khutynsky, written in Novgorod, and the life of St. Varlaam (ruler of the Khutyn monastery); triumph of peace with Sweden 1721 239. Nikanor, archimandr. Resurrection Monastery 1685–1698, wrote: a legend about the construction of this monastery, about the burial of the patriarch. Nikon, and the charter of the monastery (manuscript of the Resurrection Mon. 118:47). 240. Theophan, hierodeacon and librarian of the Chudov Monastery, translated: from the Lithuanian language in 1676 Tranquillion's Mirror of Theology (Tsar's No. 138); from Polish in 1677 “New Sky” by Golyatovsky; in 1677 Physiognomy (Tsarskago No. 416); in 1679 “On the Mystery of Repentance”; in 1688. Desiderius, or the path to perfection, ed. SPb. 1783; in the same 1688, “The Sunflower,” or the equation of the human will with the will of God (Rumyants. No. 92, 99); in 1698 “The True Faith.” Probably, he also translated the Roman Tales from Polish in 1691 (Tsarskago No. 313). Theophanes was also engaged in comparing the text of the psalter according to ancient copies, as his marks on one of them show (Description of manuscript. Synod. bib. p. 182). 241. Pavel, Metropolitan of Tobolsk from 1678 to Jan. 4th 1692, wrote: excellent instruction on the conversion of Gentiles to the Christian faith (Ist. Act. V, No. 69) and various orders (No. 46, 134–166, 211). 242. Adrian, patriarch since 1690, and before that Metropolitan of Kazan, † 1700. His writings: a) Against schismatics about the sign of the cross (Synod. bib.); letter of tonsure (Tolst. III. No. 85). b) The word at the burial of the princess skinun Anfisa (ed. in Christ. Reading 1841, IV, 119); Instructions for Holy Orders (Tolstoy II, No. 391); district message: “God has established two great principalities on earth: the priesthood and the kingdom” (General History No. 225); circular message: “All-merciful God, praised in the Trinity, create the world and create man” (Tsarskogo 441, 444 and 473); two exhortations of 1695 Metropolitan. Cornelius, who wanted to retire (Bible. Society No. 303); letter of praise to St. Demetrius for composing four menias (printed in Demetrius’ Diary); two letters to the government. Peter the Great (printed in Vivliof. XV part); two letters of 1696 to boyar Shein (ed. in the book: Shein’s campaign to Azov); present Metropolitan's diploma Varlaam Yasinsky (description of Soph. collection No. 26); charter to the archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra (ed. in the Time. General history book. XII, pp. 32–46; charter to the Polotsk and Vitebsk monasteries (Act. zap. Ross. V, no. 270; sl. no. 170, 278); the court of the saint, or extracts on the rights of the spiritual authorities (edited by Kalachov in Op. about the helmsman); instructions to the elders (printed in the XV part of Vivl.); two letters about the priest Athanasius and the deacon Peter, who were cut off for the schism (Description of music, p. 73). c) Testament written in 1697 (in the Synod. bib.). Jonah Baranovich, cellarer and archimandrite of the Tikhvin Monastery (Legal Act. 104, 319), since 1674 Archbishop of Vyatka and Perm, left behind many monuments of pastoral care in the diocese, especially the construction of churches and monasteries. The orderly order of worship introduced by him was preserved for a long time in the diocese even after him. His purity of life and high virtues gained him the reverent respect of his flock, who, after his death († 1700), commemorated him every year. The Vyatka prefect Lyubarsky, finishing his notes about him, says: “Although, apart from the Slavic-Russian literacy, he was not taught anything else; however, he had a zealous zeal for the collection of good printed and written books” (Cht. Mosk. Obshch. ist. 1848, No. 9). Nowadays we know his beautiful spiritual testament, written by him a year before his death; it breathes with sincere piety (printed in Legal Act. 462–465). 243. Ignatius, from the Korsakov nobles, steward of Tsar Alexei, from 1677 ecclesiarch of the Solovetsky monastery, from 1685 archimandrite of Novospassky, 1693–1701 metropolitan of Tobolsk. His word of 1687 to the army in the Bible. General ist. No. 241. In 1690, he composed news about Russk. kingdom. In 1687, he was sent to Kineshma to admonish schismatics and wrote a historical “news” about this journey. It was written by him on behalf of Archimandrite. Macarius “preface to Irmology”, with information about the furies of schismatics in the Solovetsky Monastery (ed. by Undolsky in the article on church singing. M, 1846). His three district epistles, written in denunciation of schismatics, are very important. In the first letter, the archpastor says that, according to the Lord, teachers of lies should appear in the church, and according to His instructions, we must beware of them, especially since they cover themselves with the guise of truth. This is how the Armenian Joseph Astomin and the Hungarian Jew Avram appeared. What is their teaching! They teach not to go to church, not to get married, not to receive Holy Communion. secrets, do not mark yourself with the tripartite cross, even burn yourself; they... spew blasphemy against St. secrets and the church. But in this way they fulfill the words of St. Hippolyta about the disciples of the Antichrist and the vision of chapter 12. Apocalypse. How can we not remove them? – In the second letter he refutes the schismatics’ blasphemous opinion about the tripartite sign of the cross and explains that the schismatics do everything that, according to St. Hippolyta, it is natural to make children of the Antichrist. Finally he exposes the curious confession of Joseph Astomin. Having said that his parents and their children joined the Orthodox Church under Tsar Michael, he continues: “You see, they printed the essence in Moscow in 155 (1647) in the psalter with the charge of folding the right hands with two fingers against our Armenian teaching. Then I spoke about that extortion, calling it truly a two-fingered addition... And for this guilt of mine, I was sent into exile from Kazan, last year in 168 (1660).” In the third last information is offered about the affairs of Istomin, Avvakum and the monk Daniel. Administrative letters from Metropolitan. Ignatius - in V volume. East. act. No. 243,247,248, 290. In addition, in Verkhotursky Monastery. there is his “Description of the Life and Miracles of Righteous Simeon.” 244. Jonah, archim. Tikhvinsky, from 1674 bishop and from 1682 archbishop of Vyatka († 1700) spiritual charter, ed. in Legal act. No. 428. Afanasy Lyubimov, abbot of Isetsky, patriarchal hieromonk of the cross, since 1682 archbishop. Kholmogorsky; for his intelligent denunciation of the schism, he was strangled and almost killed at the council. The fight against the schism was even after that a feat of his life. He had a rich library. Tsar Peter loved him for his love for his homeland. Having died in 1702, the zealous shepherd left behind: a) The Shield of Faith - a collection useful for the history of the Russian Church of patriarchal times; Shestodnevets about the creation of the world and the fall of man (rukop. Archang. sem.); brief Orthodox confession of faith (rukop. Archang. sem.); two district charters, writ. from Moscow in 1682, from March 30 and August 1, with an exhortation to strive against the sowers of schism; two diplomas to the Solovetsky Monastery. (eg in Part III of Dosifeev’s description of the Solovetsky habitation, pp. 241–257). b) Description of Tsar Peter’s three journeys to the Dvina and the Swedes’ attack on the Dvina fortress (ed. in Vivliof); description of three routes from Pomerania to Sweden (Tolst. I, No. 251). c) Home medicine, written in 1625 (Tolst. V, No. 18). 245. Timofey Kamenevich Rvovsky, hierodeacon of the Serf Monastery (on the Mologa River), wrote: a) the story of the seven wise men, 1692 (Tolstoy II, No. 370, 181, 215); b) in 1684, Greek-Slavic history; in 1699 about the beginning of the Slavic-Russian people, and the chronicle about the beginning of Moscow (Synod. Bible No. 92, 529). What he wrote about the beginning of Moscow was taken by him from the legends of the times preceding him (see Temporary General History vol. XII, pp. 25–29). Andrei Lyzlov, a Smolensk priest, in 1692 composed the Scythian history in Book V, or about the Tatars and Turks. It is clear that with the meager Latin, Polish and Russian sources that, according to him, he used, much of his information is not correct. The history of his publication. in St. Petersburg 1776, M. 1787 At the same time, the following were written: the Moscow Chronicle of 1613–1696 (Bible. General history No. 311); Vologda chronicle ending in 1700 (Tsarsk. No. 236). An unknown contemporary, Metropolitan. Hilarion († 1707) wrote a story about the Florishcheva Hermitage and the life of Metropolitan. Hilarion (Tsarsky No. 99). Extensive extracts from this work in Klyuchary Fyodor’s story about Suzdal (Temporary General History 22, 163, 178). Around the same time, “The Book of Russian Saints, Where... Live and Work Miracles” was written (General History No. 212, 231; Tolstoy V, 81). 246. Hierodeacon Damascene is known for his defense of Osten's book, to which Dometsky wrote a response (Demidov No. 624), and for three letters to Metropolitan. Job (1704) on the translation of the Bible. Parthenius Neboza, from the Russians, Metropolitan of Laodicea, returned to Russia in 1695, in 1701 he was appointed Archbishop of Kholmogory, † 1704. His works: a) Panegyric to Peter I, on the occasion of the victory at Azov, and a letter to the Tsar with news about himself; b) “Symbol”, or explanation of church utensils and vessels. 247. Euthymius, hieromonk, according to Polikarpov (Bible. General history, p. 112), was a student of Epiphanius of Slavenitsky, then a book collector at the printing house. Under his letter to the abbot of the Bratsk monastery, to whom he sent money and books, according to the will of Epiphanius, he signed: ὁ ταπεινὸς μοναχὸς Εὐθύμιος ἰδίᾳ χειρί. He died in 1705. In the Synodal Library there is his word on the words: “everyone who exalts himself will humble himself.” In 1675, he compiled an inventory of books taken at the will of the patriarch. Joachim to the patriarchal treasury from the Iversky Metochion and from the Resurrection Monastery. (eg in Reading. General history M. 1847). He probably also wrote “The Tale of the Second Transfer of the Relics of St. Alexei" 1686 (Tsarsky No. 744). His note about the translation of the Bible by Epiphanius was printed. in Dictionary I, 178–183. He translated: in 1675 all the works of Dionysius the Areopagite; 1790 - an essay by Simeon of Thessalonica on the sacred service; Catechism of Hiere; in 1694 - the apostolic decrees of Clement (in the Synod library); He also corrected Yeniphanius’s translation of Vlastar. His preface to the translation of Armenopoul ed. Rosenkampf (in the 3rd appendix to the Review of Helmsmen). In all likelihood, he translated from Greek in 1683 the Rite of Compilation and Consecration of St. world (Tolstoy 1, No. 332). 248. Saint Demetrius, in a letter to Theologist in 1706, wrote: “A little book without a named creator, called the Mirror, sent to us from your honesty, having listened and rewritten the command, I return the packs to your honesty. The little book is truly useful, it is a great reproof and shame for the schismatics. That little book is worthy of being published, just to clean up some things in places and correct them.” Pososhkov (His Works, published in M. 1842, p. 15) wanted the “Mirror” to be published for schools. In Search of St. Demetrius (pp. 588, 598) quotes words from “the message of Joseph the priest, who in recent years, by order of the sovereign, was on the Olonets top and wrote to the schismatic teachers in that country - to Daniil Vikulin and to Andrei Denisov and to the whole host of them.” According to the history of the Vygoretsky monastery, this could have been in 1700. 249. Palladius Rogovsky, abbot of the Zaikonospassky monastery († Jan. 1703), a) composed a refutation of Roman dogmas, 1699, upon returning from the union into which he was seduced in Olmutz (printed in the 18th part of Vivliof); b) translated the story of Callistus Xanthopoulos. Job, hierodeacon of the Chudov Monastery, student of the Likhuds and after them, mentor of the academy in 1694–1699. Handwritten life of St. Zosima and Savvaty, he says this about himself: “Having collected this book of their (miracle-workers) deeds and miracles from the chroniclers and many writers, with reliable and dangerous evidence, correct yourself in miracles, according to the agreement of the composition and spelling of the true Slovenian dialect... with the blessing of the monastery’s guardian father Archimandrite Firs, also the monastery’s inhabitant, for the sake of truth God's exile, Hellenic, Greek and Latin dialects of the Moscow School by the former teacher Hierodeacon Job - 1703.” It was perhaps he who composed the interpretation of the history of the Old Testament, written by the teacher Mosk. Academy (Tolstoy II, No. 380), Around 1695 he wrote a “prayer service” about the tsar and victory over enemies. Kozma, Svyatogorets, student of the academy, hierodeacon of the Chudov Monastery, first, at the request of the merchant, translated Sophronius’s rhetoric into the Slavic language in 1698 (§ 238); then he wrote his rhetoric based on the guidance of Scuffi (Tsarsky No. 351). Grigory Skibinsky, a doctor of theology in Western schools, wrote a petition to the tsar about the priesthood in 1696. 250. St. Demetrius Tuptalo, Metropolitan of Rostov, most famous both for the holiness of his life and for his gifts of mind and enlightenment († 1709). a) Known as a preacher. His sermons were published (Works of St. Demetrius, M., 1840): in II volume 51, in St. 38, in V vol. 5, and a total of 94; and two more speeches (in volume I). Of the number of his sermons spoken in Little Russia, we see no more than five published; and he often preached there. In the Sofia Bible. the unpublished words of the saint are preserved, but mixed with other people's writings; it's up to 30 words here. In the Bible Tolstoy (II, No. 404), a collection of teachings (51 in total) for various holidays, according to Kalaidovich’s remark, written by St. himself. Dimitri; in another collection (IV, no. 9) there are 19 teachings. His short instructions and prayers are very touching. The latter are addressed primarily to the Redeemer of the world who suffers for us. “The inner man, studying and praying in the cage of his heart,” instructs in inner prayer or maintaining a constant prayerful mood in the soul. Two Pastoral Epistles to the Priests - a useful guide for pastoral theology (vols. I and V). About his dramas (Esther, the Penitent Sinner, the Nativity of Christ, the Dormition of the Mother of God, the Great Demetrius) it is enough to say that they belonged to the spirit of the time and mainly to the customs of southern Russia, where they were written. Another thing is his spiritual songs. They were slaughtered by his order and on the last day of his life. You are my God Jesus; My most beloved Jesus; I will bring praise to sweet Jesus; I cry out to God in my trouble (8 songs in total) - songs that can always bring comfort to the heart and edification to the mind and will. b) On the teaching about the dogmas of the faith, he wrote: The Mirror of the Orthodox Confession of Faith (in Vol. I), Brief answers about the faith, both are a kind of short catechism, but the latter with systematic rigor and with adaptation to the needs of the time; another Mirror (V volume) - an abbreviation of the well-known Orthodox confession of faith; reflection on the suffering of Christ, on communion (in volume I), on transubstantiation in the Eucharist (volume V); the latter brings the mystery of faith closer to general understanding through comparison with natural phenomena. c) Against the schism: Search for the Bryn faith (ed. M. 1745, 1755, 1762); discussion about the image of God in man (in V vol.). Search is an essay written with a clear and deep understanding of Christianity. The writer accuses the schism of the fact that there is no spirit of the Gospel in it - an accusation, of course, more important than the accusation of some strange ritual. The faith of the schismatics is not right, their teaching is harmful to the soul, their deeds are not pleasing to God: these are the three thoughts that he sets out in the sinful parts of his work. d) History was the saint’s favorite subject. His Fourth Menaion is an exemplary work in terms of the purity of the Church Slavonic language, the mastery of presentation, and the critical care in choosing previous narratives. Its sources are the Menaion of Macarius; but he used them with discernment, trusted them and supplemented them with ancient historical works, partly with the critical work of the Bollandists. The lists of works and writers who served as guides, appended to parts I and II, show that the writer sought out everything he needed that could be found in his time. The sources of the Menaion are discussed in detail in the work: St. Demetrius, Met. Rostovsky, M., 1849. Cell chronicle - a collection of biblical history with civil history, enlivened by moral reflections (in volume IV). He wrote to Yavorsky about the purpose of the essay: “In our Little Russian country it is difficult to find the Slavic Bible... and rarely does anyone know the order of the biblical stories... And for this purpose he wanted... to briefly teach biblical history to those who know it.” His response to his chronological research, proposed in a letter to Yavorsky, is remarkable. To the remarks that in his work “dubious acts are proposed and resolved,” and that schismatics may be tempted by his research, he writes: “This is not truly history, but the errors in which ours stubbornly stand are corrected... Russian chronographs with Russian bibles are very inconsistent in the years; and the chronology used by the Greeks and Russia for a long time is not based on bibles, although they are called Holy Scripture, but on chronographs... Is it really possible to remain silent about such disagreements, and what is false should not be exposed and the stubbornness of people should be condescending?... They (superstitions) are also tempted by good, useful and holy things; and should we follow their madness? Chronograph about the beginning of the Slavic people, in the original - in the library of the Kharkov Seminary; lists are in the St. Petersburg Academy. Instead, by mistake, Gisel's synopsis was printed (in volume IV). Irrigated fleece, or the story of the miracles of the Chernigov Ilinsk Icon of the Mother of God, the Dictionary attributes this to St. Demetrius (I, 126), then archim. Lavrenty Krschanovich (II, 5). But the latter opinion was based only on the fact that Chern. the 1697 edition of Runa was published when the first archimandrite of the monastery was the honest father Lavrentiy Krschanovich.” Meanwhile, this edition is already the fifth. The previous editions of 1683, 1689, 1691, 1696 are known, and the first of them was at the expense of Lazar Baranovich, and in none of them Lavrenty is named as the author of the Rune. The author is visible in the four verses of the preface: “Hieromonk Dmitry Savich.” His other historical works: “Short Martyrology” (Synod. Bible No. 811), stopped at one month of September; “Chronicles of Tsars and Patriarchs”; “Ross Catalog. metropolitans." But “Catalogue of Bishops of Russia.” does not belong to the Saint either in syllable or in content. Let us also note that in the Uglich church the king. Demetrius' handicraft is kept. book about the death of Tsarevich Dimitri, op. Height. Saint Demetrius. His “letters” to Theologist, numbering 32, are in music. Rumyantseva (No. 407); some of them were published in works: St. Demetrius Met. Rost., M.. 1849; other letters ed. between the works, where Diarius is. The letters and Diary explain the life of the saint. In style and language, the works of St. Demetrius are an example of Church Slavonic grace. Thoughts, arranged correctly and clearly, are clothed in educated language and, at the same time, in the language of the heart. It is not an ancient Church Slavonic language; but that pure and correct church language, which over time should have been formed from the normal merger of the folk Russian language with the ancient Slavic; that language where the ancient Slavic language, having sacrificed some properties for a language intelligible to the people and removing from itself all the crude and often untrue forms of folk speech, received as much a correct and definite structure as an elegant one. 251. Gabriel Dometsky, until 1690 archimandrite of the Simonov Monastery, then until 1709 archimandrite. Yuryev Mon., and then soon died in retirement. He wrote: for the Simonov Monastery, the cell charter of 1683 (ed. in the VI hour, Ist. Hier.); depiction of the monastic life of 1683 (ed. in the VI part of the Ist. Hierarchy); Order of the Simonovsky hostel 1690; Spiritual Vertograd 1685; The path to eternity - in two ten degrees, ed. SPb. 1784 In Novgorod, he wrote answers to the defense of Osten in 1704 (in the Synod. bib.). Two letters from him to Novg are known. Metropolitan Jonah: one about the state of Orthodoxy in the south, the other about the translation of 70 interpreters (Ist. Russian ts. IV, 141, 142, 253, 255). 252. Rafail Krasnopolsky, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, the first archimandrite of Zaikonospassky, who revised Polikarpov’s Lexicon in 1703, already with the rank of rector of the Moscow Academy, according to Polikarpov, after Yavorsky, “the first in the knowledge of theology and free teachings” (preface to the Lexicon); from 1704 Archimandrite Simonovsky. from 1708 Archbishop of Kholmogory, who died in 1711. He wrote instructive and government letters. Of these, the following are remarkable: a) about the two-fingered and three-fingered sign of the cross (rukop. Archang. sem.); b) a lesson to all the people, January 9, 1711; c) about burial in empty places, without the prayers of the priest, without confession and without receiving Holy Communion. Tain, 1709. Under his supervision, the Dvina Chronicle was compiled, ending in 1705 (Tolstoy II. No. 37, printed in Part III of the Proceedings of the Free Russian Assembly). 253. Sylvester of Krai, a student of the college who traveled abroad, from 1704 the rector of the Moscow Academy, from March 1705 the Archbishop of Arkhangelsk, from September. 1707 Metropolitan of Smolensk, deceased. in 1712. In 1709, he translated a short “Cosmography” from Italian, probably for the Smolensk schools (Tolstoy I, No. 223). 254. Theodore Poletaev, Novgorodian, translated from Greek: a) in 1676, the conversations of the fathers about the life and suffering of St. husbands and wives; b) in 1713 Macaria Egypt. spiritual conversations about perfection; c) in 1715, the lives of some martyrs (manuscript of the library of Academician Sciences). Joseph Turoboysky, 1703–1704 prefect of the Moscow Academy, from 1708 archimandrite Simonovsky, in 1711 abbot of the Novospassky monastery. His works: a) The glorious triumph of the liberator of Livonia, Emperor Peter I, with two prefaces and explanations of allegorical images on the gates, M., 1704 b) “Solemn gates” to the winner at Poltava, M., 1709. 255. Karion Istomin, a student of the academy, but even before that he wrote poetry, hieromonk of the Chudov Monastery, book collector, clerk at the patriarch. Adrian, in 1712 a teacher at the Novgorod School, † 1713 His works: a) Educational: Primer presented to Tsarina Natalya Kirillovna for Tsarevich Alexei Petrovich (Tsarsky No. 27), ed. M. 1695 (notes about it in the Northern Archives of 1822, No. 11); Eden, dedicated to Tsarevich Alexei; Ekklisia - to him. Probably, Istomin also owns Arithmetic, written in M. 1700. The preface says: “Now, with much care, a new collection from many different interpreters, from time to time here in the reigning city of Moscow and the former, in Greek and Latin.” The names of arithmetic operations are Latin. After the preface, poems are written for the reader. The book was prepared for printing (Chertkov Bible II, 450). b) Oratorical and poetic: aa) A Word about the Smolensk Icon of the Mother of God; a word about the Okovetsky icons; greeting to the king Peter upon his marriage in 1689 (Tsarsk. No. 303); New name 1686 (Synod. Bible; poems dedicated to Princess Sophia in 1681 (printed in the East. Moscow Spiritual Academician, M., 1855, 396–400); various teachings and letters, including letters written on behalf of Patriarch Adrian (Chudova Mon. No. 223). bb) Service to the Wonderworker Hypatia, written in 1704 at the request of “Mr. bolyarin Nikita Ioannovich Iakinfov"; Akathist to the Mother of God, dedicated. Tsarina Praskovya Feodorovna; service of the blessed to Prince Daniel “create the worst priest Karion Istomin, director of the printing book yard, 1711, at the request of Abbot Macarius of the Danilov Monastery” (Chertkova Slavic-Russian manuscripts. St. Petersburg, 1836). c) Its translations: blessed. Augustine on love; Yulia Frontina about the war (in the archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs). 256. Andrei Ignatiev, a priest who was with the envoy Tolstoy in 1707, described a journey from Constantinople to Jerusalem (Tolst. V, No. 29). Article list of Tolstoy's embassy to Constantinople in Tolstoy I, No. 233. There is also Tolstoy's message, with a description of the Black Sea (I, No. 234). 257. Job, tonsured Sergius Lavra, since 1694 its archimandrite, since 1697 Metropolitan of Novgorod. In 1706, he opened a school at his house, calling Likhudov for it, then he opened more schools in the cities; At the same time, he opened three hospitals at his own expense, and turned the deserted Kolmov Monastery into a home for raising foundlings and illegitimate children. He also fought with zeal against the schism. The zealous shepherd died in 1716. His works: against the schismatics about the birth of the Antichrist, ed. M. 1707; letter to Cherkashev about baptism, in Tolstoy IV, No. 59; three books of his letters in the Novgorod Sofia Bible. Under him, the third Novgorod chronicle was compiled, a chronicle mainly about churches (Collected years. III, 205–279). 258. Andronik, abbot of the Uglitsky Alekseevsky Monastery, in 1713 wrote “about folding the first three fingers into the sign of the honorable cross.” The writer, among other things, quotes words from the teaching of Metropolitan. Michael and from the instructions of Metropolitan. Theopempta, - the same ones that are placed in the Council Act on the Armenian Martin, printed. 1718 (Rumyantseva L/T 7). 259. Theologist, student of the Likhuds, hieromonk and reference book. During the illness of Saint Demetrius in Moscow, Theologian did not leave his bed. Even after that, he carried out his instructions with all diligence. And the saint loved him so much that he once wrote to him: “If I had Pegasus or Bucephalus, I would send to your honesty, and come to visit me; but I myself almost wander on foot, without horse or rider.” In 1712–1720, he was engaged in correcting the Slavic Bible, and wrote an extract of errors noticed in the Slavic Pentateuch. His letters to St. Dimitri's friend. to the Synod. bibliography, where his library also came. 260. Stefan, in the world Simeon, Yavorsky, without finishing his studies in Kyiv, was sent to Lviv, and then studied in Poznan with the Jesuits, from whom he took a course in philosophy and theology; However, he was allowed to do this only by accepting the Roman confession. Upon returning to Kyiv, Metropolitan was added to Orthodoxy. Varlaam Yasinsky, as Matseevich writes in response to the Lutheran lampoon. In 1689, Simeon Yavorsky was at the Kyiv Academy atrium liberalium et philosophiae magister, consummatus theologos - “teacher of verbal sciences and philosophy and a complete theologian,” as he signed on the eulogy: Echo 1689 Kiev. In 1690 he accepted monasticism with the name Stephen (panegyric Arctos, K., 1690). On his book (in the library of the Kharkov seminary): Mowca Polski, w Kaliszu 1683, one inscription: ex libris Stanislai Simonis Jaworscy, another: ex libris Stephani Jaworscy indigni monachi, empties Posnaniae. From 1691 he was prefect and teacher of philosophy, in place of Silouan of Ozersk (panegyric to Metropolitan Varlaam: Pelnia chwaly, K., 1691). In January 1698, in the “merry Kazan” at the wedding of John Obodovsky, he called himself “abbot of the monk. Nikolaevsky Desert". In 1700, sent to Moscow, he spoke the funeral oration to boyar A.S. Shein, and Peter the Great liked it so much that the preacher was ordered to await orders in Moscow; and on April 7, 1700 he was consecrated Metropolitan of Ryazan. Since 1702 he has been “administrator, exarch and guardian of the patriarchal throne.” He died on November 27, 1722. Even the writer of the Lutheran libel on Stephen says about Stephen that he “had an amazing gift of speech and could hardly find others like him in teaching.” It happened to me, he continues, to see in church that he could, while teaching, make listeners cry or laugh. After Stephen, 29 sermons remained (ed. M. 1804). “Kazan”, based on Obodovsky’s marriage, translated into the Slavic language, with a dedication to Hetman Mazepa - in Moskvityanin 1842, No. 3. In Yavorsky’s sermons there is the power of thought, there is art in the arrangement of parts of speech, there is animation of sincere feelings, and finally there is clarity in the word; But they are quite harmed by the artificiality of that time that they encountered in places, which allowed them to exhibit pictures and figures of speech from everyday life. For example: as he says from the pulpit: “I have already forgotten Lot’s wife, how can I remember my Savior: should I sing a requiem mass, or remember it in litanies?” (Part I, p. 37). David has the labors of a cavalry (I, 194). “The eagle sits on the royal cabinets or chambers” (II. 155). “I will remember the Shlyuselburg victory over the fortress and fortification... Oh! Hard nut to crack! those were good teeth that crushed that hard nut” (II, 169). In his young years, Yavorsky wrote a lot in poetry, sometimes Latin, sometimes Polish, and specifically panegyrics (Kievlyanin for 1850, pp. 133–136). And the Metropolitan Exarch proposed beautiful rules for the new Sarov Hermitage in verse. Elements and charter of 1711, printed. at 6 o'clock East. Jer., pp. 15, 27. His best verses are an epigram placed at the end of his spiritual testament: O tituli, scopuli potius meliusque vocandi! Hey! Quibus allisi tot periere rates! Et quid sunt tituli, nisi fumus, ventus et umbra, Bullaque, quae vitreis turgida fertur aquis! It is still unknown what the contents of those Latin works of his, which were kept in 15 books between the manuscripts of the Nizhyn Monastery, were. Most likely, a significant part of them consisted of poetry, and the rest - of classical lectures. Against the schism, he wrote “The Sign of the Coming of the Antichrist,” printed. No. 1703, and then many times - a work borrowed from the book of Malvenda (Antichristus, ed. 1604, 1612, 1647). Against the Reformation: The Stone of Faith. The Lutheran lampoon says that Peter the Great recognized this book as contrary to the Greek faith. Matseevich, in response to the libel, wrote that “Reverend. Stefan, before the Emperor went to Derbent, presented the book shown to His Imperial Majesty, and His Majesty ordered it to be printed, and by His order the matter began; however, after His Majesty’s absence on a campaign, the chief rival Theodosius began to work for the Most Reverend. Stefan and demanded a written decree on the printing of the book. And so, both due to the lack of a written decree, and due to the obstacle of envious people, the printing of that book stopped; and then death stopped everything.” “Answer to the Sorbonne” regarding the union of churches. in Part III. composition. The following still remain in the manuscripts: a) Answers of Stefan Yavorsky to three theological and philosophical questions of Job, Metropolitan. Novgorodsky (Tsarsky No. 141; Chertkov p. 260]. b) Stefan Yavorsky, Metropolitan. Ryazansky’s response to the word about Prokopovich’s “unbearable yoke” (Tsarsky No. 23). c) Advice from Metropolitan. Stephen with the archpastors convened in Moscow and the voice of Sylvester of Nizhny Novgorod on how to add Calvinists and Lutherans to the church (Tsarsky No. 456) d) Letter from Metropolitan. Stephen in 1718 to the members of the Synod about not admitting Prokopovich to the rank of bishop before he renounced the errors shown in his writings (manufacturer: Moscow Spiritual Academician; in Rumyants. No. 404: Dictionary II, 261). e) His apology on the elevation in church prayers of the names of the eastern patriarchs, proposed by the Synod to the Senate on June 9, 1721. This is against Theophan’s writings: on the abandonment of the elevation of the names of the patriarchs, printed. 1721 St. Petersburg. (Tsarsky No. 588). e) Letter dated August 12. 1721 to the Kazan Metropolitan. Tikhon (Tolstoy IV, No. 39; autograph from Rumyantsev No. 404). g) Letter to Emperor Peter 1, with a request for dismissal from business, and a will ending with verses (Tsarsky No. 462). Preface to the second edition of the second book of the “Review of Russian Spiritual Literature” (Chernigov, 1863) Since the time of Peter V., much has changed in Russia. A change also occurred in Russian literature: secular literature separated from spiritual literature, choosing for itself special subjects and a special spirit. It now seemed easy for a observer of spiritual literature to notice figures in spiritual literature. But a change also occurred in the subjects of spiritual literature. According to the complexity of the needs of modern times, the subjects of spiritual education have multiplied; From spiritual leaders, in order to successfully combat the hostile spirit of the times, new measures and new techniques were required. Timely changing systems of philosophy produced changes in society; spiritual figures had to be well aware of both the spirit of modern philosophy and the effect it produces in society in order to influence society in one way or another. Let alone the fact that sound philosophy is part of religion. Thus, the field of spiritual literature expanded and came into contact with the subjects of secular education, but not against the meaning of Christianity. Christianity in itself does not shun anything worldly, with the exception of sin; The sinful world is alienated from Christianity. Christianity, no matter what it touches, perfects everything. What's simpler than the alphabet? But Plato’s alphabet breathes life, eternally living piety; and some alphabets don’t smell good! When multiplying objects of attention, you need to have a lot of caution in order to remain faithful to the Christian spirit, not to get carried away and not to be dissipated by the trends of the changing world. Christian truths, revealed in the Word of God and appearing in the history of Christianity, are the most important subject of spiritual literature for all times. After that St. The Church loves us so much that she not only took care to show us the sciences additional to the main spiritual ones, but also teaches us how to study them. – This means that doubts about the subjects of new spiritual literature are in vain. There is no argument today that works of sincere Christian piety, no matter who wrote them, should take a place in the history of spiritual literature. Who would now think of insisting that work for St. The Gospels are not a spiritual work because they are the work of Chebotarev? Unfortunately, those who review the history of spiritual life in modern times encounter two sad phenomena. After secular literature was separated from spiritual literature, many, many secular people were ashamed to write about spiritual subjects, losing sight of the fact that without Christianity, fruitful education is impossible, and only a fall into pagan disorder is possible. Others were somehow aware of this mistake of the time, but, carried away by the same distrust of faith, sometimes secret, unconscious, they separated from the Church to such an extent that they formed their own Christianity, their own piety, their own faith. The best turned out to be those from the secular world who received a pious upbringing at home, or studied for some time in theological schools, or led a strictly Christian life. That is why not many of the secular writers are worth paying attention to when reviewing spiritual literature. Otherwise, you will look and look at others, and you will leave with sadness. At one test, in a secular educational institution, the question was asked: what was missing in Pushkin? The immediate answer was: “religions.” A sad answer: but this is the answer of a young, fresh soul. According to the author’s conviction, a spiritual composition requires not only that it reason about God, but that it reason according to God’s decree, and not according to one’s own. Elder Nazarius or Elder Theodore did not write Lermontov’s glib verse about the soul: but how sweet they are to the soul with their simple words and how well they know that soul, which remained a gibberish letter for the Lermontovs. The writer takes upon himself what is within his power, or, if you like, what is available based on the current state of information about Russian spiritual literature - he writes a review, and not an extensive one, and not a history of literature. He does not consider himself to have the right to dwell briefly on works and writers that are important, as well as on unimportant ones: but he does not want to show disdain for the latter also because he does not consider this disdain for the virtue of the traveler. - Clever Petrov, ridiculing Sumarokov’s bilious vanity, also ridiculed Novikov for the fact that in his dictionary The cuckoo is a swan, the crow is a falcon. Crow and honor in her voice; but you can’t throw her out of the flock of birds. In addition, it happens that a falcon is mistaken for a crow; and this error is very unpleasant and has no useful consequences. The writer is afraid to say a lot, including unnecessary things, rather than saying what is necessary. He would like to say a lot in a little. As before, the biography of a writer shows only those features of his life that are necessary for thinking about the writer and his works: others are extra baggage in a review of a scientist. The first concern of the review was to examine the author in his exact form, with all his property, with his works, and to show him in such a way that it was clear in what respect he was an activist. The totality of figures on a well-known subject shows the historian the measure of work, and the quality of writings shows the measure of success in knowledge of the subject. The manual includes an index at the end. In reviews of essays and writers, the review is careful about what is most necessary. What is essential is to tell the truth, thoughtfully, conscientiously, out of sincere conviction, to convey the correct concept, otherwise do not call either a falcon a crow or a crow a falcon. The demonstrated content of remarkable works, the cited passages that are important for history or science, complement the concept of the work and the writer, and serve as a verification of the review of them. They may wish that every activity of a writer, as a preacher, as a canonist, as a teacher of faith, as a teacher of life, as a philosopher, or as a historian, would be revealed in detail... Or they may wish that passages important for the life of everyone, for a lawyer, for a preacher, for a priest, for an archpastor, were extracted from the works of the best writers... But in order to completely fulfill one or another, very extensive plan, a lot of preliminary work is required. Where is it? Are there any monographs about the writer - Plato, or Kulyabka, or Yushkevich, or Prokopovich? No and no. Therefore, extensive plans are still pleasant dreams. It is necessary to prepare materials in advance, then build buildings. Of the writers of the time 1720–1826, M. Evgeniy’s dictionary speaks of 90, but there is not a word about the other 150. Regarding works, the dictionary's information is insufficient in any respect, and there is not a single article in it that should not be supplemented. Yes, and this is natural: publications from old times are rare, manuscripts are even more rare, and the information in book catalogs is brief and confusing. There were many errors in the first edition of the review due to an oversight by the proofreader. The reader can easily be convinced of the latter if he sees, for example. on 2 pages “Stratemzhov” Featron, or “Sonikov” (Sopikov), or “Gottorpsky” (Gottorpsky), or Pakhimisa (Pachimera), etc. The author regrets that the publication, although independent of his will, was very faulty: but he thinks that criticism would not be high if they began to deal with the mistakes of the proofreader - and it would be even sadder if the mistakes of the proofreader became to assimilate to the writer; this would mean less than doing nothing for science. – An important oversight by the writer was in the article about K. Florinsky. In the new edition of the review, many articles are supplemented and improved, among other things, with the help of Mr. Popov’s article on the preachers of the imp. Elizabeth, and others are completely new. – The first type of article is in § 3. 4. 6. 7. 12. 14–17–19. 25. 33. 35. 51. 55. 60. 61. 68. 71. 73. 74. 76. 81. 83. 86–88. 93. 97. 99. 100. 105. 107. 108. 118. 122. 125. 126. 131. 132. 135. 137–139. 142–144. 146. 147. The second type is in § 1. 3. 13. 22. 24–26. 31. 37. 39. 45. 46. 47. 50. 58. 94. 101. 116. 119. 123. 125. 130. 132. 135. 141. 143. 145–153 new edition. We do not point out many other, less significant ones. Preface to the “Additions” to the second book of the “Review of Russian Spiritual Literature” For the review of new spiritual literature we can provide fewer additions than when revising the first part of the review. But even a few remarks that would be worthy of love for science are not like the words of a sick soul. The writer really wants to make the review complete: but just as with the first edition of the review (of which almost all copies were burned in the St. Petersburg fire), so with the second he did not want, and does not want now, for the review to serve as a basket into which every little thing would be thrown. Suum cuique, in Russian - “not according to Jacob.” Everyone will agree that it is bad logic to include among writers those who have not written anything, or to call spiritual writers those who do not see anything spiritual either in their books or in their lives. (See Spiritual Messenger). It should be wished that the editors of Christ. and Sunday readings, indexes of articles were printed with the names of their authors, as was done by the editors of the Works of St. church fathers. Then the history of spiritual literature would receive quite a bit of accurate information about spiritual writers worthy of their name. Another note about what spiritual literature is? In recent times, fairy tales, fables, legends, and popular beliefs have begun to be subsumed under the “verbal expression of spiritual life.” This means either not understanding the words we speak, or deliberately abusing high words. Of course, if by the word “spirit” we mean the immaterial power of the soul, then fairy tales or legends are a product of the spirit, and not a product of matter. But a Christian must know that in the Christian world the spirit means a blessed state of the soul, inaccessible to the powers of the soul left to themselves, and that the spiritual is not at all the same as the spiritual. Therefore, neither fairy tales nor legends are unspiritual works, but the fruit of a sick soul, just like the songs of everyday art, just like the works of a philosophizing mind not about Christ. I. Stefan Pribylovich, student and teacher of Kyiv. Academy, since 1706 prefect and teacher of philosophy in Moscow. academician, from 1711 the cathedral hieromonk of the Neva Lavra, wrote: a) “Inscription on the book of Napezh”, 1720. According to Vishnevsky, the Dominican Kliment Khodykevich in his book: “questions resolved by the answers of St. fathers,” tried to justify the Roman teaching of St. the fathers of the church. Pribilovich successfully refuted the author’s arguments and exposed his forgeries. (Rkp. Petersburg spirits, academician); b) Answers to questions about fortune, about predestination, about providence (Rumyants. No. 317); c) “The Path to the Kingdom of God”, a type of catechism, in 14 articles (RKP. Rumyants.); d) Summulae logicales an. 1708. Tractatus phisicus an. 1710. (RKP. Moscow Acad. No. 309. 287). These are notes on philosophy for students, e) Annotations on the prologue (RKP. Synod, arch.), not always modest and thorough. Novgor. m. Job wrote in 1711 about Pribilovich to Korsakov: “be pleased to call him to speak: a man is wise and calls himself a theologian much more than some others. When you thought about it, you yourself understood very well what kind of theologians the students in the Kyiv new Athenian schools are. A fair number of them knew Lopatinsky, for he is a meek and humble man in every condition, especially in the passion of God.” (Strannik 1861 1:90). This review of Pribilovich must be attributed only to his moral character, which, apparently, lacked modesty. Otherwise, in the case about Tveritinov they wrote: “Dmitry Tveritinov visited Prefect Pribilovich at many times about St. dogmas in the debate and this prefect said about that heretic that he was very Luthorian and Calvinist in his wisdom.” In 1723, “Peter I proposed to the synod that the litanies and prayers composed about victory on the resistance be corrected in such a way that they were composed with a humble petition.” This is proposed in response to Sweden's displeasure for the prayer service for the Poltava victory. The Synod entrusted the initial implementation of the proposal to Pribilovich. But the death of Pribilovich, which soon followed, stopped the work. Simon Kokhanovsky, as his surname shows, a graduate of the south, Kiev Academy, naval hieromonk, is known: a) According to the word spoken on the day of the Annunciation in Revel in 1720. The word is remarkable in its denunciation of prejudice in favor of monasticism and especially schismatic prejudice. “How does it happen that many from us with entire houses, wives and children, leaving honest civil cohabitation and communion with the holy church, flee from cities into the desert and there lead a bestial and brutal life?” The preacher, obviously, is aiming at the Ryapin schismatics and those who settled on the banks of the Peinuz in Livonia. Word ed. in Pekarsky (Science under Peter I. 1, 492–494). b) Another scientific work of Kokhanovsky is a translation of Justus Lipsia. “Admonitions and political butts, collected from various historians by Justus Lipsius in Latin, and now written in Russian in the summer of 1721 through the care and labors of Hieromonk Kokhanovsky.” In the preface, the translator says that he omitted some things from Justus Lipsius and replaced them with the best passages of Titus Livy (Reader Moscow Obshch. Ist. 1858, book 2, p. 147; Pekarsky 1, 218. 219). According to Novikov, Kokhanovsky composed more than one instructive word; but now others are unknown. In 1721, Kokhanovsky lived in Feofan’s house and they said about him that he reasoned “Lutheran” (Reader. General History, 1863, IV, 62). Ivan Tikhonovich Pososhkov, Muscovite, rich vodka distiller, known to Peter I, for his love of truth - the object of Menshikov’s hatred and the object of the love of M. Job and Prince. Ya.F. Dolgorukov, who finally ended his life in the Peter and Paul Fortress on February. 1, 1726 Wrote: a) in 1701, a report to Golovin about the military matter; b) in 1703, a report to M. Stefan Yavorsky, with his comments and opinions on spiritual matters: c) February. 24, 1724 presented to Peter I his essay “On Poverty and Wealth.” Here are the first chapters about the clergy; the zealot for the common good complains of the ignorance of the priests. “Not only from the Lutheran and Roman heresy, but even from the most stupid schism, they do not know how to recover themselves.” It also exposes the poverty of the rural clergy. He wants to see schools in every diocese. He condemns the luxury of monks, as well as the pride of schismatics. d) “The mirror of the nameless creator, a denunciation of schismatics.” This is how an expensive mirror is written in many lists. This is how it was known to St. Demetrius, who admired him and ordered him to copy the list for himself. “The little book is truly useful, it is a great reproof and insight for the schismatics... That little book is worthy of being published, just to clean up some things in places and correct the need.” This is what the saint wrote in a letter to Theodore - 1706. In one list, at the end it is written: “Ioann Tikhonovich Pososhkov, Muscovites, creator of this little book, about the summer of 1708.” – The book “mirror” consists of 26 chapters, as shown in its table of contents; then follows the application to the end of the mirror. Since the “Mirror” was already known in 1706, the composition of the addition to the Mirror must be attributed to 1708. At first Pososhkov, apparently, was afraid to announce to them the author of the Mirror; - but when he saw that the book was being read with love by people like the Rostov saint, he announced its author and, in accordance with the notes of people who knew and with his own observations, wrote an addition to the Mirror. This is what the conscientious Pososhkov writes about the antiquity of Russian double-fingeredness: “from the beginning I myself was limping with a schismatic illness: and I was baptized with double-fingered constitution and I remember that ancient tradition of being. But God do not leave me in ignorance of being. Once upon a time, at the discretion of God, a Vologda townsman, who lived for 60 years, was born twenty years before the pestilence (1653), called Sergius, nicknamed Patrikeev, who said that in his family, in the folding of his fingers, he had achieved the third change: from my infancy, my father and my mother taught me be baptized with three fingers; and not long before the pestilence they began to teach me to cross myself with two fingers. - And when the great man heard that word, he became convinced that there was truth. Since then, this man is not a bookworm and a debater, but a most truthful man, not taught about this verb from anyone, but from the simplest heart he expresses that truth. His word is great to me and will surely come true. And it was not out of the blue that I started talking about folding fingers: and I began to say what I had heard from a Vologda resident. And a Novgorodian, a townsman, called Theodore, nicknamed Tashlykov, who was 70 years old, heard the word: it’s true, and we were taught from infancy to cross ourselves with three fingers. And I was especially convinced that this is the very truth, according to the word of the Lord, two witnesses cannot but be believed. And I couldn’t bear to talk with them; but he is more than fifty years old” (Op. 2, 216). So much for the antiquity of Russian double fingers. Remember the news from Siberia. M. Ignatius: he says the same thing about the beginning of double fingers. So, what kind of conscience did Avvakum and other printers of Joseph’s time have, who, having entered into church books their own inventions that were contrary to the tradition of the Russian Church, then brazenly shouted: Nikon is violating the traditions of the church! Trouble with Avvakum's pride! All of these works by Pososhkov were published: part 1. M. 1842; Part 2. M. 1863 Remain unpublished: a) A project on schools, signed by “a poor farmer, a Moscow native, Ivan Pososhkov.” The project was submitted to the “bishop of God,” probably Stefan Yavorsky, b) A report with various proposals, for example. on the establishment of registry books at churches. The article begins like this: “We have many schismatics and warriors in St. Church of Christ." – These essays are in b. acad. Sci. 3. Feodor Polikarpov Orlov, a diligent student of Likhudov, who knew the Greek and Latin languages ​​well, inquiry officer and then director of the Moscow. printing house († 1730). His works: Slavic-Greek-Latin primer, M. 1701, with a preface on the benefits of teaching and with a hundred-word book by P. Gennady on faith. He probably also wrote the “primer book of the Slavonic language” M. 1704 and 1708, with pathetic reproaches to ignorance. “Who with a Christian heart, says the preface, will not hurt, in vain the blind are led by the blind and are coming to the pit of destruction?.. Especially you, the priests of the Lord, those who were born by you and related to you, unlearned by the law of the Lord, convince them to inherit your service, behold, dangerously, what kind of heirs you want to have and servants of the divine mysteries.” The Lexicon of three languages, Slavic, Greek and Latin, M. 1704, compiled by Polikarpov, according to him, was revised by M. Stefan Yavorsky, rector Rafail and Likhudy. Polikarpovich himself said in 1701 that Slavenitsky’s philological dictionary was given to him (biblical general history 1, 238), and of course he used it when compiling his dictionary. His vocabulary is conscientious work done with skill. Therefore, it is not surprising that he served as a leader back in the 70s of the last century, as Backmeister says. Polikarpovich published “An Official of the Bishop’s Ministry,” M. 1721. Questions to his synod about this book are in Pekarsky 2, 512. 513. The Slavic grammar of Polikarpov, otherwise the grammar of Smotritsky, slightly modified (M. 1721), was ordered by decree to be taught in schools in 1722 (collected law VI, No. 4021). History of Moscow. Academy, written by the hardworking Polikarpovich, ed. in the XVI part. Vivliof. and in the collection of Ruban, St. Petersburg. 1773 He quite liked to write and poetry. This is how he wrote (in 1694) a greeting to the patriarch on the day of the Nativity of Christ. His poems from the preface to the lexicon: “Look at this, who blames Love the works and broadcasts of others: We could do the same And write the best book sowing. If it’s powerful for you: why aren’t you creative? If only the work had been faster, the work would not have taken so long. Is it better to weigh? Where it's bad, fix it. If you don’t have the strength, direct your mind to these things.” Not superfluous advice for current criticism! To be worthy of its name, it must move science forward, and not engage in immodest abuse. In 1708, Peter V. instructed Polikarpovich to write Russian history from the 16th century. before its time. Polikarpovich worked for 8 years and at the end of 1715 he presented his story to the sovereign. The Tsar rewarded him with 200 rubles for his work, but Peter did not like the story. “Your Russian history was not very favorable,” wrote M. Pushkin to the writer on January 2. 