№ 11. Мнение Преосвященного Филарета о ревизии Вятской семинарии и Вятских духовных училищ ректором Казанской семинарии архимандритом Стефаном

His Eminence Ioannikios, Bishop. Vyatsky, in 1835, submitted documents to the Commission of Theological Schools on the construction of buildings for Vyatka schools. These documents were recognized as insufficient for control, therefore, by the journal of the Commission dated July 17, 1835, the rector of the Kazan Seminary, Archimandrite Stefan, was ordered to revise the construction of these buildings and, at the same time, also the Vyatka Seminary - in the economic part and in management in general, except for classes that cannot be inspected due to the vacation period. Having fulfilled the order of the Commission, Arch. Stefan presented a report in which he writes that on August 24, in the presence of members of the Vyatka Seminary Board, he reviewed the paperwork of the seminar board, inspected all the classes, apartments of mentors, the library, kitchen, etc. To this review, Arch. Stefan presented a copy from the journal of the seminary board. Further in the same report, Arch. Stefan writes that he invited the seminary board to give a written explanation of the irregularities he found in the management of the seminary. The response of the seminary board in the form of a presentation to him, Arch. Stephen, his name attached to the report; As for the unrest in the seminary, Arch. Stefan writes that they are all set out in the presentation of the rector of the Vyatka Seminary, Arch. Nicodemus to the Most Reverend Ioannikios, a copy of which is attached to his report. Point 18 of the instructions given by the arch. Stefan was ordered to inform the Commission of Theological Schools about all parts of the seminary board, and Arch. Stefan writes in his report that he did not do this, since the seminary board, with the approval of the Diocesan Bishop, regarding the office, library and the incident indicated in the board journal of March 6, 6, had already made its orders, and decided to present the unrest and disorder of the economic part to the district Academic board. After reading the presented arch. Stefan papers, Metropolitan Philaret gave the following opinion: There's a lot of chaos here. Firstly, the auditor himself is subject to remark: for not presenting the opinion that was specifically required, and which does not replace the opinion of the seminary board, since otherwise there would be no reason to give instructions to the auditor. For allowing the form of communication to be incorrect, since according to the charter, the auditor is given extracts from the journal, and presentations are made to the highest authorities, in which capacity the Kazan rector cannot be above the rector and the seminary board of Vyatsky. For presenting only the words of the seminary board about such items that he himself had to personally examine, such as the archive, about which it is not even said in the journal that an auditor would visit and inspect it. On the contrary, the Vyatka rector deserves special thanks to K.D.U. for his prudent entry into the affairs of the seminary and a detailed report on them to the Diocesan Eminence. It is not superfluous to bring to the attention of the Holy Synod about the students expelled for dubious and unreliable behavior, especially about Avvakumov, who was detained by the police and about those who participated in the destruction of the soldier’s house, whether it would not be recognized to pay attention to the further appointment of people in the diocese, who were noticed, by the way, in daylight robbery in the city. Professors occupying positions in the diocese are decisively deprived of the right to use seminary apartments, except in one case, if the premises for the seminary are not needed and if they take over the heating and interior maintenance of the rooms. Those using the seminar apartment should be limited to the necessary decent premises without any excess. Collect the debt owed by teachers and students from the steward who allowed this illegal debt, and if this is done according to the resolutions of the board, then from all members of the board who signed the resolution: and leave them to collect from the debtors themselves; From now on, the seminary money should not be used as debts and salaries should be given in thirds of the year, and if necessary, monthly, but always according to what is deserved. As the seminary board writes to the auditor that the seminary things are intact, according to the steward, and, consequently, there is no immediate inquiry about this not only from the auditor, but also from the seminary board, then notice this to the auditor and the board, and order the latter to immediately bring this to the position required by the charter, especially since not only from the time of the entry of the present rector, but also from the time of the order on May 3rd until the day of the auditor’s visit it was possible to do this, especially during the vacation months. To encourage Gonorsky to put the archive in order and hand over the archive, and in case of need to correct the disorder on his account, withhold a third share of his salary until the end of this matter, and next May to report whether he will be correct in this regard and whether he is reliable for the future and for a mentoring position. About the previous catalog and other documents of the library (about which the auditor, without leaving room, had to ask the former and current librarian and make a possible inquiry), make a strict but immediate explanation, entrusting this especially to the care of the rector, however, together with the seminary board; Moreover, out of respect both for the case itself and for the considered attentiveness of the rector of the Seminary, to give him the right in two or three months to report the success of this case directly to K.D.U. There is a special case regarding the insolvency of the Seminary, and a resolution has been given. The benefit, it seems, requires presenting to the Holy Synod, so that it favors the Right Reverend Vyatka, who recently inspected the Seminary even on the special instructions of K.D.U., but even in this case did not discover many important disorders that upset it, to entrust the use of more active Archpastoral attention and care for its moral educational and economic improvement. It is a pity that the auditor did not touch the Cheremis students with an eye, an ear, or a word. It seems that one could be curious, even if there was no obligation. This is what I remembered to say after listening to the case. I don't have the courage to pursue other details. In the journal of the Vyatka Seminary Board dated March 6, 1835, it is written that on October 9, 1834, students of the 1st and 2nd grades at about 4 o’clock in the afternoon, upon leaving the seminary, went in a crowd to the house of the soldier Murashova, which they broke down, for the insult inflicted by the soldier on the student Avvakumov. You might be interested in: