Spiritual investigator: [II. Legal position of the Spiritual Investigator in the trial, his rights and powers]

“Investigators appointed by the Consistory must have a seal” 1. The position of “Spiritual Investigator” is a subject of significant interest, both in legal terms and, probably, in everyday life, and at the same time, a subject that has, in our opinion, been little clarified. We say probably because in the latter respect the area of ​​our observations is very limited. We have focused and are now focusing on the legal side of this institution, which is essentially very important in the modern organization of the diocesan court. Let us, however, allow ourselves for a moment to take a practical, everyday point of view and ask: what is a spiritual investigator in our everyday life? We believe that in response we will receive approximately the following: an ordinary parish priest, city or rural, temporarily carrying out a certain kind of order from his superiors. - But what is he, by his position, a superior, some kind of power? – It hasn’t happened at all: another wealthy and obstinate priest, who has come under investigation, treats the spiritual investigator so contemptuously and arrogantly that one even feels sorry for the latter 2 . The work environment of a spiritual investigator also does not inspire fear or even respect, especially in rural life. For the conduct of his activities, a church gatehouse or some kind of useless shack is usually allocated; the father-investigator will arrive on his horse with provisions for himself and for her - for a day or two, and if he makes a mistake in the calculations and sees that he will have to stay for three or four days, then this unforeseen circumstance can threaten him with pure disaster: at least feed on the Name of Christ! The clothes on the priest - the investigator - are also unimportant, everyday: for he is going to the investigation - not for a holiday, but for work, difficult work, unpaid work, often offensive and at the same time very responsible: for trouble can be made here very easily due to lack of dexterity, due to lack of experience, even due to one’s kindness. There are no attributes of power in his improvised cell: for a spiritual investigator needs, as Mr. Vrutsevich says, (only) a seal.” What a person a spiritual investigator is in our everyday everyday life! But maybe our idea is wrong? - Maybe... and God forbid that it is not true. We repeat, our field of observation in this regard is not wide and we will gladly take back the picture we have drawn if it turns out to be not true to reality. It's not a matter of appearance and setting, but what is the actual work that a spiritual investigator does? For an answer to this question one should, of course, turn to competent persons. There is no shortage of them. For example: verdict about Prot. Lukanin (former Member of the Perm Spiritual Consistory): “not many of the priests know how to carry out investigations as required by the rules established by law: many of them carry out investigations according to their extreme understanding and discretion and are either not familiar with the rules for conducting investigations at all, or know them superficially. The investigative cases considered in the Consistory lead to this conviction” 3. G. Vrutsevich (former secretary of the Tula Theological Consistory and candidate of rights) testifies: “Investigations carried out by spiritual investigators into misdemeanors and crimes of persons of clergy rank very often do not satisfy the most elementary requirements of the laws on investigations” 4. In one official review of the Synodal Auditor we read the following: “Many shortcomings were found in the conduct of investigations in cases of the actions of clergy. The most outstanding of them is not the usual slowness: in only a few cases the investigations are completed before a year; for the most part, these cases continue for a year or more; But there are cases where investigations drag on for three or four years. Such slowness in carrying out investigations depends not so much on the nature of investigative cases, which, with very rare exceptions, are not particularly complex and intricate, but on the unsatisfactoriness of the very organization of investigative paperwork in the Consistory. First of all, when appointing clergy to carry out investigations, the Consistory does not always take into account the proximity of the investigator’s residence to the place where the investigation is to be carried out, and often entrusts investigations to persons from distant areas. Investigators appointed under such conditions, finding it difficult to appear at the place of investigation, usually (sometimes several times) turn to the diocesan authorities with requests to release them from the execution of the assignment given to them. In most cases, these requests are satisfied by the Consistory and thus a correspondence arises that continues for several months and which, with a more attentive attitude to the matter on the part of the Consistory, could have been completely avoided But the most important reason determining the extreme slowness of the production of investigations is the complete absence of what is required on the part of the Constitution by Article 160 of the Constitution. monitoring their progress. Having assigned an investigation to this or that matter, the Consistory, apparently, completely forgets about it and does not care at all about its further course; no matter how long the case remains with the investigator, the Consistory does not take any measures to ensure the speedy completion of investigative proceedings and does not even require information about his situation. The confirmations and compulsions adopted in such cases are made by her only under special circumstances, such as. due to the requirement of information on the case by the Holy Synod or. Synodal Chief Prosecutor, repetition of the complaint against the accused, etc. Imposing any penalties on investigators for unjustifiable slowness is practiced by the Consistory in the rarest cases. Remaining thus outside of any control and counting on complete impunity, investigators, in carrying out the instructions given to them, are guided solely by their own discretion and do not hesitate to leave the cases entrusted to them without any progress, sometimes for several years. As for the material side: investigative proceedings, then in this respect they are for the most part unsatisfactory. Most often they lack proper completeness and thoroughness. This shortcoming is partly explained by the fact that investigations, for the above reasons, are very often carried out long after the occurrence of cases to be examined, when it is almost impossible, or at least very difficult, to bring the circumstances of these into proper clarity, and to state or refute certain facts; partly depends on the inexperience, and perhaps even on the negligence of the persons entrusted with the investigation. Investigators in most cases conduct interrogations of witnesses extremely superficially, sometimes with the omission of very significant details, and almost never use confrontations with witnesses and defendants to clarify the case, although this is sometimes directly caused by the course of the case: and it is not uncommon for many of the circumstances involved in the case to be left without investigation. In addition, investigators sometimes do not present to the accused the witnesses to be questioned, thereby giving them a fair reason to complain about the deprivation of their right to challenge those witnesses on whose impartiality they for some reason cannot rely; sometimes they do not inform the accused at all about the start of investigations and carry them out in their absence, demanding explanations from them after the investigation is completed, and the requirement of Art. 161 is not always met. Est. Spirit. Con., so that the research carried out is read by the defendant and signed by him. The Consistory does not accept the elimination of the above-mentioned shortcomings of investigative proceedings. almost no measures............ However. for unknown reasons There are also cases of the opposite nature in the practice of the Consistory: in investigative proceedings that are completely correct and sufficiently clarify the case, the Consistory sometimes requires the addition of investigations” 5. The three reviews we submitted unanimously speak of the unsatisfactory conduct of investigative proceedings in the Consistory: the work of the investigators is, for the most part, unsatisfactory; The investigators themselves are burdened by the assignments entrusted to them and try to avoid them. This unsatisfactory state of the investigative case in spiritual courts must, of course, be put to an end, since it is clearly recognized and stated. But how? Remarkably unanimously, all three reviews we presented place all responsibility for this unsatisfactory state of affairs on the ecclesiastical investigators themselves: the majority of them do not know how to carry out investigations, and one of these reviews also points out another reason - the lack of control over the investigators on the part of the Consistory and their complete impunity. This last reason, of course, is easily eliminated: one should only order the Consistories to supervise the investigators and punish them for faulty execution of the orders assigned to them. But what to do with the inability of investigators? Skill is, of course, given by knowledge and experience, and therefore requires a certain position that makes it possible to acquire both. Does our Spiritual Investigator take advantage of this position? The answer to this question can only be negative. The duties of an investigator are not part of the vocation of a priest: the educational and training school that prepared him for the rank of priest did not impart to him legal knowledge about the investigative process, and therefore it turns out very naturally that having become a priest and suddenly receiving an order to carry out an investigation, he can carry out this order only according to “his extreme understanding and discretion.” Meanwhile, he is required to carry out the investigation satisfactorily “according to the law.” But where did he study this law? The lack of school legal education by an educated person, such as our modern priests, can be largely compensated by self-education and practice. Strong proof of this situation is provided by the reviews we mentioned above, which unanimously testify, among other things, to the fact that some priests are able to carry out investigations completely satisfactorily according to the law. Thanks to what fortunate circumstances such Spiritual Investigators appear among priests, we do not know; but in any case, this is a fact” - deeply gratifying, which vouches for the fact that the state of our spiritual investigative work is not hopeless, that our priests should be given the opportunity to practically prepare for the investigative position and they will perform it quite satisfactorily, in other words, that it is necessary to create for them a position that can give them the opportunity to acquire both knowledge and experience practically. How to create such a situation? In our opinion, the answer to the question is given by clarifying the official or legal position that, according to the law, the Spiritual Investigator must occupy as part of the persons conducting the spiritual court and turning this proper position into a valid one. For the official position in which the spiritual investigator is currently placed does not correspond to what he should occupy according to the law and according to the structure of the investigative process in general, applied in our spiritual courts. And so, what official position does the Spiritual Investigator actually occupy and what should he occupy by law? – These are the questions, the feasible solution of which is the task of this article. But before we begin to resolve these questions, we must decide the following: what laws determine the official position of the Spiritual Investigator? The need to pose and resolve this question is explained by its apparent strangeness: isn’t it really strange to ask what laws? Of course, active! – When applied to a spiritual investigator, this seemingly only correct answer turns out to be far from satisfactory in reality. So the position of the spiritual investigator is generally unclear, even in the current laws! The position of our secular or criminal Judicial Investigators is completely different. We have two types of them: one is old, pre-reform, established in 1860 and currently in force in those areas of the Empire where the Judicial Statutes of Emperor Alexander II (1864) have not yet been put into effect, the other is new, established by these latter. The official position of each of them, the rights and obligations, and the course of action are precisely defined in the legislation. Thus, the first pre-reform investigator is guided in his actions by the Laws on judicial proceedings for crimes, usually placed in the 2nd part of the XVI volume. Code of Laws (or - according to the previous codification XV vol.); the second - by the Judicial Charters of Emperor Alexander II (1st part of the XVI vol.) For both, no doubts can arise regarding the question - what laws they should be guided by, in what laws they should look for definitions of their official position. A spiritual investigator is a different matter. His position had never been precisely determined before; remains so to this day. Even the legal procedure for carrying out the investigation, which it should have followed, was never precisely defined, and it has not been defined to this day. Meanwhile, as we saw above, the spiritual investigator is required to conduct an investigation according to the law; It is recommended that Consistories punish spiritual investigators for failure to comply with legal order when carrying out investigations. The situation is unprecedented! Here is the evidence for this. In the Instructions of Metropolitan Plato (1803), only the following article is found on this issue: “Whether from the Most Reverend Bishop or from the Consistory, or from the Spiritual Board you (the Dean) will be ordered to investigate about whom and you will follow decently, according to the instructions given from the Consistory, in sheer justice, not to be friends with a friend, and not to take revenge on a friend, without continuation of time, and then imagine where it should be” (§ 44). What kind of instructions were given to the investigator - the dean according to the strength of this instruction - remains unknown, but one can think that these instructions were consistent with the investigative procedure accepted in secular courts. This should be assumed on the basis that the Highest approved December 22. The 1823 rules on the investigation and punishment of crimes in churches instruct spiritual investigators to carry out investigations precisely: “in the order established for investigative cases” (Paragraph 1). But it is remarkable that to this day not a single such instruction has been published - and what order of investigations were carried out in the spiritual courts during this time - one can only know about this from the spiritual judicial practice itself, the monuments of which are currently found only in the archives of the Spiritual Consistories. But no general legislation on this subject has been published. With the introduction in 1835 of the Code of Laws of 1832 and especially with the publication in 1841 The Charter of Spiritual Consistories - the question of the rights of spiritual investigators and the investigative procedure by which they should have been guided was resolved quite definitely. As a comparison of Articles 158 – 186 of this Charter with the laws on legal proceedings for crimes of the Book shows. II Code of Criminal Laws of 1832, spiritual investigators had to comply in their activities with the laws and rules on investigation outlined in this book. § 172 of the Constitution also convinces us of this. Spirit. Consist., which read like this: “The consistory, having received the investigation, examines whether it was carried out in accordance with the established forms and rules; whether he fully embraces and understands the matter; and if the defendant and the affected persons made signature objections to the incompleteness of the investigation, then whether additional investigations were carried out on them and whether they will not be carried out, then for good reasons. If there are any shortcomings, the Consistory orders that the investigation be completed by the previous producers or others.” Nowhere else, except for the above-mentioned book of the Code of Laws, were there “established forms and rules” for the production of investigations mentioned in the above article of the consistory charter; traces spiritual investigators should have been guided by it; but were they really guided, and could they even be guided? – This is a different question. A code of laws even today is a book too expensive for a village or city priest, suddenly appointed as an investigator, to decide to purchase it, and at the time we are talking about now, even more so: then it was the exclusive property of public places. It was not for nothing that the ever-memorable Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow, considered it necessary even after the above-mentioned editions of the Charter. Consistories and the Code of Laws to publish their “instructions on the procedure for conducting investigations - very brief, consisting of only 24 articles 6, which were distributed in manuscripts and, presumably, to all dioceses. They, in all likelihood, actually served as the main guide for spiritual investigators in their practice 7 . It is possible, however, that in imitation of these instructions, compilations or extracts of some of the articles from the code of laws that seemed the most important and applicable were made by some businessmen or officials of the Consistory and distributed by copying among the clergy: for the priest appointed by decree of the Consistories to carry out the investigation had to have at least something at hand! For us, however, it is not of great interest at this time how exactly spiritual consequences were actually produced at the time under consideration. What is important for us is that since the publication of the Constitution. Spirit. Con. and the Code of Laws, these consequences were to be carried out by the forms and rules depicted in these legislative codes. This was the case de jure until 1864 or until the publication of the Judicial Statutes of Emperor Alexander II. The introduction of new judicial statutes, which completely changed the nature of criminal and civil proceedings, had a very noticeable impact on the position of spiritual investigators, and, moreover, an unfavorable impact. For although the judicial reform should not, according to the intention of the legislator, concern the judicial power of the ecclesiastical courts, as is clearly expressed at the very beginning of the judicial statutes, 8 the passion for the novelty and undoubted advantages of the new courts over the old ones was so great and universal that it penetrated both the clergy and the closed walls of the presence of the Consistories and the chambers of their secretaries. Such legal thinking began to seem completely logical: a new judicial investigation and a new judicial investigator are better than the previous ones: Charter Angle. Legal Proceedings (1864) and the former laws on legal proceedings are placed in one volume of the Code; This means that the latter retained their power only in those areas where new courts had not yet been introduced; in the same places where the Regulations are introduced must apply. Corner. Court. even in the investigations of spiritual investigators. After all, the task of the investigation is one: to reveal the judicial truth; Why does the Judicial Investigator have the right to use the best regulations to achieve it, and the Spiritual Investigator – the worst? Even the Police Department and the Provincial Board sometimes showed a similar disdainful attitude towards the pre-reform order of investigation. So eg. in 1871, the Smolensk Provincial Board flatly refused the Smolensk Ecclesiastical Consistory’s request to send any of the police officials to the investigation as a deputy; it refused precisely because “with the entry into force of the Judicial Statutes on November 20, 1864, the sending of deputies to carry out investigations is not required by these statutes” 9 . The Perm Police Department in 1880 similarly refused to interrogate secular witnesses under oath at the request of the spiritual investigator on the grounds that “with the introduction of judicial statutes on November 20, 1864, the police carry out only inquiries, and do not have the right to conduct formal interrogations under oath; link Spirit. Consistory at the station. 309 Laws on legal proceedings. according to prest. 10 was refuted by the fact that this article is valid only in those provinces where the courts have not been reformed. The consistory contacted the Provincial Board to encourage the Police Department to fulfill the request of the spiritual investigator. The provincial government also refused, responding in the same way” 11. The Holy Synod in the decree of January 14. 1866, among other things, he suggested that in order to avoid misunderstandings that might arise in spiritual institutions regarding the introduction of new statutes, to draw up a special clarification and issued some decrees on some specific issues, but a general expected clarification has not yet followed. So, what order of judicial proceedings should the spiritual investigator be guided by - the old, pre-reform one, which now guides judicial investigators only in a few places in the Empire where the Judicial Statutes of Alexander II were not introduced, or by these latter ones? This is practically a very important question that every spiritual investigator must solve in one way or another before he decides to begin fulfilling the assignment entrusted to him. How do they solve it? Of course, according to their extreme understanding and depending on which of the existing “guides” of our legal practitioners they gravitate towards with their sympathies. As for these latter, they are divided into two characteristically different parties: one stands for exclusively the old, pre-reform order of legal proceedings; the other, without denying this order as a whole, recommends modifying it, replacing some of its articles at its discretion with articles of the Charter. Legal proceedings on November 20, 1864. The most popular representative of the first is Fr. Lukanin, the second - Mr. Vrutsevich. Consideration of the foundations on which both rely, of course, will help us resolve the issue that concerns us. Both represent two types of grounds: positive (based on official authority) and theoretical. Positive reasons about. Lukanin are as follows: In the note to Art. 2nd Establishment Fates The regulations state that “the judicial power of spiritual courts is determined by special regulations concerning them.” The Governing Senate, regarding one misunderstanding that arose in the provincial government offices, referring to this note, expressed that “the transformation of the judiciary on the basis of the Statutes of November 20, 1864 does not at all concern the ecclesiastical courts (Full. Collection of Laws of 1871, November 29, No. 50234. Decree of the Holy Synod of 1881, Dec. 25. No. 67). G. Ob. The Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, regarding the misunderstanding that also arose, in his response to the Governing Senate spoke in the same sense, namely, that the transformation of the judicial part according to the Charter of November 20, 1864 does not at all apply to the ecclesiastical and other courts indicated in the note. to Art. 2 Institution Fates Charters. (Decree of the Senate addressed to the city of Ober Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, November 29, 1871, No. 47593) 12. Against these grounds, Mr. Vrutsevich expressed the following objection: “the point cited by the author (Fr. Lukanin) from the Decree of the Holy Synod, if taken in connection with the letter of the note to Art. 2 Institution Court. Est. can only have the meaning that the power of spiritual courts is determined by a special legalization, by which legalization is meant mainly the Charter of Spiritual Consistories. But the Rule is the Spirit. Consistories, as you know, have no special rules for conducting investigations. For this reason, it contains articles that prescribe in missing cases to be guided by the laws in force in the state (Article 6) and the code of laws of the Russian Empire (Article 195). Taking into account that in 2 parts of the XV volume of the Code of Laws since 1876, both articles of laws on investigations and the Charter of the Angle have been included. Court. 1864, we have the right to think that both laws are equally binding for a spiritual investigator. This opinion is confirmed by the Decree of the Holy Synod of November 20, 1867 No. 46; on binding force for the spiritual department, Highly approved November 20. 1864 of the Judicial Charters, and in part with notes to Art. 152 and 175 of the new Consistory Charter. But as a basis for legal proceedings, Art. Spirit. Consistories are based on the principles of the code of laws of 1857, 13 then it follows that spiritual consistories, like spiritual investigators, guided by the articles of the laws on investigations as a general rule, at the same time can apply the articles of the Charter of Criminal Proceedings, to the extent that the latter are applicable to the offenses of persons of clergy and do not run counter to the grounds of formal legal proceedings” 14. The strength of the objection, as can be easily seen, lies in Mr. Vrutsevich’s independent interpretation of the note to Art. 2. Institution Court. Est. which Ust supposedly means. Spirit. Consistory, as a special resolution on which spiritual investigators must rely. This interpretation may be very good; but unfortunately for the author this very note is interpreted by two institutions of the Holy Law. Synod and Govt. The Senate and their interpretation are completely different from the interpretation of Mr. Vrutsevich. It was both of these Institutions that agreed that under the “special laws mentioned in the note to the 2nd Art. Institution Court. Est. It is precisely the laws on judicial proceedings that should be understood, which should guide the Consistories and spiritual investigators, and their demands, based on these laws, must be carried out by the Police steadily and in those areas where the Court has been put into effect. Charters of 1864 15 . But perhaps with these special legalizations, the Charter of the Angle can also be applied in spiritual courts. Legal proceedings of 1864? - This cannot be allowed. The Synod and the Senate agree and categorically declare that “the transformation of the judiciary on the basis of the Constitution. 20 N. 1864 does not at all concern spiritual courts,” that “their power is determined by special laws.” So, the positive reasons presented by Fr. Lukanin, Mr. Vrutsevich’s objection were not refuted and not weakened 16. Towards his positive foundations, Fr. Lukanin also adds theoretical grounds. “Carrying out preliminary investigations,” he says, “according to Ord. Corner. Court. 1864 and the production of formal investigations according to the “law of legal proceedings” are based on different principles, and the court proceedings themselves according to one or another statute have significant differences: a) According to the Constitution. Corner. Court. the judicial investigator carries out only a preliminary investigation and begins to carry out such an investigation himself for the reasons specified in this charter without orders from higher authorities, while for the ecclesiastical department the investigation is carried out formally by order of the diocesan authorities; b) the judicial investigator first, through interrogations of victims, witnesses, through examinations, inspections, searches, seeks evidence and evidence of the crime, and then involves the accused in the investigation and interrogates him; according to the laws of the Court. for crimes, the accused, already committed by the spiritual authorities to the investigation and the court, is brought in for interrogation before the interrogation of witnesses and the collection of evidence; c) According to Art. Corner. Court. Witnesses during the preliminary investigation are interrogated without taking an oath, but are sworn in during the judicial investigation in the District Court; during the formal investigation according to Zak. Sudopr. by crime Witnesses after confrontations are questioned under oath if the investigator finds the reasons for disqualification from taking the oath to be unfounded or unfair” 17 . These are the theoretical considerations about. Lukanin for “Laws of Sudopr. on crimes. Mr. Vrutsevich does not skimp on theoretical considerations in favor of the Court. Statutes of 1864. Here are his thoughts on this subject. “Charter Angle. A court built on principles completely different from the principles of the Code (that’s what we will call the laws on legal proceedings for brevity) more meets the requirements of justice and represents better ways to find judicial truth than the laws of the Code. In this latter, for example, the consciousness of the accused plays a very important role, which “is the best evidence of the whole world” 18. In order to bring the accused to the consciousness of a crime, the investigator himself must exhort him during the interrogation and “make spiritual exhortation indicating the life-giving cross, the gospel and St. icons." According to the Code, deaf-mutes who have secretly damaged boundary signs and all deprived of honor and rights, obvious adulterers who have never been to confession and St. sacraments, foreigners whose behavior is unknown, persons related to the case, who are related to the defendant or close relationship or friendship, or who had enmity with him until that time, even if they later reconciled, schismatics “in the affairs of the faithful.” Whereas on the basis of the Charter Angle. In legal proceedings, the defendant’s own consciousness is not required: it can only serve as a circumstance mitigating guilt, and the above-mentioned categories of witnesses - some of them are not allowed to take the oath only “if either party presents a challenge,” a. others are not mentioned at all. Further, according to the Code: a witness for false testimony, an unfair statement of ignorance or heteroglossia about the same subject is subject, in addition to the punishment established for perjury in court, to recovery of damages caused through! then losses. The searchers are also liable for losses in the same way. “Confrontations (according to the Code) of parents with children, masters and servants can be given only in extreme cases when they find themselves participants in the same crime”... “Judges and investigators can be removed by the accused, among other things, when they are on friendship or friendship with the informer or plaintiff, when the judge was fed or served by the informer or plaintiff, when the judge, being often in company with the informer, has a secret relationship with him, or when he was seen often whispering with the informer in the ear, and when the judge has a case elsewhere that is similar to the one that is subject to his judgment.” In the Charter Angle. The courts do not have any of the above reasons [for the disqualification of judges. According to the Code, with an equal degree of reliability of legal witnesses, in the event of their contradiction, preference is given to the man over the woman, the noble over the ignorant, the learned over the unlearned, the spiritual over the secular. Needless to say, in Ort. Corner. S-tva does not have these privileges. In general, the advantages of the Constitution. Ugh. The courts before the Code are numerous. But despite these advantages, many articles of the Charter are not applicable in the conduct of investigations by ecclesiastical investigators, both due to the special nature of the crimes of clergy, and because the legal proceedings of the consistories, for which these investigations are intended, are so-called formal, that is, built on the theory of formal evidence and consisting only of the examination of papers sent by the investigator. Nevertheless, the spiritual consistories, as well as the spiritual investigators, are aware, so to speak, of the moral superiority of the Ort. Corner. The court is before the Code - the former often prescribe and the latter often themselves are guided by the articles of the Charter instead of the articles of the Code; The most outdated provisions of the latter now seem to be not applied at all by both of them” 19). These are the theoretical considerations of Mr. Vrutsevich for Ust. Corner. Legal proceedings as a guide for spiritual investigators. What is curious about them is that the difference in principles on which the legal proceedings of the Charter of 1864 and the legal proceedings of the Code are built is not only clearly recognized, but also very strongly noted, i.e., in them the argument that Lukanin presented for the legal proceedings of the Code against the legal proceedings of the Charter of 1864 is clearly exposed in them. The latter is built on completely different principles than the legal proceedings consistory, therefore it is natural that many articles of the former are completely inapplicable in the latter. So, are consistories and spiritual investigators acting correctly when they apply in their practice at least some articles of the Charter of Criminal Procedure? There is only one possible answer: no, that’s not correct. G. Vrutsevich leans heavily on the “moral superiority” of the articles of the Charter of 1864 (it would be more accurate to say technical); and if the question were: which of the two legal proceedings is technically more advanced? – then, of course, his argumentation would matter. But we have to resolve another question, namely: which of these legal proceedings according to the law should be used by the spiritual consistory and its investigators? There is only one way to answer this: the judicial proceedings of the Code, investigative, formal, although less perfect in technical terms: for it is homogeneous with that judicial proceedings, which are outlined in the consistory charter and are the same that are applicable to the judicial system of the consistory and the entire diocesan organization in general. But is it not possible, however, for spiritual judges and investigators to act in such a way that, while preserving investigative proceedings in general, they will improve it in particular, at their own discretion, replacing “outdated” articles with its articles of the Charter of the Angle. Court. 1864? G. Vrutsevich advises doing this, referring in this case to the experience of some spiritual consistories. In our opinion, this method of action must be strongly condemned as introducing confusion and disorder into the administration of justice and being completely illegal. This is the dignity of justice, so that in every step of the judge one can see the dominance of the law and the subordination of judicial arbitrariness to it: but what kind of court will it be when the judge is guided in his actions by what he likes best?! But among the articles in the code there are “obsolete” ones, as Mr. Vrutsevich puts it? Shouldn’t they also be used? This point in Mr. Vrutsevich’s argument is striking in its following strangeness: among the “outdated” he actually points out articles that have already been repealed, namely Art. 316 (according to the code of 1857): the defendant’s own confession is the best evidence of the whole world”; Art. 333: “with an equal degree of reliability of legal witnesses, in case of contradiction, give preference to a man over a woman, etc. These two articles were still in the Code of 1857 and 1876. but then they were removed and are no longer in the code of 1892: why point to them? As for the others, interpreted by Mr. Vrutsevich as “obsolete”, they are still in the Code, traces. For the legislator and judicial investigators in those areas where the judicial statutes of Alexander II were not introduced, they are not obsolete. It is not clear why for a spiritual investigator, for example, an article that prescribes “to make a spiritual exhortation indicating the life-giving Cross, the Gospel, and the Holy Spirit should be considered obsolete.” Icons,” or an article that excludes from the oath (as witnesses) obvious adulterers, persons who have never been to confession or Holy Communion, and schismatics in Orthodox affairs. Thus, Mr. Vrutsevich’s theoretical considerations are for the Court. The statutes of 1864 must be considered unsatisfactory. At the same time, the first question we posed was: what laws determine the legal position of the Spiritual Investigator? – we consider it sufficiently exhausted. Such laws should be read as the Charter of Ecclesiastical Consistories and the Laws on Legal Proceedings for Crimes, placed in Part 2 of Vol. XVI of the Code of Laws. The Spiritual Investigator must have these two books of laws in his cell as the basis and determinants of his actions and his rights and powers in his office. The peculiarities of investigative proceedings operating in spiritual courts include the fact that the formal investigation, which the Spiritual Investigator is called upon to carry out, has an incomparably greater significance in it; than what is the preliminary investigation in legal proceedings under the statutes of Emperor Alexander II. The latter is an act preceding the action of the court in the proper sense and stands apart from acts in the proper sense of the court. The final result of the preliminary investigation is either an indictment, that is, the bringing to trial of the person under investigation, or the complete cessation of the case that arose - it was about him. Trace. the trial in the strict sense begins only after the completion of the preliminary investigation and the judicial investigator who conducted it completely removes himself from the case and becomes a completely outsider in relation to it. The court itself then conducts the judicial investigation again (corresponding to the formal one in the investigative process), conducts it completely again and independently of the preliminary investigation. At the same time, the jurors - the main deciders of the defendant's fate - are obliged, strange as it may seem, not even to know about the data of the preliminary investigation. They are obliged to judge solely on the basis of what they themselves saw and heard during the judicial investigation, which took place in their presence and - if they wish - with their active participation. The formal investigation has a completely different meaning in investigative proceedings. Here it is the basis of all legal proceedings, it contains all the data for the court, the entire sphere of its actions, from which it has no right to leave. True, the court (in this case, the Consistory) has the right and duty to check the investigation, demand additional investigation, and may, in some cases, summon persons related to the case for questioning; but all this is only as an addition to the main and main material obtained not by him, but by the investigator. Therefore, the formal consequence in a process is not an act standing outside it, but the first part of it. For the law specifies the following individual points that constitute investigative proceedings: “The production of criminal (as well as investigative) cases consists of: 1) In the investigation, or investigation of all the circumstances of the case or incident constituting a crime, and in the collection of evidence to discover and expose the culprit; 2) In court, which consists of verifying the investigation, judging, based on the strength of evidence and evidence, about the guilt or innocence of the defendant and pronouncing a sentence according to the law. 3) In execution of the sentence" 20. It follows from this that the spiritual investigator will make a big mistake if, in order to understand his significance in the judicial process, he begins to look for parallels for himself, or equates himself with the judicial investigator of the Court. Charters of 1864 and its consequence to the preliminary investigation. He must look for a completely different parallel for himself. He must consider himself a member of the court (in the general sense), be in solidarity with him and precisely with the role of his prosecutor - during the investigation - that is, the party attacking the defendant (in seeking the truth, collecting evidence and evidence against him), although he is obliged to present to the court everything that the defendant himself presents to him in his justification. Accordingly, the person subject to the investigation, once it has been appointed, must consider the latter not as something preceding the trial, but as a real trial and himself - having already been brought to trial or having been put on trial; he must look at the spiritual investigator as a judicial official, invested with the power to use various measures of persecution against him in the case, and therefore, on his part, he must use all efforts and means of defense and justification and present them to him immediately. For this is the only moment when he has the right and opportunity to do this. At the end of the investigation, his opportunity and right to do anything in his own defense had ceased. That this has always been and is the legal position of the investigator in the investigative process according to our legislation is proven by the following small reference with the laws of criminal proceedings of the past and present, in force where the Court has not yet been introduced. Est. Emperor Alexander II. According to the Code of Laws of the past, the institution that was intended to carry out criminal investigations was called the “Zemsky Court”. The usual investigator was one of the members of this court - the zemstvo assessor or police officer, but in important cases its chairman was the zemstvo police officer, and in more important cases - a special “temporary department of the zemstvo court” 21. But no matter what composition of members the investigation was carried out, it was certainly certified by the Zemsky Court, which was thus responsible for the correctness of its conduct 22 . The Zemsky Court was like this. in a way, an institution specially organized for carrying out investigations (although it was in charge of many other cases, mainly police ones.) During the investigation, a district attorney (assistant to the provincial prosecutor) could always be, and sometimes deliberately, sent, who “at all times had free entry into the judicial and police places of his district and city” 23 . In particular, the role of the solicitor during the investigation was determined as follows: “for the greater protection of the accused, it is entrusted to the district solicitors to carefully monitor the progress of the investigations and especially ensure that the accused takes advantage of all the methods provided by law for his defense” 24 . Along with these officials, a deputy from the class to which the defendant belonged had to sit in the investigative Presence. The law defined the powers of the deputy as follows: the deputy is obliged to observe the correct conduct of the investigation and, upon completion, certify it with assault; in case of disagreement, he has the right to present his opinion” 26. “If the investigation began before the arrival of the deputy, then he has the right to demand information about the investigation carried out, and if he finds in it either a shortcoming or a tendency to aggravate the fate of the accused, then he refers to the district solicitor, asking for his insistence on providing the accused with legal protection” 27. This was the composition before the reform Presence, which carried out the formal investigation. In it we find the accusing side (the investigator) and the accused and defending side (the attorney and the deputy) completely balanced. Produced t. arr. the investigation, reviewed by the Zemsky Court, then ascended through the ranks of the courts: the District Court, the Criminal Chamber and the Government Senate. Here it was examined and a verdict was drawn up on it by the judges alone - persons who were completely outsiders to those acting during the formal investigation. In 1860, a very important reform in the organization of the investigative process followed: the conduct of investigations was entrusted to special judicial officials - judicial investigators 28. Their rights and powers were defined as follows: “Judicial investigators are members of the District Court. They are identified, moved from district to district, dismissed from office and service by the Minister of Justice on the proposal of the head of the province" 29 . “When judicial investigators are in the city and are not busy conducting investigations, they participate in the affairs of the District Court on an equal basis with other members of the onago, without considering only those cases in which they themselves carried out the investigation” (ibid.). “The heads of the province are given the right, by agreement with the provincial prosecutors, to appoint, in excess of the staff, capable young people who have completed a course in higher or secondary educational institutions as candidates for the position of judicial investigators in the Criminal Chambers and District Courts” (ibid.). “Forensic investigators are in grade VIII and receive a salary of 800 rubles. and 200 for office expenses. Apartments and horses for traveling are assigned on the same basis as for police officers” (ibid.). “In particularly important cases, investigative commissions can be appointed by the courts either directly, or on the proposal of the police, on the proposal of the district attorney, or the provincial prosecutor, or by order of the head of the province. The commissions consist of: a judicial investigator, another member of the District Court, or Magistrate, and an official of the local city or rural police, and a deputy” (ibid., paragraph 15). This is how the establishment of judicial investigators was organized in 1860; it remains as such to this day in those areas of the empire where the Judicial Statutes of Emperor Alexander II 30 have not been put into effect. Investigative presence in spiritual courts should be organized in the same way: for since spiritual judges are obliged to be guided by the general investigative procedure established for judicial places, they should be placed in approximately the same position with secular judges. However, such a correspondence does not occur. In ancient times, precisely in the 18th century, the spiritual investigative presence was placed somewhat closer to the secular: for the investigation was carried out by a member of the consistory, or by a present steward with a scribe. After that, in the 19th century, investigations were most often carried out by dean or even ecclesiastical boards. Thus, the person who carried out the investigation was an authoritative official. But over time, a different order began to prevail in practice: ordinary priests began to be appointed as investigators - by commissions or even individually. This order began, if we are not mistaken, with the highest approved rules of 1823, December 22. Clause 1 of these rules reads: “The Diocesan Bishop, as soon as he receives notification from anyone, or otherwise comes to his attention about a reprehensible act committed in the church by a person of clergy rank, immediately orders the dean or another trustworthy clergyman to go to the place and invite one or two neighboring priests of good behavior to carry out an investigation there according to the procedure established for investigative cases.” II. 2: “If it is impossible for a zemstvo official to act as a deputy during such investigations, his village elder, elected or sotsky may take his place in order to interrogate with him persons who are not subject to spiritual authority.” The matter is posed in the same way by the Charter of the Spirit. Con. 1841, § 168 - which reads: “For the speediest research, the Eminence, in local proximity, can direct the Spiritual Board about this so that it submits the research carried out with its opinion to the Consistory; or may entrust the investigation directly to trusted clergy.” § 211: “If the plaintiff is a civilian, then an official of the city or zemstvo police is invited to the investigation.” According to the “Instructions of Metropolitan Philaret,” the organization of the investigative commission is as follows: 1) Investigations should be carried out by two or, depending on the importance of the case, three clergy; 2) The senior investigator, in whose name the order is given, invites others appointed to conduct the investigation. 3) If an employee or employees are not assigned to him, he takes them from the nearest priests with due justice and prudence: 4) for writing, if there is no clerk. a deacon or clergyman is hired according to ability. 6) If a research employee elected as the chief investigator is withdrawn for good reasons, he may immediately invite another impartial person in his place; 7) If the challenge is the chief investigator or an employee appointed by higher authorities, then the challenge is submitted to the permission of the authorities and until this permission the investigation does not begin” 31. The current Ordinance. Spirit. Consistory takes the same point of view. In some dioceses, as we know, the custom is being introduced to appoint parish priests to the position of investigators one at a time in the deanery (isn’t it a pendant for the judicial investigator Court. Constitution 1864)? It is not difficult to notice in this series of legalizations and administrative orders the discrepancy between the composition of spiritual investigative commissions and the law on formal investigation in two respects: firstly, in this series of legalizations there is a noticeable tendency not to strengthen the authority of the spiritual investigator, but to diminish it: secondly, the composition of the investigative commission does not include a deputy as a defender of the defendant, if the latter is a clergyman. This deficiency is a direct deviation from the requirements of the laws on formal investigation, both former and currently in force (see Art. 76 - 80), a deficiency that is all the more striking since for the defendant - a secular person, the law on a deputy is strictly observed in spiritual investigation. These inconsistencies with the law in the composition of the spiritual commission of inquiry are reflected in the following unfavorable consequences for justice. It is very difficult for a priest appointed as a spiritual investigator—perhaps a neighbor and fellow minister of the accused—to suddenly recognize himself as his judge (or accuser) and to take a proper official relationship with him; and if he manages to do this, then he may be embarrassed by the unfavorable reviews about him from other neighbors of the priests and those known to the defendant: “he was arrogant in front of his brother!” This timidity of his position as a spiritual investigator is recognized as normal even by the guiding advice that is given to him by our legal practitioners. “Since some defendants - we read in the “Practical Advice” of St. L. Derzhavin - they have the habit, for well-known purposes, of withdrawing either the investigator or his employees from carrying out an investigation for reasons invented by them: then the investigator, in order to avoid a wasted trip (especially if it is far away and if employees have still been appointed), it is not superfluous, without even going to the place of investigation, to take away from the plaintiff i.e. the petitioner or informer and from the defendant or accused a statement about whether they have legitimate reasons against which or from the investigators.” It is recommended that this testimony be sent in the form of this “relationship” or summons: “No. The Ecclesiastical Consistory, by decree dated No. month and year No., ordered me to conduct research on such and such a matter. I proposed to conduct research on this matter on Monday, January 15, with such and such a priest; why I ask you (or: why you undertake) not to leave your place of residence for a long distance on that date. In informing you of this, I ask (or: you have) to notify me: do you have any legitimate reasons for disqualifying me or my employee from the investigation” 32 . The naivety of such an official attitude of the delegate of the Consistory for the application of ecclesiastical jurisdiction towards the defendant is touching; but she should hardly be surprised, much less condemn. On the other hand, with an overly energetic and strict investigator, the position of the defendant, sometimes not so much a criminal as an unfortunate one, in the absence of a deputy, is extremely difficult and completely unfair. In general, the position of the investigator in this investigation is very uncertain and extremely difficult. He must experience a great internal struggle in relation to the work at hand: whether to tilt the investigation in favor of the defendant in order to preserve the reputation of a good brother: for at the end of the investigation he is again a simple priest. How can this not please the Diocesan Authorities? Or maybe it’s the other way around – that’s how you’ll please him? And so, looking at this work at hand, thinking about how to act better and being guided by the beginning: saving your soul, clever investigators - as we were told (we cannot guarantee the accuracy) - before starting the case, they go to the province to inquire in advance, of course, very secretly, what direction of investigation the Vladyka or the Consistory wants to give, and then, accordingly, they conduct the investigation. The modern spiritual investigator does not have any “prestige” in the eyes of the police, not to mention the city, sometimes rural or zemstvo police: in their eyes he is not an important official, like a judicial investigator, but simply a priest. And this is very natural and, if you like, legal: for neither in the whole Code of Laws, but even in the Charter of Spiritual Consistories, the term: spiritual investigator is not found, in the sense of an official. Therefore, it is not uncommon that in response to a completely official request from a spiritual investigator to the Police Department regarding the interrogation of a witness, the latter responds with an inscription in the same regard with the interrogation carried out by him under the signature “bailiff such and such,” and the address without any title simply means: “to priest such and such, i.e., in response to the request, a police inscription is sent, which is done when registering passports with the police 33. Until 1879, the spiritual investigator did not even enjoy the deputy right to passes and daily allowances. Only this year this deputy right was extended by the Holy Synod 34 and then finally strengthened for the spiritual investigator by the Charter of Spiritual Consistories: 1883: here in the note to Art. 156 we read: “Passage money for clergy sent by the Diocesan authorities to carry out investigations on the affairs of the ecclesiastical department is released to the account of the return from the perpetrators or from those persons at whose requests the investigation was carried out, on the same basis as passes to clergy sent by deputies for cases carried out in secular public places.” It is worthy of note that even here the term “spiritual investigator” does not appear; he is named descriptively: “A clergyman sent by the Diocesan authorities to conduct an investigation into the affairs of the ecclesiastical department.” Using this §. Est. Spirit. Con. another unfavorable reader may make a joke at our address as follows: you, the author, should have given your article the following title: “A clergyman sent by the Diocesan authorities, etc. and not “Spiritual Investigator” - as you did: for such a position is not recognized by the Constitution. Spirits. Con. therefore, it is not present at all in spiritual courts. Our critic, to our misfortune, will be partly right, and this will further strengthen the difficult impression that is generated by the obvious discrepancy between the unimportant official position of the spiritual investigator at the present time and the important task, the solution of which is entrusted to him and with the important significance that his work - a formal investigation - has in the investigative process. Yes, according to Ordinance. Spirit. Con. The official position of a spiritual investigator is not higher than that of a deputy, who is also a “clergyman on business, etc.,” just like a spiritual investigator. But our critic is only partly right: for, as we have already seen, the Holy Synod and the Governing Senate did not use the archaic style of the article in question of the Consistory Charter, but used it as an official term: “spiritual investigator” and officially ordered the police and provincial boards to recognize for the spiritual investigator the rights and powers in the conduct of a formal investigation equal to the rights and powers of the judicial investigator 1860 determined by the laws on legal proceedings. in matters of prest, and simple. 2nd part of XVI volume of the Code. From here the following conclusion naturally suggests itself, so to speak, suggested by the certificate we made with the legislation on the investigative process: The position of a spiritual investigator should be placed in full compliance with the position of a judicial investigator in 1860. But according to his official position, he must be a member of the Consistory, approved by the Holy Synods and the Chief Prosecutor. It goes without saying that the number of such members - investigators should be no less than 4 in the diocese: traces the membership of the Consistory presence should at least double. A member-investigator, if he is not busy conducting investigations, is required to be present in the Consistory specifically in court cases for which he did not conduct investigations. When carrying out an investigation, he must have a letter of guidance - from officials of the Consistory Office. A deputy from the clergy should sit with him in the investigative chamber, as a guardian of the interests of the defendant. It is desirable that the investigative member be a Priest or Archpriest with an academic education. That the consequence of such correction of the shortcomings of our spiritual legal proceedings will be an improvement in the formal investigation - there can be no doubt about this. For then those preliminary negotiations of consistories with the clergy they send, who refuse, for example, will necessarily cease. beyond the distance from the proposed business trip, which are so common nowadays; Negotiations between the appointed investigator and the defendant will also cease regarding whether the latter would like to withdraw the appointed investigator and ask for another, which, as was seen above, has almost been introduced into the norm in our country. All such negotiations extremely slow down the investigation, but they are unthinkable with the investigator being a Member of the Consistory. Of course, the process of investigation itself will be accelerated, because it will be carried out by a person of authority, who is quite clearly aware of his position and calling and, most