1716 Translations of Polikarpovich: Instructions of Abba Dorotheus with a few words by Ephraim the Syrian, M. 1701, 1785 Sebaste of Trebizond Kiminite on the Holy Communion. Theotokos to Original Sin, translation dedicated to Peter in 1703, at the synod. b. “expression of the army liturgy” trans. in 1708, - in b. acad. Sci. The military cunning of Leo the Wise “was predominant from the Greek - the position of labor in Moscow. Hellenic Greek schools of the teacher Theodore Polikarpov, son of the Orlovs - in l. 1698,” – RKP. in imp. Hermitage. Varennieva geography, M. 1718 Polikarpovich was a zealous executor of Peter I's desire to print books in civilian letters taken from the Serbs. Among the latter, Posilovich’s book: “On Spiritual Pleasure” was printed in civil letters in Venice in 1682. In 1708, he printed statements in civil letters. Ivan Maksimovich, who received a full education at the Kyiv Academy, a clerk in the Nizhyn regiment, had the misfortune of becoming one of Mazepina’s accomplices in treason and lost everything he owned in the Nizhyn regiment. In 1713, Colonel Gorlenko and clerk Ivan Maksimovich appeared to the Russian ambassadors in Constantinople, with an earnest request to allow them to return to Russia. Tolstoy and Shafirov, already having permission from the tsar for such cases, gave them the desired permission. Gorlenko and Maksimovich came to Kyiv. The decree says about them that although they are worthy of execution for treason, they are forgiven and are allowed to live in Moscow, but not in Ukraine. Maksimovich and his comrade Antonovich, as they knew Latin and Polish, were appointed translators in Moscow. printing house. Yavorsky undoubtedly took part in this, having received Maksimovich’s house and land for his Nezhin monastery. After the death of the saint, a storm arose against Maksimovich. In 1726, a denunciation was made against the printing house and its management was accused of hiring “a person who had been treasonous” as an investigator. – The Senate, without any information, decided to remove Maksimovich from office. (Synod. affairs 1721 and 1728). The poor man was left without a piece of bread and how long he lived is not known. In 1726 he dedicated it to the emperor. Catherine I, a Latin-Russian lexicon he composed. The dedication to the empress is written in two languages ​​- Latin and Slavic. A very clever preface to the reader is written in exactly the same way. The need for a Latin-Russian vocabulary for schools is explained here. “Even if someone,” says Maksimovich, with the Slavic-Greek-Latin lexicon, printed here in Moscow (i.e. Polikarpovich), for the sake of translating his exercises from Slavic into Latin, the new students also helped: both of these are passing to higher schools, when reading Latin books is imposed, how inconvenient it is when they understand the words they have heard.” The writer says that he did not have the means to obtain lexicographic works and he took as a model one Latinopolitan dictionary by Gregory Knapp (Gregorii Knappii thesaurus polono-latino-graecus, Kracoviae 1621). Slavenitsky's Lexicon undoubtedly served him as a guide. In the description of the b–ki, he said: “a book of great truths was judged for the benefit of a worthy book - (Epiphanius's lexicon) - throughout Europe, which had not yet been practiced in special rarity with honor.” – Maksimovich spent several years compiling his dictionary, although in the last three years he was seriously ill. The lexicon remains between the imp.'s manuscripts. public library. The dedication and preface were printed by Pekarsky (Science under Peter I, 192–197). Another scientific work of Maksimovich is a description of a printing library, interrupted by his misfortune. “For God’s pleasure, through the malice of a single hater, I was removed from the Moscow printing house and library, for this reason my intention was stopped”: this is what he noted in the inventory that he was engaged in in 1727 (Undolsky Search, p. 9. 10). 4. Gabriel Buzhinsky, a student of the Kyiv Academy, from 1706 a teacher at the Moscow Academy and from 1709 a preacher who became famous to Peter V. for his gift of eloquence in Moscow, from 1718 chief hieromonk of the fleet, from 1721 archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra and adviser to the synod, from 1726 Bishop of Ryazan († 1731). a) As a preacher, one singer sang faithfully about him: “On the city streets, in the sanctuary of churches. In the fields among the regiments and among the swells of the sea, Buzhinsky, speaking the truth to the people. Church, cities and shelves and water with the inhabitants, With joyful delight those who listened matured, When greatness spoke of Peter’s deeds.” The primary subject of the sermons and the places where they were spoken are expressed here, as well as the impression they made on their contemporaries. Justice requires adding only that the preacher’s passion for the modern revolution in civil life exceeded the limits of moderation. He has a word in praise of St. Petersburg, where, without blushing, he says: “not only is the whole of Russia superior in location and beauty to the place (Petersburg), but in other European countries not only an equal place, but a similar one can be found below.” According to the taste of the time, Buzhinsky’s syllable is often replete with foreign, Latin, Polish and German words. Example: “This is truly the most cherished specialty, the most cherished specialty, which God has prepared for those who love him! but open it all with this key, and open it all with this one instrument.” (Collected teachings 118). However, where he does not try to shine with the finery of the times, his speech flows quite freely and is close to correct Russian speech. So he says: “Do what you want, Saul; sharpen the sword, sweep away the copy, do not give sleep to your hair and eyelids, do not let your drowsiness, drive through the mountains and dens the innocent David, who has given everything to himself to the providence of God: but all your care will come to pass in vain.” (Ibid., p. 15). Collected words ed. Miller, M. 1768 and 1784; both collections are incomplete. The Word about God's Providence, eg. at 1 o'clock. Antiquities and novelties, 1766; separately St. Petersburg 1776. He also composed the service and canon of St. K. Alexander Nevsky, ed. 1725 St. Petersburg; but by decree of 1727 it was prohibited. Buzhinsky composed “The Sequence of Confession,” M. 1724. The order of questions to the penitent follows the order of God’s commandments; the presentation is the simplest and most understandable for everyone. “This was written colloquially, so that the most feeble-minded person could understand,” it says at the end of the confession. The rite of confession is accompanied by a “discussion” from the spiritual regulations about the “priestly position in confession.” This book is perhaps the best of all that Buzhinsky wrote for the church. Subsequently, not much was changed in it by M. Gabriel (§ 81). b) Probably Buzhinsky, according to Peter’s thoughts, wrote “An Honest Mirror of Youth” (St. Petersburg 1717. 1719. 1721. 1740. 1785). At the beginning there are the alphabet, numbers and short moral teachings from St. Scriptures; followed by “indications for everyday life,” or instructions on how to behave in society, maintain secular decency, etc. This is the first primer assigned for secular people, which has nothing in common with previous primers. And he was liked by secular people. Tatishchev wrote in his will to his son: “a small primer or an honest mirror of youth can serve for the best moral teaching.” According to the letters of Peter I himself, it is known that at his will Buzhinsky translated Erasm’s friendly conversations, St. Petersburg. 1717, and by his own will (Pekarsky, Science 2, 366–368) Buzhinsky translated Puffendorff’s introduction to history from Kramer’s Latin translation, adding his preface. (St. Petersburg 1718. 1724. 1767. 1777). Translation of history was banned under Biron and allowed under Elizabeth. In 1724 (St. Petersburg) it was published by Buzhinsky in Stratemanov’s translation “Theatron or Historical Shame”, with a dedication to Peter and Catherine and with a preface to the reader. Strateman, speaking about the popes, not only did not find anything worthy of praise in them, on the contrary, he collected only news that served as dishonor for them, and on the contrary, he unconditionally and unconsciously admired the Reformation. To translate such a book without any changes, of course, meant the same thing as bringing the views of the Reformation to Russia. Therefore, by decree of the imp. Elizabeth dated March 27 1749 Theatron was banned and copies were ordered to be selected and sent to the Neva Lavra. – St. On the 11th 1/24, Peter wrote to the synod: “I am sending here the book of Puffendorf, in which there are two treatises, the first on the office of man and citizen, the other on the Christian faith; But I demand that the first be translated only, since I don’t think there will be any benefit in the other, and I ask that it be translated not at the end of the day, but clearly and in good style.” As a result of the previous will of the tsar, the essay on the positions of a person and a citizen had already been translated in Moscow by the inquiry officer Joseph Krechotovsky; but the translation turned out to be very faulty; Therefore, the synod instructed Buzhinsky to correct the translation as soon as possible. In December 1724 Peter ordered the book to be printed in 600 copies (synod. file 1721 No. 16). The book “On the position of man and citizen” ed. St. Petersburg 1724 and was not subject to criticism later. Several letters and reports from Fr. Gabriel - in Pekarsky (II, 562. 571. 594. 657). Mikhail Ivanovich Shiryaev, son of a merchant, who studied at the Moscow Academy from 1700; he enjoyed the special love of Peter I, at whose court he lived († 1731). He wrote a poem apologia for Yavorsky's Stone of Faith. In 1721, he presented Peter V. with a cantata about the Poltava victory, where he signed: “I bring M. Shiryaev.” According to the RCP. Also known is the “preface in greeting to the Tsar’s Majesty, presented in March 1718. 19". These are poems of praise to Peter I, which were presented by “the shepherd Mikhail of Valdai.” The same shepherd wrote two more poems, one of which was written on December 15. 1717 and both glorify the Poltava winner. Although on the side of the poem of 1717 it is written in a third hand: “Valdai priest Mikhail” (Pekarsky Science 1, 370); but the accuracy of the note is more than doubtful. Is it likely that in 1717 there could have been a priest-poet in Valdai, when there were almost no learned priests anywhere in the provincial cities, with the exception of Moscow and the south? Both based on the content of the plays and the circumstances of the time, it is most likely that the author of all the praiseworthy plays shown was the same Mikhail Ivanovich Shiryaev. 5. Feodor Maksimov, a student of Likhudov in the Novgorod school, subdeacon of St. Sophia Cathedral, wrote a Slavic grammar, ed. St. Petersburg 1723, abbreviation of Smotrytsky's grammar. “The study of Smotritsky’s grammar, which is very extensive, is achieved after a long time with very considerable difficulty.” Therefore, Maksimov’s work was approved by the synod. (Case of Syn. Arch. No. 7). Maksimov makes an attempt to explain the rules not only for book language, but also for spoken language; – a wonderful attempt! Ivan Ilyinsky, originally from Yaroslavl, a student of Moscow. academy. By the will of Tsar Musin, Pushkin wanted to send him, as he knew Latin well, to Prague to translate books: according to the book. Kantemir did not let him go, citing the fact that the king himself ordered Ilyinsky to live with Kantemir. Ilyinsky taught literature to the book. Antioch Cantemir, a famous satirist, and also served as a translator for Cantemir. He was also with the prince on the Persian campaign (Pekarsky 1, 111. 233. 235. 237). Since 1727 he has been a translator at the Academy of Sciences; according to Tredyakovsky, “a straightforward, honest and good-natured man,” † 1735 The most important, learned work is his “Symphony on the Four Gospels and Acts”, St. Petersburg. 1733. 1761. After dedicating the book to the Empress, the preface to the reader ends with the following verses: “Necessity is the sacred scripture of the nobility, As if our eternal belly is the mother. But the weakness of our inner feelings is a fraction, As if yesterday and before the tree was rotten, Today we remember little or in the end we forget; Although we want to find it, we don’t know where it is. One symphony helps us in this: He reveals every speech in chapters and verses.” Due to his proximity to Kantemir, it must be recognized as more than likely that he took part in the composition of a symphony on psalms, if only not all of it is the fruit of his labors, although Kantemir published it in his own name, M. 1727. Ilyinsky translated from the Latin Kantemirov’s “System of the Mohammedan Religion”, St. Petersburg. 1722, while his comrade in Moscow. Academies translated from French “Alcoran of the Mohammeds”, 1717 St. Petersburg, translated from Arabic by Dio-Rie. The Holy Synod for a long time did not agree to allow Kantemirov’s works to be published - much of it seemed incredible and unfounded. Kantemir entered into correspondence with the synod about this and presented himself as a witness to what he wrote about Mohammedanism (Pekarsky I, 567–569. II, 370). During his stay in Kantemir’s house, Ilyinsky kept a short diary (Notationes quotidianae). Here, under June 28, 1721, it is written: “Having finished the translation, Agapit gave it to the prince.” Under 26 Oct. 1722 it is said that the emperor “deigned to take Agapit of my translation.” However, the work of Deacon Agapit: instructive chapters (ed. K. K. 1728) was not published under Peter. In the brief “Description of Commentaries of the Academy of Sciences” for 1726, we see in Ilyinsky’s translation an article by Bayer on the Scythians, with the caption: “John Ilyinsky, Yaroslavl.” – Professor Bülfinger’s farewell speech, delivered in memory of the deceased Peter I, was translated into Russian and published in Tübingen “Mr. Ilyinsky, who taught the Russian language,” wrote Tübingen in actis eruditorum, Lipsiae 1725. 6. Feofan Prokopovich, listened to lessons in Kyiv, then in Vladimir Volyn and in Rome. Matseevich, in response to the Lutheran lampoon, writes: “he (Theophanes), however, was sent to Rome by Basilian the Uniate; He fled from there and came to Kyiv in a Basilian dress, during the time of the Bishop of Kyiv, His Eminence Varlaam Yasinsky, and from him, like Stephen, he was accepted and allowed into the Church of God.” M. Evgeniy (2.296) says that Theophan was tonsured as an Orthodox monk in the Pochaev Orthodox monastery. This could not have happened. Even before 1703, the Pochaev Monastery was not Orthodox, but Uniate. At the Kyiv college, Feofan was first a teacher of poetry and rhetoric, then from 1708–1710 he was a prefect and teacher of philosophy. In 1709, a word of praise in honor of the Poltava winner made him known to Peter V., and the flattering word of praise to Menshikov, spoken at the same time, even more opened the path to fame and honor for him. In 1711, Feofan was under Peter V. on the Prut and then from 1711–1715 he was rector of the academy. In 1716–1717 he was a preacher in St. Petersburg, where he became quite close to Menshikov. In 1718, by the will of Peter V., he was consecrated bishop of Pskov, and from 1724 he was archbishop of Novgorod. Feofan was gifted with a logical, firm and insightful mind, a lively imagination, but without strong feelings; vanity and lust for power worried him greatly; with this, envy and hard-hearted vindictiveness were combined in him; the disgust from papism brought from Rome also had a great influence on his thoughts and life. Christianity was well known to his mind, he knew it clearly and completely; but it was not the dominant principle of his life; cunning and far-sighted, he knew how to find happiness for himself without having to cope with his conscience; in the throes of death, preparing to appear before the judgment of God, he said out loud: “Oh, the head, the head! drunk with reason, where will you bow? († 1736). a) The dogmatist Feofan is distinguished by strict logical clarity in his thoughts. But the dogmatic teaching of his academic lessons was the subject of strong doubts for Stefan Jaworski and many others. Stefan proposed to the council not to consecrate Theophan as bishop of Pskov before he renounced the false thoughts found in his writings. Personal explanations between Stefan and Feofan on this subject ended, however, in reconciliation. Feofanovo’s letter to the Academy about this is known. Prokopovich's dogmatic lessons were published after his death by Samuil Mislavsky; they consist of treatises: – 1. Introductio in theologiam, Kenigsb. 1773. 2. De Deo, ib. 1774. 3. De Trinitate, ib. 1775. 4. De processione Spiritus S. Gothae; 1772. 5. De creatione et providentia, Kenigsb. 1775. 6. De homine innocente. Moscow 1776. 7. De homine lapso (incomplete), M. 1776. 8. De gratuita peccatoris per Christum justificatione. Breslawiæ 1769. New edition entitled: Theophani Prokopovitz theologia dogmatica: 1–3. Lipsiae 1782; edit. 2 ibid. 1792. In the preface to the fourth volume of the first edition, the publisher writes: “His seventh treatise is on the state of fallen man. This treatise has only four chapters; nothing more; for, summoned from Kyiv to Moscow, he did not finish the whole matter.” Meanwhile, according to the edition, we see in the seventh treatise not 4, but 14 chapters. This means that the publisher added his own additions to this treatise. In the first volume, regarding the article on legends, it is noted in the margin (p. 405) that it does not belong to Theophanes, but to another writer, i.e. the publisher Mislavsky. He also owns the following article: about the importance of the teachings of the church fathers. According to the preface of the sixth volume, the writer also wanted to offer 12 treatises with the following content: “on universal grace; about election in Christ and rejection; about the incarnation of the Son of God; about the justification of the sinner; about law and gospel; about the sacraments in. and n. Covenant; about the Old Testament and New Testament churches; about hierarchy; about councils and church government; about the enemies of the church, heretics and schismatics; about the last fate." It is more than likely that Theophanes managed to expound some of these treatises at the Kyiv Academy. We think so because one of these treatises on justification was published separately in a Russian translation. Others were not published, of course, because they were not processed. The publisher says: “I was most concerned about conveying with all accuracy to print what the author himself wrote with his own hand.” In the Russian translation, Theophan's treatises: on the origin of St. Spirit, on justification, on sin, ed. 1773, about the intact state of man, M. 1785. Prokopovich wrote in Russian: The first teaching of a youth, or the alphabet with a brief interpretation of the decalogue, the Lord's prayer, the creed and the nine beatitudes, St. Petersburg. 1720, 1722, 1724, 1743. The preface talks about the benefits of education and its lack in Russia. “We have a lot of good news and God-fearing people, not knowing the power of God’s law, do not know many of their sins and remain fearless. All reverence for God is believed in external rituals and bodily trainings, below thinking about the most thorough reverence for God... Are there not many bookworms who do not know the commandments of God and the symbol of faith and the power of prayers? Criticism was written on the teaching of youths in 1727, focusing especially on condemnation of appearance. Prokopovich replied that true worshipers worship God in spirit, and expressed regret that it was in vain to outrage the people with unfair suspicions. (Pekarsky 1, 179, 180). His “Catechism” for common people is in Tsarsky No. 669. Opinion on how to instruct the youth of the purple (Peter 2). St. Petersburg 1727 Christian teaching about God, about Providence, about the law, with additions from Konissky. Mogilev 1761. About godlessness, M. 1774 and 1787. Two conversations: one - the tree of a worker with a merchant about God, the other - a citizen with a villager about the need to know the faith - remain in the manuscript. About the book - Song of Songs, composition 1730 ed. M. 1774, 1784. The occasion for the composition, according to the writer, was the following: in one society the conversation touched upon the book of the Song of Songs. One of those present, namely Privy Councilor Tatishchev, spoke of this book with ridicule. Theophanes, in the first part of his work, proves the importance of the Song by the respect of the Jewish and Christian churches for it; in the second it shows its mysterious meaning; in the third it resolves various doubts. In the essay: “The quarrel between Paul and Peter about the unbearable yoke” (in 4 parts of the work. M. 1774, especially M. 1784), the writer justifies two thoughts: a) “as legal justification requires complete sinlessness,” and b) “as no one can be sinless.” This work, written in 1712, was subjected to severe criticism and not without reason, since it left many things unsaid that had to be said in order not to be a student of Luther. Apologetic works include Theophanes’s addition to Apollodorus’ library of gods translated by Barsov: “other traces of sacred stories are found in Hellenic fables” (Apollodorus on the gods M. 1723, p. 370) and a preface explaining the importance of Apollodorus’s book for Christian readers. b) Theophan was a rather heated polemicist: aa) especially against the pope. He wrote a response to the Sorbonne (works of Yavorsky, part 4. 1770); about the Pope Antichrist - but did not finish what he started. His best work, completely worthy of respect, against papism is: tractatus de processione Spiritus S. et historia controversiae de processione Spiritus (ed. Gothae 1772); Russian translation: “the history of the discord between the Greeks and Romans about the origin of St. Spirit", ex. M. 1773 bb) Written against Protestants: “an apology for faith,” or the response of Prefect Theophan to the objections of the Koenigsberg Lutherans against the monk Michael, a former Protestant who turned to Eastern Orthodoxy - the answer is not very strong in thought (Latin text - in Miscellaneis, Breslaviae 1745; Epist. Mosquae 1776; Russian translation 1731 by Tsarsky No. 447; another translation by N. Khanenka 1747); “apology” for the Kyiv relics (Latin text in Miscell. Bresl.; translation Μ. 1786 and 1799); letter to Pastor Malyard in 1733 accepting Orthodoxy (ib. in Miscell.; translation by Tsarsky No. 283). Menander Humbertov, who traveled around the east, Italy and Russia, in 1726 proposed 46 questions about the faith and rituals of the Orthodox Church; Answers to these questions were proposed in 1728. In the RKP. it is not said who wrote these answers; but based on the time of the answer and based on Theophanes’s relations with foreigners, it is likely that they were written by Theophanes. With such an attitude towards Protestants, is it possible to think that Theophan in other cases takes the side of the Protestants and openly fights against Orthodoxy? Unfortunately, his passions led him to contradict himself. When Yavorsky's Stone of Faith (M. 1728) was published for the first time, Prokopovich wrote on behalf of Buddha a criticism of the book Stone of Faith, taking the side of the Protestants against Orthodoxy. Theophylact at the same time (in August 1730) said: “The Buddha died even before the publication of the book, and from the syllable it is clear that the writer of the book was the Novgorod archbishop.” Later they found out that the criticism was sent by Prokopovich with his student Zenkovsky to Jena and published there. Not only that, but for Buddeevo’s alleged work, criticism was also written in Moscow by Father Ribeiro, who was under the Spanish rule. Feofan submitted to the secret chancellery abusive and unscrupulous criticism of Ribeira’s book, presenting it as dangerous for the state because it condemns Protestants, as if Russia is a Protestant state. Notes ex. on Thursday total ist. 1863 books I. Many doubts were raised against the purity of Feofan’s dogmatic thoughts in 1726. Prokopovich’s answers to Marcellus’ suspicions (for example, in the Reading General History of 1862, Book I, and in the Rights Review of 1864) deserve full attention for their thoughtfulness and accuracy in expression, as well as for the importance of the subjects they touch upon; here all the points on which there may be disagreement between Orthodoxy and Lutheranism are reviewed; the answers are also important because they contain an account of Theophan’s archpastoral ministry. Comparing Theophanes' answers with Marcellus's reviews leaves in his soul convictions that are unfavorable to Theophanes' honor, a) He is not always sincere in his responses to evidence. Instead of direct answers to interrogations, he often talks about outsiders, about the favorable attention of Peter I to him, about the fact that they are allegedly trying to restore the patriarchate. b) No matter how cleverly he closes his affairs, it is clear that in both words and deeds he was often on the side of Lutheranism, through negligence; and this carelessness of the logical and clever Prokopovich cannot be explained otherwise than by the unnoticed inclination of his soul towards Protestantism, brought up by long and trusting listening to Lutheran works. That was the decision then to his case. “There are no precise explanations for some of Archimandrite Markell’s points in the bishop’s response: but the matter cannot be continued. Only in the future the bishop should not create contradictions to the church, which the archimandrite pointed out in him, but lead a pure and blameless life, as the Orthodox Great Russian bishops live; in the service and order of the church, do not allow yourself any abolition from the Great Russian bishops: if in the future he turns out to be guilty of disagreement with the Orthodox Church, then no mercy will be shown to him.” Dec. 3, 1726. - c) Written against the schism: “Admonition” on behalf of the synod to the teachers of the schism to appear for conversations about faith (collection of law VI. No. 3925); “Announcement with an admonition about those who dare to suffer,” St. Petersburg. 1722 “Christ’s sermons on the beatitudes, interpretation”; St. Petersburg 1724 “Admonition to the missionary Neophytos” (Aug. 8, 1722 in the collection of laws and articles); “On registered and unregistered schismatics”, St. Petersburg. 1722 “Admonition to the ignorant”, St. Petersburg. 1725 “Justification of watering baptism”, M. 1724 and in 4 parts of works, M. 1774; “Discourse on an oath or oath” - in 4 hours. Works. M. 1774; especially St. Petersburg 1784 “Testimony of the Great Antichrist,” a work written in 1735 and 1736 that remained unfinished. To refute the schismatic rumors about the appearance of the Antichrist either in the person of Peter or in the person of Biron, the author in Part I wanted to consider the distinctive features of the Antichrist according to the instructions of Holy Scripture; and at 2 o’clock apply these traits to dad. But only 6 chapters have been written and 7 of the first part have been started. c) Theophan the preacher. Words and speeches, published by him. parts 1 and 2 1760, 1761, part 3 1765, part 4 1774 speech at the wedding of Princess Anna Petrovna with the Duke of Holstein-Gottorp 1725 ed. in Russian Bulletin of 1841 Three words in Christ. Thurs. 1826, his monastic teachings in Christ. Thurs. 1826. In his words, Feofan is always Russian by faith - at least he does not in any way arouse suspicion against himself. However, he is a more secular than Christian preacher. He paints pictures masterfully: but they lack warmth due to the lack of feeling in the preacher; he cleverly arranges the parts of the word, deftly uses ways to convince his listeners of what he needs, but the Christian reader remains unsatisfied. The largest part of his sermons is purely political and it is brilliant in oratorical terms. This is how he oratorically described the new Russia in comparison with the ancient one (1716): everything that glittered and rang in the transformed Russia seemed to him gold, and he mercilessly humiliated ancient Russia, making it look like wood. Peter's travels across Europe were the subject of various unfavorable rumors. Feofan describes (1717) the benefits of travel in general and for the king in particular. Germany, he says, is the mother of all countries; in it the traveler learns “the orderly structure of the national government, kindness of customs, sweetness of reason and conversation, courage, science and wit.” Another will smile when hearing the news of the unheard-of sweetness of conversations and unprecedented courage of the Germans. But what about that? The fact is that they then began to introduce the German bureaucracy into our country, which has done so much evil; and Prokopovich is Peter’s zealous assistant in the gilding of Russia. – The establishment of a fleet was accepted by many as a completely useless novelty. Feofan from the pulpit defends the introduction of the fleet. “We will not find a single village in the world,” he says, “that is located above a river or lake and does not have boats: but for a glorious and strong monarchy, holding the sea at noon and midnight, not to have ships, even if there was not a single need for it, it would be dishonest and reproachful.” You see, gilded Russia also needs useless institutions, just like a merry landowner keeps beautiful and, of course, expensive boats on the lake on his estate. The riverside village holds a boat to move to the other side; Is a navy really only needed to move to the other side of the sea? It will cost much less if you travel on a merchant ship. The speaker started talking in the heat of zeal. What he says next is sensible, but even here he does not tell the whole truth. “How can we keep the (seaside) places? How can we live and be wary of an enemy attack, not just defend ourselves?” But to protect the coasts, it is not a navy that is needed, but fortresses and a coastal flotilla. This is what recent experience has shown! – The beginning of the new year in January aroused strong murmurs not only among schismatics, but among the entire people. Theophan tries to calm the people's unrest: he says that there is no “great heresy” here, there is no heresy, much less “the destruction of the works of God,” but simply a different account of time, which has already changed more than once. In the first centuries of Christianity, they did not count time either from the creation of the world or from the birth of Christ, but counted it according to consuls and Olympiads; from the birth of Christ they began to count time in the Roman church from the 6th century, and in the Greek - much later; counting from the creation of the world is found in the 2nd century. It is proper for Christians to keep track of time from the birth of Christ. – Feofan’s best words are about the burial of Peter I and the Poltava victory. In the first, he depicts Peter first as a king, then as a Christian king. For the preacher, Theophan also wrote instructions: “things and deeds about which a spiritual teacher should preach to the Christian people.” At 4 o'clock op. M. 1774, especially M. 1784. His rhetoric in 10 sections in Latin. language. (Ist. Kyiv. Acad. 148). – In the Chernigov seminary of the Russian Communist Party. with the following title: rhetorika τοῦ μακαρίτου Theophani Procopovitz in academia kiowensi concinnata. d) Feofan almost loved being a lawyer most of all, but he was not one for the benefit of the church, at least in many cases. His is “spiritual regulations,” M. 1722, 1738, 1739. About the regulations, Prokopovich wrote: “I finally completed the regulations for the church board, or the main consistory (??), simply put, the regulations, which set out eight chapters.” They should be counted with content. “There are almost 300 rules in all. When this was written, the king ordered it to be read for him and, having changed and added something of his own, he greatly approved. Then he ordered it to be read in the Senate, where, in addition to the senators, six bishops, Ryazan, Smolensk and Pskov, and Archimandrite were present. Theodosius and two other archimandrites. In two days the book was read twice and additions were made. Then the bishops and archimandrites signed with their own hands, and opposite all the senators, and at the end the tsar himself signed. Two copies of this work were prepared and both were fastened together. One was sent to Moscow and other places for signature by bishops and chief archimandrites. “For this purpose, your bishops of Chernigov and Pereyaslavl will soon be summoned to Moscow. When the regulations are so confirmed with the signatures of everyone: they will be published and a collegium or permanent governing Synod will open. May God help you! (Epist. Theophani Procop. Mosquæ 1776, p. 28). – On raising the patriarchal name in prayers, St. Petersburg. 1721; on marriages of Orthodox Christians with non-Orthodox Christians, St. Petersburg. 1721 M. 1781 (from 1781 under regulations); on the attitude of the emperor to the church, St. Petersburg. 1721; “On the church clergy and monks”, turned into an addition to the regulations; “the opinion on the divorce of husband and wife” of 1721 (rkp.) was not approved by the Synod; decree on monasticism 1724; in it, Feofan was forced to justify himself in 1731, and how did he justify himself? He admitted that he had composed the decree, but instead of calmly and conscientiously examining Radyshevsky’s comments on the decree, he wrote a denunciation to the empress of Radyshevsky for rebellion and lèse-majesté, a denunciation filled with rude abuse and an unconscionable struggle with reality, and even more pathetic because it attracted dozens of innocent people to the secret chancellery. “Among other things, this is what (Radyshevsky) wrote that monasteries on the outskirts of great and small cities began from the very first centuries after Christ, as we learned powerfully from ancient reliable stories and historians and chroniclers, whom the wealthy will find. - This is the light he gave us! Where did he himself see these stories and historians and chroniclers? Aren’t there plenty of taverns like these that have libraries?” It is incredible that Prokopovich was unaware of the ascetics of the first centuries of Christianity, whom Radyshevsky had in mind. If he did not know them, he should have asked those who knew, and not scolded in a tone of smug ignorance. “The head is very uneducated, stupid, empty, a rogue, a black hero, a drunkard,” so he constantly dishonors Radyshevsky and peppers these words with feigned horror at a fictitious conspiracy. Radyshevsky is a rebel; he does not rebel, but in all likelihood he would like others to rebel. Therefore he should be judged as a rebel. (The Spirit of a Christian 1862, article about Zavorykin). A sad picture of a soulless chicanery! Other legal works: Truth of the will of the monarchs, M. 1722, 1726, prohibited on July 27, 1727. Explanation of the truth of the will of the monarchs, M. 1726; a letter to the chancellor about marriage crowns, where he says: “it is better to make imperial crowns for the wedding of their majesties” (Moskvit. 1852); preface to the maritime regulations, St. Petersburg. 1720 Charter of cell life, St. Petersburg. 1723, and at 2 o'clock East. hierarchy; the “staff” of bishops with the appointment of 5 archbishops and with the subordination of the other 38 bishops was written in 1724, when Theophan was still the Bishop of Pskov, and the second, and not the first, member of the synod, and then the plan was left in oblivion; on the presence of a larger number of bishops in the synod, May 20, 1730 (rkp.); on being in the synod to permanent members, May 30, 1730 (rkp.); a letter to Archbishop Herodion in Chernigov about: should one compete for property? (in Chernigov hierarchy. Chernigov 1861, pp. 71–79). Based on all these works, we see in Feofan a lawyer-philosopher who bases his thoughts not so much on the practice of the church, but on considerations of his own mind. – As for the legal processes about Saints Benjamin, Leo and George (Proceedings of the Kiev ecclesiastical academician, 1861. 1, 287–302), about Theophylact (Orthodox review 1860, 2:71) or Zavorykin (Spirit of Christians. 1862 Oct. and Nov.), where much was written by Theophan’s hand and was done in his direction: these are the saddest monuments of Feofanova’s sick soul. e) At the Kyiv Academy, Feofan taught philosophy in Latin and his notes from 1708 are still intact (Ist. Kyiv Acad., 144; list in St. Petersburg Academy). f) He also studied history: but he was a very mediocre historian, not to say bad. His historical works: the story of the death of Peter V., St. Petersburg. 1726. M. 1726. St. Petersburg. 1816; the story of Peter V. before the Poltava victory, St. Petersburg. 1773, M. 1788; about the accession to the imperial throne. Anna, St. Petersburg 1737 (printed in Son Otech. 1837, part 184) - they promise a lot, but give little. Genealogical list of princes and kings, St. Petersburg. 1720, according to the author, which cost him a lot of work, is worth nothing in itself. The Tale of Cyril and Methodius (printed under Mavrurbino’s history of the Slavs, translated by Savva Raguzinsky, M. 1722), does not attract attention either for the elegance of the narrative or for criticism. Treatise on the Amazons (rkp.), with the absurd idea that these are Slavs; the study “about the Florence Cathedral” contains something useful. “When did patriarchal dignity begin in the church?” (rkp.) – unimportant research. More interesting are the epistolae Theophani Procopovitz, M. 1776; They were written from 1716 to 1736 and contain quite a bit of historical information. So in letter 5, written in August 1716 in Kyiv, he complains about the sad state of the spiritual. The sixth letter is an apologia against the accusation of unorthodoxy. In letter 20, he satirically depicts the spirit of the times: “drunken soldiers, scoundrel clerks, merchants, carpenters, even women theologians. What can we say about priests and monks, what about our Latinists? There is nothing that they don’t know, and they are ready to answer everything. And they answer with such confidence, with such courage that they do not want to think about what they are saying... For 15 years, the so-called oratorical techniques were in force - church pulpits were resounding with amazing things: why did Christ plunge into the Jordan while standing, and not lying or sitting? Why didn’t the fish die in the flood, even though they weren’t in the ark?.. Then another illness followed; everyone began to write poetry. – Now, as you see, we are all working on theology. Everyone wants to teach, and no one wants to learn.” In the 26th letter he congratulates the Holstein prince and thus honors the fallen Menshikov: Scelentissimus tyrannus, vecors homo, scelus, omnium bipedum nequissimus. In letter 22 he burns about Menshikov, who has not yet fallen, as his enemy and pretends to have died from him. His letter to Osterman in Moskvit. 1855 5, 145–158. In a letter to Biron, who sent the translated book for review: “a court man,” he wrote: “I have not studied French before, for this reason I need a Russian person to help me, who knows the power of its language.” Letter ex. in Russian Conversation of 1860 2, 195. Up to 30 other letters still remain unpublished. (See the words of part 1. St. Petersburg, 1760). In Lucubrationes Procop., Breslauiae 1744, there are 18 Latin letters: in the fourth he complains about the tyrant; at 18 of 17 Oct. 1727 writes: “Although such troubles of ours greatly harm our name among such false brothers, we do not tolerate loss among honest and intelligent people; together they let us know that from ignoramuses like those little men one cannot expect anything but evil, private and public.” In Russ. In the archives of 1863, a letter from Feofan to the emperor was published. Anne, with appendices about the oppression of Orthodoxy in Austria; another letter to her - in Zh. m. enlightenment. 1836, two letters - in Mayak 1842. Legal trials about Reshilov (in Reading General History 1862), Markell (The Spirit of Christ 1862), Theodosius (in the Russian Archive 1864), which are almost all written by the hand of Theophanes, are important for history. g) Although Prokopovich, when it was necessary to offend others with something, pointed to poetry as a weakness: but he himself was not averse to making himself look like a piti. Of course, truly poetic songs could not pour out of his soul, chilled by egoism; all that can be expected from him is sarcasm and witticisms and, perhaps, singing fueled by the passions of the poor soul. It is in the order of things that the clever Prokopovich composed a clever poem: de arte poetica libri tres, dictati Kiowiae 1705, ed. Mohilewiae, 1786. His poetic works: Canon of prayer for the health of the Emperor. Peter I, St. Petersburg. 1721 Canon of prayer for the health of the imperial family on the days of the namesake, birth, coronation, M. 1723 and 1725 thanksgiving to God for the return of health to the emperor. Ekaterina, St. Petersburg 1726 thanksgiving prayer to God for the enthronement of the Emperor. Anna, M. 1730, repeated twice a year in all churches until Anna’s death, is a sad monument to the author, although an honor for meek Russia. – Prokopovich’s Latin poems are distinguished by at least the purity of Latin. In this regard, carmen gratulatorium is the height of perfection, but the content refers to the same Anna, pitifully spoiled by her Mitavian life. Elegia monachalis, with its purity of language, is also comforting in its content: the son speaks to his father, who rejected him from the monastic life. (Miscelanea, Breslauiae 1743). His Russian poems: “to fever in fever”; thanks to the steward Gerasim for the malt, 1735; upon their arrival. Anna Vmyzu, 1733; to the Ladoga Canal, 1733; gravestone inscription for Deacon Adam, 1734 and several others listed in the table of contents of the words of 1760; everyone talks about the author's ability to be sarcastic. Its verses: “Whoever trusts firmly in God”; “if I wait for a bucket of fun”; “O vain man”, 1724 “Other I yield” - 1730 “What should I do” 1734 The first two were sung for a long time by both spiritual and worldly people in friendly gatherings. Tragicomedies: Vladimir (Tolstoy No. 4), Yaropolk (Rumyantseva No. 318), Bogdan; on the Poltava victory, K. 1709, are remarkable as monuments of time, as fragments of the customs of the past. 7. Herodion Zhurakovsky, from a noble Little Russian family, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, Archimandrite of Mezhigorsk. When it was proposed (in 1721) to elect a “kind, intelligent and schooled man” as a candidate for the Kyiv metropolis: he was elected as a candidate for the metropolis, but was consecrated as Archbishop of Chernigov; in 1734 he retired from the department in Mezhyhirya († 1736); His letters and letters to the hetman are known in the Little Russian language, mostly with complaints about the oppression of the clergy and curious in their depiction of the customs of the time. About them - in the Description. Chernigov hierarchy, Chern. 1861 pp. 68–78, in Description. cathedral scoops. mon. Black 1861 75–82. As a result of the demand of the Supreme Council (dated July 14, 1727), the bishop reported to the Synod: “schools in Chernigov at the cathedral monastery (Borys and Gleb) have been established since the beginning of 1700 in rhetoric, and how many students were in the schools to this day is not known; the first for what was not written down; another thing - it’s impossible to write down, since they are waste people - some come and go from other schools, and who finish rhetoric school in Chernigov schools, go to Kyiv or to other dioceses to higher schools; having died, some accepted the monastic rank from the Kyiv diocese, while others - in Chernigov and are now found in professorships; and others are enriched (engaged) in preaching the word of God, and others are promoted to abbot and other dignities; and those in the secular camp, some are appointed priests, while others find themselves in secular positions. The disciples have food: they are the master's children, they eat from their homes; and those who do not have their own food, according to the force of spiritual regulations, from the beginning of 1723. food and other necessary requirements are provided from monasteries and church lands every year, as long as they can be provided with content. “The number of students in the Chernigov schools of this year 1728 is obvious to all the masters and beggars 257, and at the end of the year whether there will be so many or none, the nobility is not powerful.” Pitirim, converted from the schism, abbot of Pereyaslavl and archbishop of Nizhny Novgorod († 1736). His “Sling” (St. Petersburg 1721, 1726, M. 1752) brought a lot of benefit in its time, and is still useful today. The writer, with tireless patience, sorts out all the perplexities of either ignorant or crafty superstition and discusses matters with deep knowledge of the spirit of St. Scriptures, with a bright and firm mind. His correspondence with the Kerzhen schismatics of 1716 in the history of Nizhny Novgorod. Hierarchies, pp. 53–66. Here are his letters to the king and reports to the synod, pp. 47, 83, 93. “Announcement of how Bishop Pitirim exchanged questions and answers with schismatic teachers,” printed. in St. Petersburg 1720 Second edition 1782, with additions. “Pitirimovo’s Report” to the Tsar, ed. in Reading total ist. 1860 Since, according to the report, schismatics, monks and nuns live in the forests without any supervision; and from 20 Aug. 1711 Pitirim was ordered: “to be in charge of and manage all schismatic elders, elders and Beltsy”: then, according to the considerations of both, the “denunciation” was written before Aug. 1711 and probably in Genvar 1711 The report says that in the Balakhonsky and Yuryevsky districts there are more than 10,000 schismatic households and they are enemies of the church and the state; Measures against schism are proposed: those who spread the schism should be imprisoned in monasteries and monasteries closed. Esipov (Raskolnichy affairs. St. Petersburg, 1861, pp. 644–650) published four memos from Pitirim on the case of the Dyakonovites. The first one is especially remarkable, with which he prays to deliver Nizhny Novgorod from Nesterov, who, through the machinations of the schismatics, was appointed Landrichter of Nizhny Novgorod. Smart report by archim. Pitirim about schismatics and several other papers about them - in part 2. Esipov’s schismatic affairs, pp. 193, 194, 208, 210–220, 235, 272. 8. German Kononovich, pupil of Kyiv, Chernigov Ilinsky archimandrite, † 1737 They issued a new covenant, in Chern. 1717, with dedication to Skoropadsky and with comments. In the preface he writes: “what appears in the book of this new testament to be incomprehensible, hidden and incomprehensible, we searched for this in the books of the church from teachers and the divinely inspired St. The writings of expositors, to strengthen the weak human mind and memory with positivity.” He further says that the acts and miracles of the Savior and the apostles do not require explanation: but the sayings of especially the apostle. Paul “the essence is hidden, difficult to understand, as if the essence is that whoever falls on this stone will be broken; parables and others, because they are hidden and not clear, require interpretation, which often happens from teachers: the first is allegorical, when the words of St. The scriptures, in addition to the written historical mind, signify something spiritual, mysterious, the faith of St. or befitting of the militant Church of Christ... The second is analogous, when the words of Scripture, in addition to the written mind, even by deeds or events, signify something befitting of the glory of heaven and eternal life in the triumphant, heavenly church. The third is tropological, when the words of Scripture, in addition to written reason, depict in themselves good teaching in human morals, a virtuous life is proper.” So she spoke through the lips of Fr. Herman's then Kyiv, or more precisely the then Western hermeneutics! But is it true? This is another matter. Wonderfully published by Fr. Herman “Teaching on the Seven Sacraments”, Chernig. 1716 This is the didascalia of Sylvester Kossov: but in the teaching, in addition to the fact that the language is Slavic, several questions with answers were added about St. The Eucharist is presented in accordance with the comments of the Moscow Council of 1690. O. German was diligently engaged in publishing church books in his Ilyinsk printing house. He published: Everyday Prayer Book, Chernig. 1714, with dedication to the hetman; rule to St. communion for the priest, Chernig. 1714, 1720; short octoich (for six days) 1715, similar to the Chernigov edition of 1682 and the Kyiv edition of 1704; psalter in day 16 with dedication to Skoropadsky, 1714; teaching psalter in 4 days 1720 and 1729. But he also had to endure a lot of troubles for the printing house (see Cathedral Chernig. mon. Chern. 1862). His letters to the hetman are in Onis. Ilyinsky Monastery, pp. 87–91. Afanasy (Anastasy) Kondoidi, who arrived with Cantemir from Moldova, taught the children the book. Cantemir in Greek, Latin and Italian, from 1723, assessor of the synod and archimandrite of Yaroslavl, from 1726, bishop of Vologda, and from September. 1735 Suzdal, † 1737 His word is panegyric in honor of the Order of St. Andrey, St. Petersburg 1725 Of course, he also composed a panegyric to Peter I, spoken by his seven-year-old student B. Serban in Greek and ed. St. Petersburg 1714 Kondoidi was a member of the 1725 commission to correct the Bible. A contemporary wrote about him: “historical-ecclesiastical and philological-theological works, which he wrote on behalf of the court and in which his scholarship is revealed, may soon be published and will certainly increase his glory.” (Fanderback to Keseler in Son of the Fatherland, 1842, part 1). What kind of writings are these by Kondoidi? If the only thing we don’t understand is the practice of correcting the Bible, then we don’t know what Funderbeck is talking about. 9. Alexy Kirilovich Barsov, son of Muscovites. a priest, a pupil of the Dikhuds, from 1725 “at the discretion of Protector Gabriel Buzhinsky,” a teacher of the Greek school, according to the rector Vishnevsky, in Latin, and more skillfully in Greek, he maintained a fair amount of the Greek school”; from 1731 director of the printing house († 1738). Translations of it: Apollodorus of Athens, library of the pagan gods, Μ. 1725, where the translator gives an admonition to the reader; response of the Jerusalem Council of 1672 to the Calvinists, translated. 1728 (Tolstoy 2, No. 120); liturgy of St. Jacob's Hierarchy, translation. in 1717 He participated in the correction of the Slavic Bible. His notes are in Moscow. foreign archive business 10. Varlaam Linitsky, a pupil of Kiev, from 1719 bishop of Suzdal, from 1723 of Kolomna, from 1726 of Astrakhan, 1731–1739 of Pskov, who died in the Kyiv Lavra. In all the dioceses, wherever he was in charge, he founded theological schools, and improved them with all zeal. In 1737, he had the courage to present to the higher authorities that in his diocese 200 such clerks, who were absolutely necessary for the churches, had been taken into military service. The synod, according to his proposal, demanded justice: but in 1739 the zealous archpastor was dismissed. (Ist. Russian cer. V, 120). His word for the day of St. Catherine, St. Petersburg is known. 1725 11. Anthony Stakhovsky, a student of Kiev, preacher of the Chernigov department and the first professor of the Chernigov “collegium”, from 1712, Archbishop of Chernigov, from 1721, Metropolitan of Siberia, who opened the first school in Tobolsk, † 1740 In Chernigov it was written to him: "Mirror from Divine Scripture", ed. in Chernigov in 1705 with the name of Hieromonk Anthony, and according to the preface “the industriousness of the collegium of the Chernigov archdiocese.” In the mirror, behind the dedication to the hetman and an extensive preface to the reader, are two conversations of Chrysostom (on Psalm 50 and on the words of Isaiah) and three sermons by the archbishop. John Maksimovich. The preface says that in 1705, “a stone building was built for the Chernigov school, where, if we live, rhetorical teaching will begin this year.” Here is Stakhovich's reflection on the Savior, in verse. The same prefect owns “the legend of St. Scriptures", Chernigov 1705. Under his order, "the history of Titus Livy was translated from the Latin dialect into Slavic, through the works of the teachers of the collegium, rock 1716." The translation, as you can see, was prepared for publication. Snegirev speaks about it in detail in the scientific notes of Moscow. University, M. 1833. Certificates and letters of Anthony Stakhovsky in the Description of the Chernigov hierarchy and the cathedral black. monastery, black 1861 77–86. Varlaam Golenkovsky, hieromonk and vicar of the Kyiv Lavra, † 1740. His “Dialogue” about the elders and the mystery of the Eucharist, with a dedicatory letter and two prefaces, ed. K. 1714, 1717, St. Petersburg. 1766 - a useful essay. The content of the dialogue: in the first part - about the importance of the priesthood and the preparation of a priest for St. Eucharist; in the second - about the preparation of each communicant, in the third - about the fruits of St. communion. Psalter with a brief interpretation and preface, K. 1715. 12. Theophylact Lopatinsky, a student of Kiev, who completed his education abroad, where he listened to Voorchard, from 1704 mentor and prefect of Moscow. academy, 1706 rector, since 1722 Chudovsky archimandrite and adviser to the synod; in the same year, on June 14, he expressed in writing a desire to serve the success of the faith in Irkutsk, where many did not want to go, considering Irkutsk a place of exile. But the synod, in its report to the sovereign, said that Theophylact was needed in the synod. And the following year Theophylact was consecrated bishop of Tver. We saw M. Job's review of him (§ 1). “The scientific circle,” wrote a contemporary foreigner (1726), respects Theophylact of Lopatinsky, Bishop of Tver. This is a man of the most versatile education, an expert in Greek literature, which he studies very diligently and with great success. He was a professor at the Moscow Academy; after many years of study on this path, which brought great benefit to the youth, he was elevated to the degree that he now occupies. His unwavering honesty in all circumstances of life is reminiscent of a golden age.” (Fanderbeck to Käseler in Transmvania, in Son of the Fatherland 1842 1) Since 1734, the blessed archpastor suffered “from evil people, until the end of his life, unbearable persecution and suffering” (preface to the book: denunciation of the schism) († 1741). a) He worked very hard and for a long time on correcting the Slavic Bible. testament of 1663. For the first time, according to the decree of 1713, he and Likhud and Polikarpov “agreed the Slovenian Bible with the Greek various printed LXX interpreter bibles, and about doubts and rational objections to evidence they used an explanatory polyglot from the Hebrew text, also the Vulgate and everything that turned out to be in the Slovenian Bible, partly in disagreement with the rules of grammatical inspection opposite in genders, numbers, persons, tenses, declensions, and others, all of them (they are countless) were ruled side by side; and important errors, omissions and excesses are written out separately in the catalog in the preface, for the sake of better assurance and information for the reader.” Feb. 3, 1723, authorized to print a revised Bible; but on September 7, it was ordered to review it again. The Pentateuch and the Book of Job were revised a second time. After the death of Peter, by decree of Catherine on November 10 and 15. 1726, it was allowed to print the Bible, but so that the members of the Synod and those who revised it would again believe the text. The Synod entrusted this matter to Theophylact and Athanasius Kondoidi. But first came the death of Catherine, then the misfortune of Theophylact. – The Bible in 8 books is a blessed work. Theophylact - located in the synodal b. (description of the synod. RKP. 2, 364–180). b) With fiery zeal he denounced Protestantism, aa) In this spirit, he published the Stone of Faith of Yavorsky, who wrote in the catalog of his books: “the book of my works, called the Stone of Faith, which, under the reasoning of the Church of St. I betray the eastern ones and so that the smartest heads, more than me, will correct it, and if they are tormented by them, they have betrayed them, I humbly ask Stefan the sinner.” bb) Theophylact wrote a response to Buddha’s letter about the stone of faith. “From distant countries they write against our faith, but we who live nearby write about St. We have no zeal for the church,” he wrote to the empress’s confessor Varlaam, asking him to report to the empress, so that the answer to Buddei’s letter would not be considered contrary to duty. During a personal meeting, the empress gave permission to Theophylact to write a response: but then Prince. Cherkassky, a friend of Prokopovich, reported to the empress that the answer would be unpleasant to Feofan, especially since, according to his report, a case had already been started regarding Ribeira’s answer; Theophylact was made to sign in the secret chancellery not to show his “objection” to anyone. Subsequently, they tortured him for this objection and put him on the list of criminal cases. (Orthodox Review 1862 Feb. 203, 1860 2. 42–46). c) “On the good yoke of the Lord,” an essay written against Prokopovich’s book. The author writes: “the wisdom (Lutheran) about the law of God and about justification will follow from us the enemy who has arisen, as his writing testifies to the legal, inconvenient yoke he has created. And also this little book of ours, compiled to counter his teaching, will be seen by everyone who reads it.” This is also evident from chapters 17 and 18 of the book. The work consists of 19 chapters: chapters 1 and 2. explanation of the words of Acts. 15, 10; Chapter 3 about the moral law and the commandments of God; Chapter 4 about Christian freedom; 5 ch. about the difference between the new covenant and the old; Chapter 6 about good deeds; in chapter 7 contradictions are resolved; Chapter 8 certain questions about the old law and their solution; Chapter 9 about involuntary passions of lust and Christian perfection; 10 ch. about venial sins; Chapter 11 about faith; Chapter 12 about the remission of sins in justification; Chapter 13 about grace that justifies and sanctifies; Chapter 14 about the Pelagian and Calvinian heresies; Chapter 15 about the possibility of keeping God's commandments; Chapter 16 testimony of the virtues of the saints of God; Chapter 17 the content of the enemy’s teachings and his wrongness; Chapter 18 the extensive content of our teaching, which is opposite to the teaching of the enemy; Chapter 19 admonition to the Orthodox." (RKP. Moscow Spiritual Academician). According to Mayevsky’s testimony, in 1731, Theophylact showed him his book, written against the Lutheran book of Theophan, presented to Peter I and then “transferred to him from Musin-Pushkin to write an objection against it.” Feofan announced to the committee that in 1718 he gave Musin-Pushkin a book about the Old Testament yoke (??). The committee decided to demand Theophylact's book. (Extract from the case of Theophylact in Reading General History, 1863, book 4, pp. 63, 64, 67). So for all the works of jealousy against Lutheranism, Biron, but through the machinations of Prokopovich, tyrannized Theophylact for five years, either with torture and torment, or by keeping him in prison and fortress. c) Theophylact was in charge of schismatic affairs at the Synod and was a zealous denouncer of the schism. His composition: “The schismatic lie that the Vygoretsky empty saints declared upon themselves in answers to questions submitted to them by the honest hieromonk. Neophyte”, is known in the list belonging to the Arkhangelsk bishop. Barsanuphius in 1740 (Biblical Arch. Sem. No. 532); with some changes it was published in St. Petersburg. 1742. Here, primary attention is paid to the 50 response of the Pomeranians, important because it lists all the imaginary innovations of the Russian Church, for the sake of which the schismatics separated from the church. Theophylact wrote an “admonition to the ignorant,” in accordance with the royal decree of 1723, approved by Peter I and published in St. Petersburg. 1725 (Collected Law VII, No. 4635). Contents of the admonition: the teachers of the schism were summoned to the Synod for free conversations about faith, and none of them appeared; Meanwhile, they proclaim that they are suffering persecution for their faith, while they themselves are being burned in a frenzy of impotent malice. It is clear that they are subject to arbitrariness, hostile to the church and the state. Therefore, it remains for the Orthodox to consider the teachers of the schism as people of lies, harmful to society and subject to trial. – Appeal of the Synod “to the sons of Orthodoxy” with an invitation to schismatics to appear at the Synod to discuss the faith, for example. M. 1722 d) As a preacher, he left the words: to conclude peace with Sweden, St. Petersburg. 1722 (with German translation); in d.v.m. Ekaterina, M. St. Petersburg. 1722; on the day of the namesake. them. Catherine, St. Petersburg. 1725; a mirror of the most ardent spirit towards the Lord God, M. 1787. This also includes his excellent “service” on the day of the celebration of the Poltava victory, M. 1710, in the Menaion of M. 1711 and 1717. In 1740, during Sweden’s new displeasure with Russia, it was ordered to correct this service - to eliminate harsh expressions about Sweden and its king. But St. The Synod, in agreement with Matseevich's review, found that without spoiling the patriotic work, it was impossible to correct it; and to reject Sweden’s cavils, it is necessary to sing an ordinary thanksgiving prayer service on June 27 (Synod, 1745). e) Theophylact was a mentor at the Moscow Academy for a long time. His “sacred science, explained positively and polemically in reasoning consistent with the teachings of St. Eastern Church, based on St. Scriptures, Councils and Fathers”, 1706–1710, contains dogma, moral teaching, and polemics. There is no strict systematic order here. The writer, having proposed a plan, says: “We like this order and we will stick to it.” It is clear that the order is established only by personal discretion, and not by the relation of one thought to another. According to the plan, it is clear that in sacred science there is no correct division between dogmatics and moral teaching; eg the sacraments are classified as moral teaching. His philosophical lessons with the following title: “the three paths of Aristotle, which the Russian Alcides must complete in two years; otherwise three types of philosophies, logic, physics and metaphysics, which are taught under the leadership of Cynthia Jaworski from September 9. 1704." Contents of lessons in East. m. acad. 159–167. f) A report to his synod and a letter to Cabinet Secretary Makarov expressing his desire to serve St. church, in Irkutsk, for the success of faith - in the Orthodox Church. review 1862. The report of the Synod is also there. M. Pushkin Sept. 21, 1718, wrote to Polikarpov: “The sovereign added that Virgil Urbin’s book on the beginning of all inventions has not yet been translated - the book is not big, and so there is delay. Write to Lopatinsky about this.” In another letter he wrote: “Tell Father Lopatinsky to translate the books that were sent to him. And the great sovereign often deigns to remind you why they are not sent for a long time? So as not to induce anger.” The book of Polidor Urbino “about the inventors of things” ed. 1720 g) Theophylact also loved poetry. Oda in laudem operis principis Demetrii Kantemiri systema dicti de religione et statu imperii turcici an. 1719, with the signature: ita cecinit archymandrita Theophilactus scholarum mosquensium rector. The ode consists of 64 Latin verses (J. m. project. 1855. August). His own work: description of the solemn meeting of the Poltava winner: “politicolent apotheosis”, M. 1709 (Golikova XI, 314–316. Tolstoy V. No. 5). Of course, he also composed a comedy: “God’s despisers of the proud are humiliated, with the entry of the Swean forces of the destroyer, through the action of the Academy, a prosperous image of the teachings of Greek, Slavic and Latin,” M. 1710. (Tolstoy No. 225, Rippolt’s album, M. 1850). h) His government order is a strict pastoral indoctrination to the willful abbot - in the Orthodox Church. review 1860 2, 48–50. Mikhail Ivanovich Abramov, 1711–1721 director of the St. Petersburg printing house, 1721–1723. Assessor of the Berg College, 1724–1727 again the director of the printing house, a zealous implementer of the useful thoughts of Peter I. But just as much a strong opponent of the spiritual reform of Peter I. † 1741 a) His note from 1725 in the first part makes unfavorable allusions to Theophan’s catechism and says: “it seems that one must still be holy in Russia. Patriarch." He advises electing parish trustees and, having sent out useful printed notebooks about the faith for teaching the people, to monitor the morality of the people through the trustees. He proposes to review new books, pay attention to priests and monks, and prohibit disputes about faith among the people. “All foreigners of all sects are commanded not to sow their heresies anywhere in Russia and not to attract anyone to their evil faith... Not to be admitted to the highest councils and middle ones - this custom is almost non-existent in other states - we have great boldness and fearlessly, without any fear, our own teachings, the churches of St. the eastern ones are nasty, they will scatter.” – The second part, about love for one’s neighbor, talks about the multiplication of copper coins among the people, promising to support schools and hospitals with the income of minting. Note ed. at 2 hours op. Pososhkova, 273–314. M. 1863; sl. Pekarsky, Science 1, 499–501. b) Project submitted by imp. Anna in 1730, on the management of state affairs, in 27 points. Here the writer, having spoken about the need to cancel the oath written by Theophan, writes: “it is necessary to be in Russia again St. to the patriarch, the most reverent husband, not from the Polish and Little Russian people.” He proposes to revise the recently published church rules and return to “ancient piety.” For this project, the writer was locked up (1732) in the Iveron monastery. Then they entangled him in other matters with denunciations; finally, in 1738, a decree followed: to send Avramov to Siberia and take all his estates to the treasury. The stated guilt is as follows: he did not report to the government about the works of Radyshevsky and the hero. Jonah, - divulged in letters about his imprisonment in the monastery, spoke boldly about the wall paintings of the palace hall (Pekarsky, Science 1, 502-508). c) November 24, 1740, Abramov, returned from Siberia by Anna Leopoldovna, filed an imp. A new note to Elizabeth, where he expressed his thoughts about the transformation of spiritual affairs and wrote: “the spiritual should not follow anywhere except the spiritual court, but according to the spiritual court, deal with them according to the ancient St. church statutes." He proposed to lift the ban on entering monasticism; orders introduced by the spirit. the regulations called harmful, like two new books; finally proposed to restore the patriarchate. The secret chancellery found that Abramov should have been severely punished, but how old he was and he wrote the note, he assured, only out of simplicity, with the desire to say something useful; then let him accept monasticism, so that he does not write another line. (Pekarsky 1, 508–514). 13. Markell (Martin) Radyshevsky, a student of Kiev, in 1718 a “teacher” of the Kyiv collegium, who signed the council’s review of Tsarevich Alexei (Ustryalova Peter, VI, 219, 253), under Theophanes, a judge of the bishop’s house (1724–1725), one of the leading figures against Protestantism, - penetrating the Russian Church at the beginning of the 18th century. Feofan challenged him to fight with himself with his dishonesty: having used church pearls for himself, he sent him as a madman to the Preobrazhensky Prikaz. Then, in 1726, Fr. Markell filed points against Prokopovich, convicting him of Protestantism. - Catherine ordered the council to consider the matter and then announced the remark that she forgives him only out of mercy, so that he would be careful (Reader. General History, 1862, Book 1. Legal Review, 1864). Under Peter II in December 1727, Fr. Marcellus sent a message to the emperor with the following content: “faith is the common and most precious treasure of everyone. Therefore, if anyone dared to insult her, every Christian is obliged in conscience to defend her, without fear of either expulsion or death, even the most severe. In Russia, in 1722, the Nevsky Monastery issued books: an interpretation of the beatitudes of Christ, about dousing, a primer with an interpretation of the commandments... In these books there are the strangest teachings, or better yet, straight Lutheran and Calvinist ones. Meanwhile, the decree ordered that these books be taught in schools, read in churches, and schoolchildren and proteges must study them; after that, it is easy for many to become corrupted by the thoughts of Luther and Calvin... It is also necessary to put the pheatron, a book very dubious and contrary to Orthodoxy, to the test... In the duty of a Christian and a priest, informing your Majesty about this, I humbly ask you to command that the new books be examined at a council of Russian pastors who know well the foundations of St. church, and upon examination of the inconsistencies, condemn.” Theophanes submitted a report to the Synod: the matter concerns the first point before Marcellus; Feb. 16, 1728, at the request of the Synod, Markel was sent from the Preobrazhensky Prikaz to the Synod. Here he announced: the service for peace with Sweden, written by Buzhinsky, is filled with abuse against Tsarevich Alexy. This was received with full attention; the request for a conciliar review of the books remained without consequences; O. Markell remained in custody until the death of Peter II. “The Elder Prisoner Markell” submitted a request to the empress to pay attention to his innocent suffering, and with the request he attached a “notebook on monasticism” as proof that it was not he, but Prokopovich, who was to blame. The request was submitted through confessor Varlaam. But faint hopes for a new reign were soon replaced by horrors. Bironovism appeared. How dare Radyshevsky write against the emperor’s decree in his notebook on monasticism? asked the office. O. Markell replied that he wrote against Prokopovich’s work, since he himself told him that the decree of Jan. 24, 1724, composed by him. Instead of criticizing the notebook, Prokopovich submitted a denunciation to the empress about the conspiracy and, together with Markell, dragged dozens of innocent people into the secret office. O. Markell was locked in a fortress, where he remained until the overthrow of Biron. (Pekarsky, Science under Peter I, 496–498, 503, 504. Spirit of Christ. 1862 Oct.). When imp. Elisaveta Fr. Markell - Archimandrite of Yuryev, then soon in 1742 he was consecrated Bishop of Karelian; but, exhausted by suffering, he died at the end of the same year. “Gloomy passages in the catechism, like the first teaching named by the youth,” - Tolstoy 11, 433. This was submitted as an appendix to the note about Theophanes. It seems that at the same time it was written “about the life of the heretic Feofan Prokopovich” (rkp.). His words: on the Nativity of Christ, M. 1741; another - about fasting, spoken in the court church on March 22. M. 1742; the third - on June 22, against disrespect for saints and non-worship of icons, M. 1742; all three, according to their main ideas, are directed against Protestantism. In the second, he says with consolation that the empress ordered the stone of faith, “their brains (enemies of the faith) and jaws, evil wisdom, crushing, to be released from prison along with the prisoners.” Here, turning to the empress, he says: “quench their bad tongues, close the coffins of their throats, close their lips with a blasphemous tongue; and it’s not bad to remove them from their places.” Demetrius of Paradise, hieromonk and teacher in Moscow. academician, translated in 1738: “the story of the miracle of the icon of St. Mother of God of Iveron" (Tsarsky No. 725). Pyotr Buslaev, student of Moscow. Academy, deacon of the Assumption Cathedral, wrote a poem in syllabic verse, or in his words, “spiritual speculation” on the death of Baroness Martha Y. Strogonova, with notes, St. Petersburg. 1734 “If in Buslaev’s poems,” wrote Tredyakovsky, there was a fall of feet, rising and falling: what could be smoother and smoother than his poems? A sample of Buslaev’s poems is in Novikov’s dictionary. Karamzin wrote: “Buslaev’s poem truly has fiction and smoothness, for example. in the description of Christ many verses are beautiful.” (Pantheon Russian writer). 14. Kirill Florinsky, a student of Kiev, prefect of Kharkov, from 1736 prefect of the Moscow Academy, taught theology here, from 1742 archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra, where he opened a seminary, † 1744 a) “Positive and polemical theology, taught at the Moscow Academy by Kirill Florinsky” in Latin. language (autograph in Moscow Academician No. 243) is distinguished by a strict systematic order. – He begins his theology with the doctrine of religion and St. scripture, which among the scholastics was placed at the end of the system or completely omitted. In the polemical part he often fights against papism, but does not spare Protestantism, guided in the latter case by Yavorsky’s Stone of Faith. He tries not to touch upon scholastic, subtle and useless issues. Eg. he writes: “the opinions of scholastic theologians differ about the way in which angels communicate thoughts to each other: but we do not consider it necessary to consider them in detail, because they have nothing to do with faith.” And yet in other cases he gets carried away by scholasticism and solves the question: is there an act of inference in the mind of God? where were angels created? etc. He himself, following the example of the scholastics, instead of explaining the words of St. Scripture, after which one could see the instruction of revelation about the subject of faith, builds logical structures on an unexamined and misunderstood passage of Scripture, passing them off as dogma. Eg. he writes: “the ideas through which angels know are not perceived by them from objects, but are communicated to them from God at the very moment of creation. This is proven from the 28th chapter of Ezekiel, in which the first angel is called full of wisdom, from whom the day was created (vv. 12, 14).” But a) in the text the words: from him you were created do not at all relate to the words: full of wisdom; b) the writer did not prove in any way that these words refer to the first angel. Be that as it may, the science of. Kirill is far superior to Lopatinsky’s science, both in its systematic harmony and in its less scholasticism in solving problems; in spirit it is as pious as the science of Theophylact. b) In 1741 Fr. Florinsky and Archimandrite. Thaddeus Kakuilovich was entrusted by the Synod with the task of correcting the Slavic Bible. O. Kirill showed his rare intelligence in this matter too. It was reported to the Holy Synod that a) ancient glory. the text is closer to the Alexandrian than to the Vatican text; and it does not seem necessary to deviate from the ancient Slavic text; b) in the Vatican text, according to which amendments have been made recently (§ 24), many verses are missing from the original text and it represents an incomplete Bible. Therefore, the content of the Vatican text does not favor it in preference to the Alexandrian one. – The Holy Synod approved a thorough opinion and thus the erroneous direction of the matter given by Theophan, who in his proposal humiliated the Slavic text and the conscientious work of Theophylact, was corrected. (Right Review 1860 2, 486–501). c) Kirill's sermons: for his birthday. imp. Elizabeth (Dec. 18, 1741) M. 1741, on the week. Vaiy (April 11, 1742), M. 1742 and for the consecration of the church in the Zaikonospassky monastery (July 15) M. 1742 are distinguished by the liveliness of presentation and the power of exposure. In the first of them, the preacher describes Osterman and Minich in harsh terms, calling them selfish destroyers of Russia. (Halakhova Christ., 255, 256). In the word for the consecration of the church, the organs of the Russian government of former times are depicted in the form of traders. Here he speaks about the contemporary state of affairs: “How terrible it is to even think that I won’t last an eight month, when Father Elizabeth is on the throne, and the traders are already switching to foreigners. Strange news! Has Elizabeth been long desired and already hated? How long has Elizabeth been sweet and already bitter in our hearts and lips? Has she revived us for a long time and is life already dangerous for her in the middle of the house?... But if you, sung with malice, are silent about the benevolence of Her Majesty: then you, before the waste and imprisonment, now - returning, and already collected many from Siberia, Irkutsk, Kamchadalia, from many difficult and named countries - but you admit with me that it is not for the sake of reason that the evil servant of the state Elizabeth is bitter, - like gathering the good of the fathers, he does not allow the evildoers any longer, and the father’s house is turned into a house of purchase and a den of robbers.” In the word for the week, Vai, there is a remarkable exposure of the weaknesses of the modern nobility. “The outline of the cross is depicted in the hands of the chirarg, politics is sneering; to come to the house of God, where the publican tears down, where the cry of the faithful opens the heavens and even reaches the throne of God - gout in the legs and the nature of the nobility with the common people does not allow one to stand before God. Even if we tremble at the words of God: whence comes the faithful in us - this is reborn, that the walls of the chambers and churches are burdened with paintings by Esopus and others like him, and - who cry out for our salvation day and night - there is not a half-image in our dwellings; If there is one in India, then the same respect is given to Esopova’s painting.” 15. Ambrose Yushkevich, student and mentor of the Kyiv Academy, from 1736 Bishop of Vologda, from 1740 Archbishop of Novgorod, in the same year he opened a seminary in Novgorod, which he later took care of with fatherly love and for which he left his rich library. In accordance with his will, he was buried (1745) in the porch of the school Anthony's Monastery. a) The Teacher of the Faith left in the RKP. “a thorough demonstration of the differences between the Greek and Roman papal churches.” The content of Ambrose's essay on the papal church: after the preface - the first argument of the purity of Orthodoxy: “our church is a catholic church, and not a Roman one”; 2) The foundation of the church is Christ, not the pope; 3) the true church is everywhere and always – one according to the confession of faith, which is not the case in Rome; 4) the main difference about the eternal procession of St. Spirit; 5) another difference - Jewish unleavened bread; 6) liturgy in the West is spoiled by fiction; 7) Western consecration of the Eucharist does not agree with the idea of ​​the sanctifier the Holy Spirit; 8) deprived the people of the blood of Christ; 9) cleansing fire is an invention; 10) illegally prohibited people from reading St. Scripture; 11) St. The Scripture is read in Latin alone, contrary to the word of God; 12) kissing the papal shoe is an insult to the cross of the Lord. – Let’s write down point 10, which is quite remarkable. “Everywhere the pope is fighting against Christ. Christ speaks in John in ch. 5 tbsp. 10: Test the scriptures. And dad says: don’t read the scriptures. Knowing this, he is consumed by the incessant gnawing of his conscience, lest those whom he seduced into his network, having recognized his deceit and flattery, would not depart from him, and thus he would not come to extreme reproach before the whole world. For this reason, under thunderstorms, St. forbids all worldly people to read eternal oaths. Scripture deprives us of the kind of well-being that only brings joy to the human soul with the promise of eternal blessings in heaven prepared by the death of Christ, and in the hope of receiving them constantly strengthens us, which he does not allow to be done to his own. This clearly shows what kind of spirit he is, this is that he is not for the salvation of human souls. introduces his own definitions, but for his own, God-hating, benefit and self-interest. Our Eastern Orthodox Church, like a real natural mother, provides salvation for all its children. Not only does she never hinder the glory of her Bridegroom, Christ the Savior, but, in addition to what is possible, she gives Christians assistance in this regard; She commands everyone to test the Scriptures with Christ, to read the word of God and always learn from this; Moreover, in order to protect the little-educated ignorant in difficult places from having doubts or falling into the great heresy, I wrote full-saving interpretations and explanations, according to which every Christian, if he only applies diligence, can have complete consolation in temporary life and not lose the promised eternal life. - In these interpretations of Scripture, St. surpassed others more than others. teacher John Chrysostom. Honor his interpretations of the Gospel, of the acts, of the epistles of Paul: everywhere we will see the light and know how he follows Christ. Pastorally he commands everyone to read St. Scripture also condemns the cruelly lazy, rousing them to God. Verb in the moral teaching on the preface of St. Paul in part one: “Whose answer will we also have, below the twelve we will follow the names, below the cohabitant needs without reading St. Scriptures? Having shaken off laziness and sleep, let us take care of our members with all diligence, and here many of us will enjoy the silence in the fear of God that is given to us to correct us, and there we will partake of countless good things.” – In the same preface he teaches: “As they walk in deprivation of light without the right; so, without looking at the Divine Scriptures, they are much forced and often sin, just as they walk in the most cruel darkness. Hence, evil simplicity, from the foolishness of St. Scriptures; Many heresies are destructive, hence the careless life; hence the unworthy of labor. “Let us open our eyes to the radiance of the apostolic verbs, for his tongue and the abundance of other teachings in words shines more than the sun.” b) A preacher who was articulate and spoke the truth freely. His words: on the marriage of Princess Anna to Duke Anton Ulrich (in Latin and Russian. St. Petersburg, 1739); for birthday imp. Elizabeth (18 weeks 1741), M. 1742; on the entry into Moscow (December 22), M. 1742; on the day of coronation, M. 1742; in the village of arch. Mikhail, M. 1742; in the day of thanksgiving for peace with Sweden, M. 1742; on the accession of the imp. Elizabeth to the throne, M. 1743; on July 15, 1744 M. 1744; many others remained in the RKP. The word for December 18 is historically important; the main idea of ​​the word: Elizabeth is destined from above to reign. Developing this idea, the preacher speaks about the deeds of Peter V. and Catherine, about the oppression experienced by Elizabeth after the death of her parents, and finally about her accession to the throne, freeing Russia from cruel enemies. About the latter we read: “They have attacked our Orthodox piety and faith, but in such a way as if they were eradicating not faith, but superstition harmful to Christianity. ABOUT! since so many spiritual people, and especially scientists, were exterminated under such a porch, monks were cut off and tortured!... They all did this in order to completely destroy the Orthodox priesthood in Russia and introduce their own newly invented priestless regime... People who were kind, simple-hearted, well-wishing to the state and very necessary to the fatherland, under various pretexts, were destroyed and ruined, and their equal atheists, unscrupulous robbers, thefts of the state treasury, were very loved, favored and rewarded. Yes, how many hundreds of thousands of clergy and other recruits were recruited! And all of them, almost in vain, for the sake of their spoils and vain self-interest alone, they laid down their heads.... They were here only as a shadow, only in their bodies, but with their hearts and souls outside Russia... All the treasures, all the riches of Russia, acquired through untruth, were sent from Russia overseas.” - In his speech on his entry into Moscow he says: “I ordered the book, the stone of faith, imprisoned in the darkness of ignorance, to be brought into light and released”; it was also needed for the spiritual, “as for example, every skilled craftsman needed tools: a warrior’s weapon, a sailing ship’s helm. They (the enemies) knew that it was not possible to defeat it (the Orthodox faith) except by taking away its defenses, weapons and spiritual sword, that is, the word of God, which preserves and protects the faith. And as they planned, so they did: the finished books were imprisoned in darkness, and others were forbidden to be written under the death penalty... And it already came to this that in one’s Orthodox state it was dangerous to open one’s mouth about one’s faith, in that hour of trouble and persecution one hoped.” “The entire general spiritual order was treated equally with the common people,” the archpastor said in his speech on July 15, 1744, not a single dedication or pastoral character was recognized in it, and for this purpose they appointed pastors and priests themselves, without a proper trial, handing them over to bonds and prisons, to unknown exiles... They rushed brutally to monastic squalor—some were inhumanly tortured, others were cut off and given up as soldiers, others were sent to the ends of the world, and new ones were strictly forbidden to take their places and be tonsured.” c) In 1742, Ambrose, together with Arseniy Matseevich, presented the empress with a proposal for higher church government. The content of the report is as follows: following the extracts of church rules and paternal thoughts, their appendix: “if it seems difficult, according to the spiritual regulations, to leave the titles of the synodal: then although the synod should be done, however, so that, although in a small form, the priesthood of the conciliar, apostolic, eastern church is consistent, that is, having in itself the president of the original bishop, none other than the Moscow one, entitled Moscow and St. Petersburg; the vice-president of the first - a Novgorod bishop, the second - some bishop located near Moscow... But the chief prosecutor and the prosecutor general, as well as the economy of the collegium, have nothing to do here: because of necessity, it is done that in the synod there are secular chief secretaries and secretaries. According to the true church order, those too should be clergy, hieromonks or monks. Since then, no other cases are judged and carried out here, only priesthood and rites and monasticism; Legal and illegal marriages and cases of conscience are also judged. What is there to look at or analyze about such things for the Chief Prosecutor or another secular person who does not have initiation or does not have the power to decide and bind?.. In the Synodal Assembly today not only bishops, but also archimandrites and archpriests, as well as the Chief Prosecutor and Chief Secretaries, are included - and the Holy Synod or the Supreme Hierarch touches all the titles. If, God forbid, in our former times, which in our eyes were not long ago, the regent or generalissimo with Osterman had established themselves; who would dare to argue with them when they put one or two of their pastors in the synod? So what should we do? Under the title of Holiness, they would hide under the sheep’s skin, true wolves, for the ultimate destruction of our piety.” – In the same 1742, Blessed. Ambrose presented a report to the Empress about the unrest and predation of the College of Economy and the need to close it. In 1744, we presented a report on measures to weaken the schism. (Demidova No. 659, 660). It is said here: “His Majesty the Emperor, of highly glorious memory, deigned to accept the intention that the spiritual government would again be left under the single rule of the patriarch or metropolitan, so that church government and teaching for the glory of God would best take place... But that His Majesty’s decree for fulfillment did not reach the cause of his death.” Then it is said that the schismatics are most defended by the fact that the synodal government is “taken from a single Protestant model.” The last review is not correct in relation to the church, which from the very beginning was governed by councils. Composed blessed. Ambrose wrote the rules and staff for the Novgorod seminary. at 1 o'clock. Hier. 596–603, 1807 16. Joseph Volchansky, rector of Kiev, from 1727 Archimandrite Nikolsky, from 1735 Bishop of Belarus, from 1742 Archbishop of Moscow († 1745). He owns the tractatus de incarnatione verbi divini, anno 1726, mense septem. inchoatus. List of treatise in b. Chernigov Seminary. In the Nezhin monastery his tractatus theologicus tertii anni de ultimo fine beatitudine hominis, an. 1727 trad. (Msc.). The title of the entire system: theologia christiana universa, pro diversitate materiarum in varios tractatus, disputationes et quaestiones divisa. The introduction states: “We will divide all theology into treatises and discourses. This year, following Thomas (Aquinas), we will talk about God, one in essence and threefold in persons and about angels. We will show you later what our further discussion will be about.” – From these words it is clear that on the one hand Fr. Joseph, following the example of Prokopovich, divides the system into treatises; on the other hand, he adheres to Thomas Aquinas, in other words, scholasticism, which Prokopovich shunned. This is a struggle between a new method and an old one, a struggle justified by an unfavorable opinion about Prokopovich. - Complaint from Rev. Joseph on the oppression of the Orthodox by papism - from B.-Kamensky. Afanasy Topolsky, archimandrite and rector of Kharkov 1740–1743, known by two words: per week. 7 after Easter, M. 1742; for the transfer of the relics of blessings. book Alexander Nevsky (Aug. 30), M. 1742. The latter speaks of the merits of Peter the Great. and about the change that followed with the accession of Elizabeth, who removed from the throne “alien milkmen who drained Russia itself of blood.” 17. Nikodim Selliy, a Dane, in whom Buddha’s lessons aroused distrust of Lutheranism, 1734–1737 teacher of the Neva Seminary, at confirmation Nikolai, and in monasticism Nicodemus († 1746). He studied the history of Russia and especially the Russian church with ardent love. His works: Schediasma de scriptoribus politicis et ecclesiast. historiae Russiae. Revaliae 1736; published in Russian translation by M. 1815 under the title: “a catalog of writers who, with their writings, explain civil and church Russian history.” This is where Cellius lives. The historical mirror of Russian sovereigns, written in Latin verse, is placed in the Russian translation in Ancient. Vivliof. 1.116. Sellia's work Russorum hierarchia libri quinque was included in part 1. East. Russian hierarchy. M. 1807; A dictionary of miraculous icons and several notes are in the RKP. Petersburg D. Academy. Vasily Frolov, one of the deacons who converted to Orthodoxy, wrote a lengthy “reproach to schismatics” in 1736. (Instruction on Contesting with Schism, p. 21). The Rumyantsev Museum now houses “a church justification written by a certain civilian, always practicing as a merchant,” from the first half of the 18th century (J. m. enlightenment, 1864, part 48). 18. Rafail (Mikhail) Zaborovsky, a student of Kiev, who completed his education at the Moscow Academy, where he was also a teacher, from 1725 Bishop of Pskov, from 1731 Archbishop and then Metropolitan of Kiev, glorified himself with his piety and concern for improving the teaching and economic life of the Kyiv Academy († 1747). A contemporary, speaking with delight about his virtuous life (“wonderful in his non-acquisitiveness, often, due to his failure to withstand the demands of his fines, borrowed from his servants”), writes: “he is famous in the art of rhetoric; in sermons he is gracious, glorious and eloquent; the people in Chrysostom’s sermon.” (Kyiv diocesan history, 1861, p. 484). Unfortunately, his sermons remained unpublished; indicate only two, print. M. 1735. His word on the day of the Circumcision of the Lord, preached on January 1. 1729, published in Proceedings of Kyiv. spirit. acad. 1866. His instructions for the academy ed. in Askochensky (Kyiv. Acad. 2, 102–108). His correspondence with Markevich is in the review of the Gamaleevsky monastery (Chern. 1863). 19. Vasily Grigorovich-Barsky, in his own words, studied at the Kyiv Academy “before the beginnings of philosophy,” despite the fact that his father told him that science leads to excessive debate, love of fame, pride and envy. A leg illness forced him to leave the academy. One of the Kyiv students, student Linitsky, went to Poland, “to the city of Lvov, for the sake of completing higher sciences; “Being jealous,” he says, “I wanted to leave with him, also for the sake of guilt, and especially for the sake of healing my leg, having heard that there were skilled doctors there.” Grigorovich stayed at the Lvov Academy for no more than a year, constantly being insulted by Uniates and Papists. In 1724, at the 23rd year of his life, he went “to wander through foreign lands,” first to Rome, then to Athos and to the east. And he spent 24 years wandering. This is a traveler, of which there are few. With a warm sense of faith, he sets out on foot, and no matter what obstacles, needs, or dangers he encounters, he lives in hope in the Lord. He endures abuse and beatings, but does not give up his good intentions; in the wild desert, in the vicinity of animals, he falls asleep calmly, not thinking about whether he will have food tomorrow. The illness exhausts him on the road to Antioch, he is exhausted; but in the mountains he encounters ruins and a cross with the inscription: “the cross rises for those who fall” - and this is enough for him to forget his sorrows. From Athos he went to Palestine, meeting its patriarch Chrysanthos on the way to Chios. He lived in Egypt for almost two years and enjoyed the favors of the village of Kozma. Having visited Mount Sinai, he passed through Jerusalem to Syria, where he spent two years (1734–1735) at the Tripolis school and was tonsured a monk. Antiochus. Patr. Sylvester, pressed by Roman propaganda, valued Vasily: but Barsky went to the shores of the Archipelago and lived on Patmos for six years. In 1743, resident Nik was summoned to Constantinople. Vishnyakov, the one who translated from Greek in 1745. syntagma (printed in Tergovist 1715) “about thrones and ranks” Greek. Church (Tsarskogo No. 745). Treated and provided with everything he needed, Barsky, at the request of Vishnyakov, went to Mount Athos and, after staying there for about a year, examined Greece: but upon returning to Constantinople, due to troubles, he was forced to go to Russia and 6 weeks after arriving in Kyiv he died in 1747. Barsky's travel notes circulated from hand to hand for a long time. Rev. Simon Todorsky and Rev. Ambrose, Archbishop of Moscow, wanted to publish them, but did not have time. Potemkin instructed Ruban to review the lists and publish them at his expense. Ruban published them, with several omissions and with his own corrections in the syllable, in St. Petersburg. 1778 under the title: “Pedestrian Vasily Barsky’s journey to holy places.” Then they were published: St. Petersburg. 1788, 1793, 1806, 1819; M. 1847; in Klintsy in 1788. The worst edition was 1800, and the best in terms of the beauty of the letters and the purity of the print was 1793. For Barsky’s drawings, see Note. Odessk total 1844, pp. 649–651. B b. Tsarsky’s own handwritten, but incomplete, original of his wanderings and with him 8 letters from Grigorovich to his parents and brother, 7 letters to him, 12 passports and documents in different languages ​​(No. 601, 602). Barsky's notes are distinguished by the accuracy of a statistician, the impartiality of a sage, and the mature judgments of a Christian; and the warmth of sincere piety that animates them gives them fascinating entertainment. He notices travel distances, the height and width of buildings, the time of events, the morals of the inhabitants; He especially describes in detail churches, church celebrations and priests. customs. Almost the entire second volume is devoted to a description of Mount Athos. Here he depicts both the customs of that time and the past life of Athos. Sinai and Lebanon, the ruins of Palestinian cities, are described in less detail, but clearly. Where he could, to explain the past and present, he used Greek works and obtained for himself the rarest manuscripts to make extracts from them. No matter how much he values ​​​​every review of antiquity, he does not blindly believe everything that is told to him, but trusts him with considerations of reason and faithful monuments of antiquity; against superstition he always has the testimony of St. scriptures and stories. This is not like the contemporary Western pilgrim who repeats fables with scant meaning. Here is something from the description of Patmos. “On this island there is not a single Hagarene or Turk, only Orthodox Christians of the same faith. They don’t have different villages, but they all live together in one village, which is as great as a city and stands in a beautiful place, on a single high mountain in the middle of the island, where many churches are beautiful with stone-built domes, sculptured inside, and every church has one bell or two... The essence of churches is in this residence, like 50; also in these mountains and on the crossroads, hills, vineyards and mountain towns; They say that throughout this island there are churches, small and great, about 300 or more, each of them has their own church, either from their ancestors or built by their own money: they are church-loving to the point. The essence is a certain nerdy householder, from whom a certain person has five or more churches built from generation to generation; but there are few great churches, everywhere there are few and simply built... The building is like a chapel or a chapel. In those small and distant ones they do not often celebrate liturgy, only once or twice a month; the whole singing is not performed, perhaps once a year, on the occasion of a feast of a certain church, or if someone on occasion makes a promise of worship and if, having taken one with him from the priest, he leaves and hesitates even until the morning; Having also created a whole church chant and recited it, he returns to the house... The essence of those houses is like 500, which are molded and strong in building... There is an island naked, with few fields, just like all the mountains are stone, dry and treeless, and it bears few gardens from the tree and from seeds; everything else is brought from other islands around. They are also often embittered by the sea robbers: in both cases they suffer little, for during persecution they are confined to a monastery, which stands in the middle of the village, has solid walls and the gates are covered with iron.” 20. Anthony Narozhnitsky, governor of the Sergius Lavra, since 1742 Metropolitan of Siberia, founder of the 6th class of the Tobolsk Seminary, was also jealous of the spread of Christianity among the pagans and Mohammedans of Siberia, † 1748. His word spoken on August 4. in the Sergius Lavra, printed. M. 1742 Ioannikiy Skabovsky, rector of Tver, word for 32 weeks. after the descent of the Holy Spirit (Nov. 14). M. 1742 21. Grigory Yakovlev, in his own words, baptized in Novgorod, then, together with his parents and relatives, was rebaptized in the Danilov Vygoretsky monastery; in the cell of the registrant Trifon Petrov (§ 77) he studied grammar and rhetoric, and especially studied icon painting; the latter brought him a good income; after a long stay on Vyga he lived in Staraya Russa, walked around Livonia, Courland and Poland; lived in Moscow for quite some time. Here I tried to reconcile the talkers; here, after heated debates about prayer for the king, about the Antichrist and rebaptism, I began to see that the hatred of the fanatics of the schism against the church was unfair. Here and on Vyge, he tried to convince others of the justice of his convictions, both in words and on paper. But the mentors forbade him to listen. A painful struggle began in his soul, which lasted three years. Finally, after the death of his father, he himself appeared in St. synod with petitions to accept him into St. church. “The test of schismatic opinions and the confession of the one conciliar true and Orthodox Church, together with the righteous notice of the schism of the priestless, in the summer of 1748, unhypocritical and pure before the Lord God of the many sinner Grigory Yakovlev.” This is a whole book of 85 sheets. with a lot of very interesting information. a) Preface about the origin of the schism, about the opinions of Avvakum, about schismatic views, about the opinions of priestless people, about Danilovism (with a map of the monasteries). Here he writes: “having imagined himself to die a death equal to the saints, with the torment and burdens of his soul, his monster; having imagined with foreknowledge, like a saint, to die, appearing suddenly and accidentally dying. Namely, in part: their leader, Andrei (Denisov), was suddenly infected with mortal fire at the head, as if his tongue had turned black because of it, and so, having suffered through the night, he died. Simeon, his brother, is tormented for a long time by internal illnesses and headaches, after which both passages are weakened, stinking and dying...” (2-24). b) Petition addressed to the Empress (24–26). c) Petition of St. Synod, with a lengthy denunciation of schismatic errors (27–37). Having shown that priestlessness does not have any of the seven sacraments, he writes: “It is not the unity of the church that is blessed by its contents, but is numerously fragmented by different sections, and their number is even up to fifty sections or more. Namely: In Danilovism, these are the rumors: Andreev, Semenov, Trifonov, Mikhailov Vitatina, Danilov iconographer, Zakharov Puilov, Pakhomov the elder, Varlaamov Verkhovsky, another Varlaamov of Moscow, Levanidov the elder, Sergius the elder, Leontyev Fedoseeva, Mokeev Gavrilova, Gavrilov Semenova, Fedorov Kalinnikova, Markellov Kalinnikova, Ivanov Guseva, Dmitriev Kozlozera, mediocre between the Vygoretskys and Zabolotskys, are newlyweds of duality, some with all people for one thing, and others with no one. In Filipovshchina (these impostors are the old Danilov false teaching containing) rumors: Terentyev, Matfeev, Filaretov, Andreev, Mikhailov, Koretya, Martynov Mednicha, Evdokiin elders, Paraskovin girls, nicknamed Gostin, Dvinskaya, Mezenskaya, mediocre between the Zabolotskys and Vygoretskys, nozozhons dual. In Ladozhans (non-rebaptized people on Vygu) there are rumors: Alexandrov, Fedoseev of the iconography, Vasiliev Samsonova, Naumov, Fedoseev of the other, Kudrin of the elder, Savostyanov, Ionin Dyakonova, dual new-wives. In Fedoseevism (in Staraya Rus’ they had their beginning) there are rumors: Evstratov, Savinov, Ignatov, Ivanov Bedra, Filimonov in Courland, Samopekreshchevanites, ambivalent New Zhons, Harateinists, those like them buy from the priests of memory.” “All these four agreements - they don’t want to eat, drink, or pray together: ole glory-loving arrogance! below, and those who died who do not agree with themselves are ordered to remember whom.” d) “Another special repentance for oneself and for other similar non-concealment of St. Synod" (38–85). After a story about himself (34–44), he speaks about Danil Vikulin (45, 46), about Andrei Denisov: “he was a townsman from Povenets, he was taught to be a schism from his youth from his father Denis,” although he preached a common life, he collected money for himself, under the name of cell servants, and lived quite cheerfully; one of his three concubines escorted him to the next world, giving him the potion he asked from the sorcerer (47, 48); - about Semyon Denisov (48), about Trifon Petrov (he participated in the composition of answers to Neophytos, 49), about Gavril and Nikifor Semenov (50, 51), about Manuil Petrov (51, 52, he is with Andr. Denisov wandered around Russia, studied grammar and rhetoric, took an active part in answering Neophytos); about imaginary relics, about stolen and false shrines (the old man Euthym stole icons from villages and, having baked wheat bread, sold them under the guise of old communion); about alms collectors (53–55); about magicians, about obvious fornicators (56–59); about self-immolators (57, 58); about the icon painters who transported icons and books to the schismatic (58, 59); about children, about false names (60, 61); about the works of Andrei Denisov, Semyon Denisov, Trifon Petrov, Danila Matveev (62–65); ways to convert schismatics in Suzemye (66–69). Here, among other things, he writes: “many times I have heard people there wishing to see newly published books, but not receiving them, many times forbidden by their false teachers to desire and hear them, so that their untruths would not be known, but they often say these things among themselves. If the Lord had not condescended to us through our generous giving, then long ago our spirit would not have breathed on the earth.” About Fedoseevism (70–73): the chief sexton of Vyshnevolotsk, Fedos Vasiliev, who was seduced in 1690, wandered through the Novgorod and Pskov districts for 10 years, acquired up to 3,000 followers, including the nobleman Negonovsky. The latter obtained a decree from Prince Menshikov with permission to live freely on Rapina Manor. Monasteries for men and women with churches and a population of up to 2000 souls soon formed here. But “many atrocities in them, both obvious and secret, are intolerable to either the royal or the church ears.” Therefore, some of the villains were executed, all the others fled. False teachings of the Theodosians: 1) now is the time of Antichrist; 2) because there is no grace or sacraments in the church; 3) those baptized in the church - rebaptize and not pray for the king; 4) do not bow to icons painted by schismatics of other consents; purify food purchased at auction with prayer; grain and grape wine is bad; 5) only in their consent are consecrated Easter cakes and kutia sacred; but the Eucharist is nowhere to be found; 6) at baptism and rebaptism, wear stole and armlets, also at burial; 7) “It is not shameful to have cohabitation with strangers’ wives and girls; and if bad life happens, food is not forbidden; for girls who have given birth, go as girls, even with babies, even if you keep fifty takas, but don’t get married; You can repent of that and be like a virgin”; 8) it is permissible to buy from priests certificates of existence at confession and communion; and if someone takes communion out of need, let him perform prostrations for 60 days; 9) accept those executed for schism and self-immolation as martyrs; 10) books composed by their teachers: a sacred scroll, another - answers collected by Theodosius Vasilyev, an objection to the Pomeranians about the title, notebooks with evidence of 70 heresies in the Russian Church - to be kept secret (RKP. Chernig. seminary). Yakovlev's information about Fedosey and the Rapinsky manor complements the search for them, for example. Esipov (Schismatic affairs, 18th table. St. Petersburg, 1861, pp. 87–103). About the Pomeranians, when comparing Yakovlev’s news, not only do intentional lies in Filippov’s story about the Vygoretsk cinnovia be revealed, but the information obtained by Kruglov’s search and Samarin’s search is largely supplemented (by Esipov, ibid., pp. 414–501, 356–410, 534–643); Neither Kruglov nor Samarin has a word about the sects that separated the Pomeranians from one another. 22. Stefan Levitsky, priest of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, was worthily famous for his gift of speech. His words: on August 8th. and 24 Oct. 1742 (M. 1742) and the third on November 25. 1743 (M. 1743). In the latter, the affairs of Peter V are described vividly and in almost Russian language. The speaker begins: “remember the beginning of Peter’s times; “Remember what Russia was like then? Remember how weak and despicable Russia was then!” – Then he enumerates the institutions of Peter the Great. Discharge to Letop. rus. lit. 1859 27, 28. Antipa Martinianov, Moscow priest. Archangel Cathedral, known by the word for August 16. 1742; in his words he quite successfully exposes the modern customs of the secular world. “With such a multitude of slaves and slaves coming, serving for a single moment - in this life with fragrant ointments, precious powders, various alcohols, we anoint our body, anoint our faces and rub our hands, so that not only those who are close, but also those standing far away joyfully flow, one accelerates one before the other, but although feignedly, they both smell with the most desirable desire, they smell fragrant and, as it were, delightfully praise, with solemn words they elevate and are flatteringly surprised.” Stefan Savitsky, a Nizhyn native, a Kiev student, in the rank of deacon, spoke at court the words: on July 4, 1742 (St. Petersburg 1742), on the 18th week after the descent of St. Spirit, about fasting, St. Petersburg. 1743 for 31 weeks, St. Petersburg. 1743 Sumarokov writes about him: “Deacon Savitsky adorned the court cathedra and was little revered or, moreover, persecuted by the ignorant, left the diaconate and sermons.” The appearance of preachers—deacons and priests—requires explanation. In the decree of the Synod of November 19. 1739, the Moscow Academy was ordered: “Moscow priests and deacons who studied at the Academy should preach sermons on major holidays and highly solemn days, and on Sundays at least once a month, so that they do not forget the teachings. The rector and prefect and teachers are responsible for this and report to the office of the synodal board. However, it is not clear that preachers opened their mouths in front of Anna. Only under the good Elizabeth did even the priests begin to speak freely in the pulpit. The best words of Elizabeth's time were probably published at the behest of the empress. This must also be assumed because printed sermons indicated not only the time of delivery, but also the day of printing. Eg. word Af. Topolsky on May 30, 1742, printed on July 2; Narozhnitsky's word on August 4. 1742 printed August 31st. And how many words were printed, especially in the first years of Elizabeth! G. Popov, who deliberately revised the sermons of her time, saw 48 words from 1741 and 1742 and 14–1743, 15–1744, 3–1745, 6–1746, 4–1747, one – 1748, 10–1749, 6–1750, 4–1751, one each for 1752–1754 Although this calculation is not completely correct in reality, it is nevertheless certain that a) the largest number of printed sermons belongs to the years 1741, 1742 and 1743, including one sermon - op. Deacon Flerov, one each - priests Ioan. Zmilevsky, Ioann Komarovsky, Pyotr Grebnevsky, Mikhail Krasilnikov; b) it is also true that after 1743, not a single sermon by either a deacon or a priest was published under Elizabeth. Why is this so? It is unlikely that the act of Savitsky, who threw off the priest. rank, was not the reason that they no longer wanted to see preachers of deacons and priests in the press. Then such an act deeply offended both the people and the clergy. 23. Ambrose Dubnevich, a student of the Kyiv Academy, 1727–1730 its prefect, 1731–1737 rector and the first of its rectors, archimandrite of the fraternal monastery; from 1739 archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra; from 1742 Bishop of Chernigov; introduced the teaching of philosophy at the Chernigov seminary († 1750). His notes on theology are distinguished by the fact that he was the first to introduce a special treatise on the decalogue and the Gospel law, while before him neither Theophan nor his successors taught moral theology at all (Ist. Kyiv Acad. 137); in the Chernigov seminary his tractatus theol. de Deo uno in personis trino (Msc.). In the Nezhin monastery, philosophia peripathetica by Ambrose Dubnevich (Msc). He took part in the compilation of the statute of Lithuanian and Magdeburg law, as a result of their will. Peter II. His pastoral letter, written. during a lack of rain, for example. in the Review of Chernigov. hierarchy, p. 85. Markovich, speaking about the Empress’s visit to Glukhov (August 6, 1744), writes: “the Bishop of Chernigov congratulated Her Majesty at the gate” with a speech; “Then the empress deigned to walk on foot to the maiden monastery, where she listened to mass and the predicate of the Chernigov bishop.” (Notes 2, 210). Alexy Titov, from 1713 Bishop of Tver, from 1719 of Vyatka, and from 1733 Archbishop of Ryazan, by the grace of Theophan in 1735, he heard condemnation in the church for the fact that the Ryazan people sent a petition to honor him with the Novgorod see, occupied by the sick Theophan († 1750). His touching spiritual letter from Vozdvizhensky in East. Ryazan Hierar., pp. 252–257. 24. Stefan Kalinovsky, prefect of Kyiv and Moscow. academies, since 1733 rector of the latter; from 1736, Archimandrite of the Neva Lavra, who established a school in it; from 1739 Bishop of Pskov, and from 1745 Archbishop of Novgorod († 1753). Preacher: for the New Year, St. Petersburg. 1742; on January 17, M. 1742; on February 13, M. 1742; on November 25, M. 1742; on July 3 and September 14. 1743 (M. 1743); in the Thanksgiving Day for Peace, M. 1744; on April 25, M. 1744; on thesis. them. Elizabeth, M. 1744; on the crown, by them. Elizabeth, M. 1746; on thesis. Empress, September 15, M. 1747, on September 5, M. 1749. A total of 12 words were printed. Many other sermons remain in the RKP. In the word on December 18. spoke about Elizabeth: “even then, as her blessed and eternally worthy of memory parents settled into the eternal kingdom, many-formed, unbearable dirty tricks from their unscrupulous subjects courageously endured; Even then, I was driven to the monastery by all-evil people; what she eats, what she drinks, what she does, where she goes, with whom she talks, she is supervised by vigilant spies, she did not lose heart, she did not become exhausted, she was not faint-hearted.” On behalf of the synod, Rev. Since 1736, Stefan was in charge of the printing of the corrected Slavic Bible and, at the same time, the new verification of the translation with the Greek text. The Pentateuch and subsequent books before Tobit were printed the following year, and all amendments were printed in a special, small font and under the line. The amendments, in accordance with Theophan’s opinion, were made according to the Vatican text of the Polyglot. In 1738, he proposed to the synod his perplexities: the book of Tobit had been translated and corrected according to the Vulgate, as well as the 3rd book of Ezra, which is not in Greek: should not the text of Tobit be printed in two columns, one of which would contain the ancient Slavic text, and the other would contain the corrected one? The Synod approved the proposal. But at the beginning of 1741, Rev. Stefan abandoned the revision of the Bible, attending to many other matters, and presented to the synod that it was much more profitable to print the Bible in Moscow than in St. Petersburg. They agreed with his opinion. Joseph of Orange, a pupil of Kyiv., archimandrite of Slutsk, in 1742–1747, by trust of St. Synod interceded in Warsaw for Orthodoxy, from 1748 Archimandrite of the Pechersk Lavra, † Oct. 8, 1751 Precious for history, his correspondence about the violence suffered by Orthodoxy in Poland, with attached reports from various persons, is printed. to Chernigov. diocesan Izv. 1862. Inscription on silver. the royal doors of the great oven. churches - in Description. Kyiv. laurels, pp. 207, 208. 25. Platon Malinovsky, a student of Kiev, Moscow prefect, Kharkov rector, in 1730 he was appointed archimandrite of the Pechersk Lavra, but entered the synod; at the end of 1732, for being on the side of the book: The Stone of Faith, he was put on trial, and in 1738, at the same time as Theophylact, he was deprived of monasticism and exiled to Kamchatka with the worldly name of Paul. (Orthodox Review 1862, 194–198). When imp. Elizabeth, at the request of Bishop Innocent, was appointed a teacher at the Irkutsk seminary, and then the rank of hieromonk was returned to him, with an appointment as rector of some Moscow monastery. He himself asked to be retired to the Kyiv Lavra for solitary prayer (Right Review 1860 2:82); but at the same time in 1742 he was consecrated Bishop of Krutitsky: from 1748 he was Archbishop of Moscow, † 1754 His words: per week. 2 after the descent of the Holy Spirit (June 20), M. 1742; for the imp's name day. Elizabeth (Sept. 5), M. 1744; for the emperor's birthday Elizabeth (Dec. 18), M. 1745; on September 5, M. 1746; on the day of the accession of the Emperor. to the throne, M. 1747; on your birthday empress, M. 1752. His letter to the empress in March 1748, in which due to illness he refuses the Moscow see offered to him, - in Orthodox. review for Apr. 1862 Innocent (Jacob) Paskevich, originally from Belarus, teacher of Hebrew at Sergius Seminary, hierodeacon, then hieromonk and in 1753 cellarer of the Lavra, known for two sermons: on the day of crepe. Sergie, M. 1747, and in the Trinity Cathedral on December 8, M. 1750. In the latter he says: “We hear, and we hear with a joyful heart, that our natural monarch has ascended to her father’s throne, and more than three hundred thousand have already joined our true Church.” - And to whom can we lament this, if not the mother of the fatherland? She leaves them her tribute until the time comes, and gives them as an eternal tribute to her Master Christ. He gives vestments from himself, so that with them they will put on Christ.”... Speaking about the duty of Christians to return the lost from the perilous path, he writes; “What is it that in our present years has inspired many to travel and flock to the tomb of the great Father Sergius, if not for the example of Elizabeth? Even with your feet, which is the customary way to walk to the throne, you have walked a long way to this saint more than once. And a wonderful thing! Those who previously did not even want to behold the relics of God’s saints, much less bow their heads before them, now flow with great reverence on foot to bow to the Radonezh miracle worker. He had such admirers in the year 1944, he had them and marveled at them, and from the wines and the very walls of his business the walls were amazed at this.” In the word on September 25th. says: “Now when they heard Elizabeth sitting on the throne, the Greeks, Transylvanians and other peoples of the same mind with us came in, and who left them? Transylvania boasts, Sinai and other places with it are not silent, as if from the current of its bounty there was a coolness.” 26. Simon Todorsky, after finishing his studies at the Kyiv college, spent 10 years at various universities abroad; upon returning to Russia, mentor at the academy; according to the inscription on his Belogorod portrait, “from the archimandrite of Ipata, the first was consecrated bishop of Kostroma; This wise and holy man enlightened and glorified the Kyiv Academy with the teaching of eastern languages ​​and the reading of the Holy Scriptures; he knew the Hebrew, Syrian, Chaldean, Arabic, Greek, Latin and German languages ​​completely; former teacher and confessor in. K. Peter Feodorovich and his wife c. K. Ekaterina Alekseevna"; since 1745, archpastor of Pskov and member of the synod, died Feb. 21, 1754 a) Orientalist philologist who enjoyed European fame; but his works on Eastern literature remain in the Russian Communist Party. Academy of Sciences. Rudimenta linguae graecae, auctore hieromonacho Symone Todorski – in Chernigov, seminary (Msc,). Abroad, he translated from German the work of John Arndt on true Christianity, ed. in Halle 1735, for the publication of which the imp. Anna 600 rubles; The following were translated and published there: “the teaching on the beginning of Christian life” - by an unknown author; "Anastasia the preacher's guide to knowing the suffering of the Savior." These books, as published without the permission of the synod, were banned by decree of the empress in 1713. But the first of these works was subsequently published more than once in Russia. (Bibliography, 1858, pp. 12–45). b) As a preacher, he enjoyed respect even then, as he interpreted the so-called great instructions in Kyiv on Sundays and holidays. His words are known: on February 10, M. 1743; word on marriage in. K. Peter Feodorovich with Ekaterina, M. 1745, where he depicts God’s special care for the royal house of the Romanovs; for birthday Empress Elizabeth (Dec. 18), M. 1746; on the day of the Emperor's accession to the throne. Elizabeth (November 25), M. 1747. Others remain in manuscript. In the word for February 10. said: “The ministers excluded the Russian high priests from their affairs so as not to ask them about this, where the righteous heir to the All-Russian throne would be born after the Most Serene Elizabeth. This is exactly what the decree printed by the Senate on October 18, 1740 says: then the regent (Biron) must, in advance of the Cabinet Ministers and the Senate and the Field Marshals and other generals, take utmost care in establishing the inheritance and, by mutual agreement with them, elect and approve a successor for the All-Russian Empire. But the presence of the poor high priests is not mentioned.” (Letop. Russian literature. 1859, p. 26). Simon's last word, now rare, was recently found in the archives of the Academy of Sciences and praised by him. book Petru Feod. printed to Record. acad. Ill, 268–264. According to Novikov RKP. Simon's words - in imp. library. Joasaph Gorlenko, a student of the Kyiv college, abbot of Igara, zealous archpastor of Belgorod († 1754). About his pastoral works, see Historical-statistician, description of the Kharkov diocese, pp. 12–25. M. 1852; his word at 25 weeks. fifty M. 1742 Gideon (Grigory) Antonsky, son of a Cossack of the Krolevets hundred, a student of the Kharkov college, since 1738 a teacher in Moscow. academy, 1744–1753 rector Kharkov. His words: per week. 21 after the descent of St. Spirit (Oct. 31), M. 1742; on the day of the meeting of the Vladimir icons (May 21), M. 1744 Ioann Evdokimov, a teacher at the Tver seminary, in 1754 wrote a biographical catalog of Tver archpastors, which is especially important for the information about Theophylact Lopatinsky. 27. Platon Petrunkevich, a student of Kiev, teacher of the law of the cadet corps, since 1740 archimandrite of Sevsky, since 1748 bishop of Vladimir and member of the synod. He opened a seminary in Vladimir, for which he ordered scientists from Kyiv († 1757). His words: at the Transfiguration of the Lord, M. 1742; at 15 weeks M. 1742; for the Poltava victory, M. 1743; upon the return of the Empress from Kyiv, M. 1745; for the New Year, M. 1746; on the day of the accession of the imp. Elizabeth to the throne, M. 1746; in d.ap. Andrey. M. 1746. John Kozlovich, a graduate of Kiev, from 1748 prefect, then rector of Moscow. academician and archimandrite of the Don Monastery, since 1753 bishop of southern Pereyaslavl († 1757). a) His words: on June 27, 1742, in the presence of the Empress, M. 1742, about which see history. Moscow acad., pp. 121, 122, M. 1855; for the New Year, M. 1749 b) Known from the RKP. his philosophy, “expounded according to Aristotle,” where at the end one reads Efik. Although he adheres to the principles of Aristotle, the philosophy of Descartes and Leibniz has already displaced many scholastic subtleties from his system. 28. Manasiya Maksimovich, rector of the Kyiv Academy († 1758). His treatise in Latin on the difference between the Roman and Greek churches, ed. in Breslavl 1754. By hand. His words are known, for example. per day vkm. Barbarians. His treatise on teaching science in Askochensky 2, 161–165. Theodosius Amorzhevsky, archimandrite of Bryansk and missionary in Beijing († 1758). History of the Beijing mission to the RCP; - extracts from it in the Siberian Bulletin. St. Petersburg 1818 29. Joasaph Khutuntsevich, 1743–1750 Kamchatka missionary, 1754–1757 rector of Moscow. Academician, from 1757 Bishop of Kexholm († 1759). a) The Word of the Ascension of the Lord. M. 1742 b) “The power of divine teaching” or catechism for those turning to faith (Demidov bibliography No. 580). 30. Hilarion Grigorovich, a student of the Kiev Academy, to which he subsequently donated his rich library (historical Kiev academician 133), the first prefect of the Kharkov collegium, from 1748 Bishop of Krutitsy, known for his pious life on Krutitsy († 1760). a) Participated in correcting the Slavic Bible. b) His words: per week. 6 after Easter, M. 1742; for the new year, M. 1747; on thesis. imperial Elizabeth M. 1748; for the same celebration in 1749, M. 1749. Varlaam Skamnitsky, from 1739 archimandrite of the Chudov Monastery and member of the synod, from 1743 bishop of Vyatka, from 1749 of Great Ustyug († 1760). His word for the New Year 1743, M. 1744. Gravestone for the burial of P.K. Khlebnikov, St. Petersburg. 1744 Lavrenty Yasinsky, 1744–1745 preacher of the Moscow Academy, from 1746 archimandrite of Nizhny Novgorod. His word for 29 weeks is known. according to Pentecost 1745 (General History No. 219). Nikolai Nikitich Popovsky, a student of the theological seminary and academic gymnasium, who listened to Lomonosov at the latter, the first professor of Russian literature at Moscow University, who also read philosophy, died at the age of 30, † 1760. In his works he is a philosopher, an orator and a poet. In a speech “on the benefits and importance of theoretical philosophy,” M. 1755, presenting philosophy with an image of the church of the universe, spoke about atheists: “they have nothing to imagine theology; for they do not recognize God, neither do they recognize theology and St. they reject Scripture... Who else can bring such desperate people to their senses? Just one philosophy. She refutes the false evidence of atheists and, considering only one nature and reasoning that nothing can exist through itself, forces them to admit that there is a certain Being from whom all creation has its existence and existence.” Then he talks about the difficulty of science and invites it to be expressed in Russian. “The age of philosophy did not end with Rome; she will not renounce speaking with all the peoples of subsequent centuries in their language; we cause her great shame and insult when we think that she cannot interpret her thoughts in any language other than Latin. Before she spoke with the Greeks, the Romans lured her away from Greece; She adopted the Roman language in a very short time and reasoned with innumerable beauty in Roman, as not long before in Greek. – Can’t we also expect similar success in philosophy as the Romans had?.. As for the abundance of the Russian language, the Romans cannot boast of that to us. There is no thought that cannot be explained in Russian. As for the special words that belong to philosophy, called terms, we have nothing to doubt about them. The Romans, due to their strength, translated the words of the Greeks, from whom they took philosophy, into Roman, but those they could not, they simply left. Following their example, we too can create... So, with God’s assistance, let us begin philosophy not in such a way that only one person in all of Russia, or several people, understands, but in such a way that every Russian language understander can use it comfortably.” – For a long, long time, the idea of ​​the gifted professor was not fulfilled in relation to philosophy even after his death. In his laudatory speech, imp. Elizabeth, M. 1756, the professor points out in the future the expensive fruits of the university planted by her. Letter in verse “about the benefits of the sciences and the education of youth in them” ex. in Novikova Painter, M. 1772 Pope's poem "about man" translated into verse, M. 1757, 1787, Iasi 1791 M. 1802. The subject of the poem is such that it was not easy to translate it into prose; but the thoughtful translator, who studied human nature, translated it in verse so well that he drew the attention of all his contemporaries to it. He also translated Locke’s work: “On the Education of Children,” M. 1759, 1788, Horace’s Epistle on Poetry and several other works, in verse, M. 1763, 1801. His poems are flowing and his language is amazingly playful and pure. 31. Gedeon Vishnevsky, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, who completed his education abroad with a Doctor of Philosophy diploma, teacher in Kiev. collegium, since 1714 mentor of philosophy in Moscow. academy, from 1718 its prefect, from 1720 a teacher of theology and from 1722, rector of the academy, from 1728 bishop of Smolensk, where he then opened a Slavic-Latin school, calling from Moscow. academician, mentor Alexy Bestuzhev († 1761). a) His lectures on the philosophy class: universa Aristotelis philosophia ad regulam Christianae veritatis conformata a patre et profess. Gedeon Wiszniowsky, an. 1717 (RKP. Moscow Spiritual Academic. No. 293). b) In 1719 he wrote in Latin. language of praise to the book. Dimitri Cantemir (J. m. enlightened 1855, August). His “song of greeting to Emperor Peter V. from Moscow. Academy", in Latin. and Russian language. M. 1724 Professor Kiev. He wrote to the board in 1714 a word of praise to the envoys Shafirov, Tolstoy and Besstuzhev (Tolstoy 1, No. 225). c) Adding it to the history of Moscow. Academy in Russia vivliof. XVI vol. and in the collection of Ruban, St. Petersburg. 1773. In the Northern Archive for 1828, part 32. No. 3, a “historical description of the city of Smolensk” by Gideon, Bishop of Smolensk, was printed, where the Smolensk chronicle was brought up to 1654 and then talks about the construction of the fortification by Peter V. and the opening of the governorship under Catherine in 1776; and the geographical description describes in some detail parts of the city, monasteries, churches, almshouses, factories, factories, trade and crafts. Since Gideon died in 1761; then it must be taken for granted that the published description of Smolensk was supplemented with some information after Gideon. Letter from Gideon to Kyiv in East. Kievsk acad., 188. 191. 32. Sylvester Kulyabka, 1737–1739 prefect, and from 1740 rector of the Kiev Academy, from 1745 bishop of Kostroma and finally archbishop of St. Petersburg in 1761. a) Taxonomist of the sciences: Praeceptiones quaedam de eloquentia comparanda, per hieromon. Sylvestrum Kulabka, anno Domini 1733 observatae atque juventuti in Kiewomohylano colegio traditae. Here are examples of many sermons and speeches from Kulyabka, of which only two were published. Libri V de arte rhetorica collegio Mohilo-Zaborowsciano roxolanae juventuti an. D. 1734 september. in tradendum, resumpti ab hierom. Sylwestro Kulabka. Here are 4 of his congratulatory speeches in Latin. Cursus philosophiae an. 1735–1737 (RKP. Kiev Academician, and Chernig. Sem.). Tractatus theologiae dogmaticae, an. 1741–1745 (director in Kiev and no. academician). In his treatise on the incarnation he speaks “about the possibility and need of incarnation.” In dogmatics, Kulyabka is distinguished by its depth and clarity of thought. According to student reviews - aureus, benedicendus magister. b) His words, in which the thoroughness of his thoughts is also visible: per week. about the Samaritan, M. 1742, honored with the approval of the Empress; on thesis. imp. Elizabeth, M. 1744; on the arrival of the Empress at the Kyiv Academy, M. 1744; on the date of accession (November 25, 1745) imp. Elizabeth to the throne, M. 1746; for the coronation, M. 1749; on thesis. Empress (Sept. 5), M. 1750; on August 30 M. 1750; on December 8, M. 1750; on December 15, M. 1750; for the new year, M. 1751; on February 20, M. 1751; on accession to the throne, M. 1751. A total of 13 words were printed. According to the mentioned RCP. The rules of eloquence also know words: per week. meat-eating, spoken in Glukhov, January 1733. 28 days; on Rev. Trinity, dialect. 1732; for the burial of the Kyiv voight Dmitry of Polotsk, 1733 June 12. in the presence of archbishop. Raphael; Congratulations to the Empress Imp. Elisaveta Petrovna with her accession to the throne from Archimandrite. and rector of Kievsk. acad. Sylvester; to the cathedral of the arch. Michael, preacher, priest. Sylvester Kulyabka, teacher of philosophy, in Golden-Domed Monastery. 1736 Nov. 8 days; on the great. Varvara, - there 1736 Dec. 4 d. Oratio de laudibus litterarum ab ipso illo, qui rhetoricam profitebatur, recitata an. 1734 jann. On the shroud. At burial Pechersk. archim. Roman Kopa. There is something remarkable about Roman here: “we saw, says the preacher, divinely inspired youth, we saw the fear of God growing with age, we saw self-willed renunciation after twenty years of peace... we saw the deepest and untested submission to elders, reverence for lesser ones. I will commend the abbot’s leadership in the Zmievsky monastery, which he was the first to glorify, to use, who cannot remain silent about his meekness, about his good brethren, souls and bodies, zeal and but death... The nineteenth year has passed, when this Lavra, all destroyed by fire by God's vision, had all its wealth in dust and ashes buried, then the wonderful Roman took upon himself the work and care of its restoration. And did he care so much about his Lavra? The first altar see testifies to the fact that the archdeacon's rank is still in use by the embassy holding it. But in this time of great poverty we leave behind. I do not remember here the natural composition of the body. It was wondrous because a certain love and virtue aroused him in everyone;... loved by everyone to whom he was visible; No matter who I spoke to, he struck his heart with a magnetic arrow; born to citizenship and common good." More words: on the day of the coronation of the imp. Anna Ioannovna, from the text: You bless the righteous, Lord, (with amendments); in the name of the imp. Anna Ioannovna 1738 Feb. 3 days; on the day of her accession to the throne, Jan. 19, 1739; for birthday Rev. Mother of God, with the inscription: Lord, bless for the glory of Your holy name and have mercy on me, a sinner; for the Dormition of the Most Rev. Mother of God; Day of Alexy the man of God, March. 17, 1737 So, all the sermons remaining in hand are 15. We are not talking about congratulatory Latin speeches. Sylvester did not refer to contemporary events in his words. Only in the word on September 5th. 1750, he lovingly thanked the Empress for her love for Ukraine and animatedly portrayed Ukraine’s devotion to the Empress. - “What did the resurrection of your people do to you, Elizabeth? - he says to Ukraine. – What is useful to you, what have you been waiting for for a long time, but you almost despaired of getting? I resurrected the leader for you. I know for sure, O people of Little Russia, that you have never wavered in loyalty, are always grateful, and are ready to give up your property and life for this state, which has accepted you in such strong defense, not for fear, but for conscience, serving the sovereigns, loving sovereigns more than those who gave birth to you, and knowing faith and fidelity without oath and without oath (that is, if there were no oaths and oaths, yes you however, your blood will not be spared for your loyalty); I know for sure that you, O pious people! Taking your children from milkmaids, before teaching them the alphabet, to know Elizabeth, to love Elizabeth, for Elizabeth and her inheritance you will teach her soul and teach it completely; I believe without a doubt that the aged old man, together with his staff, bows his knee before God in gratitude to God for such mercies to you, through this most merciful sovereign; in later years an aged youth will rise and the story will be a son, as he has heard and seen.” Karamzin’s review of Kulyabka: “it seems that he himself did not think of being an orator and wanted to speak only in the simple language of a Christian teacher; its meaning is very unclean and dark, to the detriment of many good thoughts.” – Is everything here true? First of all, simplicity is a high quality of a Christian speaker and he is expected to have thoughts, not a fancy set of words. Kulyabka’s speech is calm, but not without animation and witticisms; the word composition is Latin, like others, but not always. 33. Mikhail Kozachinsky, a student of the Kyiv academician, started a school in Serbia, traveled through the Slavic lands and Germany, after Kulyabka, 1739–1744, prefect of the academician. and teacher of philosophy, from 1745 Archimandrite Vydubitsky, and then Slutsk. His cursus philosophicus, per quaestiones philosophicas juxta usum in scholis peripateticorum, ab an. 1739 traditus. (Msc.). The Russian translation of the course was printed with the title: “Aristotelian Philosophy”, Kyiv 1745, Lvov 1755; the translation was prepared for the arrival of the imp. Elizabeth and Count Razumovsky to Kyiv. For the same occasion, Kozachinsky wrote a greeting in three languages ​​on behalf of the Imperial Academy. Elizabeth, for example K. 1744; This greeting was accompanied by a description of the imp. Peter I, written in verse, as well as a greeting (Tolstoy’s note No. 252). Poems to the Emperor in three languages. Philosophy was dedicated to Count Alexei c. Razumovsky, on his name day, and a strange genealogy of Razumovsky was attached to the book. Kozachinsky's Latin poems are very good, Russian ones are no worse than Sumarokov's poems. An example of them is from Askochensky. He also has a program of his philosophy of 1747 (Kyiv 2, 168–17, 54–57, 511–515). The story of the suffering of the baby Gabriel, tortured by the Jews, is written in prose and verse, in Polish and Slavic, in the Russian Communist Party. Tikhon Aleksandrovich, mentor of poetry and rhetoric in the Kyiv academician, since 1745, after Kozachinsky, mentor of philosophy and prefect-hieromonk. His praecepta de arte poëtica 1743 an. they say in the first part de carmine, de carmine slaveno, polono et de variis generibus carminum, de carmino latino et caet.; in the second part de poesi epigrammatica, lyrica, bucolica et satirica, elegica, drammatica, epica. The textbook contains many poems, several acrostics to the Empress and Mme Raphael, composed by Alexandrovich himself. His praecepta oratoria, an. 1744, consist of 8 chapters: praenotationes rhetoricae, de periodis, de amplification, de inventione, de dispositione, stylo, de memoria et pronuntiatione. Syntagma totius aristotelis philosophiae, publicis disputationibus illustratum. an. 1745 in MSc. (Ist. Kiev academic. 145, 149, 160). 34. Gideon of Crikovsky, Archbishop of Pskov. His education began at the Kazan seminary and ended at the Moscow Academy, where he attended theological lessons as a hieromonk. Here he became famous for his gift of preaching. Based on the approving review of Count Shuvalov, he was appointed court preacher and at the same time (1754) ordained Archimandrite of Savinsky; from 1758 archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra, from Oct. 1761 Bishop of Pskov; remained a preacher of the court, with the title of member of the synod. Dismissed from St. Petersburg, he died at the age of 37, 1763. The preacher is always clear and calm, without outbursts of feeling, strong in thought and depth of feeling. He harms himself only by sometimes extending his imitation of Minyaty beyond what is proper, to which, however, the need for frequent preaching at court forced him. Regarding language, he no longer follows the example of previous preachers - he uses the folk language, supplementing it with liturgical language; The endings of words, their changes and syntax are Russian. His best sermons are on weekdays. the prodigal son and the one that was spoken on the occasion of the Lisbon earthquake. “Don’t you want to attribute everything to nature? - says a smart preacher about an earthquake. – Don’t you think that saltpeter and some other dry and easily ignitable particles, having collected in hidden channels and washed away with some water particles, produced heat, and then a flame, and thus the thinnest air in the earthly tubes running away from our eyes, brought into indignation, and shook the earth and water? So be it; I do not oppose this: there is no need to completely refute natural forces or discredit their testers. But why, I ask, not before, but at this very time, not in other, but in these very parts of the earth, did nature produce such an effect? Wouldn't anyone say that it all happened by chance? By chance, one city survived, the other collapsed; By chance, those people were saved, others died. But where shall we put this word of Christ, so that not the hair of your head perishes without the will of the Heavenly Father? (Matthew 10:30). No, listeners, it is not nature, but the Creator of nature, who creates good in us and creates evil, according to scripture (Is. 45:7), the main cause of all these unpleasant events. He keeps his nature in obedience and sets whatever limits he wants.”... Further, the preacher resolves two more questions: what was the reason in people why the Provider allowed the terrible revolution to take place? Are all the lost sinners? In the word about the prodigal son, the speaker talks about how many gifts we have received from God and how we use them. The second part is worth attention in terms of the picture of time. “Let us look at how much we, being in our ranks, in our merits and in our abundance, have benefited from the church of God or society!... I would gladly keep silent, listeners, about this; I myself would be glad to cover up such a shame of ours: but the poor petitioners, who do not receive any pleasure, but the poor do not see the slightest pardon from the abounding in everything, but the people are deluded in the darkness of ignorance and do not receive proper enlightenment from their shepherds, cannot keep silent about it. They say: what have we got from the authorities when they don’t wipe away our tears, don’t listen to our sighs, don’t accept our petitions? It is Thy will, Lord, to call them gods in the Scriptures: but for the most part they seem to us like idols, having eyes and not seeing, ears - and not hearing, hands - and doing nothing good to us with them. Others cry out: Woe to us, Lord! to whom have You entrusted Your wealth!... Look at our members, shaken by the fierce filth; look at our bones, dried up by hunger and thirst; look at our flesh tormented in the righteous... And is there anyone who would take pity on us? Still others, sighing painfully, protest against their spiritual guardians that they have almost no care for their souls; They neither teach them, nor visit them, nor console them in suffering, nor affirm them in well-being. “Isn’t this prodigal son vividly depicted in such our negligence and self-will”?... Words by Krinovsky, ed. at 1 hour Moscow 1754–1759, then at 2 hours Moscow 1760, at 4 hours Moscow 1855 35. Joasaph Mitkevich, a student of Kiev, Archimandrite of Khutyn, from 1758 Bishop of Belograd († 1763); on behalf of the synod, he corrected the menaions of St. Demetrius for the third edition, Kyiv 1754, and the Pechersk patericon in 1756, ed. K. 1759 t. Anania Fedorov, the clergyman of the Suzdal cathedral, wrote "histories, a collection about Suzdal", in three parts. In the first part - about Suzdal and its principality, about bishops and monasteries, about the inhabitants and streets of Suzdal. In the second - about places subject to spiritual management - about tithes and cities. The third part is additions to the first part: about bishops John and Feodor, about M. Hilarion and about some monasteries. Collection according to the list of 1846, printed. in Time, total. source, sq. 26, 1–207. The description of the key is rich in information and compiled with some report. In the list of 1846 it was supplemented with later information. Klyuchar wrote his story no later than 1761: on page 45 “the middle chapter is gilded now, 1761”; on page 145 his signature is under the request of 1749 and the decree of 1755 is recorded; on page 58: “these chambers were in 1752, but they were all broken into dilapidation, where now there is no sign”; on page 45: “from the late perestroika of 1628 to 1755, 228 years, which remains unharmed to this day by the grace of God.” The difference in words in the description of the Eminences, starting with the Eminence Gennady, from 1762 (p. 40) supplemented from time to time, did not extend beyond 1761; see pages 7, 22, 50, 95. Lists of descriptions in Tolstoy 4, No. 34; Rumyantsev No. 5. Alexey Bulgakov, a graduate of the Kyiv academician, a priest, compiled a set of the Slavic Ostrog Bible with a Latin translation of the “original Bible of the Hebrew dialect.” (Rkp. Tsarskogo No. 525). Feofan Leontovich, abbot of the Vilna Spiritual Monastery, one of the energetic fighters for Orthodoxy against papism in the western region. In 1756, he reported to Chancellor Bestuzhev that students of the Jesuits, having attacked the Spiritual Monastery, defeated it and killed the monks. In the same year (November 22) he wrote to the Metropolitan that during the funeral the Jesuit students “made noise and shouted in the voices of various beasts, cursed at the rituals and threw mud at the Orthodox.” In response to Keyserling’s response - to complain to the courts about grievances - he replied that complaints along this path would be successful “only when a single sheep begins to frolic between a thousand wolves.” The consequence was that Fr. Feofan was removed from the post of rector in 1738. Arriving in St. Petersburg, he submitted a note to the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, where, in addition to his two previous thoughts, he also expressed that if the Russian government does not help the Orthodox of the West, Lutheran Prussia will help them. Feofan was sent to Kyiv. At the end of 1762, at the request of the government, he submitted two notes in Moscow to the question: “what political benefits could come from growing up. to the state on the occasion of the protection of the Orthodox in the West? Here he said among other things: “Our Russian state will be able to take 600 versts of the best and most fertile land, with countless Orthodox people, in front of the whole world, righteously and correctly, from the Poles.” So, this is who was the first to vote for the return of the southwest to Russia! (Russian Vestn. 1864 September, 357–380). 36. Mikhail Vas. Lomonosov, the son of an Arkhangelsk fisherman, came to Moscow on foot to study at the academy; here he studied grammar and rhetoric; he went to Kyiv to listen to philosophy, but returned from there and in November 1735 was sent to the Academy of Sciences; Spent 5 years in Germany, taking lessons in history, philosophy, physics and verbal sciences. Upon returning to Russia - professor and member of the academy; fought to the death with the Germans, partly due to stupidity of the head, partly due to selfish views, who prevented him from spreading science throughout Russia, † April 4. 1765 Lomonosov had an amazingly versatile mind: a physicist and metallurgist, philologist and chemist, geographer and historian, orator and poet; Moreover, he was a first-class naturalist, an equal tester of the laws of the Russian language, and an equal lyricist. His works are in 3 parts ed. St. Petersburg 1847 For spiritual enlightenment the following were and are significant: a) his “spiritual odes”, numbering 11. Among them, the first place belongs to the ode chosen from Job. Oh, you who grieve in vain You grumble against God, man! Pay attention, since jealousy is terrible He comes to Job from a cloud of rivers!... Where were you, like me in orderly rank This beautiful one created the light. When I set the firmament of the earth And the host of heavenly powers glorified Show your wisdom... A beautiful song, a song of a soul familiar with the structure of nature! “Evening Reflection on the Greatness of God, on the Occasion of the Great Northern Lights” (1743) is a truly poetic work and at the same time a song of an explorer of nature. “The day hides its face, The fields were covered with gloomy night, A black shadow ascended the mountains. An abyss has opened and is full of stars; The stars have no number, the abyss has no bottom.” The poet expounds his theory of the northern lights and, before Franklin, shows the true cause of the wondrous phenomenon. The sixth and seventh stanzas are a poetic refutation of the hypotheses about the radiance. The “hymn to the beard,” recently discovered, is interesting (Bibliography II, 461–470): And with a low bow he asks In eternal peace miss Superstitions jump into the flames... How did it happen that the “hymn to the beard” raised a storm against itself? What do you expect from dumb heads? b) Of his prose works, one should not forget especially his “harmony of natural science with religion.” The Creator gave the human race two books. In one he showed His Majesty, in the other - His will. The first is this visible world, created by Him, so that man, looking at the enormity, beauty and harmony of its buildings, would recognize divine omnipotence, according to the concept given to himself. The second book is St. Scripture. It shows the Savior's favor towards our salvation. This is how the great Russian naturalist argues. “And here’s how he valued Voltaire: “I can’t help but send V. Pr-vu a new fiend to Voltaire’s muse, who declares that he and his sovereign (Frederick II) are atheists, and is not ashamed to attribute praise to him before the whole world. It is impossible to find a more decent example in all of Voltaire’s works, where his crazy wit, unscrupulous honesty and abusive praise were more visible, as in this panigyric libel.” The letter was written to Shuvalov on October 3. 1752. His note “on the clergy” ed. in Letoc. rus. lit. 2, 175. His essay “on the benefits of church books” for Russian literature is remarkable. He considers it necessary to use the church language for the highest syllable, while in the middle syllable, according to his concept, words that are understandable in both Slavic and Russian should be used, while in the lower syllable there are only Russian words unknown in Slavic. – The idea is partly fair. – But what meant much more for the Russian language was that Lomonosov, with all due respect to Peter, drove out of use with his works German, Dutch and other foreign words that had flooded the Russian language since the time of Peter, and wrote a grammar of the Russian language. Proclus Bukhartovsky, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, from 1751 a teacher at the Voronezh seminary, † 1759, 35 years old. According to the handwritten note of M. Evgeniy, a former mentor at the Voronezh seminary, “this teacher was more hardworking and more capable than all the former teachers; in the seminary library there is the Latin Aristotelian Logic, which he collected in 1756 and 1757 and taught to students of rhetoric and which proves his rather dialectical mind and hard work. It must be said to his credit that he convinced Rev. Theophylact in 1757 to establish a seminary library, for which he commissioned such books from Kyiv, in which the analysis of the authors and the publications themselves testifies to his sufficient knowledge of literature.” His best work is the Symphony on Proverbs, which remains among the manuscripts of the Voronezh seminary. Its title is: “Symphony on the Inspired Book of Proverbs c. Solomon, newly composed through the works of the priest Proclus Bukhartovsky, which for the benefit of the house reverend. Kirill, Bishop of Voronezh, the newly assembled seminary library, with the desire to multiply books, gave an appendix in 1759 M. April. 4 d." 37. Makariy Petrovich, Serb, educated in Moscow. Academy, 1759–1760 its preacher, from 1761 prefect, from 1763 archimandrite and rector of Tver, died at the age of 32, 1766. Known: a) as an interpreter of Scripture: “Concord of the Evangelists” in the RKP. b) The dogmatist is very smart and in the spirit of the Gospel: his Orthodox teaching, St. Petersburg. 1783, 1790 c) The preacher is eloquent. His words (in 2 parts of Moscow, 1786, in collected works, Moscow, 1790) are distinguished by clarity of thoughts and heartfelt eloquence. Not being a natural Russian, he had a mastery of the Russian language like few Russians. d) His system of philosophy in the RKP. e) Historical works: Life of St. Arseny, Bishop of Tver. M. 1764, 1802, 1805. The life and suffering of St. book Mikhail Tverskoy. M. 1796. Both with errors against history, but excusable for the time of the writer. Sylvester Dobrinya, preacher of the Kyiv Academy, abbot of Vilna and archimandrite of Glukhov († 1766). His word about the ingratitude of the Jewish people, St. Petersburg. 1751 38. Dimitri (Daniil) Sechenov, Archbishop of Novgorod (1709–1767). He received his education at the Moscow Academy. “The ruler of newly baptized affairs” in Kazan and the archimandrite of Sviyazhsk, he zealously distributed St. faith between pagan and Mohammedan peoples; 1742–1748 Bishop of Nizhny Novgorod; due to poor health, he retired; from 1752 bishop of Ryazan and member of the synod, from 1757 archbishop of Novgorod. He was strict in church rule; for his work on the Kazan commission, he acquired the right to respect from the church; but in church government, unfortunately, he was carried away by vanity and wanted to please people more than God. He was famous in his time as an excellent preacher; his language is quite pure and free, not bound by either Latin or Slavic, close to simple but correct Russian speech. The word for the Annunciation (M. 1742) depicts the state of the church and the fatherland before the accession of the emperor. Elizabeth to the throne. This is the most complete and masterful picture of the affairs of that time, leaving behind the paintings of Cyril and Ambrose. “We buried the glorious monarchs (Peter and Catherine); They buried our prosperity... What a great persecution they brought against the Church of Christ and the pious faith! They had their time and the area was dark: they did what they wanted! And first of all, they tried to take away the dearest treasure of our souls, the invaluable wealth of our salvation - piety. The forerunners of the Antichrist were sent out throughout Russia, the tares of the teachings were scattered everywhere, they damaged so much that many cowardice loved darkness more than light, loved human glory more than the glory of God... Christian dogmas, on which eternal salvation depends, were reduced to fables and nothing: to the Intercessor of our salvation, the vigilant Christian Helper, protection and refuge, they did not call for help and did not demand its intercession; the holy saints of God were not revered; they did not bow to icons of saints; the sign of the holy cross, which demons tremble and abhor; the apostolic traditions and the holy fathers were rejected; Good deeds will earn you an eternal reward. swept away; During Lent, the saints devoured meat, but did not even want to hear about the mortification of the flesh: they laughed at the remembrance of the dead... Who, the true children of the church and the truth of Christ, heirs of such charmers, did not listen to such charmers, the right immaculate faith, from Christ, from the apostles, from the saints, the father preached, confirmed, they kept, no matter how much abuse and reproach they inflicted on the enemy of piety! men, rude outfits! Anyone who keeps fasts is called a hypocrite. He who converses with God through prayer is an empty saint. Those who bow to icons are superstitious. Whoever holds his tongue from idle talk is stupid and does not know how to speak. He who generously gives alms for the sake of love for Christ and his neighbor is simple, he does not know how to use his property, he does not get it in his hands. Whoever goes to church often will have no way. - And most of all, the colossal persecution against the most pious defenders, against the most sacred secrets of the ministers, the rank, I say, spiritual! Bishops, priests, and monks were tortured, executed, and stripped of their hair. Continuous mail both by water and by land, where to go, for what? - monks, priests, pious people are taken to distant Siberian cities, to Okhotsk, Kamchatka, Orenburg; and they frightened you so much that the very shepherds, the very preachers of the word of God were silent, they did not dare to open their lips about piety. Indeed, the spirit is vigorous, but the flesh is weak: the grace of martyrdom is not sent to everyone... They also took on great persons, and even more so they knew the piety of the defenders, many noble families were completely exterminated, many honest, faithful servants were killed in heavy imprisonment, dungeons, many had their heads chopped off, their tongues cut.” The Word for July 8, 1742 (M. 1742, third edition M. 1747) depicts the moral weaknesses of the time. “Let us look at how we love Christ. I love Christ in a word: in various villages I have well-equipped chambers, beautiful chambers, baths, and kitchens; and the churches of Christ in the same villages, without cover, rotted. I love Christ: I have zippers, hides, gold snuff boxes, silver teapots and washstands; and in the Church of Christ there are lead vessels. I love Christ: I have gold-woven curtains and blankets; and the terrible mysteries of Christ are covered with a dyed veil. I love Christ: I myself drink champagne and Hungarian wines instead of kvass; and he never sent even a hair's-length to the church. I love Christ: to seek honor, to gather wealth, to feast, to talk vanity, to boast, to have fun, to have fun day and night - easy, not boring; but to thank Christ in prayers, to stand in church with tenderness and fear of God is the right thing to do in the hustle and bustle and have no time to pray... I love Christ: how can I miss my name day without a celebration? For three days and nights I am having fun and drinking; and the holiday of Christ's Nativity or Resurrection will come, the main salvation of drinking wine - for dressing up, for delivering affectionate bows, congratulations to different houses, and was not in church: he grieves that he did not find someone at home, and there is no sadness about that - he did not have time, they began to announce the gospel early. I love Christ: in a word, I hope in Him, I surrender myself entirely to His will, and with our enemy we threaten not in God: or do not weigh, onsitsa senator, president, governor, governor, secretary, such a noble person is my benefactor, relative, friend: see what will happen to you. But we don’t know that in the morning the patron will either be deprived of honor, or will be carried to the grave, and will not be able to help himself... Others do not know about taverns, about trading, about sneaking, about the work of churches; They don’t know how to read the Our Father, the Virgin Mary, but ask for another scripture below; and instead of writing in everyone’s mouth there is blasphemy, slander, foul language, deception in the mouth... But there is no need to ask about the love of one’s neighbor. All our love is in the insidious lolithic, how to kindly greet, fairly treat, politely see off, pleasant letters, smooth words, low bows, frequent glasses, incessant rehearsals: hello, hello; but even if he had no heart in the world, he would never find peace in the future... It often happens that my neighbor has offended me in no way, he lives piously, he will not offend anyone, he fairly rules his office; but we burn with envy more than the fire of hell, we torment his glory, we blaspheme his honor, we interpret him crookedly; only guilt that God made him glorious, honest, where we would rejoice and praise God that our brother is glorified - there we lament, yearn, grieve over the good of others. I love my neighbor: and to whom honor or government is entrusted, he does not reason that the authorities from God were created for no other purpose than to do good to others, help the poor, stand up for the offended, defend the truth; don’t even think about it. Will justice be there? Wait in the front hut for about five hours, but come back in the morning, don’t wait any longer. Can you find mercy? They will strip you from head to toe: not the scum, but they are ready to remove the skin; and when you start looking for more truth, you won’t find a place in the Siberian countries. I love my neighbor: but whoever comes across wealth does not know that it is not his gold, not his silver, according to God, he is only appointed as a builder of God’s estate, to help those in need. And he, like an unbreakable slave, will fence you in with such walls and castles, not only to give to anyone, but he won’t even honor anyone, he won’t give a ruble without interest, he won’t put half a dime in the hands of the poor, and he himself won’t taste the sweet bread, he trembles, he doesn’t sleep at night, no matter how much loss occurs.” To the Fatherland Record. 1839 his speeches to Peter III were published upon his accession to the throne, Jan. 1762 after the liturgy and upon his entry into the Synod. Speech of gratitude by his imp. Ekaterina, St. Petersburg 1763 Other sermons and speeches of his, which everyone wanted to publish with them. Ekaterina, remain unpublished. In Pogodin's library there are two collections of his words, one on 25 sheets, the other on 17 sheets. 39. Porfiry (Peter) Kraisky, student and teacher of Moscow. academician, from 1741 prefect and from 1742 rector of the academy, from 1748 bishop. Suzdal, from 1755 Kolomna and from 1765 Belgorod († 1768). a) His words: on Great Friday 1742 (M. 1742) and another on August 26 (M. 1742) are not distinguished by their peculiarity; but in the word on November 26. 1749 vividly depicts the changes brought about by Peter. b) By decree of the Synod of 1743–1744, he corrected the rite of accepting non-believers and heretics into St. church; as a result of this to us. “The rites of those united from other faiths to the Orthodox Church,” M. 1757 (Ist. Moscow academician M. 1855, p. 132). Andrei Bogdanov, son of a Japanese man, who studied at the Academy of Sciences from 1733, where he later became an assistant librarian († 1768). His “symphony on the Epistles of the Apostles and the Apocalypse”, printed. M. 1737. The experiment is not entirely successful, because each text is repeated in it as many times as there are words in the text. The composer himself wrote in the preface: “here in the first image or beginning are both names and verbs, and these are names in the nominative case, while the verbs are in the first person in the indicative mood,” that is, it seemed that the composer arranged the symphony only by names and verbs, but in reality it turned out differently - a lot of unnecessary things were written. The symphony he began for the entire Bible remained unfinished and remains in the RKP. Petersburg spirits academy. His description of St. Petersburg 1705–1751, with walls and facades, rich in content, ed. with additions by Ruban, St. Petersburg. 1779; Its “logical alphabet” and Japanese “grammar” are stored in the RKP. Academy of Sciences. He probably translated the description of “Japan”, with the history of the persecution of Japanese Christians, St. Petersburg. 1734 40. Gervasy Lintseevsky, a student and mentor (of poetry) at the Kiev Academy, a Beijing missionary, since 1757 the bishop of southern Pereyaslavl, courageously fought against Roman propaganda and, through her machinations, was retired, died in 1769. Upon entering the flock, he wrote a district letter to the clergy, with instructions on deanery and life worthy of clergy: ed. in Mayak 1843 His two district letters to the suffering Orthodox Christians, the first, quite extensive, ex. to Kyiv. epar. Ved. 1863 No. 22: second, short, dated June 12, 1767, ed. to Kyiv. epar. Ved. 1863 No. 6; in the latter he writes: “This is the second time I’m writing to you.” The time of the latter also determines the time of the first - the beginning of 1767. In both cases, he urges to patiently bear sorrow and obey his superiors. In the first she also writes that the empress decided to defend the persecuted before the king. In the Yugo-3 Archive. His letters to Russia: vol. II, nos. 46, 47, 72, 77, 89, 150–152, 155; vol. III, nos. 104, 105, 116, 128. In March 1768, Gervasius wrote to Archbishop George: “and in every difficulty and trouble, thanks be to God, even now the poor people do not cease to break free and come to us.” But the torment of the enemies soon reached its extreme limit and the patience of the Orthodox was exhausted. In August, a terrible punishment broke out against the inhuman tormentors, known in history as the “Kolievshchina.” The contents of the district charter serve as a refutation of the slander that Gervasius disposed the people to revolt. There are also reports to the Synod about the same thing: vol. II, nos. 93, 94, 102, 144; Vol. III, No. 12. Certificate to new members of the Kanev board, September. 1768. with pastoral exhortations, printed. to Kyiv. Ep. Ved. 1864. No. 6. Evstafiy Mogilyansky, monk Epiphanius, a student of the Kharkov college, teacher of Ustyug and archpriest of Poltava, since 1763 archimandrite of Nezhin, since 1769 rector of Kyiv. Nicholas Monastery († 1769), famous for his gift of speech. From his words are printed: on July 11 and November 21. 1742 (M. 1742); on July 17, 1743 (M. 1743); on 25 Feb. and 19 Aug. 1744 (M. 1744); per week 1 All Saints and 14 weeks. after the descent of St. Duha, M. 1744 41. Arseny Mogilyansky, who studied in Kharkov, from 1742 a teacher in Moscow. academy, from 1744 archimandrite of the Sergius Lavra, 1744–1752 bishop of northern Pereyaslavl, from 1757 metropolitan of Kiev († 1770). For his special gift of speech, which glorified him when he was still a preacher in Moscow. academician, in 1743 he was taken to the court to preach and subsequently, when he was already the bishop of Pereyaslavl, he received for preaching a precious panagia worth 60,000 rubles, which is now kept in the Sergius Lavra. His words were published: per week. 11, M. 1742: per week. 16, M. 1742; in the village of the meeting of the Vladimir icon, M. 1742; on Spiritual Day, M. 1742; upon the arrival of the imp. in the Lavra the praise of St. pleasers, St. Petersburg 1743; on the Dormition of the Mother of God, M. 1743; per week meatless. St. Petersburg 1743; at 4 weeks great fasting, about prayer and fasting, St. Petersburg. 1743; on 15 Aug. M. 1743; per week 24, M. 1744; speech imp. Elizabeth in the Lavra, M. 1744; a word for peace with the Swedes, M. 1744. He also composed the service and akathist to St. Demetrius of Rostov. See the service of St. Dimitri, ed. in Kyiv. His clever instruction is to tell the two mentors of the Sergius Seminary the catechistic teachings in the church. in Add. to creativity father 1861 pp. 557–566. His letter about the affairs of the union to Arch. S.-W. R. t. 3, no. 40. Pavel Konyuskevich, teacher of pyitika at the Kyiv Academy, preacher in Moscow since 1741. academician, since 1743 Archimandrite Yuryevsky. since 1758, the Metropolitan of Tobolsk, opened a theology class in Tobolsk and begged for a salary for the seminary, was zealous about the spread of the faith among the pagans; slandered by Savvaty Isaievich, whom he called for the seminary, in 1767 he was retired to the Lavra, where since 1770 he has rested incorrupt. His notes are known, written in 1740 on the road to St. Petersburg (Askochensky, 2, 59–60). 42. Kirill (Theodore) Lyashevetsky, son of the hundredth clerk of the Poltava regiment, later priest Olishevsky, studied at the Kyiv Academy and in 1743 became a tutor at the new Sergius Seminary, from 1748 its prefect, from 1753 the viceroy of the Lavra, who read theology at the seminary, from 1758 Bishop of Voronezh and from 1765 of Chernigov, † 1770 His word in Sergiy Ave., M. 1749; other M. 1745 speech by imp. Elizabeth when visiting the Lavra - in Prib. to creativity father 1861, pp. 592–594, where and about him, pp. 596–7. Sumarokov wrote about him: “Kirill Lyashevetsky did not enter into glory: for many, pleasing someone, blasphemed him, thinking that he loved well... But this venerable man was loved by all spiritual people. So no one should have been appointed bishop for the sake of pleasing his enemies, to whom he, for his part, was never an enemy? This is what prevented the author of the word from becoming famous: “My soul clings to You.” For extracts from the word on D. Ave. Sergius, which is written in living language and sprinkled with sarcasm, see Add. to creativity father 1861, pp. 574–579. Dimitry Grozinsky, a student of Kiev and archimandrite of the Seversky Spassky Monastery († 1770); composed instructive words, which Novikov calls fair; also wrote poetry. The gravestone inscription of his archbishop. Plato and M. Timothy ex. in issue 10 of Ant magazine, St. Petersburg. 1771 Pankraty Charnutsky, hieromonk and preacher of the Sergius Lavra, archimandrite of Chernigov († 1770). In the Sergius Lavra, in the presence of the empress, he spoke a word about deeds of reward, M. 1744. Philofey Kontarevsky, a student of the Kyiv college, abbot of the Lebedinsky Trans-Dnieper Monastery, in 1764–1767 wrote interesting letters about the affairs of the union, ed. in Home Conversation 1859 43. Ambrose (Andrey) Zertis-Kamensky, after Kyiv he listened to lessons at the Lvov Academy, a teacher at the Neva Seminary, from 1742 archimandrite of the Resurrection Monastery, where he built a wonderful dome over the Holy Sepulcher, from 1756 bishop of Pereyaslavl, from 1761 archbishop of Krutitsky, and from 1768 Archbishop of Moscow; for pastoral orders he was killed (1771) by the rabble according to the teachings of the schismatics; His main killer is the merchant Ivan Dimitriev, an inveterate schismatic. a) He translated the psalter from the Hebrew. The translation was prepared to be presented to the empress, but death stopped the process. The psalter was published by Reshetnikov in the collection of psalms, M. 1809. Its translations from Greek: 12 messages of Ignatius the God-Bearer, M. 1772; Cyril jerus. catechetical and secret teachings, M. 1772; John of Damascus' exposition of the faith, M. 1765–1781; He translated Gratius's argument against atheists and naturalists from Latin, M. 1765. b) His words are awaiting publication; and notes but history. Russian churches are considered lost during the riot. One of his letters, excellent in spirit, is from B. Kamensky in Slov. I know people 1, 36, 37. M. 1835. His philosophical themes in Chistovich in Ist. pet. ac., 433–35. His letter about the church. properties in Day, 1865, No. 39. 44. Arseniy Matseevich, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, in 1734–1736 was among the members of the Kamchatka expedition, and had troubles with the officers, which ended to his credit. At this time, living in the Solovetsky monastery, he tried to return to St. Church of Abbot Joasaph, imprisoned in Solovki for his persistence in the schism. In 1731 he was appointed synodal hieromonk. In 1741, Metropolitan of Tobolsk and from 1742 - Metropolitan of Rostov. Having submitted a review of the synodal administration together with Ambrose (§ 16), he, at his request, was favorably dismissed by the empress from attending the synod. In Rostov he opened a seminary, which he worked on with all his heart. In 1764, for protesting against the confiscation of church property, he was imprisoned in the Arkhangelsk Korel monastery, under strict guard. In 1766, following a denunciation from a soldier, he was subjected to a new trial and, after conversations with Ekaterina and Sheshkovsky, he was locked up in the Revel fortress, where he died in 1772, having written in charcoal on the wall of his narrow prison: it is good for me, for you have humbled me. About him in Yarosl. epar. led 1862, no. 34–39. a) A denouncer of schism. His admonition to the schismatic abbot Joasaph, proposed in 1734, ed. in Right. Social security 1861 III, 184–204. He corrected and published with his preface Theophylact’s denunciation of the Pomeranian responses, M. 1745. At the same time, in 1745, he composed “an expanded denunciation of the schismatic answers of the empty saints of the Vygoretskys proposed in 1723” (Tolstoy 4, No. 60). The addition turned out to be necessary because in Theophylact’s denunciation, primary attention was paid to one 50 response of the Pomeranians. In his denunciations of the schism, Arseny examines little the private schismatic opinions: considering them trifles, he turns all his attention to the spirit of the schism and shows that those who separate from the church deprive themselves of the means of salvation - the sacraments. The tone of his denunciations, compared with previous denunciations, is quite moderate, there are few harsh expressions. The contents of the expanded denunciation, with extracts from the original, are in Orthodox. Interview. 1861 b) A denouncer of Lutheranism: wrote “an objection to the Lutheran libel, called the hammer” (Tsarskogo No. 29: b. Kharkiv. sem; Synod. No. 984). The objection was written under the imp. Elizabeth. For she is spoken of as modern, and the reign of Anna is mentioned as a matter of the past. The words speak quite clearly about the time of the objection: “The answer (of Theophan to the Lutherans) from your own authors was printed in Latin in Vratislavl in 1745.” In 1753, on March 8, he wrote to the Empress: “I most humbly convey that through my labors two books have been composed, one is a denunciation of the schismatic Olonets book, and the other is an objection to the Lutheran libel, to the book The Stone of Faith written.” – The writer analyzes the lampoon in detail, following every step of it. Responds to abuse both strictly and truthfully. To demand from him criticism of Lutheran teaching itself, as someone recently demanded (Orthodox Review, 1860, pp. 370–391), means not to understand the question proposed to Matsievich. The hammer does not write an apology for Lutheranism; even contrary to its name, it does not write criticism of the Stone. He is a libel against Stephen and the clergy. To the lampoon’s reproach for the drunken life of the clergy, Matseevich replies: “our priests, according to your confession, lose their icons when they are drunk, and your pastors, sober in fornication houses, lose their cloaks and heads. And you don’t put that into play. Your pastors are not always sober: it’s almost the law to go to the church and not only tell the prefect, but also to celebrate mass, according to your law, and drink a glass at home.” The answer is apt and truthful! Lampoon said that Russians fast - they don’t eat meat, but they engage in dancing, comedy, and balls. “If you’ve seen our dances, comedies, games,” Matseevich replies, “then such audacity, such debauchery comes especially from your instruction and teaching. Who is our comedian and dance master if not yours?” The objection is important due to several historical information about the time of Peter and Anna. So it says: “and although we have a synod instead of a patriarch, you, a Lutheran, an enemy and rival of our church, do not gain any advantage. It was not done according to your will, so that both your regent and your pastors would be present at the synod.” c) He had the gift of preaching. His words are printed: for the consecration of the church in Basmannaya, October 16. M. 1742: on the day of the ap. Peter and Paul, M. 1742; on the Empress’s name day (Sept. 5), M. 1742; on the day of the accession of the Emperor. Elizabeth to the throne, M. 1744; for engagement in. K. Petra Fedor. with Catherine, M. 1744; in the name of the imp. Elizabeth, M. 1749; on the 1st day of August, M. 1749; on December 1 M. 1749; at Tsarskoye in the RCP. No. 18 three sermons: per week. upon erection, at 3 weeks. on Pentecost, at 13 weeks. on Pentecost. The latter begins like this: “I am a guest in this God-saved reigning city of Moscow.” In a protest about the estates, he wrote: “We need to strengthen the preaching of the word of God, because the harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few. However, we must not forget the words of the Apostle: do not be too many teachers. We see from ancient times that teaching and preaching the word of God is a special gift of God to whom it is given. There were many preachers, but not many Chrysostoms.” After this, examples are given of how preachers, either out of art or out of an evil soul, sowed error instead of truth. “It is better for a church to be without a sermon than to have such preachers: it is better, in the old way, to read ready-made, printed sermons selected from the works of the fathers than to read new ones.” In the library of the Yaroslavl seminary, 12 volumes of Matseevich’s teachings are preserved, with a total of 217 very long teachings. According to the writer’s notes, they were spoken between 1746 and 1761. Since the teachings are very long, each was divided into two days, and others into three. There is little original in them. They are filled with extracts from the writings of the fathers and teachers of the church. From them one can see Arseny's extensive acquaintance with ancient church literature; Zeal to teach the flock the ways of salvation is also visible. His jealousy was especially directed towards the schism. He speaks a lot against schism in his teachings about the priesthood, about the church, about the Antichrist; extracts from teachings - to Yaroslav. epar. Ved. 1864 After reporting to the synod about the relics of Demetrius in 1752 (list from Tsarsky No. 18), the synod instructed him to write the service and life of St. Demetrius (Bolshoi Kazan University No. 21, 384). But then this order was fulfilled by someone else. His letter dated January 3. 1763 to the Emperor. Catherine, written in the spirit of a Christian shepherd, printed. in Russian Demon. 1860 2, 231, 232. d) As a thinking and truth-loving lawyer, he expressed himself in the report on the synod (§ 16), in the draft form of the oath for the clergy, presented to Empress Elizabeth (Day, 1862 No. 16; Contemporary Chronicle, 1862 No. 32) and in a protest against the disposition of church property. – The last protest begins with a statement of the decree of August 12. 1762, which issued receipts and expenditure books and ordered that income from church property be used for the most necessary items. The Eminence found this order a) offensive to the archpastors of the church, since they did nothing to deserve the distrust shown to them; b) illegal, because according to the Acts of the Apostles ch. 4, and according to the rules of the church, Apostle. 38 and 41, the management of church property belongs to the bishops, and according to 13 pr. 7 the universe. of the Council, anyone who has taken possession of church property must immediately return it; c) dangerous for the church, according to the consciousness of the empress, expressed in the manifesto of June 28, 1762, by the confiscation of church property, which was started by Peter III; The Orthodox Church will be shaken in its structure and will be placed in danger of the betrayal of St. faith. “Having dealt with the history of the church, we find the first plunderer of church estates, Tsar Julian the Apostate,” while in the Orthodox Russian Church, from the first times, property was donated to churches and monasteries. d) The order is extremely strange: “the prisoner, and the last poor person, is the best and happiest, as long as anyone gives him, he is free to do so. Woe to us, poor bishops, for it is not from filth, but from our own people who pretend to be true believers that we endure great torment.” The second part of the protest relates directly to the confiscation of property. They say that bishops are required to establish and support schools. How to contain them? “Truly, schools and academies are needed, in the proper order, in the reigning cities, in the state capital... And under bishops, there should be schools for priestly children and those preparing to be promoted to the priesthood, so that they can properly understand what they read. And such schools under bishops are needed no other than Russian, since in our churches they read and sing not in Latin or other foreign languages, but in Russian.” – For this we need funds. “What are we doing? In our present century, many people deign to feed dogs better than priests, clergymen and monks, and they will always see to it that churches and monasteries and bishops’ houses do not have excess property, and under the guise of excess they take away the latter.” To confirm his thought, the Right Reverend points to Ananias and Sapphira and to the lover of the states, Judas. Monasteries and monasticism, he says, should be supported even according to the decree of Peter 1, because without them there is no place to get bishops from. “God save such a case, so that our state will be without bishops! There will be nothing else that will follow, except a retreat from our ancient church: there will be a need first for priesthood, and then for lack of priesthood.” In conclusion he says: “No other reason brought me to write all this, both from the word of God and from the law, except zeal for God and the law of God; “If this turns out to be a mistake on my part, I ask for forgiveness.” From this content of the protest, it is clear that Arseny said about church property the same thing that was proposed at the council of 1503 by St. Joseph of Volokolamsk to John III and at the councils of 1551 and 1575 to John IV. One new need for property is indicated here - the maintenance of religious schools. Why did Catherine rebel against Arseny with such strange passion? Even if there were no other reasons, then this alone is enough: according to German philosophy, the church and its ministers are serf servants of the state, who have neither property nor the right to vote. They didn’t see then, as they see now, that true state law does not take away property rights from anyone, otherwise consequences harmful to the state itself could arise, since untruth is a bad means of getting rich. (Modern chronicle, 1862, No. 50). A note about the life of Arseny, his comments on the oath form, two protests about estates, decrees and letters about Arseny were written. in Reading total ist. 1862 book. 2 and 3. The trial about him is in Day 1864 No. 39; Here, two letters from M. Timofey to him are especially remarkable. 45. Sofroniy Mladenovich, originally a Serb, abbot of Moscow. Znamensky Monastery, skon. 1773 He worked a lot on correcting church books and verified both triodions according to the original; translated Vasily V.'s conversations into the six-day period and his interpretation into the psalms. In 1770, the synod instructed the prefect of the Sergius Seminary, Ilyinsky, to review and correct the translation of the conversations, “as clearly and correctly as possible, not in high Slovenian, but in pure Russian style.” Ilyinsky gave the following review to M. Plato: “translation by Hieronymus. Sophronia with approbation (with sample) c. there is almost no difference, and especially in words, there is no similarity; and therefore these works should not be corrected with the original so much as they should be translated again, which in fact is corrected by me with all possible diligence” (Appendix to the creative fathers, 1863, p. 545). Conversations ed. M. 1782 Stefan Ivanovich Pisarev, student and teacher of Moscow. academy, translator and chief secretary of the synod († 1773). Translations of it from Greek: Sacred History. and n. Testament, St. Petersburg 1763, 1821 Elijah Minion of teaching at 3 o'clock. St. Petersburg. 1765. 1776; at 2 p.m. M. 1781 The first volume of teachings, with the dedication of the work to the emperor. Elizabeth, written Dec. 16 1741, printed in St. Petersburg. 1759 (Chronicle lit. 2, 33). The Word of Chrysostom on Eutropius, with news about Eutropius, St. Petersburg. 1759 Conversations of Chrysostom on Psalms Μ. 1773; his about the priesthood, St. Petersburg. 1775 Lenten confection or word about death, St. Petersburg. 1777 Agapit deacon exhortations to the emperor. Justinian M. 1767; Minyatiya, Stone of temptation M. 1783; Plutarch on raising children St. Petersburg. 1771; Skufa Rhetoric, St. Petersburg. 1779, 1798; Gnomologist or sayings of the sages, Μ. 1767; the color of virtues (Tsarskogo RKP No. 656); history of Peter V., work by Katifor, translated 1744, ex. St. Petersburg 1772. 1778; from Italians Advice of Wisdom translated, M. 1760, 1778 Vladimir Trofimovich Zolotnitsky, the son of a priest, a graduate of the Kyiv Academy, who studied philosophy at Moscow University, a teacher of the ground corps, who served in the field service from 1771, died as a colonel of the Dnieper pikemen regiment. His Christian-philosophical works: Discourse on the immortality of the soul, M. 1768 “The state of human life, contained in some moralizing notes concerning natural human inclinations,” St. Petersburg. 1763 Reduction of natural law, St. Petersburg. 1764 Society of Various Persons, St. Petersburg. 1766 According to Novikov, Zolotnitsky wrote “many satirical letters and poems.” In his "fables", ed. M. 1766, moral appendices are unnecessarily long. 46. ​​Jacob Blonnitsky, the son of a priest, who studied at the Kyiv Academy from 1724, became a monk in 1729 before completing his course, and after completing his studies lived in the Lubensky monastery. In 1741 he was summoned to become a teacher at the Tver seminary, where he taught rhetoric and Greek; at the end of 1743, with the approval of M. Raphael, he was appointed as a teacher of Greek at the Moscow Academy, for which he wrote a brief Greek grammar in Latin and translated into Russian the Epictetus Enchiridion, ed. in 1744. From 1745 to 1748, by decree of the synod, he worked together with Archimandrite Illarion Grigorovich in correcting the glory. translation of the Bible: but due to illness he left these studies and was sent to Belgrade to Rev. Joasaph, who placed him in the St. Nicholas Monastery for scientific studies. Here he translated the decrees of the Jerusalem Council, which took place under Saint Dositheus against the Calvinists, and the books of the Areopagite on the heavenly and church hierarchy. In 1751 He secretly retired to Athos and, settling in the Zograf Bulgarian monastery, studied the Greek and ancient Slavic languages, examined and compared up to 40 church Slavic books with Greek originals. The fruit of these studies were: a grammar of the Church Slavonic language, a Hellenic-Slovenian lexicon and a Slavonic-Hellenic lexicon. In 1761 he returned to Russia and introduced St. Synod about his studies on grammar and lexicons. Holy The synod forgave him for his guilt, ordered him to complete his scientific works, and Kyiv. He instructed the metropolitan to place him in one of the Kyiv monasteries and keep him in complete peace. In 1767, Blonnitsky presented his Slavonic grammar of book church use to the synod and wrote about it like this: “in it 1, all obscenities found in previous grammars were cut off; 2, words are often given in their accidents to such an etymological order, which is the only one seen in many years of reading Slovenian books; 3, verbs in their production and in formations, as long as it was possible for the one who invented it to have an unclear path, but they were properly explained and set in their ranks; 4, names in declensions and births to the new path are given according to the special properties of this language; 5, all parts of the word in the essay are separately defined by these rules and the accompanying notes are sufficiently explained, with examples from the newly corrected Bible attached everywhere.” In August, St. The synod instructed the Moscow printing office to review the grammar. In May 1777, the office presented a lengthy report to the synod, which showed the shortcomings of grammar. The first drawback is the darkness of the language in which the grammar is written, partly Slavic, partly Ukrainian. Some rules are so obscure that the words remained incomprehensible to those who revised them. – As for the examples, many of them, besides those given from St. scriptures, only those used in Little Russia were introduced, such as: Pavlenko, otsopredi, I overhear, I am listening a lot, I am hearing, I am calming, and others are also completely uncommon, such as: muffled, stislo, sichu, ryul, gloomy, rakka, tinkling, quacking, cackling, shaking, crashing, I don’t think anything, I read it, I read it, etc. “Therefore, there is no need to print it, especially for public account.” About the Hellenic-Slovenian lexicon, Blonnitsky wrote: “it contains Greek words in alphabetical order with a Slavic translation, with an indication in which book a famous word is used in one meaning or another.” “In the Slovenian-Hellenic-Latin lexicon,” wrote Blonnitsky, Slavic sayings are collected from the above-mentioned Hellenic-Slavic lexicon and to those civilian ones are added from the trilingual, Tsellariev, Latin Slavic handwritten lexicon, stored in the Moscow printing library, and in addition added from synonyms of Polish, which are used in Russia usually. The author's intention was: 1. To define every speech, whether it is pure Slavic, or adopted from a certain dialect, or even from an alien language, to bring it with a Slovenian interpretation. 2. The purpose of the vocable is to bring everything to the theme or to the beginning from which they are produced, whether simple or complex, and to indicate its etymological strength and similarity or dissimilarity with other related ones, which is very necessary in the production and modification of verbs, as I have shown in grammar. 3. Discern which essence agrees in appearance, but differs in sign. 4. By showing anomalies, of which there are not very many in us, and to indicate the deprived defectiva, which are also not found in many numbers.” In 1767, Blonnitsky asked the synod for permission to move to Moscow, where he hoped to have better means to complete his work. In the Moscow printing library, he said, two lexicons are kept: the Hellenic-Slovenian-Latin one of a certain Epiphanius (Slavenitsky) and the Latin-Slovenian one from the books of St. Dimitri. With these aids, the names of animals, fish, trees and herbs were left with him without explanation. Moreover, he wanted to entrust his lexicons for verification to Sophrony (Mladenovic), who was translating books. The Synod ordered the grammar to be sent, but did not allow the writer to appear in Moscow. Father Jacob went to live in a fraternal monastery - here, on the instructions of M. Gabriel, scientists revised his lexicons. Then, for several more years, he multiplied his lexicons and, without finishing, died on April 14. 1774 His Slavic grammar is in the archives of the synod, but it is not known where the lexicons are located. 47. Varlaam Lyashevsky, teacher of Greek and Hebrew, in 1746 prefect and teacher of theology in Kyiv. Academy, since 1757 archimandrite of the Don Monastery and rector of Moscow. Academy († 1774). An excellent philologist: since 1747 he corrected the Slavic translation of the Bible; his “history of corrections and testimony of corrections” is part of the ed. in the preface to the Bible, St. Petersburg. 1751, but most of his comments about the errors of the Ostrog Bible, the Bible of 1663, handwritten lists, differences in the Greek and Latin text according to editions and lists remain unpublished; and their publication would be useful for an Orthodox philologist and even for a teacher of the faith. – His grammatica graecae linguae, Brest. 1746, Lips. 1779, 1785, 1781. Mosquae 1814. Even in 1830, Professor Kolokolov spoke at the St. Petersburg conference that Lyashchevsky’s grammar, more than other known ones, was satisfactory and useful in classical use. His tragic-comedy: “The reward of deeds in the future life” ed. in Letop. lit. 1859, 7–22. This, like Prokopovich’s, is an imitation of Western mysteries, food harmless for youth who loves entertainment. “The Mirror of the Office of Sovereigns” he brought to the. to Peter Feodorovich in Kyiv in 1744 48. Joseph Zolotoy, son of a bell ringer, pupil and teacher of Muscovites. academician, from 1748 its preacher, from 1750 abbot of the Serpukhov monastery, from 1751 archimandrite of Petrovsky, from 1761 bishop of Vologda († 1774); inscription on his tomb: “Glorified everywhere by teaching, by life, This throne has ascended to the shepherds. Where he spent his life in useful deeds, Useful to society, useful to the church, to the city. Verbal sheep that are useful to the flock.” His word on February 26, M. 1749, considered in East. Moscow acad., p. 123, M. 1855 Konstantin Borkovsky, since 1754, teacher in Moscow. academician, from 1757–1769 its preacher, 1760–1772 rector of the Kazan seminary, and finally archimandrite of Nizhny Novgorod († 1774). Known for: a) the word on the day of the accession of the imp. Catherine to the throne, M. 1762 b) in the RCP. essay “about eternity” (Ist. Moscow Academy 102–222). 49. Grigory Vasilyevich Kozitsky, after completing his education at the Kyiv Academy, entered the house of Count Gudovich as a mentor and then traveled around Europe with one of his pupils, Andrei Vasilyevich. Upon returning to Russia, he was appointed (1758) to the Academy of Sciences as a lecturer in philosophy and literature, and soon afterwards he was appointed an adjunct and honorary member of the academy. From here the Empress took him as Secretary of State and he died in this rank in 1775. Even while he was abroad, with one of his collegiate comrades, he translated into Latin from Modern Greek the Miniatievo’s work against papism: “The Stone of Temptation” and published the translation along with the original in Breslavl in 1652, dedicating it to the glorious Hellenist Lyashchevsky. In this edition, Miniatya’s original is much more accurate than what was printed in 1743: the translators not only corrected errors in the text, but added omissions, the passages cited by Miniatya were taken from the best editions, dark places were explained in notes and an alphabetical index was added at the end. In Russia, wanting to acquaint Europe with the scientific works of Russians, he translated two of Lomonosov’s works into Latin: on the benefits of chemistry and on the origin of light. The Empress, understanding his thoughts, instructed him to translate the “Order of the Commission” into Latin. With the rank of member of the assembly established by the empress for the translation of useful foreign books, he translated. he “Eninus's Discourse on the Structure of the World” and ed. St. Petersburg 1770 In 1769 and 1770 he published a satirical magazine: “All sorts of things.” The appeal to the reader indicates the nature and purpose of the publication. “Dear reader! I have undertaken to tell you everything that I please, without any order. Sometimes I will give you useful instructions: sometimes you will laugh; there will be times when I expect surprise from you, and also reproaches.” The best articles are about raising children (extracts from Galakhov I, 328–331). The pictures of life of that time are remarkable (extracts from Afanasyev: satirical magazines, 138–139, 148, 210, 213, 222–228). Answering why the sent letter was not published, the publisher says: “we advise the gentleman to take care of his letter until the time when a lexicon of all human weaknesses will be compiled... It seems to us that his love for his neighbor extends more to correction than to condescension and philanthropy; and whoever only sees vices without love is not able to give instructions to another.” 50. Afanasy Volkhovsky, Kharkov teacher, first prefect and first rector of Sergius Seminary, from 1758 Bishop of Tver, from 1763 of Rostov, introduced the teaching of theology in the Rostov Seminary, † 1776 a) His theological lessons, taught at the Sergius Seminary (systema theologiae coepta anno 1751), are occupied in plan and content by Theophan; only some treatises or parts thereof are presented scholastically. Thoughts of life also meet in places. Speaking about the need to offer the teaching of faith catechistically, he notes: “catechistic theology is necessary for everyone. For how can one be called a Christian who does not know the essence of the Christian faith? Due to ignorance of the first principles of the Orthodox faith, the pitiful simple people easily succumb to the seduction of false teachers and fall into the grossest errors. I’m not talking about ancient times: the present state of our church serves as proof of how many thousands of simple souls are drawn into schism and are almost daily abducted from the society of the faithful, while the priests either doze or suffer from the same disease of ignorance.” Athanasius presents Theophan's treatises, which were suspected of being unorthodox, in his own, scholastic way. b) His words: on September 25. about spiritual poverty, M. 1745; weeks 14, about the title to the kingdom of heaven, M. 1745; on June 29, M. 1749; on 25 Sep. about the power of the prayers of God's saints, M. 1749; for the new year, M. 1758; another for the New Year, M. 1763; his words resemble learned treatises and are very long; one in 36 printed pages. Extracts from the first two in Add. to creativity father 1861 563–573. c) According to the RCP. his “instructions to the priest’s elder”, 1760, is known. Isaiah Germanovsky, 1766–1770 rector of the St. Petersburg seminary, archimandrite of Nezhin and from 1775 of Kiev-Mikhailovsky, known by the word: for the celebration of the second reception of noble maidens of the educational society, St. Petersburg. 1767 O. Isaiah “composed many very significant words,” says Novikov, but now they are unknown. 51. Victor Ladyzhinsky, mentor Kyiv. Academician, from 1764 Archimandrite of Nezhin, and from 1768 of Kursk († 1777). Known for two sermons delivered during the series: for the New Year, St. Petersburg. 1775; for the day of theses. led book Natalia Alekseevna, St. Petersburg. 1775; his report on his position is in Askochensky 2, 240, 241. German, hierodeacon of the Neva Lavra, translated from the Greek word Macarius of Egypt, St. Petersburg. 1772, 1817 and, together with Hierodeacon Modest, composed a symphony on St. Scripture, St. Petersburg. 1773 52. Ioann Ioannov, archpriest of the Nikitsky church, in the Basmanny part of Moscow, published “Soul-saving reflections on the knowledge of God and oneself, with an apology to quench sadness,” M. 1779. Ivan Khmelnitsky, having completed his studies at the Kyiv Academy, took more classes at the University of Koenigsberg and was awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy here. Upon returning to Russia, he was a member of the drafting commission for a new code. By the will of the Empress, he wrote “instructions for the commission to compose a project.” He wrote in Latin: “Discourse on the Principles of Philosophy,” ex. in Koenigsberg in 1762. Another of his works, also written in Latin. language, “about kinship, according to the laws of nature and according to people’s rights.” Its translation from German: “the light visible in faces, or the greatness and diversity of constructive intentions,” St. Petersburg. 1773; ed. 3, St. Petersburg 1805, ed. 4, St. Petersburg 1817 According to Novikov, Khmelnitsky wrote “a refutation of slavery according to the natural law and the right of the people.” Of course, this was a response to the imp’s task. Catherine. 53. John Stavrovsky, archpriest of Moscow. Sreten. Cathedral († 1782. His words: on the passion of the Lord, M. 1778; about unanimity in the birth of Grand Princess Mary, M. 1781; about true joy in the birth of Prince Alexander II, M. 1781. 54. St. Tikhon (Timofey) Sokolov, orphan, pupil and mentor of Novgorod, rector of Tver, from 1761 bishop of Ladoga, from 1767 bishop of Voronezh, then lived in retirement in the Zadonsk monastery, one of the great luminaries of the Russian church († 1783). The writings are sacred. Tikhon ed. in volume 15 St. Petersburg 1825 a) In the essay “On True Christianity,” St. Although Tikhon does not deal only with the dogmas of faith and it was written not for school, but for ordinary people (vol. 4, 284): but here he offers “about the word of God and spiritual wisdom, about the heart and tongue of man; about the last four; about the gospel and faith, about St. church and baptism." In general, moral rules are derived here from clearly stated dogmatic thoughts; The composition cost the writer a lot of work. A significant part of his “cell letters” contains reflections on the knowledge of God and the perfections of God and a depiction of the earthly life of Jesus Christ (Vol. 15, letters 31–55, 57–71, 78–82, 103–105, 110–114, 222, 223); about St. special brief instruction on the mysteries (vol. 1, 3–17). Holy Scripture serves for him as a seal of truth for every contemplative thought. “The Word of God,” he says, “is the undoubted, true, firm and unshakable rule, as given by God, of holy faith and godly Christian life: for it is a lamp to our feet, as the prophet confesses” (4:12). b) He is a preacher and spiritual mentor: his sermons are known (vol. 3); short words (vol. 1): flesh and spirit (vol. 2); spiritual treasure gathered from the world, at 4 o'clock. (vol. 10–13); letters to friends (vol. 14); two letters to Christ. Thurs. 1833 4, 62; 1834 1, 314; two letters to Moskvit. 1850 No. 18; 1851 No. 1; cell letters, St. Petersburg. 1796; exhortations and instructions to the flock (Collected works. vol. 4, 337, 1, 103, 105, 121, 152, 161. M. 1825); the saint's teaching to lenders - on Resurrection. Thurs. V, 258; ibid. V, 421 – his letter; another in Chr. Thu., 1856; third in The Wanderer, 1860. The high dignity of his moral instructions is also evident from the fact that St. The synod compiled from them “instructions on each Christian’s own duties,” St. Petersburg. 1789, and this “instruction” was sent to churches for reading in churches. For the success of the preaching of St. Tikhon, first of all, considered the good life of a preacher necessary. “It is necessary,” he says, “to go forward oneself, who wants to be a leader and show the way to others and lead them to the fatherland; - It is necessary so that the conscience does not convict oneself; whoever wants to convict others for their sins should not hear: doctor, heal yourself (1, 154). What you have to say to people, you must judge and understand well and offer it to people. The food is first boiled and dissolved in salt, and the meal is presented as pleasing and useful. Thus, a shepherd must cook the food of God’s word inside his heart and dissolve it with the salt of his mind, and thus present a spiritual meal to hungry people: otherwise the shepherd can conveniently sin in the word... What you teach the people subordinate to you, you must do everything yourself first; This is how you will teach in word and deed, when your life is in accordance with the word” (1, 153). Because he himself observed this rule, his instructions have such a strong effect on the soul. A distinctive feature of the instructions of St. Tikhon - depiction of spiritual thoughts in visible images; he has a special gift to explain the invisible to the visible, to lift thought from earth to heaven. His book shows this most clearly: “Spiritual treasure gathered from the world.” St. Tikhon tries to speak directly to the common sense of everyone, acts on the sense of truth innate to everyone. This is what he says about standing reverently in the church. “For you too, Christian, take away the boots from your feet, that is, worldly sadness, throw away vain thoughts when you come to the house of God: for the place you are standing on is holy ground.” The man is a plowman! stop thinking about farming, throw haymaking out of your head, don’t wander around the fields, steppes, villages, hamlets; You have come to the wrong place: the place you are standing on is holy ground. Merchant! don’t haggle here, don’t negotiate the price, don’t worry about selling, put the shop, the bargaining, the goods out of your head; don't buy a place here; They don’t buy or sell here: there’s a place where you’re standing, the land is holy. Warrior! don’t think about the gun, about the battle, about the victory here; do not prepare yourself for battle, do not prepare for the ship; do not scold the place here; the place you stand on, the ground is holy. Secretary! do not prepare a promemory; do not write interrogations; This is not the right place; – don’t judge here; for there is nothing to judge here; there are no quarrels here, no one here is a petitioner; This is not a judicial place: the place you stand on is holy ground.” - Everyone will agree that this appeal to everyone’s common sense is also a masterful oratorical appeal. c) Shepherd and monk St. Tikhon left many instructions in his writings. These are: his instructions about confession (1, 18); sample admonition to the defendant (vol. 1, 41); district message to the clergy (1, 25–40); rules of monastic life (vol. 1, 67); instructions to monks (vol. 1, 75); those who have turned from the vanity of the world (vol. 1, 54). Oh St. Tikhon, as a writer, reads. cit.: Tikhon 1, Bishop. crow. M. 1844 55. Gabriel (Grigory) Kremenetsky, a graduate of the Kharkov college and Moscow. academician, from 1736 mentor of the Neva Seminary, from 1742 its rector, from 1749 bishop. Kolomna, from 1755 Kazan, from 1772 Archbishop of St. Petersburg, from 1770 Metropolitan of Kiev, to whom Kyiv owes a lot. academy († 1783). His teaching on Christian rites, or a word to the Catholic people, Kyiv, 1779, explains in questions and answers the sacraments and rites of the Orthodox Church. In the RKP. remain: a) His pastoral letter to the Kazan flock; written on November 15, 1755 from St. Petersburg. In it, he desires and promises his flock the mercy of God, if the flock maintains faith in the Triune; “second, if you confess even before the end of your life, that there is no other Savior to the world except our Lord Jesus Christ, who poured out His most pure blood on the cross for the salvation of mankind and with it quenched the righteous wrath of God and His Father. cathedral and apostolic church, preserve”, b) Instructions on deanery, compiled on the basis of the rules of St. fathers, regulations and decrees. Order on the use of 58,425 rubles donated by him to the Neva Academy, ed. in Askochensky (Kiev and its Academy 2, 305–307). Jerome Farmakovsky, student, prefect and rector of the Kazan seminary, since 1771 Bishop of Vladimir († 1783). His words: two in Murom, M. 1779; two at the opening of the Vladimir governorship, M. 1779; for the consecration of the church in the Senaksar desert, M. 1780. Several of his letters to the Sarov desert, ex. in Description Saratov Desert, M. 1853, pp. 64–85–92. 56. Nikodim, the elder of Starodub († 1784), is known for disputes with schismatics about the rite of acceptance into the church. His detailed description of the disputes about the Moscow worldview ref. in East schismatic IV, 40–59. His extensive letter to the monk Gerasim about the cross is also known. Enlightened by the turmoil of willful ignorance, he desired to accept the blessed priesthood. In this arrangement he wrote: a) a letter to the abbot of the Pokrovsky monastery, Mikhail (Kalmyk); b) monk Gerasim about the varied depiction of the cross; c) letter to gr. Zavadovsky, with the desire to unite with the church; d) letters to the Starodub residents with exhortations to agree to the proposed conditional union with the church (Vitaly about the church); e) letter to Potemkin dated April 23. 1783 with 12 conditions under which up to 1,500 Slobozhans are ready to unite with the church (Tsarskogo No. 490); f) suicide letter to M. Gabriel (from Vitaly); g) letter in sl. Klimov dated December 15. 1783; h) draft request to the synod. Writings against the schism date back to the same time: a) objections of 1760, written by some Theodore (Tsarsky No. 31); b) church approval of 1768 (Tsarskogo No. 30). Cassian Lekhnitsky, prefect from 1773, rector of the Kyiv Academy from 1775 († 1784), wrote a guide for his listeners “on the dogmas of faith.” It was printed in Kiev, 1779. 57. Veniamin Putsek Grigorovich, since 1733, the first instructor of the Kazan seminary, who taught all subjects of seminary education one after another; from 1740 hieromonk; more than once he went to preach to St. faith to the Muslims and pagans and converted many Tatars, Cheremis, Chuvash, Mordovians and Votyaks to Christ; from 1748 bishop of Nizhny Novgorod, from 1753 of Tver, from 1758 of Pskov, from 1761 archbishop of St. Petersburg and from 1763 of Kazan, retired from March 17, 1782 and died in 1785. Lyubarsky writes that while he was a seminary mentor, “on established days, both students and people, he publicly interpreted the Catechism and delivered sermons”; Having been in ministry for two years (1746–1748), he preached as assigned. His word on the 25th day of May, M. 1754. His appeals to the people during the Pugachev rebellion are famous; one of them was published in the Kazan provinces. led 1844 Nos. 36, 37. An admonishing message to the flock, sent to churches, ed. in Right. Social security 1859 2, 205–210. Despite the fact, Benjamin, due to the scoundrel’s slander, suffered severely, being taken into custody, and almost died of paralysis. - His response to the imp’s letter. Catherine in Encycl. Lexicon 9, 418. The word in the public meeting of the Kazan gymnasium in 1775. M. 1775. 58. Anthony (Alexander Borisov, otherwise Runovsky), a student of St. Petersburg. seminary, from 1763, teacher of the law of the cadet corps, from 1770, with the rank of Archimandrite of Vyazhitsky, preacher of Moscow. Academy, from 1774 Bishop of Pereyaslavl, in 1776 he entered Astrakhan, where he started a seminary, † Nov. 10, 1786 His words: in the d. coronation of the imp. Catherine, St. Petersburg. 1761; upon completion of the first year of the cadet corps, St. Petersburg. 1767; upon completion of the feat of inoculating smallpox imp. Ekaterina, St. Petersburg 1769; for the funeral of Field Marshal gr. A. G. Razumovsky, St. Petersburg. 1771; other sermons, by the way, even upon joining the Astrakhan flock, remained in the RCP. (Lyuminarsky, Historical Astrakh. Hierarch. in Reading General History, 1848, No. 7). Tikhon Yakubovsky, son of a Korop resident, a pupil of Chernigov and Kiev, from 1774 bishop of Sevsky, from 1767 of Voronezh, from 1776 of Suzdal, † 1786. His word and speech at the opening of the Suzdal governorship, M. 1779. Philip Vasiliev, priest of the Church of Constantine and Helena in St. Petersburg. hospital, spoke the word on the day of the church holiday, ed. St. Petersburg 1782 59. Makar (Mikhail) Susalnikov, from the students of the Sergius Seminary, priest, 1778–1782, preacher of the academy and abbot of Znamensky, from 1782 archimandrite of the Sergius Hermitage and teacher of the law of the cadet corps († 1787). His works: a) “Admonition to young men”, in the form of a catechism, in 2 hours. St. Petersburg. 1785 b) Words that are very sufficient (Collected works in 4 parts. M. 1799–1803). 60. Theophylact of Gorsky, student and rector of the Moscow Academy, since 1776 bishop of northern Pereyaslavl, since 1788 bishop of Kolomna († 1788). a) Taxonomist: orthodoxa orientalis ecclesiae doctrina de credendis et agendis, Lipsiae 1748. Petropoli 1818. The work was compiled according to the plan of the author himself; the presentation of thoughts is not always original; the writer followed Buddha and Schubert. - At least his composition is better than previous systems, partly because it has eliminated all disputes, which for many are boring, partly because in the presentation of parts it is distinguished by the sequence of thoughts. “After the beginnings and foundations of divine Revelation,” says the writer, we will present: 1) the doctrine of God, considered in Himself and in relation to His works; 2) further we will talk about the origin and state of the first man, also about the fall and the disasters that people suffered as a result of the fall; 3) we will present the teaching about God’s advice to save man and reveal how this advice was fulfilled - about the universal grace of God and about Christ; 4) about the assimilation of salvation, or about preparing a person for salvation, about faith, rebirth, conversion and good deeds; 5) about the means of salvation, about the law and the gospel, about the sacraments and the church; 6) finally, let us depict what a person should hope for and what he should fear at the end of this life.” This is the content of dogma. As you can see, the writer introduces into it some subjects of moral theology. Plan of moral teaching: “first, we will talk about divine laws in general, then about human actions and about the actions of regenerate people, about the means of preserving the law, about conscience and punishments; then we will explain the meaning of the ten-words and talk about the duties of a Christian in all conditions; finally about the means to Christian perfection and Christian prudence.” The most important mistake here is the determination to present the duties of a Christian according to the commandments of Moses: the writer will certainly repeat himself often and his presentation will not have an internal connection. Both in moral teaching and in dogmatics, the writer cites texts of Scripture to support one or another of his thoughts, but never bothers to think whether the text exactly contains the meaning that it assumes. These are still remnants of arrogant scholasticism. Another systematic work of Theophylact is an extract from the first part of Orthodox teaching: “Dogmas of the Christian Orthodox Faith” in Russian and German with dedication to. K. Natalya Alekseevna, M. 1773; in Russian and Latin, M. 1773; in Russian, M. 1773; in German. M. 1773; in Russian and French, St. Petersburg. 1792 b) Of his sermons, the funeral homily for M. Timothy, M. 1767, is remarkable; other words: on d.ap. Andrew the First-Called, M. 1776: on d.ap. Peter and Paul, M. 1776 c) In the RKP. there remains an interpretation of it for all the Holy Scriptures. Scripture. 61. Joasaph Zabolotsky, preacher of Moscow. Academy, since 1777, teacher of law at the Academy of Arts and Archman. Sergius Hermitage, in 1782 Bishop of Nizhny Novgorod, from 1783 first bishop, then Archbishop of Tver, who died in 1788 not yet old, 50 years old. His words and speeches, M. 1789–90, show him as a gifted preacher: in his works one can see the ingenuity of the mind and the vividness of the imagination; his language is pure, something few could boast of in his time. Konstantin Kryzhanovsky, graduate of Kyiv. Academy, who completed his education abroad, taught in Kyiv from 1753. academies of Jewish, German and French languages; he knew the latter as well as his natural one (Askochensky K. acad. 2:182); from 1770 Archpriest Romensky; translated from the Latin work of Bl. Augustine: a) contemplation of God, b) solitary souls’ conversations with God; c) about diligent teaching about Christ, or the Word of God, in one’s mind, St. Petersburg. 1786, 1795 Dimitry Sergeevich Anichkov, a student of Sergius Seminary, completed his education at Moscow University and was a professor of philosophy and mathematics here, † 1788. a) His philosophical works: “On the wise saying of the Greek philosopher: consider every matter with reasoning” M. 1762. This world is proof of the wisdom of God, and there is nothing accidental in it. M. 1767. On the beginning and origin of natural worship of God, M. 1769. This work contained several thoughts that disagreed with true religion, taken from Lucretius; Anichkov replied that incorrect ideas were introduced during printing, outside his knowledge, by a comrade who returned from England. In accordance with the opinion of Archpriest Alekseev, the copies were selected and burned. Anichkov corrected the reasoning and published it again. In all his subsequent writings he was of a strict religious and moral direction, just as in life he was sincerely pious. “On the properties of human knowledge and on the means that protect the mortal mind from errors,” M. 1770, is a correct and clear reasoning. – In an essay on obstacles to knowledge, M. 1774, he points out deceptions of the senses and prejudices. Particularly remarkable in its sublimely spiritual content is his speech “about the immateriality of the human soul and its immortality arising from it,” M. 1777; in the age of materialism, such speech shows in Anichkov a high character, which boldly goes into battle with the delusion of the century. The essay is worth attention: “On perverse concepts arising from excessive trust in feelings,” M. 1778. “On methods of explaining the connection of the soul with the body,” M. 1783, less interesting. In addition to Baumeister, he wrote for the audience his annotationes in logicam, metaphysicam et cosmologiam, M. 1782. b) Mathematician: ed. "Course of Pure Mathematics", M. 1765. This is Weidler's translation. Subsequently, he changed, supplemented and corrected this course, so that an original essay was compiled in 4 parts (M. 1780–1787), including arithmetic, geometry, trigonometry and algebra. Its arithmetic was published in Moscow in 1764, then with additions in 1775, and several more times. 62. Pallady (Pavel) Yuriev, a student of the Nizhny Novgorod seminary, from 1751 hegumen, from 1753 archimandrite of Pechersk, 1758–1778 bishop of Ryazan; he introduced the teaching of Greek and Hebrew, arithmetic and geometry, and finally theology, which had not yet been taught until 1767, at the Ryazan seminary. His last years he lived in retirement in the Nizhny Novgorod Pechersk monastery, where he had previously been abbot, and where he died in 1789. a) His instructive words, ed. at 3 o'clock Moscow 1763, are not distinguished by their eloquence. b) Chronology, or indications of years from the beginning of the world to 1778, divided into 7 centuries, M. 1777 c) His spiritual testament to the RKP. (Makaria, Monuments, St. Petersburg, 1857, pp. 253–255). Petr Tomilov, Moscow. priest, translated “Sulpicius Severa St. History in. and n. covenant", ed. M. 1783; He also submitted to the censorship in 1786 his interpretation of the Epistle to the Romans. 63. Tarasy Verbitsky, rector of Kiev. academy († 1790). His words: in d.ap. Andrew the First-Called, about labors worthy of reward, St. Petersburg. 1774; about the cheerfulness with which we must carry forward the Christian feat into the future of blessings. book Alexandra, St. Petersburg 1774; other words in RKP. Mikhail Shvansky, archpriest of the Kharkov cathedral and prefect of the collegium, very learned († 1790). Many of his words were published under his own name by his successor, Archpriest Andrei Prokopovich, M. 1803. According to Novikov, one of Shvansky’s words was published in 1770, and he calls the preacher “very skillful in preaching the word of God.” Vasily Petrov, Moscow. priest, “The Hand of the Theologian,” M. 1787, is a chronological confusion. Nikifor Zyrin, archpriest of the mountains. Makariev, on Unzha, composed “Non-original ipdiction or sighted Paschalia”, M. 1787, in the second edition of 1799, with the discussion of the Reverend. Simone about Easter. 64. Theodore Ushakov, abbot of the Senaksar desert, strict ascetic of piety († 1791). His teachings were published in his life, M. 1847. Ioann Gerasimovich Kharlamov, Moscow. archpriest († 1791), known as a translator of useful books. Translated: from Latin. St. Ambrose About positions, M. 1767; his About repentance, St. Petersburg. 1778; with French Ancient history, with geographical indications. and chronological places, at 3 hours, M. 1787; from German Wagner's St. history in 208 stories; 2 hours, M. 1775, 1793 Conversations with God, in 12 parts, M. 1787 Collection of discussions concerning literature, general and sacred history, op. Delamberta, part 1. St. Petersburg, 1784 - the mistake of being carried away by the spirit of the time; De Beaumont, youth school, 4 hours. St. Petersburg. 1774 Varlaam (Vlasiy) Mislavsky, a graduate of Kyiv. Academy, Archpriest Glukhovsky, since 1784 rector of the Kyiv Academy († 1791). He greeted the Empress with a speech at the Academy, ed. at Askochensky (Kiev 2, 359, 360). 65. Ambrose Serebryakov, student and teacher of the Vyatka Seminary, since 1778 prefect of Moscow. Academy, from 1782 rector of Novgorod, from 1786 from the Olonets bishop archbishop of Yekaterinoslav, member of the Russian Federation. academy, learned and inquisitive, vigilant and meek archpastor, much beloved prince. Potemkin, who spent his free time with him in spiritual conversations († 1792). a) Then, as he was a teacher of rhetoric, he wrote “A Brief Guide to Russian Oratorio,” M. 1778, for the 2nd time in 1792. This, after Lomonosov’s rhetoric, was the first experience in Russian. Here we propose different types of evidence appropriate to one or another type of oratorical speech. The writer says that the Russian syllable cannot be quite abundant and sublime without Slavic words, and that, however, there is nothing more unpleasant than the stupid combination of a purely Slavic word with a purely Russian one. However, he paid a tribute to the century in his leadership. He participated in the composition of the second part of the academy's dictionary when he was present at the synod. b) In his few published sermons, he follows his rule on language. One of the three funeral words of his book. Potemkin's "The Last Kiss", Iasi 1791, was published (Northern Bee 1848 No. 208) as an example of touching eloquence. In addition, they are known: the speech of Prince. Potemkin, Iasi, 1790; word in d. thezoim. imp. Catherine, St. Petersburg. 1789; in the third week led fasting in the Nyamet monastery, Iasi 1790 c) Interpretation of it on the prophet. Ezekiel, unfinished, in manuscript. d) Comparison of Christianity with Alkoran, in the RKP. e) Milton's Paradise Lost, translated from French, M. 1780. The forewarning shows the “excesses and errors” of the poem regarding the teachings of the Orthodox Church. – His review of Pope’s essay “An Experience on Man” – in Bibliogr. Zap. 1858, pp. 490, 491. Moses (Mikhail) Gumilevsky, student and teacher of Moscow. Academy, from 1783 its prefect, from 1791 Bishop of Feodosia, killed by servants in 1792 a) Two funeral speeches of the book. Potemkin, one in Nikolaev, the other in Kherson, ed. in Otech. Zap. 1824 7.19, and to Kherson. Epar. Ved. 1861 61–64. The speaker shows the best qualities of the deceased and the grief of Nikolaev and Kherson, founded by Potemkin. b) Philologist: “Discourse on the purification, fertilization and enrichment of the Russian language,” M. 1786; Hellenic-Greek grammar, M. 1788. He translated the conversations of Macarius, part 2. M. 1782; conversations of P. Chrysanthus, M. 1784; Dionysius the Areopagite hierarchy, M. 1786; church hierarchy, M. 1787. He also translated several volumes of Fleury’s church history, but the translation remained unpublished after Potemkin’s death. Hieronymus Ershov, from 1788, from the prefects of the Pererva seminary, prefect of Moscow. academy, from 1790 abbot of Ugresh († 1792), in 1787 he submitted to the censorship a translation of Bingham’s church antiquities. His “thoughts on the bliss of a pious life,” M. 1703. Gideon Zamytsky, a student of Sergius Seminary, one of the examiners of the Krutitsa department, preacher of the academy in 1759–1760, then abbot of the David Hermitage. He translated from Greek “Philo the Jew on the Sabbath and other Old Testament holidays,” M. 1783. Mikhail Zavyalov, student and since 1783 poetry teacher in Moscow. academies; in the same year, he asked to be dismissed to a secular rank, but M. Platon wrote: “as Zavyalov recently held a teaching position at the academy, he must continue it and thereby deserve the enlightenment he acquired in theological schools.” Zavyalov remained a teacher at the academy 1783–1785. After leaving the academy, he served in the office of Prince. Potemkin, but even here he retained a warm love for St. faith. O. Polubensky (§ 117) in a letter to Metropolitan Seraphim wrote: “Mikhail Zavyalov, who was formerly a teacher at the academy and a short one for me, while in the office of His Serene Highness, was at the table (of the prince) and heard and told me; the prince said: the French have many defensive books about religion; the time is coming so that ours don’t doze off and don’t make mistakes.” – Zavyalov thanked the church for his education with the wonderful fruits of his labors. He translated Dergam's very intelligent and useful work: Natural Theology, 2 parts M. 1784, 1811, 1820. and Erasmus's work: Christian, warrior of Christ, M. 1783; His poems are also known: an ode to the emperor’s name day. Catherine, Nov. 24 1784 St. Petersburg. 1784; Ode to Arseny, bishop. Tversky, M. 1789 66. Tikhon (Timofey) Malinin, student and preacher of Moscow. Academy, Archimandrite of the Otroch Monastery and Rector of Tver, since 1775 Bishop of Voronezh; in Voronezh he opened the teaching of philosophy and theology and the teaching of French and German; in 1788 he was transferred to Tver with the title of member of the Synod, and in 1782 - to Astrakhan, where he died in 1793. a) Interpreter of Scripture: Interpretation of the 1st Council Epistle of Peter, M. 1794. b) A preacher who often preached sermons without preparation. But now only the word about the accession to the throne of the Emperor is known. Catherine, St. Petersburg. 1791, and the word at the funeral is holy. Tikhon I – in the collected works of Tikhon I. c) His letter to Metropolitan Plato in East. Moscow acad. 279, 270. M. 1855 Nikolai Malinin, student of Moscow. Academy, translated: Eusebius Church. history part 1, M. 1786; essay bl. Theodorit on Providence, M. 1784; The last thing is complicated with Moscow. The Academy owes a debt that has long been borne by it. Back in 1724, the Holy Synod instructed her students, Postnikov and Kargopolsky, who returned from abroad, to translate the book of Blessed. Theodoret about Providence, but the order remained unfulfilled (Ist. Moscow Academy, 236). Vasily Belyaev, a student of Moscow. Academy, translated an important work from Latin: Anselm’s reflection on the redemption of the human race, M. 1783; hand book bl. Augustine on the Contemplation of Christ, M. 1783; his holy and soul-saving reflections, M. 1784; in addition, translated by him, with the addition of his own: Saving reflections on the knowledge of the human, internal and external, state, M. 1782; The science of dying safely, M. 1783; Shield of patience for various misfortunes, M. 1787 67. Innokenty Polyansky, student and prefect of the Ryazan seminary, since 1783 rector of St. Petersburg. seminary, since 1788 Bishop of Voronezh, member of the Academy († 1794). Selected teachings by him. in Voronezh 1799; he provided notes for the second part of the academy's dictionary. Paisiy Velichkovsky, who studied at the Kiev Academy and labored on Mount Athos, from 1779 the abbot and then the archimandrite of the Moldavian German monastery, who taught many people the ascetic life († 1794). a) Works: scroll about mental prayer; five letters. Both ed. together with his life, M. 1847 b) Translated the Philokalia, M. 1793, 1822, 1832; St. Isaac the Syrian instructions, German. monastery 1811 Maxim the Confessor questions and answers (rkp.): Theodora Studite catechumen, M. 1856: Abba Barsanuphius, M. 1854 68. Grigory Savich Skovoroda, a student of the Kyiv Academy, who traveled abroad, teacher of the Pereyaslav Seminary and Kharkov College; Having parted with the latter due to displeasure, he spent a wandering life, moving from one place to another; but where he stayed, he lived alone, on a farm, in an apiary, in a cell; he aroused in the young people of the Ukrainian nobility a love for science, just as, being among the people, he aroused in the people a love of goodness in the people's language. Under his portrait, dressed in a scroll, the verses are read: "A zealot for spiritual truth, theologian, And in word and mind and life the sage, Lover of simplicity and freedom from vanities, Without flattery, a friend is straight, always happy with everything Reached the top of science, having learned the spirit of nature, Skovoroda’s example is worthy of hearts.” The character of the life of Skovoroda, who died in 1794, is accurately depicted here. About his life in detail - in the Foundation of 1862. Published works of Skovoroda: 1) Friendly conversations about self-knowledge, 3 hours. St. Petersburg. 1798, according to the RKP. conversation: “Ask about knowing yourself.” 2) The initial door to Christian goodwill: written in 1766 for the young gentry of the Kharkov province, and updated in 1780, in the Zion Bulletin of 1806 and in the Morning Star of 1834. 3) Three songs of Skovoroda, from his “garden of divine songs”, where they are numbered XVIII, XIII and X; ed. in the Telescope, 1831 4) Poor Lark, parable, M. 1836 5) Friendly conversation about the spiritual world, M. 1837 6) Conversation of two, M. 1837 7) Kharkov fables, 30 in total, M. 1837 8) Swearing by the arch. Michael with Satan, about this: it’s easy to be good, M. 1839 9) Works of Grigory Savich, St. Petersburg. 1860 where a) XXXIII of his poems, with the title: “the garden of sacred songs, grown from the grains of St. Scriptures”, b) prose articles published for the first time: “spinning the demon with Barsaboo” and a conversation about that - “know for yourself”. The publication, unfortunately, contains errors. 10) Skovoroda’s letters, many ed. in the Fundamentals of 1862 Remain unpublished, except for 8 translated articles, works: a) about the ancient serpent and the Bible, written. in 1763 b) Narcissus, know thyself, op. written, like Ashan, in 1765 in the Zimborsky apiary; c) symphony to the words: reh, I will keep my ways; d) symphony: if you don’t hang it yourself; e) Alcibiades Icon, Op. 1776 f) illiterate Marco, op. 1785; g) alphabet of the world, about nature; h) conversation - ring; i) the ancient world; i) Lot's wife, op. 1787, in Gusinka; j) conversation 1 Zion; k) conversation 2 Zion; l) dialogue – soul and imperishable spirit; n) grateful hero; o) two sermons: one on the words: he woke up and saw his glory; another to the words: let him kiss me with the kisses of his lips; n) a book about love for one’s own, called Olga the Orthodox (review of her essay - Lotova’s wife); p) about worship in heaven; c) about the state of a person after death. – Many of these works are in the author’s lists written for Yakov Mikhailovich Zakharzhevsky. To his credit and to the general benefit, the Ukrainian philosopher in his writings is most concerned about the better life of man. He awakens self-knowledge in everyone. Know yourself, know yourself, he repeats in several essays. Recognizing himself, a person will see the dignity of his immortal soul and the insignificance of everything earthly. Everything temporary in the eyes of a philosopher is of little importance; our thoughts and desires must be constantly turned to eternity. “Christ’s philosophy turns to the heart and heals it,” he wrote, and he wrote correctly. Skovoroda’s moral teaching is as sublime from a philosophical point of view as it is in agreement with Christianity. But the theoretical way of thinking in his writings is obviously taken from Behm’s mysticism. Kovalensky, at the end of his notes about Skovoroda, speaking about his last meeting with him, writes: “I don’t know the Martinists,” said Skovoroda, “but every sect smells of property; and where there is property, there is no main goal or main wisdom.” Getting to the point of talking about “the philosopher’s stone” and about making a composition to extend human life to several thousand years, Skovoroda said: “these are the remains of the Egyptian carnivore, which, unable to prolong bodily life, found a way to continue the existence of corpses and mummies. This sect, measuring life by the yardstick of years, and not deeds, is not in accordance with the rules of the wise about whom it is written: having lived a short time, fulfill your duty.” The assessment of the Martinists is correct! But the trouble is that Skovoroda’s philosophical theory largely coincided with the theory of the Martinists, or, what is the same, with Boehm’s theory. A pantheistic view of nature is often visible in his writings; God and nature, nature and God are one: you often see this in his work. Disregard for the letter of Scripture is the same as Bem's; he adores the spirit, the spirit of Scripture, as if the spirit were not expressed in the letter. Skovoroda has one advantage over the Martinists and Boehm, that the practical sobriety of his soul inspired him with an aversion to materialism, whereas in Boehm’s philosophy the spirit is relegated to matter and life is dirty. The peasant Karazin brought three volumes of Bem’s works, translated in the last century, to the writer. There is no indication in the manuscript who translated Bem: but based on the contemporaneity of the volumes with Skovoroda and his connections with the noble houses of Ukraine, it is likely that the volumes, if not translated by Skovoroda, were then in his hands and brought unclean dust onto his soul. Skovoroda’s language is mostly pretentious and dark, mystical, beloved by Bem. Therefore, it is not easy to understand Skovoroda. The best of his works is The Initial Door to Christianity. It is written clearly and simply and its instructions are close to the heart. 69. Damascene Semenov-Rudnev, student of Moscow. Academy, from 1766–1772 he attended lessons in theological sciences, history and mathematics in Göttingen, and improved his knowledge of the languages ​​of Hebrew, Greek, French and German; in 1773 he received the degree of professor of philosophy, history and philology at the Academy of Sciences, from 1775 he was prefect, and from 1778 he was rector of Moscow. academy. Already a rector-archimandrite, on Sundays he publicly explained the Holy Scriptures in the audience. Quite a number of nobles and merchants gathered to read and listen to it; from 1782 bishop of Sevsky, from 1783–1794 of Nizhny Novgorod, died in retirement in 1795. a) Historian: wrote in German. language abbreviated chronicle of ancient Rus' according to Nestor, ed. Gatterer in Universal Historie an. 1771; This work brought the writer fame in Germany and a diploma for the title of correspondent of the historical institute. His note on the Chuvash religion in 1785 in the RKP., Geographer, Society. b) A well-versed historian of learning - in the treatise Theophos published by him. Prokopovich: de processione spiritus S. Gothae an. 1772; Here are the following, composed by him: a chronological list of teachers who wrote in defense of the Greek beliefs about the Holy Spirit and against it, notes and amendments to the history of discord and the life of Theophanes. With these additions, Theophanes's work was corrected and expanded, so that it received much more value than before. Damascene, having in mind the best editions of the works of the fathers and teachers of the church, exhibited authentic readings of ancient teachers based on them, or showed that the work that Prokopovich exhibited with the name of the ancient teacher did not belong to this teacher at all. – In 1785, he wrote “The Russian Library or information about all the books that have been published in Russia since the beginning of the printing house.” It consists of 3 books; the first describes books from 1518–1742; in the second, 1742–1768; in the third, 1769–1785; at the beginning of everything there is “a brief description of Russian scientific history, an excellent essay for the time. When listing books, scholarly remarks about the merits and content of the book are sometimes added; Many books are told where they are kept. The “library” is located between the RCP. Moscow spirit. acad. No. 118–115. c) The Clever Preacher: Words Spoken 1775–1782, M. 1783; word on accession to the throne, St. Petersburg. 1792 d) Philologist: “Sulzer on the benefits of reading ancient classical writers,” M. 1774, 1780, 1787. He translated the Orthodox teaching of M. Plato into Latin (Orthodoxa doctrina Petrp. 1774); the works of Plato were published in 9 parts, M. 1779, the works of Lomonosov in 3 parts, M. 1778. “Considering that in the Nizhny Novgorod seminary,” the empress wrote to Damascus, “the teaching of the languages ​​of the different peoples found in your diocese is taught, I wish that your Eminence would deliver to me a dictionary of those languages, writing in Russian every word as it is pronounced.” - To carry out the will of the empress, the best students were chosen, some of the priests and those educated in St. faith of foreigners. Under the direct supervision of the bishop, in 7 months a dictionary of four foreign languages ​​was compiled in two volumes. The words are arranged in the Russian alphabet. Against the Russian word, words in Russian were written in the columns - Tatar, Mordovian, Chuvash and Cheremish. The Eminence added historical and statistical information about the peoples. – The dictionary was sent to the Empress on April 13. 1785. A list of it, in 1000 pages, is in the Nizhny Novgorod library. seminary. The dictionary was useful for local preachers of St. faith. The Right Reverend also wrote a Mordovian grammar, but it remained unpublished (Makaria Ist. Nizhny Novgorod diocese, pp. 171, 172). 70. George Konissky, from the Nizhyn nobles, student and rector of the Kiev Academy, from 1758 archbishop of Belarus († 1795) a) His life belongs to history, and some of his works are devoted to history. He suffered a lot from Roman propaganda and lived to protect those who suffered from the same propaganda. In 1762, he appeared together with the Russian archpastors for the coronation of Catherine and gave her a speech in which, along with congratulations, he expressed hope for the protection of the empress for the lamenting people of the same tribe. In 1765, he delivered a speech to the new king Stanislav, where he briefly but powerfully depicted the suffering of the Orthodox: “We Christians are oppressed by Christians; The faithful suffer more from the unfaithful than the unfaithful. Our churches, where Christ is constantly preached, are locked; and the synagogues of the Jews are open, where Christ is constantly ridiculed. Because we do not accept human opinions as the law of God and do not dare to confuse earth with heaven, they call us schismatics, heretics, apostates. Because we are afraid to offend our conscience, we are forced to prison, to beatings, to the sword and fire.” This speech from Latin was translated into Polish, Russian, German and French and made a strong impression in Europe in favor of those suffering from fanaticism. Both speeches were published in 1 volume, ed. Grigorovich, St. Petersburg. 1835. The most famous of his historical works is the history of Little Russia, written at the request of the emperor. Catherine. This work combines the poetic liveliness of the paintings with critical caution. At the beginning, George follows the chronicles, not finding it necessary to contradict generally accepted concepts. But then you see a deep study of events and a clear statement of causes and consequences. Bold and conscientious in his testimony, with love for his family and hatred for the fanaticism of propaganda, he is sometimes, but rarely, carried away beyond the limits of justice. He describes the battles with amazing vividness. Many pictures of the suffering of Orthodoxy were painted by the brush of a great artist. This is for example painting of the execution of Ostryanitsa. The history of Little Russia in the lists was very well known to lovers of domestic glory, but was recently published by the Moscow Society of History in its Readings, M. 1846. Koniski based his condemnations of fanaticism not only on thoughts of faith and the course of history, but also on state regulations of Poland itself. In 1767, he was summoned to Warsaw to attend the commission determining the state rights of Roman Christians and dissidents. Then he presented an essay in Polish: “The rights and liberties of those professing the Greek-Eastern faith in Poland and Lithuania,” printed. 1767 in Warsaw. This work required hard work to retrieve from the archives forgotten decrees of the Polish government issued in favor of the Orthodox. This book is now difficult to find. The historical news about the Belarusian diocese is also quite important, ed. Rubin in the Curious Monthly Book of 1776 and in 2 parts of the works of George. This should include the historical word about former persecutions (in part 1 of the work, 149–179). George's letters, numbering 12, to Catherine and various government officials also speak about the state of affairs of that time. Notes from Georgie about the Mogilev seminary in 1793 - in Mogil. lips Ved. 1860 Report to the Empress about oppression of the clergy - on Thursday. General ist. 1860, book. IV. His letter about the affairs of the union in the Archive of the South-West. R. t. 2, no. 45, 49, 153, 163; vol. 3, no. 65, 88, 89, 109. b) Konissky also occupies an honorable place among systematic teachers of the faith. His dogmatic theology (in Latin, the language Msc.) is a beautifully worked out system, although not completed to the end: systematic rigor is combined in it with a wealth of information. Bulgakov's History of the Kyiv Academy contains a review of Georgieva's dogmatics (pp. 145–148). Konissky published Prokopovich’s catechism with additions, Mogilev, 1768. c) Konissky also taught a course in philosophy at the Kyiv Academy, and his notes were respected at the academy. The difference between his philosophy was that, offering judgments of reason on issues of inquisitive thought, he cited the opinions of the fathers, as the highest thinkers of Christianity. Title of the essay: Philosophia peripathetica juxta numerum facultatum quadripartita, continents in se logicam, physicam, metaphysicam et ethicam 9 (RKP. Chern. Semin.). A review of his course in Bulgakov (pp. 126–129), and an extract of his original words from Gabriel in the history. Philosophy, 6, 50–52. When M. Timofey in 1755 asked Konissky’s opinion about Baumeister’s then newly published philosophy, George replied that he very much regretted that he did not have the opportunity to be guided by this book: “otherwise,” he wrote, “so much time would not have been lost on the litter of Aristotelian interpretations. Baumeister's metaphysics offers solid foundations for the other sciences. His logic is cleaned up to seven times from the scholastic rubbish.” d) George was famous in his time for his brilliant eloquence. His best oratorical works are his speech at a meeting with the emperor. Catherine: “Let’s leave it to the astronomers to prove,” etc., and the two mentioned historical speeches. Many of his words can still serve as examples of eloquence, in terms of expressiveness of language, strictness of order and strength of evidence. Kyiv words are dotted with Polish and Latin expressions: but this is not in Mogilev ones. Three district letters to the clergy - one on the need to preach the word of God to the people, another on observing the order of rites and caution when performing baptism, the third on being careful when making confession - serve as an excellent monument to the zeal of the pastor towards the priests. All these works were published in the collected works of George; but the Kyiv words have not been published there, one of which is on the Transfiguration, patois. 1749, printed. in Mayak 1843, another of the same year on the Assumption - on Resurrection. Thurs. 1855 No. 21; 6 unpublished sermons were published in Christian Reading (1826, 1831, 1832, 1834, 1840, 1841). Pushkin responded this way: “George’s sermons are simple and even somewhat rude, like the teachings of the early elders; but their sincerity is fascinating.” We think that the first is not entirely accurate: Konissky has the simplicity of an enlightened husband, and not the simplicity of rudeness. Pushkin wrote about Konissky’s poems: “artistically, they have (little) merit, although a thinking spirit is visible in them. The following elegy seemed remarkable to us: The ripe classes await the sickles, And to us the messengers of death are gray hairs. ABOUT! mortal, careless, look in the mirror: You are gray, as if you were 50 years old. How did you get ready for your mortal journey? What will you bring before the just God?” etc. (Op. Pushkin V, 198, 203). The Russian inscriptions (in part 2) are weak. A Drama of the Resurrection of the Dead, presented in 1744, ed. in Letop. Russian liter. 1859, 39–54. Parfeniy Sopkovsky, a student of Kyiv, rector of Novgorod and bishop of Smolensk; He supported many orphans at his own expense in schools, and sent other students to Moscow University at his own expense. He introduced the teaching of simple Greek and French, history, geography and mathematics at the seminary († 1795). a) His essay on the offices of parish priests, ed. 1776 St. Petersburg. 1777, 1780, 1789 M. will long remain an excellent guide for priests. It was compiled on the basis of “the word of God, conciliar rules and church teachers.” Written in Russian, although printed in Slavic letters. This work has recently been translated into English by Dr. Palmer, who recognizes it as a classic work. b) Of his teachings, only the word at the opening of the Polotsk governorship was published, St. Petersburg. 1779 Speech to the Empress, composed by him and delivered in 1776 by the leader of the Smolensk nobility, from Glinka: Russian. Reading 2, 31, 32. St. Petersburg. 1845 He often interpreted in the church of St. Scripture, but for the most part without writing down his instructions. 71. Ioann Ioannovich Sidorovsky, a student and teacher of the Kostroma seminary, since 1773 a priest and teacher of the law at the Smolny Institute, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. academy (1795). a) Teacher of the Faith: Instruction of Youth in the Christian Life, 1784, explanation of the Sunday and Feast Gospels, St. Petersburg. 1783, for a long time served as a classic book in secular schools. b) Philologist: for the academy's dictionary he collected words starting with the letters 3 and O and compiled an explanation of words starting with the letters A. B. In 1786 he represented Ros. Academy two parts of its Russian grammar, on the production and composition of words (J. M. N. Prosv., 1848, No. 11). He translated the works of Plato (but not all), in 4 hours, St. Petersburg. 1870–85 Pavzaniyevo and Strabonovo description of Hellas, 3 hours, St. Petersburg. 1788–89 Lucian's conversation in the kingdom of the dead, at 3 o'clock, St. Petersburg. 1775–84 Kedrina church deeds. and civil, 3 hours, M. 1794 d) Teacher of Piety: translated by John Zlat. demon on psalms and commentary. Isaiah Ave., M. 1787; on various matters and praises to the martyrs, M. 1791; various moralizing words, 2 parts, M. 1787–1791; selected words (Ἔκλογα), 2 parts, M. 1782: from French, translated by him: politics from the words of St. Scriptures, op. Bossuet, St. Petersburg. 1802; cry of truth against the temptations of the world, St. Petersburg. 1801; experience of God's providence, St. Petersburg. 1781 72. Joseph Sharov, abbot of the Valaam desert, described his unfortunate “adventures”, St. Petersburg. 1792 Agapit, hieromonk, was a preacher in Moscow. Academy 1787–1789, and then the builder of the Perervinsky monastery. Its translation is known: confession of the blessed one. Augustine, M. 1787. Probably he also translated the work of the famous Ippon shepherd: conversation of the soul with God, M. 1783. Feofan, hieromonk, one of the teachers of the Novgorod seminary, preacher in Moscow. Academy in 1785 and 1786, then lived among the brotherhood of the Novospassky Monastery, and then in the Kaluga Lavrentievsky Monastery. He translated: “The Shamed Atheist” M. 1787. Biblical Dictionary, 2 parts. M. 1787. He also collected and published “Pictures of the Antiquity of Civil and Domestic Life”, Kaluga 1793. Vasily Grigorievich Ruban, studied at the Kyiv and Moscow academies and at Moscow University, † 1795 a) His religious and moral works: the canon of Easter, in verse, St. Petersburg. 1773; magazines: Neither this nor that, St. Petersburg. 1769, where, in addition to poetry, Seneca’s discussion of Providence, translated by S. Bashilov; Seneca's death letter; dormitory positions; ode: Money. "Hardworking Ant", St. Petersburg. 1771 Here is “daily prayer for the end of the plague”; poems “in memory of soldiers”; Theophrasto's characters; conversation in the kingdom of the dead; about commerce of Crimea; about its cities, etc. In the first journal, Starozhilov, in his letter, responding to reproaches for the publication of Senekin’s letter, wrote: “they say that they are bored with the importance in big books; but I guarantee you that they did not even take the former into their hands, and they did not hear of the latter. It is known that such flutters are just as afraid of a long mass as they are of a large and intelligent book.” The publisher, terminating the magazine, wrote: “we did not please either the petiteurs or the sedate people: the first because we did not dream of either clothes or people, but there is nothing to regret about that; they are sick, with emptiness in their heads; the second because they wrote on scraps of paper that they wouldn’t even pick up; “They are hunters of heavy books.” b) His historical works: “A Brief Chronicle of Little Russia”, St. Petersburg. 1777, where there is some information about the church; “Earth description of Little Russia”, St. Petersburg. 1777 with statistical information about the church. “Old and New” - collection in 2 hours. St. Petersburg. 1772 and 1773. Here are the rank of vestments of the patriarch and other priests, the will of F. M. Apraksin of 1728 with curious time marks. “Curious monthbook” for 1775 and 1776, for 1778–1780, 1795, with historical and statistical articles: in the first (1775) - about the Mogilev diocese, in the second (1776) - the history of the Moscow Academy and the Novomoskovsk monastery, in the fourth (1780) - about the Belgorod dioceses; in 1795 - a description of the Arkhangelsk diocese. Description of Moscow, St. Petersburg. 1782 Visitor and describer of St. places, St. Petersburg 1794 Sergiy Petrovich Sokovnin, Kalyazin landowner, op.: “Historical experience. dictionary about all the saints who became famous in the Greek-Russian faith,” ex. in M. 1784. “Selected Thoughts about God,” M. 1802. 73. Vitaly, a monk who converted from the schism, a disciple of the elder Nicodemus (§ 54) and then the abbot of the Trinity Nicodemus Monastery, wrote “about the church,” where in the first part he sets out the doctrine of the church and the need for hierarchy, citing the words of fathers and teachers from early printed books; in the second he describes the efforts of the schismatics to get themselves a bishop and especially the concerns of their mentor Nicodemus about bringing the Starodub schismatics closer to the Church. The first part is printed. in Christ. Fri. 1854, part 1, 396–436. Extracts from the second part were published by Muravyov (Raskol, exposed by its history, St. Petersburg, 1854, pp. 349–368). It seems that he also owns a letter written in September 1789 in response to the complaint: “Already 130 years have passed along the Nikon Patr. and no one except you has revealed such boldness as to accept the priests from the archpastor.” The answer says: “It was not me who started this, but Archimandrite Nikanor, who came with the Solovetsky fathers to Moscow, asked the Patriarch and Emperor Alexy Mikh. to be the Solovetsky monastery according to the ancient rite and not involved in new things, for which they received a flattering dismissal, and for this indulgence, so as not to cause discord in the church, the archimandrite, according to newly printed books, joined the service being performed. "... Then other excuses follow. (Rkp. Chernigov. arch. houses). Yakov Belyaev, novice of Nicodemus Trinity. monastery, in 1789 he wrote the essay: “The true path to knowledge of the church.” The work consists of 16 chapters and discusses the cathedral church and 5 Old Believer churches, the priesthood and its inexhaustibility, the eternal bloodless sacrifice, the bishop and the eternity of the Church. He also wrote: “about internal heretics” and types of the church; letter to Kursk “about affairs and misfortunes”; message dated March 12, 1787 to Elisavetgrad, with an exhortation to preserve the blessed priesthood; against the Vetkovites about the cross and censing; letter to Zhuravlev (§ 148) about the schismatic Kazan nunnery (eg in Ist. Izv. about schismatic IV, 81–91); speech spoken in the Nicodemus Hermitage upon the adoption of the same faith (ibid., IV, 96–98). Gerasim Knyazev, a monk of the Christmas crimson desert, wrote: a) two letters to the Don with evidence of the need for episcopal power, 1784 b) a letter (dated March 11, 1787) to Elisavetgrad with an exhortation to accept the same faith (eg in Historical reports on the schism. IV, 89-106). 74. Schhismatic writings especially proliferated in Pomeranian hermitages. – More worthy of note are: a) Andrei Denisov, the most dexterous leader of the Pomeranians, who listened to the instructions of Vavila, a student of Kapitonov, who, according to Semyon Denisov, was “a foreigner of the Lutheran faith, skilled in logic, philosophy and theology” († 1730), - Pomeranian answers in 1723. He also wrote questions for money to the deacons Pitirim and answers to 185 questions Pitirim (Description of compositions. 2, 121–160); several messages on the occasion of a dispute with the Theodosians about the title; the story of Bishop Paul Col.; the story of the cathedral within the Olonets near the village of Nikon; against marriage; against Yavorsky’s book about the Antichrist; many words, exhortations, messages to the Pomeranians, including a message to Genning. b) Semyon Denisov, Andreev’s brother, rector of Vygov († 1742): “the city of Christ” or the lives of various superstitions; “the history of the Solovetsky sufferers”; five replies to Neophyte, included in the Pomeranian replies; about crossing; apology about the cross; reproof of the book: “rod”; messages to M. Job; “charter” of the Vygov deanery; a few useful words. Extracts from the vertograd from Shchapov, pp. 223–226, 229–337, 242–254, 255. Contents of the vertograd and sols. stories in Description. schismatic composition 1, 62–122. c) Dositheus of Kerzhensky, hieromonk, denunciation on behalf of the council of 1709 to the teaching of Avvakumov. What is most remarkable here is the very teaching of Habakkuk, especially since the council justifies St. Demetrius in his news about the teachings of Habakkuk. Avvakum writes to the Solovetsky elder: “Behold, Nightingale, and believe the Trisubstantial Trinity. The being is one and divided equally into three. The uncut one, I suppose, by equality, is one into three beings and natures. Savior said: I am in the Father and the Father is in Me, by will, and not being in being. The property of the blessed being (God) abides in the highest, in the living light is unapproachable, and on earth and under the earth is inaccessible... Fedka, and Fedka!.. According to your heap, there is a need for one face and one composition and image. Oh, son of a whore, slanting dog, fool, sufferer! If you don’t know the power in the books, and you ask the village women: “I have lost my way with pride, Empress Mother, on the waters of the desert, and I don’t know the right path to God, but the devil abhors me to ask my spiritual father, and from him I am cursed for my theft.” Help me, mother, to my orphanhood, correct my crooked soul and the whole organ of my soul is going crookedly, with great difficulty I am going the wrong way. Tell me, empress, about St. Trinity: What is Trinity? That's what she'll tell you. – Ask her again, what is the being of God? And she answers you... My thin little heretic Fedka speaks with the very essence of the incarnate God of the Word. I confess and believe the property is immovable, but the pouring out of God’s word into the womb of the Virgin is the power of a natural being. The Lord’s soul simply, says (Theodore), was not in hell, like other holy souls, but Christ sent it to the Father with his blood, redeeming us, and not going to hell from the cross. The most pure soul descended into hell with an incorruptible body lying in the tomb, and not without a soul the body was in hell and the soul without flesh... And even as he says, Christ was not after rising from the tomb body and soul in hell, but with one soul he was captured in hell, and the body at that time lying dead in the tomb, spare, O Son of God, from this madness and absurd wisdom... And about the soul that is blindness He says there is nothing to listen to: he says it’s three-part. No, don’t be a whore: all the saints teach that the soul is one-dimensional and corporeal; mind, word and spirit are the active forces in it... The soul is a corporeal thing - it is spirit, but it is also denser; uniform and one-piece, and not three-piece.” - To justify St. Demetrius against the slander of the Denisovs, as if “he sewed fables against Habakkuk,” we quote the words of Deacon Theodore from a letter to his “brothers and relatives in the flesh”: “They had bitter disputes with me and curses and oaths. They, Archpriest Avvakum and Priest Lazarus, began to confess the Trinity on three thrones and speak tribodily and trisubstantially, and Lazarus speaks in three persons in three compositions. But they say that Christ is the fourth of God and sits on the fourth throne, and they do not confess the very essence of the divine in him, but they say that the power and grace from the Filial hypostasis poured out into the maiden, and the very essence of the Filial and the (being) of the Holy Spirit. never descends from heaven to earth—power and grace are sent. The Holy Spirit does not descend on its own, they say. The place describes the Deity of St. Trinity, in Jewish terms, with the carnal mind. But Habakkuk confesses Christ’s descent into hell after rising from the grave, and does not call Christ’s rising from the grave a resurrection, but merely a rising. He is resurrected, as if he came out of hell. - And Lazarus speaks of the one soul of Christ that was in hell with the power of the Divine and without flesh, before rising from the grave, and calls Christ’s rising from the grave the resurrection. - Lazarus and Habakkuk also oppose the transposition of St. gifts. Both of them philosophize first about the proskomedia of the complete body of Christ and blood. – And the foundation of the church was on Peter the Apostle (they say), and not on Christ Himself. But I, Deacon Theodore, do not accept all this wisdom, but I reject it and reprove it.” This is followed by a detailed refutation of Habakkuk's opinions. d) Ivan Filipyev, Vygovsky foreman († 1749), history of the Vygoretsky cenovia; a story about sufferers from different places; life of Andrei Denisovich. The first excerpt is in the description. schismatic cit., I, 170–260; the whole story was published in St. Petersburg. 1861 e) Trifon Petrov, a Pomeranian († 1766), about the seven church mysteries; about the cross of Christ; “Kerzhensky answers”, written for money with Denisov; a few words of praise, including to the self-created Siberians who did not take the oath to Catherine I. f) Evstrat Fedoseev, son of the founder of the Fedoseans († 1768), history of Fedosiy Vasilyevich; several articles about the title; petition or history of Peter (extracts from it from Shchapov, pp. 108, 109, 400, 482, 483). g) Mikhail Grigoriev, Moscow tradesman († 1775), the history of the division of the Pomeranians with the Fedosians; about their meetings in Moscow; stories about various incidents in Old Believer societies (extracts from the first work by Shchapov, p. 264). h) Danila Matveev, a Pomeranian († 1776), many essays about how Bespopovites cannot have a legal marriage; a book with notes on the tablet, the rod of government and the vet; about the three-part cross. i) Alexey Samuylov, a fugitive from Novgorod. seminarian and mentor of the Feodosians († 1771): “the spiritual sword,” an extensive essay in 1761 about how the church can exist without consecration, and several small works of the same Protestant spirit. i) Ivan Aleksiev, a Starodubsky Pomeranian from the peasantry († 1776): a description of the wisdom of the Dyakonovschina, Onufrievschina, Netovites and Fedosians; the history of the fleeing priesthood (extracts from it from Shchapov, pp. 232, 235, 532, contents - in the description of the schism, op. I, 262–291); a book about the existence of the Antichrist in Moscow; about the secret of marriage. j) Vasily Danilov († 1783), a Pomeranian hermit, “a word against the debauchery and atrocities of the Vygorets elders and kroloshans”; several essays against marriage; denunciation of Ilya Kovylin; books with criticism of the writings of Pomeranians. k) Semyon Matveev, Zaraisk merchant, Vygov hermit († 1786), an extensive essay “about the fate of the Church of Christ in the last times and about the Antichrist.” h) Efim, a fugitive soldier - a Fedoseevite, not accepted as a commander in the seaside and in the village of Sopelki, near Yaroslavl, who founded the sect of the Runners († 1792), message of 1787 to Moscow and a flower garden. Efim’s teaching is essentially the same as that of the Fedoseevites, only his hatred of the emperor’s power is extended to all civil orders - to the audit, to the poll tax, to the workshops, to the table of ranks; this is an open struggle against civil order, hiding behind the appearance of piety. m) Timofey Andreev, a Pomeranian hermit († 1808), several articles about how Bespopovites cannot have marriage; the history of Philip, the founder of the Philippians or Philipons; indication of the existence of the Antichrist in the world. We pointed out such schismatic writers who, based on their writings, deserve the attention of a historian, either by presenting the opinions of superstition, or by presenting events. Many other writers, mainly from the Pomeranian children of the schism, are shown in the “bibliography” of Pavel the Curious, M. 1861. The Curious made a lot of efforts to collect schismatic writers as much as possible, thinking thereby to glorify the schism; He also worked a lot to decorate his writers and writings in as magnificent a manner as possible. But no matter what titles he adorns them with (the publisher of the bibliography left out much of its idle talk), the works of the schism never cease to be either an empty collection of words, without the power of thought and feeling, which are almost all laudable words and most moral words, or an incoherent and unaccountable collection of thoughts, peppered with the antics of frenzy and outright lies, such as the stories and contests of the schismatics. The best essays on the treatment of external and moderation of tone are the works of the Lutheran schoolboy Andrei Denisov. Slich. description schismatic composition 2, 218–330. 75. Samuil Mislavsky, prefect and rector of Kiev, from 1768 bishop of Belogorod, then Krutitsy and archbishop of Rostov, from 1783 metropolitan of Kiev, member of the Russian Federation. academy († 1796). a) Teacher of the faith: dogmas of the Orthodox faith, in lat. and Russian, Kyiv 1760; he corrected and supplemented the dogmatics of Theophanes (§ 5); published Zernikov's treatise on the origin of the Holy Spirit. Kenigsb. 1774). b) As a preacher, from an early time he was distinguished by his fairly pure language and correct presentation of thoughts. His published words: on the day of accession to the throne of the Emperor. Catherine, M. 1768; on December 21, 1768, St. Petersburg. 1769; on 24 Nov. 1775 “about the power, rules and benefits contained in the law of God”, M. 1776; a word about the great objects of Catherine's institutions, St. Petersburg. 1777; M. 1778; on December 21, on incentives to accept the position of judges, M. 1778. Three last sermons ed. translated into Greek, Latin, and German. languages, Μ. 1776, 1778; speech at the first service in Kyiv in 1784 (about the true advantage of the city, which it can boast of before others), M. 1786; exhortation to his new vicar Bishop Victor, spoken on June 9, 1785, M. 1786; his speeches: imp. Catherine in Moscow, M. 1775; to her when visiting the Danilov Monastery, M. 1775; to her in Kyiv, K. 1787; according to RKP. the words of Prefect Samuel are known: for the birth. Christovo, 1757; on Rev. Feodosia, 1758; in the first he speaks of the greatness of grace and to whom it appeared; in the second he solves two questions: what is the yoke of Christ? and for whom is it easy? In his teaching during his first service in Rostov, having given instructions to the priests, he said to the flock: “You, O Christian souls, entrusted to these shepherds, fathers and leaders, obey your mentors and repent, for they are watching over your souls... Help in their needs from your righteous labors, according to your acquisitions and possessions. For if they sow to you spiritual seed, is it great if they reap your bodily harvest? Do you not know that he who makes sacred food eats from the sanctuary, and he who serves the altar shares with the altar? (1 Cor. 9:11-13)." His admonition to his vicar Victor is historically important. “The Lord has entrusted you with the grapes in those parts of His dominion where His rods are choked by thorns, where His branches wither when they bow down. “Your duty is to restore the fallen, withered and dew-dried words of God and to cool, water, revive with grace, to preserve the most precious remains unharmed and not allow them to be destroyed and trampled upon... He has appointed you as a chosen vessel to carry His name beyond the borders of our fatherland among those of other faiths. - Do not be afraid, do not worry about what or what you say... He placed a yoke and a burden on you, a yoke disproportionate to your humanity, a burden that exceeds your strength. But remember that this yoke is Christ’s, that this burden is the Gospel, and therefore it is good and easy because it is accompanied by the grace of St. Spirit, - that that great monarch was pleased to bear this burden for you, - whose strength of spirit will not allow you to any despondency and relaxation" (See § 83). c) Wrote by a historian. description of the Kyiv Lavra, which adds: a) description of Kyiv, b) news about it, c) about the princes buried in it, K. 1799, 1801, 1804; the latest edition includes a list of inscriptions. His correspondence with Jacob the abbot has been printed. to Kievsk. Ved. 1857 d) As a teacher, his instructions are known, with a schedule of when to teach which subjects at the academy (in Ist. Kyiv Acad., 129, 130). In his experiment on teaching subjects (ibid. 139–143), he wrote among other things: “there must certainly be theology alone, and not create any course again.” With the rank of metropolitan, he forced natural and universal history, pure and mixed mathematics, to be taught at the academy (ibid. 124). According to Novikov, Mislavsky corresponded with many scientists in Europe. His Latin grammar was published in Kyiv. Iriney (John) Bratanovich, Kiev student, Moscow prefect, Rostov archimandrite, since 1775 Bishop of Vologda, who opened the teaching of theology and the study of the languages ​​of Greek, Hebrew, German and French at the Vologda seminary († 1796). The inscription on the tomb: “his words thundered divinely.” Known from the RKP. a collection of his words, up to 60 in total; some of his instructive words were published in Yaroslavl in 1786. Lavrenty Baranovich, prefect and rector of St. Petersburg, since 1774 bishop of Vyatka († 1796). According to Novikov, he wrote a lot of good words, but only two of them were published, St. Petersburg. 1764 76. Antony Zybelin, student, teacher, prefect and rector of Moscow. academy, from 1770 Bishop Archang., from 1773 Nizhny Novgorod, introduced to Nizhny Novgorod. seminaries taught theology and arithmetic, and opened theological gymnasiums or schools in district towns; 1782–1785 he was Archbishop of Kazan and died in retirement in 1797. His words at the opening of the viceroyalty: Nizhny Novgorod - two words, St. Petersburg. 1780, Simbirsk - two words, St. Petersburg. 1781, Kazan - two words, M. 1782; the latter were considered exemplary, and all were printed at the behest of the empress. Dvina chronicler and brief information about Nizhny Novgorod, ex. at 18 o'clock Vivliofiki, compiled and reported to them. His four letters to the Empress expressing gratitude for the attention to him are printed. in Russ. Besede 1860 2, 254–258. According to the RCP. the instructions to his schools are known. Avramy Florinsky, rector of Vladimir and archimandrite of Rostov († 1797). From the many teachings of his ed. one word in memory of St. Demetrius, M. 1807; he corrected the ancient translation of Chrysostom's conversations into Matthew, M. 1781 and John, M. 1793. Alexander Egorovich Levshin, archpriest of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, brother of M. Plato († 1797). a) His words: to inoculate smallpox imp. Ekaterina, M. 1758; a letter of thanks for the end of the plague, M. 1772, which was famous; led to birth book Paul, M. 1773; for the renewal of the Assumption Cathedral, M. 1774; at the conversion of the schismatics, M. 1774; thank you imp. Catherine at the consecration of the cathedral, M. 1774; about the fact that a person is not born for himself, M. 1779. b) Levshin is especially known as an archaeologist-historian. His history. description of Moscow. Assumption Cathedral, M. 1783, has not lost its interest even today. 77. Iakinf Karpinsky, a student of Kharkov, rector of many seminaries and archimandrite of several monasteries, who died in Novospassky in 1798. Known a) most of all for his brief dogmatics (Compendium theologiae dogmatico-polemicae, Lipsiae 1786. M. 1790, 1810). Contents of the essay: “about St. Scripture, about God, about the works of God, about Providence, about Christ the God-man, about the grace of God, about good deeds, about the covenant of God, about the church, about the sacraments, about recent events. Addition about traditions: a) about tradition in general, b) about apostolic traditions: about the invocation of saints, about the veneration of the cross, icons and relics, about the keeping of holidays, about fasting, about churches, about monasticism, about prayer for the dead.” It is clear that most of what is said in the addition relates not to dogma, but to moral teaching, and it would be more appropriate to talk about the meaning of tradition where it speaks of St. Scripture. In the RKP. there remains a discussion about. Jacinthos "on the canonical meaning of the book of Esther." b) His words, St. Petersburg. 1782 Mikhail Samuilov, a student of the Neva Seminary, a priest and teacher of law at an academic gymnasium, a court archpriest, translated: a) from Latin. history in. and n. Testament, St. Petersburg 1778 M. 1800 b) from Greek. Josephus Flavius ​​Jewish Antiquities, 3 hours, St. Petersburg. 1778–1783, 1795; the preface to the latest translation describes the life of Flavius, as well as the good and weak sides of his work. 78. Innokenty Nechaev, student and prefect of Moscow. academician, from 1763 bishop of Tver and in the same year of Pskov, from 1770 archbishop, member of the synod and Russian. Academy, with the trust of the Empress, reviewed the position of religious educational institutions; active and pious shepherd († Jan. 24, 1799). Due to the fact that during his burial in the Neva Lavra no funeral homily was spoken, Derzhavin wrote the tombstone: “Vitya did not praise you. The voice of eloquence is small for the righteous.” Beautiful because it is true in relation to the deceased person. a) Preacher. His words published: in the village of marriage. K. Pavla, St. Petersburg 1773; for the opening of the Riga governorship, St. Petersburg. 1783; for the birth of the imp. Catherine, St. Petersburg. 1788 Some teachings are in the collection of synodal sermons, others in the RKP. Novikov wanted to see all his words published. b) Pastoral instructions: instructions to the priest, St. Petersburg. 1790, 1795. The rite of confession of children, M. 1769, 1795. The Pskov flock still uses some of his written instructions. c) Christian lawyer: wrote comments on Catherine’s “mandate,” and it seems we will not be mistaken if we say that the best in the order belongs to the Christian shepherd. d) Translation: preparation for death, St. Petersburg. 1793, 1798. He participated in the composition of the first part of the academy's dictionary and wrote comments on the rest. Innokenty Dubravitsky, student and teacher of the Novgorod seminary, since 1788 rector of the Neva seminary and teacher of the law of God to the Orthodox students of the Lutheran school of St. Petra; in 1793 he was a mentor in. Princess Elisaveta Alekseevna, from 1795 the abbot of the Yuryev Monastery, died in 1799. His three sermons: about true glory, about the importance of piety, about the power of examples, printed. St. Petersburg 1791 His word at the election of judges. St. Petersburg, 1792. Rhetorica sacra, Petropoli 1790. 79. Arseny (Vasily) Vereshchagin, student of Moscow. academician, prefect and rector of Tver, from 1774 bishop of Arkhangelsk, the following year of Tver, from 1783 archbishop of Rostov, † 1799 His words: on the name day of the imp. Catherine, about true glory, M. 1773. For the choice of judges, M. 1781. In Tver he often happened to meet the empress and almost every time he gave a speech. He corrected the translation of Chrysostom's words about repentance and holidays, M. 1772, 1773 K. 1777. Hilarion Kondratovich, rector of Tver, bishop since 1776. Pereyaslavsky, 1785–1797 Seversky, retired († 1799). The words he spoke during the sermon series, for example. M. 1779. His speech at the opening of the Nar. schools in Seversk. St. Petersburg 1789 Joasaph Bolotov, missionary and bishop of Kodiak († 1799). Left a description of Kodiak, ed. in Friend of Enlightenment, M. 1805 4, 89. 80. Nikifor Feotoni, from a noble Corfu family, who received an extensive education at Italian universities, since 1799 archbishop. Kherson, from 1786–1792 Astrakhan, retired († 1799). a) He was diligently engaged in explaining St. Scriptures. His: “Interpretation of the Sunday Gospels,” in Greek. at 2 o'clock, M. 1796; in Russian trans., M., 1805. Interpretation of Sunday readings from the Apostle in Greek. M. 1805, in Russian. lane M. 1809. Code or chain of interpreters (number 15) on the first 8 books of St. Scriptures and the books of kingdoms in Greek. ed. in Leipzig 1772–1773 in 2 volumes, a precious work of collection of interpretations, unfortunately, not yet known in Russian translation. b) Preacher: instructive words for Pentecost and several speeches in Greek, in Leipzig 1766; Russian translation has not been published. Theotoka's speech to the empress at her consecration as archbishop. St. Petersburg 1779. Four words to a nun, M. 1809 c) The exposer of the schism: aa) a district letter to the Old Believers of the Kherson diocese; bb) responses to the Solovetsky petition sent by the Bakhmut schismatics; c) answers to 15 questions of Irgiz schismatics and reasoning about St. world. These essays. ed. M. 1800; fifth edition - M. 1834; gg) letters to schismatics eg. in Skalkovsky's Sketches of Novoross. region, in Astrakhan. lips Ved. 1845 No. 8. d) The denouncer of papism: about the violence of Catholics and who are the schismatics and the unities? in Greek in Halle 1775; Russian translation has not yet been published. e) Philologist: published the works of Isaac the Syrian in Greek, in Leipzig 1770. f) Physicist and mathematician: physics in Greek. language at 2 o'clock, Leipz. 1766, 1767. Course of pure mathematics, 3 hours in Greek, M. 1798–1800. His biography in Moskvityanin 1844, No. 2, 1845. 81. Gabriel Petrov, student of Moscow. academician, from 1758 rector of Sergius Seminary and from 1761 Moscow. Academician, from 1763 Bishop of Tver, from 1770 Archbishop of St. Petersburg, from 1783 Metropolitan, member of the Russian Academy, a shepherd distinguished by apostolic courage, love of truth and wisdom in council; his wise love animated and supported Russian monasticism, shocked by the changes of that time, with advice and orders; he sent capable missionaries to preach St. faith in America; he asked the imp. Paul exempting the clergy from corporal punishment († 1801). a) Interpreter of Scripture: interpretations of the conciliar messages, M. 1794, explanation of the conversation about the beatitudes and several psalms, in the RKP. Petersburg acad. No. 59. b) Systematic teacher: dogmatic theology, which he taught at Sergius Seminary and at the Moscow Academy, is the best systematic work of that time: with the thoroughness of reasoning, which does not allow unnecessary scholastic subtleties, it combines clarity of presentation, a sufficient supply of historical information and attentiveness to the exact meaning of the sayings of St. Scriptures. The Latin manuscript is kept in the sink library. spirit. academy. Theophylact of Gorsky used these notes for his system (§ 73). A Brief Christian Moral Teaching of Gabriel, ed. St. Petersburg 1769, 1770 c) Preacher: on the day of the accession to the throne of the imp. Petra Feod. ed. in "Mosk. Led" 1762; for the coronation of the Emperor. Catherine, ed. M. 1763; on her namesake day, M. 1766; on the day of accession to the throne - about justice, St. Petersburg. 1770; exhortation to the people on the occasion of the plague (ed. in the collection of Ruban, St. Petersburg, 1772); on the day of theses. Empress, St. Petersburg 1777; word on the day of the coronation of the emperor. Catherine, St. Petersburg. 1773; Speech to the Empress for the New Year, St. Petersburg. 1776; for the opening of St. Petersburg. province, St. Petersburg 1780; for the consecration of the church in the almshouse, St. Petersburg. 1781; for the opening of the governorship of Vyborg, St. Petersburg. 1784 “Collection of teachings on all Sundays and holidays” belongs mainly to his works. Here in its exact form is his teaching in week 13; others were taken from different sources, but were partly corrected and partly redone by the Metropolitan; processing related primarily to simplicity of presentation in order to make the teachings accessible to the people. Collection of ed. at 2 o'clock, St. Petersburg 1775, M. 1776, then many times. Then he collected mainly paternal “short teachings for every day of the year”, M. 1781, K. 1782 and many times. This also includes the instruction of his Valaam monastery, ed. in description Sarov Desert, M. 1853, pp. 124–126. His pastoral district letter to the Tver flock, ed. in The Legend of M. Gabriel, pp. 21, 22. Letters to the abbots of the monasteries, ibid. 87, 142–146; his letters to various persons, in the same place pp. 82, 83, 85. His letter to the lips. Volkov in Sev. Bee 1844 No. 56. Letter to the architect. Arseny in Russian. Archives, 1864, 1163–1167. d) Interpreter of church rites: “on the service and orders of the church,” St. Petersburg. 1792; 2nd ed. with amendments and additions M. 1795. This work is worthy of study. He shortened and corrected the sequence per week. Orthodoxy, M. 1761, 1767; composed “a sermon on visiting the sick” and the rite of confession to penitents, M. 1766, 1796. d) Church lawyer: in the RKP. Petersburg book Academy No. 415 contains his: a report on the illegality of classifying the clergy as a middle class, and daily notes on the meetings of the commission for drafting laws; charter for the Valaam monastery; praise to the hostel and instructions to the prefect ed. in Tale, about M. Gabriel, pp. 63, 64, 127, 128, 135–138. He examined the helmsman's book of the 1653 edition, and in accordance with his opinion, in the 1786 edition a) the preface and the legend in part 1 were excluded: why are the ecumenical patriarchs of the popes from the kind union rejected; at 2 o'clock - an essay by Nikita Mnich; b) in the order about marriages, explanations are added to the ancient names of kinship in accordance with how they are called in Russian. f) Philologist: delivered words for the academy's dictionary with the letters: I.I.K. In addition, he participated in the compilation of the rules of the dictionary, gave advice in composing the first part of it, provided notes on the second part and provided explanations of doubtful words for the remaining four parts. The Academy itself said that its success in composing a derivative dictionary, and especially the first two parts, was due mainly to his advice and works. His letter of 1794 about the study of the French language in East. m. macad. 311. M. 1855. Bestuzhev-Ryumin’s book translated into Latin: “The Consolation of a Christian,” with his preface, ed. M. 1763 Afanasy Volkhovsky, a graduate of the Kharkov College and the Kyiv Academy; from 1775, rector of the Kirillov Monastery, from 1785, archimandrite of Yuryev, from 1788, bishop of Old Russia, 1795–1797, bishop of Mogilev, deceased. retired 1801. His district letter to his flock ed. M. 1795 82. Apollos (Andrey) Baibakov, student of Moscow. academy and university, rector of Sergius Seminary, since 1788 bishop of Sevsky, since 1798 of Arkhangelsk and member of the Russian Academy († 1801). a) Interpreter of St. Scriptures: on the Epistle to the Ephesians, M. 1785: on the Epistle to the Philippians, M. 1785; on the last to the Colossians, M. 1785; on 1st last Corinthians, M. 1786; on 1st last Thessalonians, M. 1786; on the last Galatians, M. 1787 Interpretation is mostly limited to paraphrase of the text and is rarely clear in its understanding of St. words b) Teacher of faith and piety. “Teachings” during the sermon series, St. Petersburg. 1787 Teachings: for January 6, M. 1799; on May 9, M. 1799; on June 5, with an explanation of the rites of consecration of the church, M. 1799. “Faith, hope and love, theological teachings,” M. 1782; it is a kind of systematic exposition of the contemplative and moral truths of Christianity. “Contemplation in nature of the works of God,” with an explanation of Psalm 102, M. 1782. Christian calendar, M. 1784, Nature and grace, M. 1784. Several discussions on the objects of faith, M. 1781. The inextricable union of two brothers, M. 1784. His lecture on angels, as an example of a concise and clear presentation, - in Arr. to the creative father 1863 pp. 420–423. There is also his answer to the objection to the universal calling of God, for example. in 1 part of theological reasoning, M. 1781. In 1790, “a study of the book on error and truth,” composed two years earlier (1788), was published in Tula; – the author of the study is not named; It is only said that Tula society approved the thoughts of the study. since Apollos since 1788 already lived in Sevsk, with the rank of bishop of Sevsk, and he was a native of Tula; and the research shows the author to be closely acquainted with philosophy and foreign literature (it points to Bel, Locke, Newton, Copernicus, Maupertuis, etc.): then this gives the right to believe that the research was written by the educated Apollos. The Latin phrase indicates the same writer. Book: “about error and truth”, ex. M. 1786, belongs to Saint-Martin, leader of the Freemasons (§ 95). The study sensibly criticizes the book and exposes Saint-Martin's dreams, showing their emptiness. The preface says: “never a prudent and fair-minded scholar will, instead of the deeds of nature, confirmed by repeated tests, offer his assurances, which have not received, so to speak, the mark of truth, with unconfirmed evidence of what is put on them... He who has a fair teaching does not offer anything without the most correct explanations, made by long-term observations, undoubted and tangible: but the dreaming thinker, proud of his fictitious wisdom, commands his readers to accept them as the true springs of all nature, despite the fact that its essence and its current circulation can be cognized not by imagination, but by questioning the most diligent testing of nature, which denies any revelation in itself of idleness, portrayed as vanity, but reveals itself only to those who, through diligence and hard work, strive to penetrate into its creations.” (Contemporary 1857 No. 4). c) Teacher: teaching rules, M. 1774, 1781; revised edition, M. 1826. The author in the theory of Russian poetry followed only his predecessor Tredyakovsky (Method of Russian versification. M. 1735). Poetry is divided into narrative, dramatic and mixed; He says a lot about empty objects - about a symbol, an emblem, a riddle, but little about the matter. Also known are his: general method of teaching, M. 1781; Dictionary of Piitiko-Historical Notes, M. 1781; Slavic-Russian grammar, Kyiv 1794. Here we also include his literary works: Jepheai, tragedy in prose, M. 1778 Athanat, M. 1780 Uranius, M. 1781, 1785; in his translation, Reichel's Guide to Understanding the State of European Powers, M. 1775. Gellert's Spiritual Songs, in Poems, M. 1778 and 1781. In the rank of member of the Russian Federation. Academy Apollos in 1786 presented the rules in which case the letter G is pronounced softly and in which firmly, offered comments on dubious and little-used words and expressions in the collection of words starting with the letter K. Pyotr Alekseev, archpriest of Moscow. archang. Cathedral, member of the Russian Academy († 1801). a) Philologist: Church Slavic dictionary in 3 hours, St. Petersburg. 1773 Second edition of the dictionary with the addition of irmos, translated into verses, in 3 parts, M. 1794 volumes. Third edition in 4 parts. Moscow 1815, 1816, with additions by the writer, but where the censorship found a lot of self-will and excluded them. Fourth edition, multiplied against all others, in 5 hours, St. Petersburg. 1817–19 Explanations for the words are offered quite clearly; the words are collected from books not only currently used by the church, but also from some that have been replaced by new translations and new writings. The work is still not superfluous for reference when reading church books, although to understand ancient manuscripts and the ancient Slavic language, another dictionary is needed, such as the one published by Mr. Vostokov. Alekseev published, with philological, historical and other notes, the Orthodox Istoration of Faith, M. 1769, and it into language. Latin, Greek and German., M. 1781 “Review of the Slavic early printed book of the Apostle,” ed. Fr. Skaryna, printed. in Part VI of Proceedings of the Free Russian Assembly (M. 1783). Translations from Latin: Barnabas Brissonius on the Persian kingdom in 3 hours, M. 1781 Korn. Agrippa on the superiority of the female sex, M. 1784 Hugo Grotius “True Christian Piety” (de veritate religionis), M. 1768, 1786 and 1801, with dedication to the emperor. Catherine, true deity, true viceroy (? ? ?); There are enough poems by Alekseev in the book. Initially, Alekseev prepared a dedication to the book to M. Dimitri, and when he, instructing Kondratovsky to correct the translation, set the book in motion, and he himself died, Alekseev concocted a dedication to the empress. Kondratovsky writes (1768) to Plato, then still an archimandrite: “I also dare to convey to your Reverence that blessed. in memory of His Eminence Metropolitan of Novgorod. Dimitri Sechenov (§ 38), my dear former fellow student in theology, personally invited me, asked me to correct the book of Hugon Grotius on the Christian faith, translated by a Moscow priest and attributed to him, and for this, after the meal, I fairly rewarded my correction of the translation with his cell money” (Bibliographical entry. 1, 233). b) Historian: “The outline of the history of the Greeks.” church", at 5 o'clock. 1st o'clock from birth. Christov to Konstantin V.; 2nd from Konstantin to Vladimir; 3rd to v. K. John; 4th to Peter the Great; 5th before Catherine (from Chertkov, one 2nd part from Popov in the Reshetilovsky archive). The essay is not very interesting due to the lack of information; since it is written in a subjective direction, armed with the shells of clumsy rhetoric, it is already extremely boring. Another work that also remains in the RKP is “The Dictionary of Heretics and Schismatics,” including Russians, showing their teachings, which is more worthy of attention (RKP. Petersburg Spiritual Academician and Chertkov in add. 2:439). Particularly interesting are the articles: Avvakumism, Avramievism, Akindin, priestlessness, flagellants (Khlysty), Bogomils, Dosifeevism, Doukhobors, Evfrosinovism, Erofeyevism, Judaism, iconoclasm, Kozminism, Molokans, Mennonites, Myslenniki, Nogovshchina, Nikitovshchina, netovschina, Onufrievschina and subbotniks. Recently, two stories about P. Nikon were published, passed off by Alekseev as stories of Peter I with comments and forwarded in a letter to the emperor. Pavel (Russian Archive 1863, 7–10). The content, style and language are obviously not Petrov’s. This is nothing more than a libel of pathetic anger against the hierarchy and an unscrupulous measure of self-preservation. In the letter, Alekseev offered the sovereign his readiness to serve “against the higher clergy without publicity and not in the form of denunciation,” that is, by secret denunciations, which, as he himself says, he did under Catherine. What a pathetic baseness, especially in the person of the archpriest! Anecdotes, remarks and a letter are important not for the history of P. Nikon, but for the history of the time of Catherine. Alekseev’s espionage is also recorded in Khrapovitsky’s notes (p. 63). The pathetic intriguer especially caused a lot of trouble with secret denunciations to Saint Plato, who did so much good for the Moscow clergy and for the entire Russian church. When imp. Pavle Alekseev, although he attracted Pavel’s attention with an outburst of flattery at the coronation, was still afraid that Plato’s disciple would get to the intriguer. And so he hurries to appear to Paul with documents of the zeal of a loyal subject. In detail - Russian Bulletin, 1864. In the same Archive (pp. 910–918) Alekseev “Description of Moscow. riot of 1771,” curious as an eyewitness description, and a letter to Potemkin. c) Preacher: funeral homily over Sarah Petrovna Muravyova, St. Petersburg. 1768; thank you word imperial Ekaterina, M. 1772; speech on the dignity and benefits of the catechism, M. 1759. Remains unpublished: “The way to teach the catechism.” “Why is there no second song in the canons?” Peter Irodionov, priest of the Toropets Pokrovskaya Church, is known from “Izvestia concerning the city of Toropets and its district,” St. Petersburg. 1777 News dedicated to the Pskov governor, gr. Sivers, and contain several historical and statistical notes. Sergius (Simon) Yurshev, son of Moscow. merchant, one of the schismatics who took part in the rebellion of 1771, who was for a long time the abbot of the Irgiz schismatics, then the abbot of the Edinoverie Belorussian monastery, who experienced many troubles from the schismatics and was almost killed by them, wrote a useful Mirror for the Old Believers, St. Petersburg. 1799 Before turning to Edinoverie, he wrote a lot in favor of the schism: “about the conception of the Irgiz monasteries”; about the priestly sect in Irgiz; replies to Anthony about the non-acceptance of the Oblivan priests; meeting about the same in 1783; conversations about the same with doubters (Prav. Sobesedn. 1857 2, 389, 399). The Mirror of Sergius consists of three parts: the first says that schismatics do not have a true church, because their shepherds are impostors and there are no true sacraments. “Not for the Old Believers, perhaps very few of them, but especially for the sake of profit, fugitive priests clung to them. For having small and poor parishes, and knowing that the Old Believers generously pay for their services, they resort to them, leaving their flock” (pp. 27, 28). The second part speaks of the blessed priesthood; in the third, the false assurances of the non-priests that there is no grace in the Orthodox Church are refuted. Xenophon, monastic Cyprian, who converted from the schism, in 1792 wrote an edifying story about his conversion (Tsarsky, No. 312, and in Valaam mon.), eg. in extraction at Historical. Zhuravlev's news about the schism (§ 97), separately - M. 1806, in Stryatin 1862 Theodore Kochurikhin, Uglich merchant, who converted from the schism, questions of the Feodosian consent of 1775, - to the RKP. Rumyantsev, according to description. pp. 622, 623. 83. Sylvester of Starogorodsky, an orphan after his father, a court priest, but the godson of Grand Duchess Elisaveta Petrovna, was kept in the Neva Seminary on the meager means of his mother, prefect and rector of the Neva Seminary, since 1761 bishop. Pereyaslavsky, from 1768 Bishop of Krutitsky, since 1771 sick in retirement († 1802). In his retirement, Sylvester had to experience several troubles, from people who were strict towards others, but not towards himself (Zap. Khrapovitsky on February 21 and 22, 1788). Catherine did not favor him on suspicion of his closeness to Matseevich (Day, 1864, No. 39). Rules of monastic life, St. Petersburg. 1805 Description of the Resurrection Monastery ed. in 4 hours. Monthly works, St. Petersburg. 1786. His request for dismissal from classes at the seminary due to illness is from Chistovich in East. Peter acad., p. 37. Ioannikiy Orlovsky, since 1774 rector of Nevsk. seminary, who first taught philosophy, then theology, in 1782 he entered the Solotchinsky monastery, where he died in 1802. His word in ancient times. m. Georgiy, St. Petersburg. 1776 Varlaam Sinkovsky, 1761–1765 rector of the Sergius Seminary, then archimandrite of the Volokolamsk and Golutvin monastery († 1802). His letters to Plato – Fascicul. litterarum, quas dederunt ad Platonem, Petr. 1776 (Add. to the works of the father. 1862, 396–398). His word at the burial of Admiral Selivanov, St. Petersburg. 1782 Varlaam, a convert from the Jews, hegumen, from 1769 a teacher of Hebrew and German at the Sergius Seminary, then an archimandrite. He translated it from Latin. Golden essay by Rabbi Samuel, St. Petersburg. 1782. – translated from Arabic into Latin by the monk Alphonse Bon, – fourth edition in Leipzig 1769; published through the efforts of Hieromonk Theotokius, the current archbishop in Russia. In the Russian language it is published in a third printing, in addition to reprinting in Moscow in a manner contrary to the law, under the title: “collection of useful flowers.” Arr. to Creation St. Fathers, 1863, pp. 532, 533, 536, 537. Jerome Poniatsky, who studied at the Smolensk seminary, was a hieromonk in the navy, 1790–1792 a teacher at the Kyiv Academy, then hegumen of Smolensk and archimandrite of Nizhny Novgorod; since 1799 archim. Voskresensky († 1802). His word in the day of accession to the throne of the imp. Pavla, St. Petersburg 1797; word and speeches spoken on the occasion of the consecration of the Church of Mary Magdalene, M. 1801; poems and speeches to General-Chief Glebov, St. Petersburg. 1776 His translations from the German: Garwood's Thoughts on the Bliss of the Pious, M. 1783 Guide to parents and educators, selected from the words of Pollikonfer, St. Petersburg. 1798 Misail, abbot of the Turukhansk monastery, Siberian missionary 1782–1792, a student of Kyiv, since he writes: “parochy”, not parish. His report on his Turukhan missionary work is in Chr. Thurs. 1864 Here you can see how the “baptized” zemstvo government helps matters of faith. Eg. the missionary was denied travel. The Samoyed responds to an admonition to accept Christianity: “yes, it’s good to be baptized!.. Here one of ours was baptized - the Tunguz of the Kurei horde, Egor... Now he pays the poll tax, and our yasak too.” Georgy Pokorsky, a pupil of Kostroma, a priest of St. Isaac's Cathedral († 1802), wrote “about the church and the sacraments,” M. 1780, 1793, against the schism, a weak essay. They are presented to the Russian Federation. Academy collection of words starting with the letter d. Elijah (Mikhailov.) Kandorsky, a Moscow priest, translated several works: A Christian who sensibly discusses the contempt of worldly vanities, M. 1795. Advice from a father to his son in the last hours of his life, M. 1798. Spiritual solitude, M. 1799. Peace of the soul is the fruit of peace with God, M. 1802. His work: on the formation of the spirit and hearts in the thought of God, M. 1799 84. Simon (Simeon) Lagov, from 1770 Bishop of Kostroma, from 1778 of Ryazan († 1803). He was one of the most zealous and gifted shepherds of the church. The son of a Prilutsk monastery servant, he was taken by Ambrose Yushkevich (§ 27) into the choir; the archpastor, noticing his talents and desire for learning, sent him to the Novgorod seminary, paying for his release from taxation. At the Novgorod seminary, Lagov was a teacher of various classes, became a monk with the name Simon, was rector and archimandrite of the Anthony Monastery, then was abbot of the Kirillov and Novospassky monasteries. In the rank of Kostroma archpastor, he arranged new buildings for the seminary, he himself taught the students the Hebrew language and the “sighted Easter” with church history. There was not a single church left in the diocese that he would not visit personally, regardless of any difficulties of the roads; and while visiting the church, he offered instructions first to the clergy and then to the people, testing the priests and clerks in their knowledge of the subjects of their office. The same was his service in the Ryazan diocese. Here he revived the theological seminary, and he himself was its rector at all times. His works are heterogeneous and, unfortunately, not all have survived. a) Preacher: teachings to the Kostroma flock, M. 1776, only 3 teachings: about the qualities of a mentor, about faith in the incarnation of God, about God’s love for people. New collection of teachings, M. 1778, 17 teachings in total. New edition of all Kostroma teachings, M. 1796. Words and speeches spoken in Ryazan, M. 1779; the second collection of Ryazan words, M. 1781, all written in Russian, but with Latin construction. Simon had the gift of speech: he often spoke teachings without preparation. b) The interpretation of the New Testament remains in manuscript. c) A short catechism for the people and instructions on the importance and necessity of St. the sacraments were sent out to them throughout the Kostroma diocese, so that the priests would read them to the people on Sundays and holidays. His message to the schismatics ex. St. Petersburg 1852 d) Its establishment “for the residence of students” of Ryazan, also in the RKP. e) About Easter, M. 1799 A letter to the Kostroma archpriest, where he writes: “I noticed that the faces of saints are painted by masters with great blackness, similar to how they praise the apostasy from the church with schismatic superstition, and other faces and things are not proportional.” As a result, he established a committee of those who knew the “art of icon painting” to oversee the correctness of icon painting in the cathedral. (Vozdvizhensky, Ryaz. Hierarchy, pp. 265–281; Ryaz. Provincial Ved., 1854, No. 56; Kostr. Provincial Ved., 1855, No. 15). Simon's note to the governor of Ryazan that the rules of the church do not allow ugly folk amusements on Easter, aroused a complaint from the governor; the latter's pitiful letter to Potemkin in Rus. Archive 1865 1, 65, 66. Letter from Simon, Archimandrite. Novospassky, to Plato on his theology, ed. in Fascic. litterarum ad Platonem, Petrop. 1776. Victor Sadkovsky, a pupil of Kiev, archimandrite of Kursk, and then of Slutsk, from 1784 bishop of Pereyaslavl and vicar of Kiev, in 1789 he was captured by a Polish detachment and taken in shackles to Warsaw, where he spent six months in prison; from 1793 Archbishop of Minsk and from 1796 – Archbishop of Chernigov († 1803). The signature on his Chernigov portrait says: You see the bishop, who has been captured, He suffered greatly for the truth—his law. But wisdom, a gentle spirit and Victor's strength She brought all the strength of her adversary under her feet. From Warsaw bonds to Minsk, in Poland, and from there He sat on the Chernigov pastoral throne. He wisely governs his flock and governs holyly, For which he expects rewards from the Most High. His word for the New Year, about good intentions, St. Petersburg. 1775 His speech to the king, spoken in Latin, and a district letter to the flock, with an admonition to be submissive to the legitimate Polish authorities, written on April 25. 1785, printed in Kyiv. diocesan led 1861, pp. 87–89, 149–152. Another district letter from Victor in 1794 with the conviction to return from the union to Orthodoxy is in the Bulletin of Govorsky 1863, November. Letter to George Konissky - in Mogil. Ved. 1859; to Plato - in Fasc. litt. ad Platonem. Yuvenaly Smirnov, prefect of the Kazan seminary and abbot of the Zilantov Monastery, since 1772, teacher of the law of the cadet corps, then archimandrite. Constantine Monastery, where he died. His words: at the highest court on November 26, 1780 St. Petersburg. 1780, at the graduation of cadets from St. Petersburg. 1782 Words at the highest presence in the court church, St. Petersburg. 1785. His Initial teaching is rhetorical, M. 1804. Alexey Syromyatnikov, Moscow merchant who converted from the schism († 1803). On fiery zeal for Orthodoxy ed.: Extracts on the honor of a bishop, M. 1779; preface to grammar and. Joseph, M. 1782; incriminating testimony against disobedient church members, M. 1784; extracts from conversations of Chrysostom, St. Petersburg. 1784; testimony about the sacraments of the church, with extracts from Ignatius the God-Bearer, St. Petersburg. 1790; St. John Chrysostom “on schismatics separating from the church” St. Petersburg. 1790; places from the bloc. Augustine about St. churches, St. Petersburg 1795 85. Pavel Ponomarev, a graduate of the Sergius Seminary, who completed his education in Moscow. academy and university, governor of the Sergius Lavra, from 1772 rector of the academy, from 1794 bishop of Nizhny Novgorod and member of the academy, from 1798 archbishop of Tver and member of the synod, and from 1800 archbishop of Yaroslavl († 1805). His speech to Catherine, delivered in Nizhny Novgorod, was considered exemplary (published in the Peninsky anthology 1, 558). Many of his teachings remain in the Russian Communist Party, among other things, three of his words spoken in Nizhny, one of them against schismatics; extracts from them in East. Nizhny Novgorod hierarchy, pp. 183, 185–187, Description of the Sergius Lavra, St. Petersburg. 1782 and then published many times. until 1837. The history of church literature translated by him remains in the RKP. and does honor to his taste. He told the Russians. Academy its notes on parts 5 and 6 of its dictionary. About the speech of Archimandrite Paul to the Empress, June 21 1787, in the west. Khrapovitsky noted: “Novospassky architect. Paul spoke poorly yesterday; he is a student of Plato; they deliberately try not to be surpassed, and now in Balti there are better people than in black.” The best Belets is of course Alekseev (§ 82). So be it. Why did they think that the church would not be happy if the best white man wanted to be at least a decent black man? Against their will, they are given up to be soldiers, and not into monasticism, which is a matter of good arbitrariness. – How Plato loved learned monks, see App. to creativity father 1862, pp. 422–424. They undertake to measure spiritual affairs by worldly standards and turn out to be pathetic. Dimitry Ustimovich, until 1785 abbot of Zolotonoshsky, then prefect and teacher of theology in the Kyiv academician, from 1793 bishop of Pereyaslavl, from 1795 of Smolensk († 1805). His birthday word. Mother of God, M. 1784 Afanasy (Alexy) Ivanov, student, teacher, prefect and rector of Moscow. Academician, from 1788 Bishop of Kolomna, from 1799 Archbishop of Ekaterinoslav († 1805). His notes on the class of reading the Holy Scriptures, where the Slavic translation was verified with both the Greek translation and the Hebrew original, remain in the RKP. His words for celebrations. days and holidays, M. 1787 Translations: The Athenian Nights of Aulus Gellius, ed. with approx. at 2 o'clock, M. 1787. Apology of Tertulian, M. 1802. Vasily Prokopyev, a student of Moscow. academician, archpriest Moscow Sretensky Cathedral and member of the consistory († 1805), known according to the words, M. 1786 Grigory Prigorovsky, teacher of rhetoric at the Mogilev seminary: known by the word when cellar. Archbishop George of Konissky (ed. in Chron. Thu. 1843). 86. Meletius, hieromonk of the Sarov desert, student of the seminary († 1805). In 1793 and 1794 he traveled to Jerusalem and upon his return published Travel to Jerusalem, St. Petersburg. 1798, is an essay worthy of attention. In his description, Meletius was not content with what he himself saw, although he observed everything carefully: he used Greek. manuscripts and especially the history of Jerusalem. Patriarchate, written by P. Dositheus; coped with an excellent description of St. Lands of the book. Radzivil and with a description of Abbot Binos. With special attention, he verifies Sukhanov’s proscinary and with complete success denounces his mistakes and the false opinions that schismatics based on him. He described the Jerusalem Temple in all detail, all the icons were named with the meaning of what they were like in painting and where they came from. His information about the sects that divided the church, about St. fire descending on Holy Saturday on the Holy Sepulcher. His thoughts about Golgotha ​​are also remarkable. Nikolai Antonov, Penza archpriest-preacher; his two words, one when starting the selection of judges, St. Petersburg. 1792, another at the end of the selection, St. Petersburg. 1793 Georgy Illarionov, a Moscow priest, published the words: on the inspiration of Holy Scripture and on the death of the Savior, M. 1802. Readings for the benefit of the soul, M. 1803. Christian in solitude, M. 1799. 1857. Semyon Protopopov, 1785–1792 Greek teacher. language at the Moscow Academy, composed “Instructions of the Greek language, with the addition of words found in n. covenant" M. 1788 Maxim Semiganovsky. a student and teacher at the Kyiv Academy, wrote: “Rules for beginners to learn Latin. language at the Kyiv Academy", M. 1791, 1794, St. Petersburg. 1798; “Russian spelling and pronunciation of letters.” M, 1794; Polish grammar, K. 1791, 1831. The latter was a classic at the Kyiv Academy for a whole half-century. Protopopov (139) wrote: “I received a book about spelling and pronunciation of Mr. Semiganovsky; There are some pretty hefty rules; and with all this, it is surprising that a Little Russian, whose pronunciation and language itself are generally quite well known, writes rules for the Russians.” (Bibliographer. Record. 1858, p. 755). Ivan Sokolsky, French teacher, first at Sergius Seminary, then in Moscow. acad. a) Translated from French: “The historical shortening of the life of Jesus Christ, His teachings and miracles,” against unbelief, M. 1785. Important adventures from unimportant circumstances, M. 1786. Treatment of oneself, Caracchioli, M. 1788: from German. – Peplier’s French grammar, M. 1788. b) Composed an office and merchant calendar, M. 1788, 1795. 87. John Mikhailov, deacon and then priest of Moscow, very remarkable for his philosophical and theological works. a) His works: “The Science of the Soul,” or a clear depiction of its perfections, M. 1796. Outpouring of feelings when looking at Emperor Paul, M. 1797. Mamai the overthrown, M. 1798. “The sower of piety or Christians. morality", M. 1798. "Medicine" for a sick soul, M. 1799. "Tablets of the Covenant", in the form of Christ. calendar, explaining the power of Holy Scripture, M. 1801. Victim of the zeal of the imp. Alexander upon his accession to the throne, M. 1801 b) Translations from French: on moral and physical gaiety, op. Caraccioli, M. 1797; Selected thoughts from Mark. Aurelius, Julian, Stanislaus and Frederick. M. 1797; solitary Godly Thought, at 3 hours. Moscow, 1798–1799 People like Mikhailov were very useful in their time. Secular people were then keen on the philosophy of the encyclopedists and translated their works into Russian. Almost all of Voltaire's works were translated for Russian society at that time. Voltaire's Candide, trans. Bashilova, St. Petersburg 1769; New arrangement of the history of reason, Voltaire, St. Petersburg. 1777 Three conversations from the works of Voltaire, St. Petersburg. 1777 Travel of Sacramentado, Voltaire, M. 1778; articles about rumors from the encyclopedia, St. Petersburg. 1774 On beatitude, J. J. Rousseau, M. 1781 On the beginning of morality between people, J. J. Rousseau, trans. I. Potemkin, M. 1782. New letters from J. J. Rousseau, St. Petersburg. 1783 Momnon, Voltaire, M. 1782 History of the Crusades, Voltaire, trans. I. Velyasheva-Volyntseva, M. St. Petersburg. 1782–83 Small stories by Voltaire, St. Petersburg. 1783. The Philosophical and Critical Writings of Voltaire, trans. Rakhmanin. St. Petersburg 1784. Satirical and philosophical writings of Voltaire, St. Petersburg. 1784 Voltaire's Political Testament, trans. Rakhmanina, St. Petersburg. 1785 Collected Works of Voltaire, trans. I. Rakhmanina, 3 hours. St. Petersburg. 1786. Philosophical speeches about man, Voltera, M. 1788. Defeated prejudice, Voltera, M. 1788. Zadig or Fate, Walter, trans. Golenishcheva, St. Petersburg. 1788. The Princess of Babylon, Voltaire, trans. Polunina, M. 1789. A mixture of the writings of Voltaire, trans. N. L(vova), St. Petersburg. 1788. All sorts of things, Voltaire, trans. N. L(vova), St. Petersburg. 1789. Reasonings of Walter, St. Petersburg. 1789. My Sleeping Cap, Op. Mercier, trans. Rakhmanina, St. Petersburg. 1789. The Way of Human Happiness, Voltaire, M. 1790. The Man of 40 Thalers, Voltaire, trans. Golenishcheva, St. Petersburg. 1792. Natural Law, Voltaire, trans. Palitsyna, St. Petersburg. 1802. The White Bull, Walter, trans. Rodzyanki, St. Petersburg. 1802 In the Petersburg Gazette, May 30, 1779, they wrote: “Teplov fell from his position. His death was very terrible and similar. After three days, speech was taken away and he was greatly tormented. And after that he began to speak, revealing himself to his confessor and to everyone, generally saying: “I did not honor the church, nor God, and I abhorred His shrines, I am now lost. You listening generals, seeing my death so painful, repent and be virtuous. I have never done any good to anyone in my life, for which I receive payment.” Unfortunately, this lesson was soon forgotten, or seemed otherwise incomprehensible. And the opinions of encyclopedists continued to be considered invisible wisdom, and their books continued to be published and bought. Blasphemy was in vogue. They wrote a “message to the servants,” with impudent ridicule of the servants of the faith (ed. in Pustomel, St. Petersburg, 1770). When paralysis struck the unfortunate merry fellow, then they only came to their senses, and in bitter repentance they wrote “a confession of deeds and thoughts” (op. Von-Visin, in the Petersburg Journal, 1798). It was a strange time! The higher-ups were as if in a daze, clouded by dreams of freedom—a freedom fueled either by crude materialism or by soulless rationalism. – What develops true freedom in the soul was received coldly, and more often persecuted with sarcasm. They exposed to public disgrace a person who “seeks virtue in long prayers, observes holidays strictly, goes to mass every day, always lights candles before holidays, and does not eat meat during fasting.” (Comedy of Catherine: About the Time!). As you can see, Christian affairs are a funny oddity! But at other times they were portrayed as defenders of the Russian people and the people's faith. They were carried away by the malicious slander of encyclopedists against religion to the point that they not only forgot to think about religion as the basis of civil improvement, but were afraid of it. – Under the banner of humanism, the door was opened wide to unbelief, debauchery and superstition, as if all this were not a humiliation to humanity. They wrote and worried about humanity, about freedom and truth, but did not understand that without a Christian basis all this is worse than dreams, since in practice it turns out to be the despotism of egoism. Their philosophical morality gave birth to clever robbers of the treasury and the same stranglers of the weak, from whom the state organism reached extreme disorder; Their pedagogy instilled a thirst for vanity, developed a taste for secular frivolity, idle waste of time and a dissolute life. (See Dobrolyubova 1, 174–189. Russian Archive 1864, pp. 66–71). Sometimes they were ashamed not to appear to be Christians, but were only deists, while deism of the mind in all its forms, like the deism of feeling, is not at all the same as Christianity, and with it it is impossible to acquire either intelligence or happiness. With him you will allow pitiful contradictions in life: sometimes you will work for universal enlightenment, sometimes you will start talking about paganism and Mohammedanism: let them live! With a deistic mind, let them deftly spot in the other the “deceiver, the seduced”: but they will not spare themselves the honor of falling into the role of both. This honor especially easily accrues to a self-loving individual, who may be offended because the honor of an unclean deed is attributed to others and not to her, or her immodest words are repeated: “I write down whole feet of institutions.” In the rapture of reasoning, they did not allow anything miraculous, but did not see the simple truth that Christianity itself is a miracle both in the history of mankind and in the history of every person. They sought fame as followers of Locke's philosophy. (Collection of instructions on education, St. Petersburg, 1789). Pathetic desire! True, even now they write: “if there are no innate ideas, if all a person’s knowledge is the fruit of his own activity: then, of course, the importance of human nature has increased” (Galakhov). But how is it? Because man was placed alongside the monkey and the donkey, did his nature become elevated? Is it possible to save, if not yourself, then others, from this high honor? After all, this philosophy in essence is the philosophy of sensual, animal life, where spiritual life, life according to higher thoughts and ideals, has no place, where the circle of knowledge and activity is limited to what is seen and heard, what is smelled with the nose and licked with the tongue. Yes, “there are more than one kind of windmills in fashion in the world, and more than one Don Quixote loved to build them in order to fight with them later” (Ekaterina). The opinions of encyclopedists were considered unprecedented wisdom. It is painful to see how an intelligent, majestic empress humiliates herself in front of dirty people, such as Diderot, Voltaire, D'Alembert (Schlosser of the 18th century I, 413, II, 375). Catherine’s correspondence with Voltaire (1764–1778) is known, and has been translated into Russian more than once. Brigadier Rachmanin is so enthusiastic about Voltaire that he spends his old man’s nights translating them and publishes them in the village of Kazinka, although he points to St. Petersburg. (Bibliography Zap. I, 281). By the grace of the Synodal Chief Prosecutor Chebyshev (1764–1774), says Von-Vizin in his confession, it was forbidden to publish an essay that proved the existence of God. What is this? Crazy? Oh no! This is the mind of a court monkey. The courtiers and nobles did not know anything higher than French philosophy or what was called French education. “Belle, Montesquieu, Voltaire were among my favorite writers,” says the prince. Dashkova. (Moskvityan. 1841, No. 1). But Dashkova still understood what she was reading. Others understood little of what they were saying and reading against religion, although they spoke boldly and with enthusiasm. They were not able to answer any objection of a strong mind, but, relying on their meaning in the world, they did not want to listen to objections. Wigel wrote: “in wicked Penza for the first time (1800) I heard ridicule of religion, blasphemy against God, epigrams against the Mother of God from people who were complete ignoramuses; however, they were already talking about Nonnot, about Freron and about Abbot Guen and trampled them into the mud, extolling the praises of Candide and the White Bull.” – Pugachevism presented its protest to the apostates for their faith: but they turned a deaf ear to it. – Having been placed at the top by the random circumstances of life, they thought that they were certainly superior to others in their souls, and there was no reason for them to listen to the teachers of the Church. Others laughed at the passion for everything foreign, and yet did not cease to believe that Voltaire and others like him were a miracle, how smart they were. In “Evenings” (Part 1, 12, St. Petersburg, 1772) they wrote: “due to some incomprehensible passion for a native of Paris or another town of the ancient Gauls, we hope in each of these guests who rub themselves into our fatherland to find greatness of spirit, sharpness of mind and justice of heart, which we marvel at in the learned and famous Frenchmen... Not to have concern for the morals of their children, love for the fatherland, love for one’s neighbors – it’s godless.” You see how low the demands are even of those who undertake to teach others: not a word about the need to teach children the gospel faith. They are only concerned about some kind of justice of the heart, which, of course, they cannot give an account of to themselves. – What happened to those houses of the nobility, where even the light of the “Evenings” was not accepted, and where the teachers of the youth were people whom “the Parisian police asked to get out of the capital”? (Drone, 1769, p. 126). This is how things went on in sweet freedom until the massacre began in Paris. In 1790, Sept. 4, Radishchev, a student of Helvetius, was sent to Siberia for an essay (Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow), “filled with speculations that destroy public peace, belittle the respect due to the authorities, and insulting expressions against the royal power.” (Collected Order No. 16, 901). 88. Anastasy Bratanovsky, a student of the Pereyaslavl seminary, teacher in various seminaries and from 1790 in Nevsky, teacher of law in the cadet corps, in 1796 archiman. Novospassky, from 1797 Bishop of Belarus and then Archbishop of Astrakhan, “member of the Russian. Academy" († Dec. 9:1806). “Who knew Anastasia by hearsay, And he already revered him sincerely. This good shepherd was an adornment for the church. Exemplary life, soul and mind. Widows and orphans saw consolation in him: He often endowed them with other good things. a) The preacher is quite lively and free, so as not to consider, following the example of others, harsh language to belong to the church. department, and so intelligent as to see and depict objects clearly and speak about the right things for the time. Understanding his time, he often turns to philosophy and expresses its abstract thoughts in a pleasant style. His best sermons: on taking over the administration of the Belarusian diocese, on the burial of Betsky and Shuvalov, on the opening of the provincial city of Mogilev and a speech at the graduation of cadets. In general, his St. Petersburg and Belarusian sermons are more approved than those in Astrakhan. It is clear that his best sermons do not mean exemplary sermons. Their pomposity is tiresome; up to 50 pathetic questions in one word - game. Another thing is the thoughts that make up the content of his words. The word about Betsky develops the idea that “the death of the virtuous is proof of the immortality and bliss of virtue in the future life.” In the word about Shuvalov, the main idea is that “earthly happiness cannot serve as a reward for virtue, which receives perfect reward only in heaven.” In both words, the chosen thought is not only proven, but the opposite one is also refuted. And this also meant that they boldly humiliated materialism. One must imagine the loud fame that the encyclopedists enjoyed then in the highest circles (§ 87) in order to understand the courage of the preacher, humiliating in front of the same nobility the wisdom of inaccessible sages. This is the firmness of a Christian shepherd who boldly speaks the truth about lies to the great of the world. She, of course, most of all gave power to his word over the hearts of his listeners. Anastasius's thoughts on unfortunate modern philosophy will never lose value. An unbeliever is not a man, he told his listeners. “The first human dignity, glory and honor, consists in the recognition and knowledge of God; in this is reason, in this is wisdom, in this is glory and honor, in this is the whole man. Physical animality brings us closer only to the dumb. A meaningful spirit distinguishes us from brutes. But even with this meaningful spirit, without piety towards God, man is bestial, unless the animals are proud of their advantage over the wicked man. The knowledge of the one who acquired it." (Published in St. Petersburg, 1850, pp. 87–91). “Disastrous debauchery, unholy vice! What convictions would they have to incline their hearts to their side? Are our weaknesses? ABOUT! How better is it to surrender to the mercy of God with the recognition of them, than to consider them a justification for life that is contrary to God! Is it pleasure? Disastrous are those pleasures which God does not favor. Is it happiness? Unmourned lucky ones who think of bliss without virtue, without God, outside eternity. The despiser of law and virtue nowhere finds cover for his insolence. Nature reproaches him, torments his conscience, faith persists, God, as the Lawgiver, demands duty, and as the Father, he seeks filial love. His feelings and passions lull him to sleep until God’s justice calls: “Come and let us be satisfied” (pp. 312, 313). Anastasius’s contemporaries meant a lot, and his instructions about the need for God’s revelation still mean a lot (p. 141–147), about God’s Providence over man (pp. 51–58, 182–192), about immortality and the sources of unbelief (pp. 126–132, 346–352, 515–538, 206–213). – Words and speeches, published by him. at 4 o'clock St. Petersburg 1796, 1799; second edition M. 1814; new ed. St. Petersburg 1850 His “treatise” “on the arrangement of sermons” (tractatus de concionis dispositionibus formandis, M. 1806) is a dry work, tiring with the fragmentation of rules, and poorly conveys the technique of composing a sermon. One of his letters is in Snegirev’s Life of M. Plato, several letters are in B. Kamensky’s Dictionary of the Ven. People I, 17–23. b) His interpretation of the Gospel of John remained unpublished. c) He translated several useful books, such as: “Protection from unbelief and wickedness”, St. Petersburg. 1794 Arnaud’s poem – “Jeremiah’s lament”, St. Petersburg. 1797 “The True Messiah”, M. 1801, 1851 “An Experience on Perfection from Formaeus”, St. Petersburg. 1805 In 1801, when imp. Paul was in Moscow, Rev. Anastasius was instructed by decree to review and correct Gibbon's book on the fall of the Roman Empire. Anastasia’s letter about himself and his scientific works - in the Bible. Zap. 1859, pp. 240–241. 89. Theoktist, the cathedral hieromonk, read in the Mogilev Cathedral, on Sundays, “an explanation of the conciliar epistle of James, with brief moral teachings,” ex. in M. 1804 John Alekseev, first a teacher of the corps, then a priest of the Spassky Cathedral, which is on the forest, for example: akathist and service to St. Demetrius, M. 1801. Akathist, life and service to Stephen, Bishop of Perm, M. 1799. A guide to the knowledge of Easter signs, M. 1787. General historical dictionary, in 2 hours, M. 1793–94; translated: from Greek. Diodorov history. library, St. Petersburg 1774–75 Eliana's story, M. 1773, 1787; from Latin, - Valery Maxim - sayings and deeds, nine books, 2 hours, St. Petersburg. 177 2 g. Gabriel (Petrovich), Prince Gagarin, former Minister of Commerce and friend of the Emperor. Paul, a secret ascetic († 1807) wrote: a) Akathist Ap. and Evang. John. b) Akathist with service and life of St. Dimitri's height. c) Service to Ave. Theodosius totem; all three editions in M. 1798 His “Fun in the village. Theological" published after his death, M. 1813. The epitaph he composed for himself is touching: “Passerby! you go, but you lie down, like me: Stay and rest on my stone. Look what happened to the proud creature? Where did the man go? And the ashes were overgrown with nettles! Tear off the epic and remember me. I’m at home, you’re visiting, think about yourself!” Yuvenaly Voeikov, from the nobility, a graduate of the land corps, Novospassky abbot († 1807). Historian-genealogist. Before him, the genealogy of Russian noble families was an uncultivated field. He took care of it with love and was quite successful. His works: genealogies: Voeikovs, M. 1789, 1792; Krapotovs and Durovs, M 1792; Vadbolskikh, M. 1792; Kozakovs, M. 1792; Checherinykh, M. 1792; Saburovs, M. 1794, 1797; Karabanov, M. 1795, Makarov, M. 1795; Lopukhinykh, M. 1796; Sheremetyev, M. 1796; The life of F. M. Bulgakov, with his will, M. 1795; Genealogy of the Bulgakovs, M. 1796. About the Yuryev Romanov family and the life of the village of Philaret, M. 1798; with addition M. 1802. Description of the Novospassky Monastery, M. 1802; Description of marriage imp. Peter I with Catherine I, and their daughter Anna Petrovna with the Duke of Holstein-Gotthorne, 1726, ed. Hier. Yuvenalyem, M. 1798, a grateful offering to the president of the Khitrovo College, M. 1792. Markellin, abbot, ex. Description of the Sarov Desert, M. 1804 Alexander, teacher of rhetoric in Novgorod. seminary, then archimandrite of the Zheltikov Monastery, wrote a chronicle about the monastery of St. Savva of Vishera, St. Petersburg. 1806; Ancient letters are included in the chronicles. Lavrentiy, 1804–1806, archimandrite of the monastery of the cross, left news of the monastery of the cross in Onega, M. 1805. 90. Sylvester Lebedinsky, rector of Astrakhan, then 1797–98 rector of Kazan, from 1799 bishop of Pereyaslavl, from 1807 archbishop of Arkhangelsk († 1898), wrote: compendium theologiae dogmaticae, Petropoli 1799, Μ. 1808 is a rather weak work both in content and presentation. The Evangelical tributary, M. 1796, in 2 parts. M. 1807, - in the latest edition it is largely original; spiritual and moral essay: “imperishable food”, M. 1794, 1799 Jerome (Archpriest John) Stefanovich, archimandrite and rector of the Ryazan seminary. Composed: a) Instructions to correctly compete with schismatics, M. 1807, 1815, 1825 b) Notes on the Ryazan hierarchy, compiled according to acts. The original is in the Spassky monastery, and the list is in the Ryazan consistory. Flavian (Theodore) Laskin, a student of Kolomna, since 1800 rector of Novgorod, since 1804 rector of the Neva Academy († 1808). His words: when electing judges, St. Petersburg. 1805; in case of the highest rescript to the residents of St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg. 1805 Mikhail Protopopov, a graduate of Moscow. Academy, translated: a) from Greek. Athenagoras, Athenian philosopher, on the resurrection, St. Petersburg. 1791; b) from Latin. works (selected) of St. Cyprian, bishop. Carthaginian, St. Petersburg 1803; c) from English – Purgold Orthodoxy Greek. churches, M. 1776; d) from German. – Gellert’s moral teaching, in 2 hours, M. 1775–1777. Sulzer, conversations about the beauty of nature and reflections on the subjects of natural science, St. Petersburg. 1777 Andrei Kolokolov, Ostashevo archpriest, composed “Love and Peace,” or excitement for love and peace, M. 1801; translated from German. "A warning against all sins of uncleanness." M. 1800, 1801 Sergius Krasnopevkov, a student of the Neva Seminary, protopresbyter and confessor of Emperor Alexander († 1808). His Abridged Explanation of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, M. 1801. Speech for the arrival of the emperor. Alexandra from Moscow, St. Petersburg. 1801 Translation of the reflections of the English presbyter Dodd in prison, St. Petersburg. 1795 Evgraf (Evfim) Muzalevsky, - Platonov mentor and rector of Sergius Seminary, since 1807 rector of St. Petersburg. Academy († November 11, 1809). His words: in the village of crowns, imper. Alexander I, St. Petersburg. 1809; at the burial of foreman Bulgakov M. 1810. The first word - about the weakness of the mind - is distinguished by the vividness of the pictures; the second breathes with the liveliness of feeling. Philosophical explanations of it, e.g. about dreams - in Approx. to creativity father 1864, pp. 455–461. His outline of theological sciences is in Chistovich, in Ist. acad. 182–192. 91. Juvenaly Medvedsky, a monk, listened to philosophy lessons in Novgorod, and theology in Tamb. family, from 1799 he was the governor of Khutyn, then a catechist at the Sergius Seminary († 1809). His “System of Christian Theology”, in 3 parts, M. 1806, is known - an experience remarkable both because the writer only through love for science achieved a fairly extensive knowledge of theology, and because it was one of the initial experiments in systematic theology in the Russian language. Catechism, in RKP. Rhetoric, M. 1804. Akathist to the Holy. Alexey, M. 1802. In the RCP. Akathists to Varlaam of Khutyn and Mikhail of Klop. Ambrose Yakovlev-Orlin, since 1765 prefect of the Kazan Academy, since 1794 rector of Moscow. Academy, from 1796 Bishop of Vyatka, from 1804 Archbishop of Ryazan († 1809). His words spoken during the sermon, ed. St. Petersburg 1792 Nazariy, who entered the Sarov desert in 1752, 1781–1801 abbot of the Valaam monastery, 1801–1809 lived again in the Sarov desert, an elder of spiritual life. He wrote instructions that breathe experienced piety, ed. in Description Sarov Desert, M. 1853, pp. 130–164. Melchizedek Znachko-Yavorsky, son of the Lubny esaul, who studied at the Kiev college, from 1753 hegumen of Matreninsky, from 1768 of Pereyaslavl, from 1771 the governor of Sofia and hegumen of Vydubitsky, from 1781 archimandrite of Glukhovsky † 1809 He left his memory in the church with his courageous defense of Orthodoxy against the violence of union and papism, and with his suffering for Orthodoxy. – A detailed overview of his activities and the current state of Orthodoxy is from Lebedintsev: Archimandrite Melchizedek – in 2 volumes. Archives of the South-West. Ross., K. 1864. On the case of the union: its reports are in the Archive of the South-West. Ross. vol. 2, No. 11, 16, 19, 21, 23, 35, 44, 58, 61, 63, 68–70, 75, 83. 158. Vol. 3, No. 1, 67, 114, 132, 133, 157, 160. Letters - ibid., 2, No. 39, 42, 56, 57, 95; vol. 3, no. 122, 123. District messages 2; No. 73; vol. 3, no. 124. 92. Arseny Moskvin, rector of Yaroslavl, from 1798 bishop of Old Russia, from 1799 - Voronezh († 1810). His tin is on the line, St. Petersburg. 1793 Eugene, who taught history and geography in the Nevsky family from 1776, archimandrite of the Arzamas Spassky Monastery († 1810), spoke a word for the New Year, ed. M. 1807 Lavrentiy Mordovsky, abbot of the Kirensky monastery († 1810), wrote Description of the Kirensky Trinity Monastery, M. 1806, 1841. Vasily Protopopov, since 1787, teacher of French in Moscow. academic When he and another student, Stefan Popov, were presented as teachers of the French language, M. Platon, having elected Protopopov, wrote: alteruter non male gallice loquitur, hoc mihi gratum est. After that, Protopopov was a teacher of rhetoric and poetry at the Kolomna Seminary. From 1797 he was cathedral archpriest in Kolomna, and from 1800 in Tula, in the latter he taught poetry and French until 1800 († 1810). In Kolomna he composed an ode to return. Bishop Athanasius from his travels, M. 1797. His speech upon Athanasius’ departure for the Voronezh flock, M. 1799 “My grief forces me to translate some of David’s psalms into verse: is it possible to print them somehow?” - this is what he wrote in 1796 to the bookseller Selivanovsky. But it is unknown whether they were printed. Perhaps some ended up in the Collected Psalms, ed. in M. 1809 by Reshetnikov. Protopopov's letters - in Bibliography. Notes of 1858, pp. 755–776. There, about some of his translations, about which he wrote: “I love Jean-Jacques not as an antagonist of religion, but as a sensitive writer who knows how to touch the soul and talk to the heart.” Naive! – Fr. Vasily was considered a good preacher. At one sermon, his reverend. Methodius wrote: orationem plurimis laudibus exornandam censemus. 1802 About another reverend. Ambrose responded: “It’s nice for us to see that St. the church has teachers filled with the spirit of piety and true eloquence, which is what distinguishes this word.” But not a single word of his has been published. Collected works and translations of Protopopov, Moscow, 1789. In 1792, Bolkhovitinov, then still an archpriest of Voronezh, wrote to Selivanovsky: “I have not yet received a letter from Archpriest Protopopov, and I believe that I never will: for, as I heard, he is very envious of me being a prefect. Clever, you say, and a reason worthy of a good man! But what are you going to do? Passions are common to everyone. From now on, I won’t bother him with letters myself.” (Bibliography Zap. 1859, p. 66). Foma Filimonovich Rozanov, a graduate of St. Sergius Seminary and Moscow. academy, since 1800 fellow director of the synod. printing house († 1810). His: Latin-Russian dictionary, M. 1797, 1805, 1806; Budonov's transcription of the Latin-French lexicon; Russian grammar, M. 1808; Slavs grammar, M. 1810. These books were classics for a long time, with the exception of the last. Slavic grammar was soon replaced by another, since it was found inconvenient to teach, due to too many examples. A Brief Sacred History for Children, M. 1806. Introduction to the Message of Nature, trans. from French, M. 1793 Lolota and Fanfan, trans. from French, at 4 o'clock. M. 1791; ed. 2nd 1793; 4th–1812 Rozanov wrote satirical articles: his remarkable “A word of praise for something, dedicated by the writer to someone, and by the translator to no one, with the addition of a word of praise to nothing,” M. 1787. His other essay is especially caustic: “Consolation and good advice to fashion, which is complaining about the expulsion of fashionable and expensive goods from its admirers; composed by Fita Fertov” – printed without indicating the year and place of publication. In 1792, Bolkhovitinov wrote to Selivanovsky: “Foma Filimonovich’s letter made me laugh.” This probably refers to fashion advice. 93. Veniamin Rumovsky, from 1774 Bishop of Olonets, from 1775 Archbishop of Arkhangelsk, from 1798 Nizhny Novgorod, († 1811). a) Historian-archaeologist. His famous New Tablet, M. 1803; in corrected and expanded form - M. 1805, 1810, 1816, 1825, 1843, 9th ed. St. Petersburg 1853; Before that, he translated the Goar breviary (euchologium graecorum) and the translation is kept in the RKP. Petersburg academy. They usually write that the New Tablet is almost a translation of Goar’s missal. It's not fair. In terms of presentation, the tablet is a completely original work, in terms of content, although it contains some of Goar’s comments, in the first edition it already contains a lot that Goar does not have, and in subsequent editions there is even more that belongs to Benjamin himself. The New Tablet is an explanation of the Christian church, its accessories and sacred objects. actions. In terms of its completeness, this essay is most satisfactory. It is a pity that the explanations of St. actions and objects sometimes deprive themselves of trust by giving two or three meanings to the same object, moreover, unconsciously. The language is not Russian and not pure Slavic, but with a Latin construction. b) During the management of the archang. the diocese, while reviewing the diocese, collected ancient manuscripts and chronicles to compile the history of the local church, and in 1781 he ordered the creation of memorial books in all monasteries and churches, the inclusion of ancient monuments in them and the continued recording of important incidents. The consequence of this was that many ancient monuments, hitherto unknown, were discovered, and under the supervision of the enlightened archpastor, a detailed history and description of the archpastor was compiled. dioceses, ed. in the Curious Monthly Book of 1795 He composed the Sacred History for young children, in Russian, Greek, Latin, and French, St. Petersburg. 1778 c) Under his supervision, the History of dumb animals was translated from Latin, at 5 o’clock, M. 1803. d) His word per week. 18, in response to the words: From here on you will catch people, speaking. in the village Sarsky, - in Tsarsky, page 561. Veniamin, according to Novikov, composed “very many decent words, praised by knowledgeable people.” Gennady Chelnokov, pupil and prefect of Kazan, since 1798 member of the spiritual censorship and archimandrite of Volokolamsk († 1811). His words spoken at the chread, M. 1810 John Ioannovich Krasovsky, a student of the Kostroma seminary and its prefect, from 1783 a priest and teacher of the law of the cadet corps, then at the school of St. Catherine, court archpriest and member of the Russian Academy († 1811). a) Preacher: Catechetical interpretations, at 5 o'clock (rkp.); two catechisms for proteges (rkp.); teachings (rkp.); service to the Feodorovskaya icon of the Mother of God, M. 1777 b) The experience of the agreement of the evangelists remains in the RKP. c) His philosophical argument “On the Ultimate World”, national. in the same works of the Academy. d) As a philologist, he participated in the composition. Russian dictionary. Academy and precisely delivered the words starting with the letter Z, and explained all the words starting with the letter B, and during the publication of the remaining five parts, he worked diligently, providing explanations for the words of the church language. e) His translations are published in the monthly works of the Academy: Afinogorov’s apology; Ermiev's mockery of paganism; 1st book of Theophilus to Autolycus. His discussion about the authenticity of Flavian testimony about Jesus Christ was also published there; Kalmet's research on the military affairs of the Jews and their civilian officials, St. Petersburg. 1795 In his translation from Greek. Kydonius against fears of death, St. Petersburg. 1796 94. Platon (Peter) Lyubarsky, a native of Chernigov, a student of the Chernigov seminary and then the Kyiv Academy, from 1762 prefect of Vyatka, from 1772 rector of Kazan, from 1794 archbishop of Astrakhan, from 1805 Ekaterinoslav († 1811 g.). a) Preacher: Teaching to the Kazan flock about maintaining loyalty to the Empress, in October. 1773 Speech at the consecration of the banners of the regiment, Prince. Urusova, M. 1799 He spoke on April. 24 1774 funeral eulogy for Bibikov. His: Celebration of the opening of the Kazan governorship in the Kazan seminary, with two speeches, M. 1781. b) Historian: Vyatka hierarchy, ed. in Reading Moscow total ist., 1848 No. 7, but with abbreviations; Astrakhan hierarchy, ed. there; news about the Kazan Transfiguration Monastery, with the addition of inscriptions and letters (rkp.); Kazan hierarchy (rkp.); Brief news about Pugachev, ed. in 2 volumes of Pugachev's history, op. Pushkin. All these historical works are stored in the RKP. Kazan University. Many of his letters to B. Kamensky about the Pugachevism are in the archive of old cases. Notes from some at the Grotto in Materials about the Pugachevism, St. Petersburg. 1862, pp. 6, 10, 11, 17. In the same archive, Grot indicates (p. 5) “a daily note about Pugachev, kept by the city of Orenburg to the Annunciation Church, which is in the Gostiny Dvor, by priest Ivan Osipov,” and also “a story about the origin of the impostor, composed by the city of Orenburg to the Trinity Church by priest Ivan Polyansky.” Evgeniy Romanov, teacher of law to the cadets, who taught them Russian grammar, from 1800 from Kolyazin archimandrite to Kostroma bishop († 1811). His Slavic Dictionary, ed. St. Petersburg 1784, selected from Berynda's dictionary, but with better explanations of words and with the addition of grammar rules. His words remained in the RKP. Gennady Shumov, student of Sergius Seminary, mentor of Moscow. academy, from 1803 its preacher, from 1808 prefect and abbot of Znamensky († 1811). His words: at the burial of Count Osterman, M. 1804; at the burial of P. D. Eropkin, M. 1805; at the burial of the prince. V. Saltykova, M. 1807; in the day of birth V. K. Mikhail, M. 1807; on the birthday of imp. Elizabeth, M. 1809 Theodore Malinovsky, archpriest and teacher of the law of the university († 1811). His teachings to university students, M. 1813. Description of the village of Gruzina, M. 1816. Innocent (Mikhail Sukhanov), a graduate of the Irkutsk seminary and Nevsky Academy, from 1805 the prefect of Irkutsk, from 1808 the archimandrite of the Kyrenia monastery († 1811), wrote “historical. Discourse on Russian Councils”, St. Petersburg. 1803 His speech is from Chistovich in East. Petersburg acad. 438, 439. Gleb Ivanovich Prokhorov, son of the Toropets archpriest, a student of the Pskov seminary, wrote “On the wisdom and goodness of God, contemplated throughout the world,” St. Petersburg. 1800, is a judicious essay with good feelings. He also wrote “about the customs and rituals observed in Russia during marriages” (rkp.). Alexey Rodionovich Popov, from the clergy, lived for a long time in the Vygov desert, for his talents and activities he enjoyed, as Curious says, respect “in Vygoretsia and its environs, even to Petropol”; then he left the schism and was an archpriest in Novgorod at a nunnery. The curious one adds: “he ended his life in grief over the loss of his primitiveness.” But he lies, as in other similar cases. O. Alexey, according to Zhuravlev (Izv. on the schism 2, 5–7), compiled a description of the Vygoretsky monastery; He described the character and teaching of the Pomeranian talkers in such colors that do not allow one to doubt his complete renunciation of the nonsense of the schism. – About his schismatic writings – Curious. 95. Platon (Peter) Levshin, Metropolitan of Moscow (1737–1812). He studied at the Moscow Academy, where he studied not only the subjects included in the academic course, but also others that were not taught. He, as his notes say, taught himself geography, and “acquired knowledge of history by constantly reading historical books, which he adhered to throughout his life and there was no more pleasant exercise for him than reading history, all history in general, and his own country.” Languages: Latin, Greek, French were mastered by him so much that he spoke them. After completing the course of science, he was a teacher of literature and catechist at the academy, in 1759 he became a teacher of rhetoric at the Lavra Seminary and at the same time accepted monasticism. The following year, prefect, and from 1761 rector of the seminary. In 1763, Catherine, on her way to Rostov, was in the Lavra and the word spoken by Plato: “about piety” drew her attention to him; she chose him as a teacher of the law to the heir to the throne; He was the crown prince’s mentor for 10 years and loved to talk with foreigners at court. In 1770, Archbishop of Tver and from 1775 Moscow, he remained archimandrite of the Lavra until his death. His life was described by Snegirev in 1837 and, supplemented, ed. M. 1856 Selected thoughts of Plato, in 2 parts, published by Kandorsky, M. 1802. a) Plato is a systematic teacher of faith. The content of his dogma, read in Latin at Sergius Seminary, and the answer to the question about the origin of souls - in Prib. to creativity father 1863; The conclusion of the latter is especially remarkable. “If, he says, the origin of the soul is hidden from us, but its redemption is open, there is no danger here. For we believe in Christ, not in order to be born, but in order to be reborn, no matter how we are born.” His Orthodox Doctrine of Faith ed. St. Petersburg 1765 (in 7 volumes of works); in Latin translation, St. Petersburg. 1774; in German, Leipsig 1770; in French, St. Petersburg 1776; in Greek, Vienna 1786; in English, Edinburgh, 1814. The ease of presentation is the best thing about this work. It consists of three parts. The first is about natural knowledge of God. Here we are talking about the existence and properties of God, about God’s creatures, about the image of God in man, about the immortality of the soul, about Providence, internal and external reverence for God, about the future life, about the corruption of nature, about the need for grace. The second part is about frank knowledge of God. Here about St. Scripture and the Church, about St. The Trinity, about angels, about the salvation of fallen man, about the Person of Christ Jesus and His offices, about the works of the Holy Spirit, about the sacraments, about the resurrection of the dead, about the eternity of the righteous and sinners. The third part is moral Christian teaching. Other works of the same kind: catechism for clergy, M. 1775, then many times (collected works, vol. 6); "Short Catechism" for children in question. and the answer. (vol. 6). This children's catechism was first published in 1776; then it appeared: the initial teaching for people who want to learn books, M. 1776. Here on the first pages are the alphabet, moral sayings and commandments; and then the children's catechism. And also the catechism in conversations, initially taught to the people at the academy (vol. 9); This catechism contains a fairly complete and quite clear statement of the dogmas of the faith, and in its kind should be considered exemplary. b) The sermons of M. Plato enjoyed great fame in their time. There is no doubt that he possessed a rare gift of speech: he spoke sermons without preparation. All his words and speeches number up to 500. - The thinker is always abundant, but not always deep, he harms the purity and correctness of Russian speech with the Latin order of words. The success of his preaching he owed much to the art of pronunciation and his happy appearance. Distinguished by his loud and courageous voice, majestic posture and bold gait, he aroused strong attention to himself by his very appearance, and sometimes amazed listeners with a bold and sudden turn of speech, an unexpected oratorical movement. His best oratorical work is the speech of the imp. Alexander at the coronation: this is a masterful work of art and high instruction of a Christian shepherd. Then follow the words about education, funeral c. to Natalia Alekseevna, and “to defeat the fleet near Chesna.” In the latter, he amazed the listeners with an unexpected movement. Having counted the exploits of Peter I, he left the pulpit, approached the tomb of Peter and, touching it, exclaimed: “Arise now, great monarch, father of our fatherland! Arise and look at your kind invention!... Arise and enjoy the fruits of your labors!... With the exception of a few more, all of Plato’s other sermons are distinguished by simplicity and clarity and are very edifying. These qualities did not appear in them unconsciously, but as a consequence of the preacher’s beliefs regarding church preaching. “I admit,” he wrote, “that I never cared much about ornate and speckled syllables. Such a playful and arrogant syllable, perhaps, is ever needed for secular writings; but in a sacred place, where the eternal Truth speaks through the lips of a preacher, I considered that he was superfluous. - Moreover, the preacher must talk to people of different status and concepts; and therefore necessity requires that spiritual conversation be intelligible to everyone; removing from himself, as much as possible, the suspicion that the preacher is seeking more praise from his listeners for his eloquent words, rather than being zealous about instilling virtue and the fear of God in the hearts of his listeners. “I paid all my attention to ensuring that in my words there was nothing dark, unintelligible or doubtful, or having a mutual understanding; so that everything is put in its place, similar to the natural order; the evidence for every proposal would be decent, convincing, indisputable, and there would be nothing between them that would seem doubtful to the listener, or that he could make an objection to... If a word with such a spirit is composed and pronounced, it will have a greater effect on the heart of the listener and will serve more for his benefit than one that produces only a variety of colorful expressions and only produces one loud noise, which has neither strength nor spirit.” (Preface to the lecture). He did not think that eloquence was not needed in any case - otherwise his own masterful words would have been against him, for example. for the coronation. “But he especially considered eloquence inappropriate where it was necessary to present a controversial thought and defend the truth. “Vityism is useful in order to present the truth, recognized by all, in the most beautiful and flattering form. - But where it is necessary to defend and prove it, which has been overcome by lies, then it is not only unnecessary, but also harmful. It is unnecessary: ​​for the face of truth is beautiful in itself, without any feigned embellishments. Harmful: because it gives the suspicion that the defender of the truth wins, perhaps not because the truth is on his side, but that he prevails only by the current of his words and the sorcery of eloquence. – Why a lush and sweet device of words? Reveal the truth itself in its essential form. She is a majestic wife: she forces herself to be loved and honored by her dignity, without demanding the embellishment of an unchaste wife. How did lies prevail and put the Gospel to shame? The simplicity of the word. For when it is hidden from the wise and prudent, and revealed to infants, this proves its holiest (truth) simplicity. How did the apostles assure the world and lead it out of error? The simplicity of the word." (Word in 1 week of Lent, vol. 5). c) Historian: a brief Russian church history, in 2 parts (M. 1805, second edition 1824); life of the Rev. Sergius, M. 1782, 1784, 1818, 1837 (Collected works, vol. 10); notes on a trip to Kyiv, 1804, ed. Snegirev in Arr. to the life of M. Plato, M. 1856; he also has an ed. travel notes to Yaroslavl, Kostroma and Vladimir, 1792, as well as notes about his life. The latter, from 1808 to 1812, were led by Samuil Zapolsky, the vicar of the Lavra, later the bishop of Kostroma. Plato's writings are clear evidence that he spoke and acted with integrity; but along with the important, there is also enough of the unimportant in them. Note from his imp. Alexander about the consequences of the Tilsit peace, partly ed. Snegirev has 2, 31, 32; Plato's letters, worthy of the attention of a historian, almost all ed. Mr. Snegirev in the Life of M. Plato; one - to Moskvit. 1842, No. 1; two in the Russian Bulletin of 1847; the two best letters to the imp. Alexander, during Napoleon's invasion, ed. in the Christomathy of Galakhov. Letters to rector Arseny - in Russk. Arch. 1864, 1169–1181. As for the “Russian church history” of M. Plato, written when he was 68 years old, he himself wrote about it this way: “I do not wax wise about this work of mine and do not consider it to be perfect in its way, but it may still be insufficient, and in some places, I think, erroneous. But at least, in the absence of any Russian church history so far, it will serve some benefit in theological schools.” His story was useful not only for schools, but also for the entire Russian public, where at that time the nonsense of Elagin and Tatishchev, offensive to the church, was circulating. The saint pursued Elagin from place to place with sound criticism. Elagin, in his experience, rejected the appearance of ambassadors to Vladimir with proposals for faith: “Vladimirov’s wife represented all this at the theater,” said Elagin. The saint wrote: “such a vain dream, arising from an unrefined spirit, does not require refutation, as at first glance it is strange in itself. What kind of theaters are there in Vladimir? What kind of theatrical performances do nuns have in Greek monasteries?... I think that this happened from excessive dreaming about myself and in order to show off some kind of novelty, perhaps assuring myself that it would serve as amusement to others like him... I consider this to be the fruit of an unenlightened, but arrogant imagination about myself; He, as if admiring it, said to himself: “What don’t I know?” His judgments about Slavic pagan worship amaze with vigilance and courage. In the chronicle of Nestor, he says, churches are nowhere to be seen among the Slavs. “From this we can conclude,” he says, “that anyone could offer sacrifice to idols standing in open places.” The historian’s insight regarding the first impostor is especially amazing. “Stating what is common with all our writers that Grishka was not Tsarevich Dimitri, but an exact impostor, I venture to express my new opinion that this first impostor was not Grishka Otrepiev, the son of a Galician nobleman, but someone fictitious, invented and set up by some cunning villains, a foreigner or a Russian; or maybe Grishka Otrepyev himself, the son of a Galician petty nobleman, but long ago prepared, disposed and treated for this from attackers; and not the one our chroniclers give out; or even that, but the whole thing did not happen in the same way as they describe... Without penetrating into the depths of the evil and enormous plan... it is completely incomprehensible, and therefore impossible, that the son of a minor nobleman, brought up in a distant and wild Galician district, and in his very youth, 14 or 15 years old, could have the idea to honor himself and disclose that he is Tsarevich Dimitri.” (pp. 168, 172). Plato attributes the production of the False Demetrius to the Jesuits. And now the acts have revealed the close connection of the Jesuits with False Demetrius. d) Accuser: 1) Schism: “exhortation of the illness of schism to the weak,” St. Petersburg. 1766 (Collected works, vol. 6). There is a spirit of meekness and love here, trying to soften the hardened stubbornness of the schismatics, who previously burned themselves (in 1765) in the Zelenets monastery. 2) Encyclopedists: “answers to Voltaire’s 16 questions” (in Tsarsky, RKP. No. 491). 3) When signs of the existence of some kind of secret society, a society of Freemasons, were discovered in Moscow, which printed a huge number of different books, and Novikov turned out to be one of the main figures, the Empress instructed (December 24, 1785) the Metropolitan to test Novikov in faith and review all the books published in free printing houses. Up to 500 books were sent for revision. The Metropolitan instructed Archimandrite Serapion and Abbot Moses to revise them. After an oral conversation with Novikov, having collected written answers from him about his attitude to Christianity and having received a report from the commission about the books, the Metropolitan wrote (1786) to the Empress that he would like to see more Christians like Novikov, but among the books printed in his printing house there were “some so-called encyclopedists.” - Then followed (March 27, 1786) a decree, which commanded “six books to be sealed and not sold, but the rest to be sold.” Books prohibited: 1, about error and truth; 2, apology or defense of free masons; 3, fraternal exhortation; 4, Chrysomander, is an allegorical and satirical story; 5, pocket book; 6, Paracelsus' chemical psalter (Collected Laws XXII, 16, 362). These are not books by encyclopedists, but by masons. How did it happen that Masonic works are recognized as the works of encyclopedists? In essence, Freemasonry and encyclopedism are similar to each other: here and there, the arbitrariness of the mind walks, building a system of religion at its own discretion; here and there complete independence from the church. Novikov wrote in his answers: “I have been in the society of Freemasons for a long time, because I have not seen or known anything in it that is contrary to the laws of God and civil law, or to my conscience.” But this did not mean that in Freemasonry there was in fact nothing inconsistent with the law of Christ. In it, the light of reason is replaced by the grace of Christ and Christ Jesus is nothing more than an extraordinary teacher. For a Mason, as for an encyclopedist, every faith is good and everyone chooses which one he wants. This is what § 2 of the “theoretical degree” - the Masonic Catechism - says: “every theoretical brother must adhere to one well-known Christian religion... However, everyone is free to agree to those opinions that he considers to be the most reasonable.” Masonic morality also gives free rein to passions, as does the teaching of the encyclopedists. This is at least what we see not only in the history of many Masons, but also in some of their writings. The Masons, like the remnants of the Templars, were not a joy for the autocratic government; and in this form their society was opened in St. Petersburg even under Elizabeth (Letop. lit. IV, 48–52). - Thus, they had reason to call the Masonic works the works of encyclopedists, especially since, for the general benefit, they wanted to arouse caution against the secret society - by putting a shameful name on it. In Novikov, the blessed archpastor could not help but appreciate his charitable love for his neighbors, and his useful books, such as “Drone” for 1769, 1779, “Painter” 1772 (fifth edition in 1793), “Purse” 1774, where Novikov often rebelled against French frivolity and coarsely sensual life (Afanasyeva, Satirical magazines 1769–1774, M. 1859). And the saint, in good conscience, defended Novikov with his recall from the punishment that was ready for a liberal enemy of public order and especially autocratic rule. But Masonic books are nevertheless condemned by the saint as false and harmful. Since Masonic writings shroud Freemasonry in Christian images, and when analyzing Novikov’s books, the commission was presented with too much work: it is not surprising that the commission did not understand anything different about Freemasonry. This is how the “selected library for Christian reading” escaped the ban, in 3 parts of Moscow, 1784, the second edition “for the benefit of the poor” (ts. 1 r.) ed. M. 1786. At the end of part 1 of this book there is an advertisement signed with the letters y. m., which according to S. T. Aksakov. (Russian Bes. 1859 1:40) mean: y (textbook) m (asonry). Intentionally or unintentionally, the police did not deliver to the commission several other Masonic works printed in the secret printing house of the Masons. These are: Instructions on Prayer, M. 1783. The Spirit of Freemasonry, M. 1785. Speech of the Rosicrucians (192 pp.). The secret meaning of the six-day affairs of this world (396 pages, without year and place of publication, like the previous one). “True Metaphysics” by Pordec (Sopikov No. 6211). This was followed by a decree on June 27, 1786: “Private printing houses should not print church books or St. Scripture, faith or interpretation of the law and holiness related.” And even then, when a commission was appointed to verify books printed in free printing houses, it was ordered: “to ensure that no books are printed in which any kind of philandering, absurd speculation or schism is hidden.” This was a strong blow for Freemasonry as well. The establishment of spiritual censorship, announced at the same time, was a blessing for St. churches. The good-natured protection provided to Novikov by M. Platon did not save Novikov and his friends from troubles. The members brought the evil upon themselves. Rescued, Novikov began his activities with increased zeal, distributing the very books that he was forbidden to keep. I. V. Lopukhin († 1816), a member of the society, after a conversation with M. Plato, who, as he himself writes, rebelled against society, wrote a “moral catechism of true f. m." (Freemasons). By this they wanted to show that true Freemasons are not encyclopedists; This is why they discovered that the untrue Masons are the friends of those. Let "Mason without a mask", St. Petersburg. 1794, was not worthy of much trust - even if he spoke only about the abuses of the secret society. But secret societies, by the very fact that they were secret, aroused the government’s caution against them, especially as the French Revolution became more and more terrible. In 1790, a pastoral letter to the true and just free masons of the ancient system was published.” Again against himself, Elagin, in his secret book about Freemasonry (preface eg in Russian. Archive of 1864, p. 102), admits that among the Freemasons there were friends of Voltaire who were ready to do anything. Lopukhin wrote “spiritual knight” and printed it with the appendix of the catechism, M. 1791. Novikov was captured and interrogated not gently. Then (1792) they learned, and even then not completely, that Masonic societies in Russia had attracted many aristocrats of blood, capital and intelligence, and their connections with the Illuminati, the engines of the revolution, were also discovered; Novikov was locked in a fortress; Lopukhin was left in Moscow only for his sick father, but under strict supervision; book N. Trubetskoy, translator of the “new theology”, M. 1784, exiled to the village. Trubetskoy's peasants answer the question: why was your master exiled? They answered: they say that he was looking for another God. The answer is simple-minded, but true. Lopukhin wrote: “members practiced knowing themselves, creation and the Creator, according to the rules of science contained in the Bible and in the writings of men, by direct revelation of those enlightened by God” (Notes about their lives, 1806). Who are these men besides the men who wrote the Bible, enlightened by God by direct revelation? Aren't they the fathers of the church? That was the trouble, that they abandoned the vigilant leaders of life with contempt and had to rejoice at the blind guides. Guides of the mystics - Boehm, Weigel, Portech, Franenberg, Saint-Martin († 1803), Paracelsus, Cornelius Agrippa, who believed in material spirits, but not in Christ the Son of God, who mixed theology with alchemy, metaphysics with medicine. The last two were pure materialists, while the others acted under the control of feeling and appropriated inspiration to themselves. Lopukhin wholeheartedly believed in alchemy. In the spiritual knight he depicted, in his words, “briefly the main points of Hermetic science.” Hermetic science or alchemy dealt with the transformation of some metals into others and explained all natural actions by three main factors - salt, sulfur and mercury. Novikov, in letters to Karamzin (1814), rebelled against the discoveries of astronomy and chemistry, under the influence of his favorite alchemy. It is clear that the members of the Novikov society were not limited to the moral tendencies that they exposed to everyone. They had their own philosophy and one of the stupidest, the philosophy of the alchemists; they had their own faith, the faith of worshipers of physical nature, who expected the rebirth of the corrupted soul not from grace, but from the forces of nature. It was deism, which differed from the deism of the encyclopedists only in that it was the deism of daring reason, and the deism of the Freemasons was the deism of blind feeling and dreamy imagination. Correspondence between M. Platon and Ekaterina about Novikov - in Let. rus. liter, book 1, 4 and 5. Bibliography. zap. 1858 No. 6 and 21. Moskvit. 1842, no. 3; 1843, No. 1, 1844, No. 11. Moscow Freemasons - in Rus. Bulletin of 1864 No. 8, and 1865 No. 4. Notes from Khrapovitsky on May 2, 18, 26 and 29 under August 2 and 15. 26 Sep. and 18 Oct. 1792. e) Canonist: “instructions to deans” - one of the best works of its kind, accepted by the synod as a general instruction to deans of all dioceses, M. 1775 (vol. 6); rules on joining schismatics to Edinoverie in the RKP. f) Teacher: his rules for the academy and seminary are curious; an institution for students supported at the expense of M. Plato (ed. in Ist. akal. 418–422. M. 1855); instructions for Bethany Seminary (ibid., pp. 293, 294); instructions for the interpreter of St. Scriptures (ibid., pp. 294, 295); instructions for the history class (pp. 296, 297) and teaching church jurisprudence (p. 298); instructions for elders over students of Sergius Seminary (Add. to the creative fathers. 1862, 2, 425–431). 96. Vladimir (Vasily) Tretyakov, French teacher. and German language. in Moscow academician, from 1795 preacher, from 1798 prefect, from 1799 rector, dismissed in 1801 due to illness († 1812); are now known: a) His word is in power. icons of the Mother of God, M. 1801, about what we should seek true glory in and how we can worthily glorify God, b) German Conversations, M. 1795; Experience on the disagreements of churches, trans. from French, M. 1768. When the Oxford professor Golmes, who undertook to publish the Greek Bible with variants, in 1795 asked M. Plato to commission the comparison of the printed Greek text with the list of the Synodal Bible. No. 329, and sent 10 pounds sterling, then this work was accepted and completed by Fr. Vladimir together with Ambrose Protasov. In 1801, he, according to the instructions of the synod, described the books printed under St. Job, Hermogenes, Philaret, Joasaph and Joseph, which he found in Moscow libraries. (Ist. Acad. 332:333). Feofan Shiyanov, a student of Kiev and a printer of the Lavra, archimandrite of Nezhin, from 1798 rector of Chernigov, from 1800 bishop of Chigirin, from 1807 of Poltava († 1812). His speech to a gathering of judges, M. 1785. Speech to the Empress, M. 1787. Word in the village of St. Georgiy, St. Petersburg 1799 His words at the opening of the monument in memory of the Poltava victory - in Polt. diocesan Gazette 1863, No. 13. Kozma Molchanov, Arkhangelsk priest, mentor and prefect of the seminary († 1812). His word on the capture of Prague, 1794. Berdichev, 1794. His Description of the Arkhangelsk province, with plans and maps attached, St. Petersburg. 1813 John Ioannovich Dmitrevsky, son of an archpriest, a student of the Ryazan seminary and car washes, academy, seminary teacher, translator at the synod, secretary of the Tambov consistory, was a teacher of Latin and Greek. languages ​​in Moscow university. Especially well known, worthy of fame, is “his explanation of the liturgy,” M. 1804, 1805, 1807, 1812, supplemented and corrected in the latest edition. Contents of the essay: in the 1st part of the testimony of St. writings about St. Eucharist; the meaning of liturgy; how it was accomplished under the apostles. In Part 2, how to prepare yourself for the celebration of the Liturgy; about the church, St. clothes and vessels. In the 3rd part - proskomedia. In the 4th part there is the Liturgy of the Catechumens. In the 5th hour - the Liturgy of the Faithful. In the 6th part, Simeon of Thessalonica’s interpretation of the liturgy, the explanation of the liturgy of the faithful, is written very satisfactorily; but the study of proskomedia has significant shortcomings, although excusable for the time of the writer. - This work - a scholarly one - required a lot of work from the writer; One cannot help but thank him for his zeal for finding out the truth. – “Reverent reflections during divine services” were written for the people by the author, M. 1839, 1842. Remains in the RKP. "Historical and legal research on marriages." A less remarkable work for the present time, “On the beginning of Vladimir, on the transfer of the capital from Kiev and on the great princes who were there,” M. 1802, was published. Its translations: Clement's Epistle to Rome, M. 1781. Speeches of Isocrates, St. Petersburg. 1789 97. Andrey Ioannovich Zhuravlev, Edinoverie St. Petersburg archpriest. In 1788, as someone who had been in a schism and had learned from experience how to deal with schismatics, he was sent by M. Gabriel to Starodubye to establish common faith. Within three years, he united many to the same faith, founded several churches, and after that he returned to his place († 1813). He wrote: a) “a brief history. news of the schismatics”, St. Petersburg. 1784, 1787, 1791; b) “full historical. news about schismatics”, at 3 o’clock, St. Petersburg. 1794; with additions, at 4 o'clock, St. Petersburg. 1795, 1799; ed. 5 – St. Petersburg 1855; c) historical featron with chronologist. news about kings, princes, patriarchs and metropolitans, St. Petersburg. 1814; months of the saints of the Russian Church (RCP). His news about the schisms is distinguished by the most accurate justice; from his words it is clear that he used various notes and personal communications with schismatics; and in fact, it turns out that everything he collected, he tried to present conscientiously, without being carried away by any species. The only thing that needs to be excluded from this is his opinion about the connection between the schismatics and the Strigolniki, if only he accepts it as historical. He did not provide evidence for the latter, nor were any documents found after him. However, the opinion of the venerable archpriest is less strange than when they write that the schism began shortly before the time of the Council of the Hundred Heads, while at that time only others had some strange opinions, for which no one separated from the church, did not make a schism. About the affairs of Fr. Andrei among the Starodub superstitions there is a “synoxarion” compiled by a modern schismatic. The fanatic of the schism could not say anything reprehensible about Fr. Andrea. The most remarkable thing in the synaxar is the characteristic descriptions of schismatic societies. “Write to the angel of the Klimovskaya church: we know your deeds and labors, which you do with youths and young men, seducing many nuns and working women, even in the Klimovskaya Kazan monastery, from them the children born are thrown into the wells and the waters come out. Write to the angel of the Zlyn church: we know your deeds, which your sacred youths and young women do, baptizing infants not in three immersions, but in four, and mix two hypostases into one cranberry, turning their backs to Christians, saying: “the back, they say, see, but my face will not appear”... To the angel of Zybkovskaya write to the church: “I will multiply you with immigrants, thieves, seditionists and all the gatherings that creep on the earth, and I will make you a den of robbers and a dwelling place for strangers; and I will divide your host into many hosts and priestlessness, shrabovschina, stukovschina and many other things will take root in you...” Write to the angel of the Voronkovo church: “I know your deeds and your labor, and you raise him up to slaughter the workers and elders who want to be freed from this vain world and receive the crowns of martyrdom with the holy fathers of Bryn: of this For the sake of great punishment, blasphemers and superstitions who blaspheme your name, Khlopovshchina and Militantism will be punished... Be bold, my beloved child, and do not cease to multiply the number of martyrs and saints in heaven, and no one will defeat you, either in the courts of Starodub and provincial courts, or in the forests and pine forests of Mashevsky, where your ascetics watch the passing pinchers and butcher them.” Evlampy Vvedensky, student and rector of Sergius Seminary, since 1795 rector of Moscow. Academy, from 1801 Bishop of Arkhangelsk, from 1809 Bishop of Kaluga († 1813). His words: for the new year, M. 1804, about what makes us happy; to the electoral class of citizens on December 15, 1804, M. 1805; before the oath of the newly elected, M. 1805; in case of celebration for the outpouring of royal bounty awards, M. 1805; at the consecration of the church in the village. Goryainov, M. 1810; his review of the rhetoric of Lying - in East. Moscow acad. 303, M. 1855 Lukian Fedotovich Protopopov, Archpriest of Preobrazhensky in St. Petersburg. and protopresbyter of the Assumption Cathedral († 1813). His words: in d. birth c. book Pavla, St. Petersburg 1790; for the new year, St. Petersburg. 1795 Gabriel Dankov, a student of the Neva Seminary, 1782–1800 a priest at various embassies, since 1802 he was the spiritual director. Princess Elena Pavlovna. His gymnasium or seminary youth mentor, St. Petersburg. 1781 Contemplation of the most excellent writers of the Latin language, from Borrichia, St. Petersburg. 1783 98. Ioann Vasilievich Levanda (born 1736), studied in Kyiv. academy and was a teacher here, from 1783 a priest of the Assumption Church in Podol, from 1783 its archpriest, in 1785 he was named archpriest of the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral († 1814). Levanda enjoyed great fame as a preacher. He wrote many words and welcoming speeches. They are ed. at 3 o'clock, St. Petersburg 1821, but not all of them, moreover, are faulty and not even everywhere consistent with the original ones. The word on Great Friday - in Chr. Thurs. 1832 Word in case of pestilence 1770 - in Mayak 1843; for the new year - on Sunday Thu. VII, 348. Speech at the funeral of Pankratiev - in Kyiv. epar. Ved. 1864, no. 5. Wigel, an eyewitness to the preacher, writes about his funeral speech to Samuel: “at that moment he was charming, tears flowed in streams from his eyes and he had to stop from time to time from sobbing; I will never forget this touching hour” (Russian Vestn. 1864, book 1). His best word is considered to be his word on the text: Is it not possible for you to watch with me for one hour? “Listeners! it happened, our Jesus said to the disciples: but as I say to you, I say to everyone: therefore it seems to me that our Savior, seeing us in the sleepy disciples, and His sleepy disciples in us, now says to us: Was it not possible for you to watch with Me for one hour? What does this mean, what do I want to talk about?” This is the proposal that is presented in the sermon. The presentation explains the meaning of the Savior's words. Then follows a comparison of the position of the apostles with the position of Christians, and the resulting thought: the vigil required of Christians is not burdensome. Earthly life in comparison with eternity is too short an hour. Moreover, our weakness is strengthened by God’s strong help. The best thing in this word, as in all others, is a warm feeling, breathing kindness, the thought of a mind soaring to the sky and picturesque figures of speech. But in Levanda’s words there is neither a strict logical development of thought, nor a solid and clear understanding of the words of Scripture. The preacher himself exposes the latter when he says: “It seems to me.” The first evidence is the entire presentation of the main idea in the best word. It is remarkable that in the words spoken before 1769, the word composition is mostly Latin, the expressions are often harsh or pompous; on the contrary, in those words and speeches that have been spoken since 1769, the flow of speech is light and lively, the periods are short, the arrangement of words is Russian. This difference is so great that one might think that the first volume of words belongs to one writer, and the other two to another. Wiegel is right: “Levanda spoke better than he wrote.” His external oratorical skills were brilliant: “Levand was combined with his beautiful appearance by a sonorous and extremely pleasant voice,” says the same Vigel. – These external qualities and softness of heart explain the glory with which Levanda was surrounded during his life. The collection of his letters remained unpublished, but they probably contain quite a bit useful for the truth. Sophrony Gribovsky, who studied philosophy in Kyiv and theology in Moscow, a teacher of law at the university, and since 1793 an archimandrite and missionary in Beijing, returned from Beijing in 1807 and died in retirement in 1814. He described Russian. missions in China (rkp.) His “news about the Chinese, now Manzhurek, state” ed. in Reading m total ist. 1861, book. 2. It speaks of the peoples, government, climate, religion of China, the Lamas, the Hoshens, Louji and Confucius. 99. Nikolai Nikolaevich Bantysh-Kamensky, graduate of the Kyiv and Moscow Academy and University, head of the Moscow State Archives († Jan. 20, 1814). The “history of the union” he wrote, M. 1805, has not yet lost its value, because its information is taken from rare manuscripts. He collected up to 30 volumes on Russia's diplomatic relations with foreign powers and notes on its internal movements. Among them are useful for the history of the Russian church: a) a description of Asian courts, Greek clergy, Moldavian affairs, etc. b) A register of historical and ceremonial affairs of the archive, such as coronations and marriages of rulers, rites of joining Orthodoxy, baptism and burial, c) An extract on the management of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra and the monasteries attached to it. In addition, Nikolai Nikolaevich rendered great services to spiritual enlightenment by publishing many classic books; composed by him in Latin. Latin Grammar, ed. M. 1779, 1781, 1783; Leipz. 1789; Latin grammar with Russian translation, ed. 12, corrected, M. 1813; to Burgius' rhetoric, M. 1776, 1779, he added, in addition to Russian examples and the life of the author, paintings of 700 Russian works. The works are arranged as follows: 1) libri philologici, 2) historici, 3) geographici, 4) mathematici, 5) medici, 6) philosophici, 7) theologici. To Baumeister's philosophy (Baumesteri elementa philosophiae, Mosquae, an. 1771), on the advice of Ambrose and Damascene, he added from Prokopovich's system de legibus meditationis, from Weisseng's logic de distinctionibus logicis, from Nikkler physics, from Kanzius and Golman de jure oeconomico, publico et ecclesiastico. Letter from B. - Kamensky to His Eminence of Pereyaslavl about the murder of his uncle, Archbishop. Ambrose, in the Bulletin of Europe in 1819 and in Chernigov, eparch. Izv. 1862 Joseph Giganov, priest of the Tobolsk Cathedral and teacher of the Tatar language at the public school, wrote a grammar of the Tatar language, ed. St. Petersburg 1801 Russian-Tatar Dictionary, St. Petersburg. 1802, 1804 100. Methodius (Mikhail) Smirnov, student and teacher of the Greek language in Moscow, academician, from 1791 its rector, from 1795 bishop of Voronezh, from 1799 Kolomna and Tula, from 1803 archbishop. Tver and from 1814 Pskov († Feb. 2, 1815). a) Interpreter of Holy Scripture: Epistles of St. Paul to the Romans, M. 1794, 1799, 1815. This is a paraphrase with brief remarks from the fathers. b) Taxonomist: “Sacred theology based primarily on Holy Scripture, taught by the hieromonk and rector Methodius to the students of the Lavra school,” in Latin, contains three books: the first contains an introduction to theology; in the second - dogmatic instructions in the third - moral theology. The first book contains a history of theology, which neither Theophan nor Theophylact had. The second contains five sections: about God, one in essence and trinity in Persons; b) about the works of God - about creation and Providence; c) about redemption; d) about the actions of the Holy Spirit; e) about judgment and eternal life. A treatise on the church is missing. – The writer follows Gollaz and Feofan in places, but reworks everything, especially taking care of the conciseness of the presentation and pointing to authors whose subjects are presented at length. Some passages from the introduction are in Add. to creativity father 1863, pp. 433–439. Moral theology speaks: a) about moral powers and law; b) about duties that are set out not according to the commandments of Moses, as in Theophylact, but according to the subjects of activity; c) about the means to fulfill the law. – In the entire system of Methodius there is more coherence and clarity than that of Theophylact. – When Methodius was transferred from the Lavra to the rector of Moscow. academy: then most of the students followed him to Moscow. This shows to what extent Methodius’s lectures captivated his young listeners. Theologia moralis (MS.), a good work, but not finished. On behalf of M. Plato, Methodius wrote an answer to English scientists to their questions about the differences between the Eastern and Western churches and comments on Dutens’ book on the Russian Church (Tsarsky, No. 498). Methodius's work was translated into English in London and published there. c) Preacher: words spoken in different places (13 in number). M. 1809. A few words from him. in the Outline of his life and deeds. M. 1823. A new edition of the words is more complete, M. 1823. The difference between his preaching is pastoral simplicity, not caring about the magnificent decoration of words, but smart in thoughts; His style is very light for his time. “Beloved! - he said in the new year of 1802, we are all sinners: but listen to such a sinner as I am, who wishes the best for myself and for you. The all-merciful God has given us a new year: let us thank Him from the depths of our hearts that He has given us a way to everything better. Let us recognize and preserve the value of God’s gift. New Year: so we will put aside outdated prejudices and bad inclinations. New Year: let’s change old but harmful customs. New Year: so let’s show new experiences of our virtues.” Direct and frank, he sometimes spoke in the stern tone of a shepherd. In his 1802 speech on the election of judges, depicting the importance of the oath and the consequences of loyalty or disloyalty to it, he addresses the new judges with the following speech: “So, if you are entering into your ranks with the proper feeling of all this, then I assure and greet you with the great blessing of God. If your oath promises consist of one ritual and appearance, then without hesitation I inform you that I will be the first to cry out to God against you and say: Lord! I told these people Your will and Your judgment, but they neglected everything: I am clean from their blood” (p. 18). Of his 23 teachings, 8 are devoted to the doctrine of the church and obedience to it. In his farewell speech to the Voronezh flock, he expressed how he understood his pastoral ministry: “Separating from you, I call as testimony this most divinely present place, in which I greeted you with the word of my initial ministry, I call heaven as a witness that throughout my entire stay within the local flock I wished you good with all my soul; Whether I had time, I don’t know. But to her! I tried to be a good shepherd, seeking you and your salvation, I can say, with the loss of my health and peace... Oh! How many times have I looked at you with sadness in my spirit, trembling at the Lord’s voice to me, a sinner: Behold, I am a shepherd, and I will seek My sheep from their hands. ABOUT! how much this thought has always struck me with horror that it is fitting for me, with the placing of the holy omophorion on these shoulders, in the image of Jesus Christ, our common Shepherd, that it is fitting for me, who is weak, to find the lost sheep, place it on the shoulders of my soul and bring it to the Heavenly Father, and always bear the burden of pastoral service! O beloved! I confess, and now the light in my eyes darkens with the sole imagination of this great God’s pledge, this and the most heavenly powers of the terrible preservation of Christian souls, acquired by the blood of the Lord and God! But what can we say about how we can appear before the judgment seat of Christ? These were truly my thoughts, in which I have been immersed here until now. My heart was filled with such feelings, aching for you with love! Your salvation was so precious to me!” d) Historical works: History of the first centuries of Christianity (liber histor. de rebus primitivae ecclesiae) Μ. 1805. About the Florentine Cathedral, M. 1805. About the apostolic rules. M. 1803, 1806 e) Teacher and philologist: brief rules and a dictionary of simple Greek, M. 1783, 1795. In his translation, selected passages from St. Justin, with the addition of Vasily V.’s letter on desert living, M. 1783. Criticism of Methodius on the method of science in public schools, 1786, caustic in places, - in Add. to creation father 1863, pp. 512–518, 526. One thing seems strange in this criticism: it considers it more necessary to study Latin grammar than Russian. Plato’s instructions said: “it is indecent to accustom oneself to the Latin language and abandon one’s native speech.” And yet Plato himself wrote to Metropolitan Ambrose in 1800: “I do not recommend teaching lectures in Russian at our school. Our clergy are already considered by foreigners to be almost uneducated, because they cannot speak either French or German. But our honor also supports us that we speak Latin and correspond - there are few classical books in our language. Perfect knowledge of the Latin language greatly contributes to Russian eloquence. I am writing this from the general council of academic and Trinity rectors.” It seems that the preference for the Latin language over the Russian language involved a bias acquired by centuries of experience. To be known as a scientist, but not to be one, is a little honor. And the theological and philosophical lecture, offered in Latin, required a lot and a lot of attention from the student for the language, so that there was little left for thought; – that is why it was not easy and little for us to learn to think independently. – Add also the lack of skill to communicate in Russian. As a result of both, it turned out that “there are few classical books in our language,” and there were even fewer scientific studies about faith. f) On the doctrine of the rites of the church, he wrote: Discourse on Jewish and Christian Easter, M. 1793, where he outlined the history of the Christian celebration of Easter. “Rule of the Easter Circle”, M. 1800, 1803, 1806, then adopted as a guide for schools. A discussion about Easter was added to the editions of the Rule. Ioann Savchenkov, rector, and archpriest of Belogorodeky. His words, M. 1804 101. Andrei Afanasyevich Samborsky, a priest in London at the embassy, ​​from 1785 accompanied the sovereign heir Pavel Petrovich during his trip to Europe, a mentor in the law of God during the century. book Alexandra and Konstantin, from 1788 archpriest of Sofia, from 1799 confessor. book Alexandra († 1815); He was mainly engaged in agroiomy and publishing. “Description of practical English agriculture”, M. 1781. Otherwise known: “Speech to his empress upon returning to. book Pavel from the Southern Journey", St. Petersburg. 1787, and “Stay in Hungary, death of Vel. book Alexandra Pavlovna, described by her confessor.. (Ed. in Day 1862). Khariton Andreevich Chebotarev, professor of philosophy and history at Moscow University († 1815). His: a) The Four Gospels, or the set of four evangelists, M. 1803, is a work worthy of all respect in its subject matter, especially since the author, as contemporaries wrote, devoted 5 years to it and redid his set three times. M. Plato and Archbishop. Augustine respected Chebotarev for this work, as a matter of sincere piety. Respect well deserved! But that doesn't mean