importantly, a skilled and experienced person. But the beneficial effect of the indicated measure will no doubt be reflected in the next moment of legal proceedings - in the Consistory itself. For then, when listening to an extract from the case, when judging the strength of evidence and evidence, skilled and experienced persons will again be present and take an active part and, by virtue of this, already have greater independence in their opinions than the existing members of the presence. Then it will no longer be possible for phenomena such as “for unknown reasons, the Consistory orders the production of additional investigations even after investigations.” pits, produced completely impeccably” - possible, according to the testimony of competent persons, now. Of course, this measure will require an increase in the staff of each Consistory by 2000 rubles. per year 35. But this circumstance should hardly be considered an obstacle to the introduction of a measure, since its necessity is clearly recognized. But how much can this measure improve matters? We will not exaggerate its dignity if we define its price as follows: it will introduce into the spiritual department a court according to the law in place of the court operating in it “at the extreme prudence of inexperienced clergy sent to carry out the investigation” and at the “discretion” of the Consistory. And such a transformation of the spiritual court is worth the above-mentioned costs. Vrutsevich: Guide for consistories of spiritual investigators and clergy. St. Petersburg. 1896. p. 158. “There was such a case: the accused, having received (from the Spirit. Investigator) questions, signed off on receipt of them in his notebook and did not give answers. The investigator writes and sends written requests for answers; the defendant either does not accept the papers or does not show up at home, announcing through the servants that he has left to correct the requirements. The investigator never got answers, stopped the investigation and reported to the Consistory.” Lukanin: A guide to conducting inquiries and investigations into the crimes of clergy. Permian. 1898, p. 51. Lukanin, op. book preface. Vrutsevich, op. book preface to 1st ed. A. Zavyalov: Circular decrees of the Holy Rule. Synod. St. Petersburg. 1896, pp. 175 – 181. Meanwhile, in the Code of 1832, the order of consequences was determined by 240 articles: from 766 to 1006. The mentioned instructions of M. Philaret are printed in cit. book by A. Lukanin, pp. 21 – 24. We base this probability on the fact that we personally encountered these instructions (handwritten) not in Moscow, but in another diocese; 2ndly, on the fact that the brochure of St. L. Derzhavina: Practical advice to priests during investigations. Kiev 1869 was compiled under the undoubted influence of the above instructions of M. Philaret. Institution Court. Regulations, Art. 2. Note: “The judicial power of spiritual, military, commercial, peasant and ethnic courts is determined by special laws regarding them.” Code of laws T. XVI, Part 1. Zavyalov: Circular decrees of the Holy Rule. Synod. Decree of the Holy Synod, April 7. 1873., p. 105. This article reads: “To interrogate witnesses located in other places, interrogation centers are sent to the local authorities, who take testimony from them under oath and, having certified it with their own authority, send it for inclusion in the case.” Lukanin, op. sq. pp. 71 – 73. A. Lukanin, cit. book, Preface. page II. A small inaccuracy: (The Charter of the Spirit. Con. was published in 1841, when the Code of 1837 did not yet exist. ) Vrutsevich, cit. book page 6. ) This is the interpretation of the Holy Synod and Tsrav. The Senate made the above-mentioned clash of the Permian spirit. consistory with the police department due to the application of Art. 309 order about legal proceedings. The text of the Senate decree reads as follows: “The ruling Sepat has considered the question of who should be contacted by spiritual investigators when taking evidence from secular persons in cases subject to spiritual court and taking into account 1, that according to the note to Art. 2. Institution Court. Est. transformation of the judicial part on the basis of the Constitution. 20 November 1864 does not at all concern the spiritual and other courts indicated in the mentioned note, the judicial power of which is determined by special laws regarding them (and the matter was about the application of Article 309 of the Law on Legal Proceedings); 2, that therefore cases of declaring marriages illegal are carried out on the same basis and in those areas in which judicial statutes were put into effect on November 20. 1864 and 3, that for the stated reasons, the police in these latter areas are obliged to fulfill all the requirements of the spiritual investigators in these cases, found the refusal of the Perm provincial government to force the police to fulfill the demands of the spiritual investigators to be incorrect, and therefore determined: the resolution of the Perm provincial government should be canceled, about which this board should be informed by decree for proper execution.” The full text of this very important decree for spiritual investigators was published in the Church Bulletin of 1883, No. 19. Reference by Mr. Vrutsevich to the Decree of the Holy Synod on binding force for the spiritual department, Highly approved. Charters of 1864 and a note to Art. 152 and 175 Const. Spirit. Consist. does not have any significance because this decree and articles deal with the procedure for legal proceedings in criminal cases of clergy in general courts, and not about the procedure for legal proceedings in spiritual courts. Lukanin, op. book Preface, page II. Practice has often refuted this theory. By the way, there is a well-known case in which a husband, on the basis of his own confession, was punished with whips and sent to hard labor for the murder of his wife, who turned out to be living several miles from the village where her husband lived. Such confessions were extracted through torture and biased interrogations. Note by Mr. Vrutsevich. Vrutsevich, op. book page 4. 5. Laws on legal proceedings in cases of crime. Ch. I, art. 1. Code. Zach. Vol. XVI, Part II, 1892. Arch. Zach. 1857 t. P. Art. 2714. Sometimes a member of the Criminal Chamber was also under investigation. T. XV. sg. 145 (on formal investigation). P.S.Z. 1860, No. 35890: “Desiring to give the police,” says the Highest Command, “more means for the successful performance of their duties, we decided to separate from the police in general the conduct of investigations into crimes and misdemeanors subject to judicial review.” P.S. 3. 1860, No. 35890. Establishment of the Court. investigators, paragraph 2. See Code. Zach. Vol. XVI, Part II, 1892 Establishment of local judicial institutions of the previous structure. The definitions of the rights of deputies have been somewhat modified, but essentially remain the same. See art. 76 – So. Zach. o formal. consequence. Ed. 1892 At present, this paragraph should be considered repealed, as it slows down the progress of the investigation too much and contradicts Art. 65 Zak. about legal proceedings in cases of crime, which reads: “In the event of a challenge, the investigator is obliged to continue the investigation until he receives a decree from the court regarding the resolution of the challenge.” L. Derzhavin: Practical advice to priests in conducting investigations into misdemeanors and crimes of clergy, 1869 Kyiv. Page 1 – 4. We have seen such official correspondence. “According to the Supremely approved opinion of the State Council on June 24, 1886, the issuance of runs to the spiritual investigator should be made from a loan for runs allocated according to the schedule at the disposal of the diocesan bishop: in the event of a shortage of this loan from local diocesan sums, borrowed with the return of this money from the loan allocated to the disposal of the Economic Administration under the Holy Synod.” Attitude of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod dated December 21. 1S74 for No. 11302. See Lukanin, op. books, p. 175). The Spiritual Investigator should not consider it unfair for him to receive a salary of 500 rubles. i.e. half against the Court. Investigator of 1860, because it is assumed that he will have fewer cases, and his cases are not as complex as the criminal cases of the Judicial Investigator. In addition, the Spiritual Investigator is also expected to have income from the position of a priest or archpriest. You might be interested in: