In memory of His Eminence Bishop John (Kratirov)

In Moscow, in the stauropeginal Simonov Monastery, His Eminence John, former Bishop of Saratov and Tsaritsyn, rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, peacefully reposed in the Lord on February 12 of this year at the 70th year of his birth. The deceased was one of the most enlightened hierarchs of the Russian church, although he did not leave behind special scientific works. Both capital theological academies - St. Petersburg and Moscow - had him as an honorary member. He is widely known as an experienced, firm, wise administrator and as a man of the kindest and truth-loving soul. All these high qualities were united with rare harmony in the majestic image of the deceased. Everyone who, for one reason or another and circumstances, had personal and direct relations and conversations with him, immediately saw and felt in the deceased hierarch, simple in address, frank and direct in speech, a most worthy bearer of the archpastoral rank, a high mental and moral Christian authority, from whom there was something to learn. The writer of these lines has experienced this himself, and has seen the same thing in the experience of many other persons of different social positions. With excellent natural talents, the deceased himself had previously undergone a good school of life, which made him a man of experience and intelligence, which is why he could and did lead the lives of individuals and institutions entrusted to his leadership. His Eminence John, in the world Ivan Aleksandrovich Kratirov, is a native of the Vologda diocese (born in 1839, July 27), the son of a rural priest of Totemsky district, who died in the rank of archpriest - rector of the cathedral in the city of Kadnikov. He received his initial education at the Totemsky Theological School, and then at the Vologda Theological Seminary. After completing the course in the latter (in 1860), he was sent, as the best of the students in terms of success and behavior, to enter the Moscow Theological Academy, where he graduated in 1864, as part of the XXIV course with a master's degree in theology 1. In the same year (November 9), he was appointed teacher of church history at his native Vologda seminary. However, his service here did not last long. Two years later (in 1866), being already married, at his own request, he was appointed teacher of the same sciences at the Yaroslavl Theological Seminary, where he also held the position of assistant inspector: Four years later (in 1870), he was elected and confirmed as secretary of the council and board of the Moscow Theological Academy, in which he was a member for 12 years. The surviving former students of the Yaroslavl and Vologda seminaries, who listened to the lessons of I. A. Kraterov, retain a good memory of his teaching and relationship with students. And the deceased himself sometimes spoke about manifestations of affection and respect for him from students, when he was a teacher at two neighboring northern seminaries. The direct responsibilities of the academic secretary are limited to compiling journals of the council and board of the academy, preparing representations and relations with various institutions and individuals, and maintaining correspondence on current affairs. At first glance, it may seem that this whole matter is of little importance, not significant for a scientific institution. In reality, however, this is not entirely true. An ineptly or awkwardly drafted proposal or resolution, sometimes one careless expression in it, often leads to misunderstandings between individuals and institutions that are very important in their consequences, refusals to satisfy requests and petitions, and on the contrary, a well-expressed resolution on sensitive issues sometimes prevents major internal misunderstandings in the corporation, completeness of references with the law - incorrect resolutions and actions. In many important cases, a good secretary is what a good lawyer is in a complex lawsuit or trial. The rector of the academy, under whom I. A. Kratirov served, recognized him as such a good secretary, sometimes calling him in their circle “our minister” or “minister of spiritual affairs.” He quickly mastered the technique of office work, thoroughly and widely became acquainted with the legislation (and not just with the charter of the academy and orders for the ecclesiastical department), and acquired the skill of conducting academic correspondence with rare accuracy and appropriate language. This is evidenced by the printed minutes of the Academy Council during his secretaryship. At the same time, he was distinguished by extreme, one might say methodical accuracy in the performance of secretarial duties, as was the case, however, in subsequent times. Service at the academy and communication with academic professors, of whom Ivan Aleksandrovich was especially close to many, gave him the opportunity to follow the development of theological science, with all the trends and new works that arose in it, and he made extensive use of this. He also had his own rather multi-volume library, and not of uncut and unread books. With his further official movements, a significant part of it was donated by the deceased to various persons. In 1883, there followed a significant change in the official position of I. A. Kratirov. And before that time, when he was secretary of the academy, offers were made to him to take a higher official position. Thus, under Count D.A. Tolstoy, as the deceased himself said, he was offered to go to serve in St. Petersburg in the office of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, or to initially take up the position of an official of special assignments. But having become accustomed to the academy and alien to ambition and quest, he rejected such proposals. There were also proposals from several prominent seminaries near Moscow, under the influence of the then elective principle, to run for the position of rector of the seminary; but he also rejected this kind of proposal without hesitation and decisively every time. But in 1883 there followed a persistent invitation from I. A. Kraterov from the Right Reverend Ambrose of Kharkov to take the position of rector of the Kharkov Seminary. His Eminence Ambrose (appointed to Kharkov on September 15. 1882) was also looking for an outstanding person for this position - not only an experienced and firm administrator, but also a widely enlightened person, who at the same time had connections and communication with the scientific world, especially in the person of professors of theological academies. Such a candidate was needed for various and very solid reasons: often in view of the state of the seminary, in which the Right Reverend Ambrose found it in some respects when he entered the Kharkov department, often in view of the university position of the city itself, partly because the rector of the seminary was supposed to be entrusted with the duties of the editor of a new theological and philosophical journal, the publication of which the Right Reverend Ambrose was supposed to begin in 1884, i.e., the journal “Faith and Mind." In the person of I. A. Kraterov, His Eminence Ambrose saw a candidate who met all these requirements, a “kind and diligent collaborator” for himself, as the late Kharkov archpastor himself, who loved precision of expressions, later put it on one special occasion. As such a reliable and worthy candidate, I. A. Kratirov was recommended to the Reverend Ambrose by both the academic authorities and professors. I. A. Kratirov, persuaded by his academic friends who promised him their help in publishing the journal, accepted this proposal, although not without hesitation. Upon his ordination to the priesthood and elevation to the rank of archpriest by His Eminence Alexy, then vicar of Moscow 2, by the beginning of the 1883/84 school year. year I. A. Kratirov assumed the position of rector of the Kharkov Theological Seminary, where he remained for ten years. With the rectorship, he (since 1884) was entrusted with the duties of chairman of the Kharkov diocesan school council and editor of the magazine “Faith and Reason”. Each of these positions required no small amount of effort, time, tact, hassle, written and personal communications with different persons and institutions; but the deceased fulfilled all the duties associated with these positions with honor. As the rector of the seminary, Archpriest I. A. Kratirov worked hard for the benefit of the seminary entrusted to him and created for it a predominant position among other seminaries. In a relatively short time, the teaching and educational work and discipline that had been shaken in the seminary were brought to the proper height by him. Based on the conviction that the work of teaching and upbringing and discipline can be properly carried out in an educational institution, especially with 350-450 students, only under the condition of the convinced, unanimous, consistent action of the entire educational corporation of the institution, and that strong and good fruits cannot be achieved with disparate and disunited forces, he united the entire corporation in its educational influence on students and attracted all its members to this matter. All important pedagogical issues, successes and behavior of students, when he was rector, were decided at general pedagogical meetings, with the participation of all teachers, and not just three members of pedagogical meetings from teachers appointed by the diocesan bishop. 3 Teachers who were not members only did not sign the journals of the board, but always cast their vote openly and it had full force. The decisions taken were not re-decided or changed in an administrative-clerical way, because at the very meeting the chairman was able to formulate resolutions with rare precision, observing all the necessary nuances and giving reasons, with full attention to the existing legal provisions and orders for the spiritual department. In this case, he revealed experience and skills in the language of official office work, acquired in the position of secretary of the academy council. The consequences of this order were very good in various respects, and especially contributed to the elevation of educational work and discipline in the seminary and the authority of the teacher in the minds of students. The same goal was facilitated by the involvement of each of the teachers in the precise performance of their duties. In this regard, the rector himself was an example of diligence for everyone, alien, however, to soulless formalism. At the same time, his relations with his colleagues in all cases were imbued with complete benevolence and sincerity, his judgments and conversations with truthfulness, the absence and the shadow of any guile. His truth-loving soul could not stand lies and hypocrisy. The manifestation of these qualities in front of him from someone else disturbed his mental balance, the consequences of which were forced to be experienced by the perpetrators themselves. There have been cases of this kind. There are some freaks in the family. The deceased saint remained like this for the rest of his life. Manifestations of deceit and hypocrisy in anyone, not excluding persons occupying a high position, deeply outraged the deceased and forced him to speak in the accusatory language of the ancient prophets... The rector maintained family and friendly relations with the corporation, entered into their family needs, joys and sorrows, and was always ready to help in any way he could. There are people alive who have experienced this, and therefore we limit ourselves only to establishing reality, without setting out the facts. In his relationship with students, Rector Kratirov was a benevolent father, ready to delve into all the needs and circumstances of everyone, to help everyone in any way that circumstances required, not only at school, but also after completing the seminar course. Many of them turned to him after leaving the seminary, personally and in writing, and he helped them with advice, patronage, before whom they should, and in other ways, in necessary cases giving answers to written requests. But even here, his truth-loving soul did not tolerate guile, hypocrisy, schoolboy resourcefulness, etc. Equally, with all the severity of power, he acted against manifestations of licentiousness, self-will, stubborn laziness, etc. At the beginning of his rectorship, this way of his actions met with opposition in the form of rude, although small and isolated schoolboy antics, it is very likely that not even without artificial external influences against the rector as a “Muscovite” (the late Archbishop Ambrose also experienced this as a “Muscovite”); but the firmness and consistency of administrative and educational action, however, without extreme measures, soon put an end to this. In all possible cases and circumstances, the rector defended and defended the honor and dignity of the seminary students. Concerns about protecting the honor of the educational institution prompted the initiation of a petition, satisfied by the Holy Synod, to introduce uniforms for seminary students. The lack of uniform often caused the seminary students to be accused of urban outrages, to which they were completely immune. One of the local newspapers once even published a report regarding the crime (injury from a revolver shot) that the culprit “apparently” was a student of the seminary. This “apparently” was a complete lie, but it forced the seminary authorities and the board to persistently desire the introduction of a form for students, which was introduced, if not in the first of the seminaries - in Kharkov, then, in any case, in one of the first. That this should have and indeed had good consequences is revealed by the fact that uniforms have now been introduced in almost all of our religious educational institutions, from higher to lower, and it would be a great pity if they were abolished, as is supposedly supposed, if newspaper reports are to be believed. Attention was drawn from the very beginning of Fr. I. A. Kratirov and on the condition of the seminary buildings, both the main classroom building and the buildings with teachers’ apartments. It cannot be said that in this and generally in economic terms when he took office, everything was going well there. Rather, on the contrary... Rector I. A. Kratirov restored order in the seminary economy and brought the seminary buildings into proper condition. With the assistance of the Right Reverend Ambrose, he first found funds for a major overhaul of the main building, the installation of a stone fence with an iron lattice along the façade of the building, planting and putting in order the seminary gardens, and then almost the entire seminary estate (about 6 acres) was surrounded by a strong and high fence. The Kharkov Seminary is located some distance from the city - on a mountain (the so-called “Cold”), towering above the entire city. For all teachers of the seminary, as it is located outside the city limits, there are government apartments. But along with comfortable and spacious apartments, there were also cramped apartments, with significant and other shortcomings that were beyond repair by their inhabitants. The rector responded to this need of his colleagues and petitioned the Holy Synod for funds to build a new building for the apartment of the inspector and teachers, and together for a thorough renovation of the existing apartments. On the part of St. Ambrose, he did not encounter any opposition; he (St. Ambrose) also signed a petition to the Holy Synod for the release of funds, but that’s all... The rector himself deliberately went to the capital to bother about this, at his own expense, of course, and the efforts were crowned with success. The inspector of the seminary (K.E.Y-n) also had the opportunity to contribute his influence to St. Petersburg. That's not enough. In view, on the one hand, of the comparative high cost of living in Kharkov, on the other, of the insignificance of the regular salary of teachers of religious educational institutions, they have found the opportunity to provide teachers in kind with heating (coal). While he was the rector of the seminary, through his care and efforts, a new extensive building was built for the dormitory of the seminary students, the water supply of the seminary was ensured by installing an artesian well on the seminary estate, purchasing the necessary mechanisms and accessories for transferring water from the well to all seminary buildings and teaching apartments. Under him, a bright and spacious stone building was built for a model school at the seminary with funds donated by the famous sugar manufacturer, now deceased, I. G. Kharitonenko. 4 It is natural from this that I. A. Kratirov, as rector, enjoyed complete authority and love, both from the entire corporation and from students. A visit to this or that family in his free time was considered an “event” and a holiday”; they met and received him as a most honorable and dear guest. When the 25th anniversary of his academic service marked the 25th anniversary, the corporation, as a sign of deep respect and gratitude, asked him to accept from it a morally valuable offering (a Bible with paintings by Doré, a luxurious edition in a corresponding binding 5); and when he left the seminary, the students of the seminary, saying goodbye, many with tears, presented and asked to accept as a prayerful memory a valuable image of the Savior, and the corporation of employees - a valuable album of artistic work (Khlebnikov in Moscow) with photographic cards of the seminary employees and their families 6). With the responsibilities of the rector of the Kharkov Seminary, I. A. Kratirov carried out the duties of the editor of the magazine “Faith and Reason” for ten years. These latter especially required a lot of labor and time, and did not do without grief 7 . In particular, he was responsible for identifying the journal’s staff and pre-reading articles sent to the editor for publication. However, no article could be published in the journal without the prior consent or approval of the journal’s founder, Rev. Ambrose. Articles unsuitable for the journal should not have been submitted to him at all, but those proposed by the editor for publication - almost all of them must be submitted with the editor’s conclusion. The Reverend Ambrose was a very strict critic, who, in addition to refusing to publish, made comments on the very manuscripts of authors, often scientists and who had acquired a name in literature, especially when something or someone spoiled his peaceful mood. The official editor also had to take these sentiments into account. It is hardly necessary to say how much mental effort, how much caution and tact was required from the editor both in relation to the unofficial editor and to the authors who sent materials to the magazine. There were cases, when returning manuscripts to the authors, that the official editor had to erase with a rubber the pencil marks on them of the unofficial editor, which were not harmless to the authors. The academic service and connections with the Moscow Academy corporation helped I. A. Kratirov a lot in the matter of editing. Many of the professors of the Moscow Academy willingly sent their works for publication to the Kharkov magazine 8 . Many other persons with names well-known in science and literature were also invited to participate in the journal 9 . During the editorship of I. A. Kratirov, the magazine stood high; all the best that appeared in the magazine, valuable in scientific, theological and philosophical terms, appeared in it mainly at this time. At present, the journal is far from what it was then... The widely enlightened I. A. Kratirov himself was able, as far as it depended on him, to attract scientific forces to the journal. “Independent” circumstances, however, were often mixed into the case, and it was not always possible for him to eliminate them. Not through his fault or oversight, but in addition to him and against his desire, such works as the well-known plagiarism “Paganism and Judaism by the time of the earthly life of the Savior” 10) (V. and R. for 1886 and 1887) or “E. Renan and his newest Russian critic" (for 1893) - an article in which the "plagiarist" quite transparently revealed his moral character. It goes without saying that by saying this, we do not mean to diminish the importance and work of the most Reverend Ambrose for the journal; and his words, speeches and conversations, imperceptibly placed in the magazine, themselves constitute deep Christian-philosophical thoughts, exemplary in their presentation, admonitions, instructions, explanations, to which at one time all educated Russia listened. Nowadays there are no such “words” in “Faith and Reason”, but where are they?... As chairman of the Kharkov diocesan school council, rector prot. I. A. Kratirov worked a lot on the organization of church schools of the vast diocese, although for special local reasons beyond his control, he could not, with all the desire and conditions, place the rich Kharkov diocese in one of the first places in relation to the quantitative and qualitative state of the parochial schools. It should be noted that while, if not in the majority, then in many dioceses, there were disputes between different departments over public schools, often reaching the point of obvious aggravation of relations and open struggle, nothing of the kind happened in the Kharkov diocese when Rev. Kratirov as chairman of the council. He adhered to the conviction that for all institutions and individuals working in favor of public education, the work is enough, the work is holy and great, and therefore there should be no grounds or reasons for competition; on the contrary, it is more useful for business to help each other. He often expressed this conviction in secular meetings and acted accordingly, which, in turn, predisposed representatives of other departments in relation to church schools to the same course of action and attitude. The latter, starting with the then trustee of the district and the directorate of public schools, showed him visible signs of favor and respect, both in personal relationships and in official relations 11. In 1888, Archpriest I. A. Kratirov suffered family grief: on September 5, his wife died. He remained alone (he had no children). This loneliness after over 20 years of marriage was sad and difficult. But Ivan Alexandrovich cheerfully experienced the misfortune within himself; He did not complain to anyone about his grief, he continued to carry out his official duties, without ceasing to be active and set an example of diligence for others. Soon after this, pressure began on him in order to persuade him to accept monasticism and the bishopric. The late St. Ambrose came up with these proposals more than once; The late K.P. Pobedonostsev spoke about the same thing, mainly during his travels through Kharkov. But oh. the rector did not give his consent to this, citing the fact that he had not yet managed to do everything suggested for the seminary, that he did not feel sufficiently prepared and disposed to receive the highest grace of the priesthood and episcopal service. But God's will had to be done. In 1893, he agreed to the persistent persuasion of the Right Reverend Ambrose to become his closest assistant in the rank of Bishop of Sumy, vicar of the Kharkov diocese. On March 6, he was tonsured into monasticism, leaving the name of his heavenly patron, in his worldly state, and on March 7, he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite, and in the same month (March 26) the Highest order was given to him to become the Bishop of Sumy. When he was named bishop (April 23), he said: “I stand before you, supreme archpastors of the Russian Church, to solemnly pronounce the word of obedience to the calling of my unworthiness to serve the Church of God in the rank of bishop. I thank you, I accept you, and no less contrary to the verb. Now the time of perplexity, doubt, and hesitation has passed for me. Through the lips of Your Holiness, the will of God was expressed, God-wise archpastors, that before they knew the will of God about themselves as unworthy, my weak spirit was subject to considerable fluctuations. When the word of the call to the episcopal service first touched my ears, I was extremely embarrassed. Episcopal service constitutes difficult feats, subjecting those who accept it to various restrictions, deprivations and great responsibility before God, people and their own conscience... Until my last days, I was not an ascetic, but was a simple worker in the field of the Lord, and I thought to remain such until the end of my days, believing that according to my strength, the service that I performed in preparing spiritual youth for pastoral service was sufficient. But men of high spiritual experience explained to me that I should not look too high and put myself in line with the great hierarchs of the Church of Christ... that weaknesses are filled with the power of God... Other advice and instructions were given to me, partly known to me before, but in the mouth of spiritual wisdom they received a special power of persuasion for me and inclined me to accept the rank of bishop" 12... The circle of affairs entrusted to the Bishop of Sumy was not extensive: the management of men's theological schools (the actual review of the journals of the school boards), the determination and resolution (ordination) of the positions of lower clergy, and it seems only in villages and district towns, but not in Kharkov itself, the performance of divine services, the preliminary reading of consistory decrees, etc. In addition, Rev. John continued to remain chairman of the diocesan school council. Accustomed to an active life, he coped with all this easily; He spent his free time on book studies, finding that he needed to learn a lot in the vast field of theology, church law and church history. At the same time, he continued to maintain the closest and closest relations with the theological seminary. It is clear that with the adoption of the bishopric, his connections and relations with secular society, with representatives of various government, educational and charitable institutions in Kharkov, should have expanded. His broad and bright view of current events and topical issues, directness and sincerity of judgment, simplicity and naturalness of address, full of dignity - all this involuntarily endeared him; respect for him and his authority grew in spiritual and secular society. Placed by his very position in the necessity of becoming acquainted with diocesan life and affairs, he had the opportunity to largely verify various conversations and rumors passed on in friendly circles about the course of diocesan affairs and the “influences” on their character and direction, and to exert influences consistent with his convictions and character: to hinder others, to direct others along a more correct path, and simply to condemn others by revealing the truth to those who should. ..It would seem that such and such a collaborator was needed for the elder archbishop, who was apparently weakening at that time. But his will, as the people of Kharkov, and apparently not without reason, thought, was not completely free in some respects... Quite unexpectedly, the elder archbishop himself invited him to be his vicar, whom he could get to know well during his 12-year service as rector of the seminary, and recognized him as a “kind and diligent employee,” a year and a half after his elevation to the rank of bishop of Sumy, he was appointed (1895). January 17) Bishop of Elizavetgrad, Vicar of the Odessa Archdiocese 13!.. The Most Reverend John reacted to this with his characteristic complacency. But many of his friends and admirers, many of whom were high-ranking people, were upset and embarrassed for him by his move. Apparently, in the “higher spiritual spheres” something was felt “wrong” in the matter of transferring the former most honored and authoritative rector of the seminary, who had not done anything wrong, to the vicariate 14. At least, almost simultaneously with the move to Elizavetgrad, St. John was given to know that it was intended in the near future to invite him to high and responsible service in the capital... And indeed, his ministry in Elizavetgrad lasted no more than six months (1895 January 17 - August 23 of the same year), which is why moving there can rather be called a trip to the sea coast of Crimea for the holidays. But even during this short time of service, he acquired the most sincere feelings of respect and favor from his flock 15. Six months later (Aug. 23, 1895) he was appointed Bishop of Narva, vicar of the St. Petersburg diocese and rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. As rector of the capital's academy, Rev. John remained for three and a half years. The legal and administrative structure of the academy was well known to him, and scientific and educational work was his native element. He devoted himself to his new ministry with all his soul, but also brought into it his characteristic “spirit of peace and love,” simplicity and sincerity, and thereby contributed to maintaining vigor in the scientific activities of the academy. He shared her joys and sorrows 16. “During these three and a half years of his rectorship, the Academy enjoyed a blessed peace, which gave it the opportunity to calmly walk along the path of its historical development and realize the scientific and educational goals of its purpose as a church of the highest theological science” 17. It is not surprising that the students who completed the course said goodbye to the rector every year with feelings of love and respect, presenting the rector with an album of their course as a souvenir, and when he left the academy, appointed Bishop of Saratov and Tsaritsyn (1899) January 19), then the students, knowing how to appreciate the cordial and fatherly sympathetic attitude towards them on the part of the boss, alien, however, to any indulgence, expressed their attitude towards him by presenting an elegant panagia. The professorial corporation of the academy also treated him, which was expressed in daily communication with him and openly and solemnly on various occasions, and especially resulted in speeches when he left the academy, during the fraternal farewell academic meal. In addition to the duties of rector and vicar, the Right Reverend John also carried out the duties of chairman of some diocesan committees and societies and observer of the teaching of the law of God in St. Petersburg in secular educational institutions; and during his dying illness and then after the death of His Eminence Metropolitan Palladius and until the appointment of the now living High Hierarch of the Russian Church, His Eminence Metropolitan Anthony, he served as temporary administrator of the St. Petersburg diocese (from Oct. 5 to Dec. 5, 1898). On February 3, 1899, the Right Reverend John left the capital of Saratov, accompanied by the good wishes of the professors and students of the academy, who arrived at the station to accompany their rector to the place of his new ministry, as well as their St. Petersburg admirers, friends and acquaintances. The service of Rev. John in the vast Volga diocese of Saratov. Soon after taking over the administration of the diocese, something opened up in diocesan life that urgently required the use of decisive influence from diocesan and higher authorities. There were many current affairs. At first he did not have an assistant in the person of the vicar bishop, St. John. Diocesan life brought forward many different questions and cases, completely new for the bishop, whose ministry had previously been devoted primarily to teaching and educational work. Inevitably, complex cases arose that required joint consideration and resolution by the diocesan authorities and various civil institutions. The bishop had to spend nights doing these things and searching for legalizations and authoritative printed explanations, and also generally spend a lot of time on a broader acquaintance with canon law. To ease the overwhelming work of the already 60-year-old hierarch, a vicar bishop was appointed - Hermogenes, now an independent bishop of Saratov and Tsaritsyn. But due to overwork, St. John suffered an illness in Saratov, from which he, however, began to recover. The experienced doctor who treated him hoped to completely restore his strength, but unexpectedly died himself. The method of treatment he had adopted was abandoned. Moral sorrows unexpectedly followed, the original beginning of which was hidden where it least of all should have been. The disease began to take its toll. He was subsequently summoned (in the fall of 1902) to the Holy Synod when his health condition required treatment and especially favorable conditions for this. In March of the following year, St. John was released from the administration of the Saratov diocese, with his appointment as a member of the Moscow Synodal Office and as administrator of the Moscow Stavropegic Simonov Monastery (March 12, 1903). For the deceased, this was a complete surprise, and given the nature of his illness, it was least of all “fatherly healing”... He was even deprived of the opportunity to say goodbye to his Saratov flock. He went straight from St. Petersburg to the monastery assigned to him. In Saratov, the rare administrative gifts of the deceased did not have time to be fully revealed, but it was still revealed why “the clergy of the Saratov diocese, as one message from Saratov says, still remembers with a sense of gratitude the Rev. John, as one of the best archpastors, who was involved in all the needs and situations, especially of the rural clergy" 18. Quietly and peacefully, in submission to God's providence, the life of the deceased went on within the walls of the Moscow monastery that sheltered him. His life here was busy with worship, attending meetings of the synodal office, traveling to the Moscow Academy, which was close to him as a pet, secretary and honorary member, for academic celebrations, colloquiums, etc. While living in the monastery, the deceased never ceased to be interested in news in theological literature, although not to the same extent, as well as in the events of his current life. Often the elder was visited in his cell by his former colleagues and other close people, as well as the few surviving relatives. He was always happy about these visits, and in conversations with them he found earthly joy for himself. Unfortunately, lately his speech has become incomprehensible. The brethren of the monastery in which he was abbot treated him with sincere devotion and love. They were captivated by his kindness, simplicity of manner, and sincerity. They also knew his merits while he was strong in spirit and body. They followed him and took care of him. But unexpected circumstances occurred both for the brethren and for St. John himself. On December 5, 1908, the Holy Synod ordered his release from his post as a member of the Moscow Synodal Office. Around the same time, it was proposed to the monastery to prepare a room for the “bishop” to stay in the monastery. In fulfillment of this instruction, of course, only such a room could be prepared as could be prepared in the winter in the shortest possible time. The tenant in this room, as it turned out later, was intended to be Rev. John. An order followed for the release of St. John from the management of the Simonov Monastery (dated December 4, 1908) - to complete rest, with the provision of a place in the same monastery, even without any pension, but only with the hope that a pension could be applied for - not a “senator”, but only 1000 rubles, whereas he had the right to such a pension even from his position as rector of the Kharkov seminary, but by the position of rector of the academy - and on a much larger scale. The former rector of the capital's academy, the temporary administrator of the St. Petersburg diocese, an honorary member of two academies, the bishop of Saratov and Tsaritsyn settled in cramped, low, dark “cells” without complaint... He did not complain or grieve to anyone about anything. “What happened” could and did only cause tears of deep sorrow at the sight of the condemnation to such a “retirement” of a hierarch who served the church for over 40 years... The deceased seemed to have a presentiment of all this when he was still in full spiritual and physical strength and expressed a desire to be released from diocesan service and to be given peace in his old age, subject only to the granting of a pension for the position of rector of the academy... The brethren of the monastery surrounded the “retired bishop” in the new “cells” with careful care and concern, but the blow would have been severe even for a healthy person. Immediately visible to everyone, but a gradual fading of the life of the Reverend began. John, in the absence of visible illness. According to the expressions of the monks who were recently close to him, immediately after settling in the new “chambers”, it was as if “something broke inside”; He stopped taking medications and food. On Tuesday, in the first week of Lent, in the evening (February 11), the Right Reverend Misail, the administrator of the Simonov Monastery, performed the consecration of oil over St. John with the brethren of the monastery, and the next day in the evening he rested painlessly, quietly and peacefully until the day of the general resurrection. Thus, the life of the most reverend and truth-loving saint of the Russian Church, the kindest man, faded away. He did not bury the talent given to him by God. For those who knew the deceased archpastor closely, it is self-evident that after him there was and could not be any money left. Everything he received he distributed to the poor, some in the form of certain monthly distributions. But the deceased did not like to talk about it. This they did, according to the commandment of the Savior, in secret (Matthew 6:4). Only membership fees to various charitable and educational institutions were made explicit. On Saturday, February 14, the burial of Rev. John. The deceased himself made the most important orders regarding his burial during his lifetime. The funeral liturgy and funeral service were performed by: His Eminence Misail, former bishop. Olonetsky, Rev. Ioannikiy, former bishop. Arkhangelsky and Rev. Gregory, former bishop. Omsk, co-served by Fr. the protopresbyter and sacellary of the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, several archimandrites of the Moscow monasteries, the rector of the Vologda Seminary, who deliberately came to pay his last respects to the deceased, and the brethren of the Simonov Monastery. Of the surviving relatives of the deceased, few could come to the funeral, due to the remoteness of their place of residence from Moscow. Not many of the deceased’s friends and admirers had the opportunity to come to Moscow. Among the academic comrades of the deceased, P.I. deliberately came to bow to the deceased and pray for him. Kazansky (retired professor). The vast monastery church was full of worshipers from the permanent residents of Moscow. Over the coffin of the deceased, the Right Reverend Bishop Misail said a warm, sincere word, outlining with living features the bright image of the deceased, his various wise deeds for the benefit of the church and the fatherland 19. The monastery choir diligently and skillfully performed all church services. Remarkably, the body of the deceased, even on the very day of burial, had only the appearance of death, but there was not the slightest corpse smell. The body of the saint was buried in a crypt, in the lower floor of the majestic winter monastery church. In memory of the deceased, generous alms were distributed to the poor, and the officiating hierarchs and all concelebrants of the deceased were offered a memorial meal in the monastery dining room. Peace to the ashes of the deceased! May the Lord grant him to obtain mercy from the Lord on that day (2 Tim. 1:18)! We are convinced that from many hearts of his disciples and admirers, especially in the priesthood, when offering a bloodless sacrifice, a warm and intelligent prayer will ascend to the High Priest in the century, who is able to save to the end those who come through Him to God, who is always alive, to intercede for them (Heb. 7:24-25). The XXIV course (1860–1864) included 43 students. Of these, 19 people graduated with a master’s degree (I. A. Kratirov) is listed in the lists of masters under No. 9, the rest - with a candidate’s degree. Among his course comrades, masters, are D. F. Kasptsyn and P. I. Kazansky, who later became professors at the Moscow Academy. In the world of A.F. Lavrov, former professor Moscow. Theological Academy, who died in the rank of Archbishop of Vilna. He was on very friendly terms with I.A. Kratirov. They corresponded with each other until the death of Rev. Alexey. During the holidays, I. A. Kratirov sometimes traveled from Kharkov to Vilna to the Rev. Alexia. By the way, the late Rev. John told about his ordination that while his ordination as a deacon and priest was taking place, the Moscow cathedral clergy did not treat him particularly politely - they forced and “pushed” him to certain actions and movements, obviously, as they were accustomed to this during the ordination of ordinary proteges. The elevation of this protege to archpriest was a surprise for the clergy members and caused them embarrassment... For their “works,” however, they received “gratitude” according to the prevailing custom... In § 92 of the Constitution. spirit. semin. 1884 states: “at pedagogical meetings there are, under the chairmanship of the rector, an inspector, three members from teachers, appointed by the diocesan apostle and two members from diocesan clergy, elected by the clergy, with the approval of the local bishop, for three years. Currently, this section of the charter has been partly amended and partly cancelled. Now all teachers and members of the inspection must participate in meetings, have the right to vote and sign the decisions of the board. But before the legalization of this new order, as we know, many rectors studiously avoided inviting the entire seminary corporation to meetings, even in urgent cases. The formal basis for this was the charter, and the hidden reason was the fear of fair exposure of the “local” system of conducting educational affairs. And these “systems” changed in other seminaries with amazing speed - a new rector, a new system. The history of the theological school cannot say “thank you” to these figures... All this is convincingly explained and confirmed by examples from Prof. Y. N. Glubokovsky in the book: “On issues of theological school.” St. Petersburg 1907 When I. G. Kharitonenko died, a generous benefactor, the rector of the seminary, I. A. Kratirov, deliberately went to his burial in Sumy, in gratitude for the donation made for the construction of a school building at the seminary. The funeral service was performed by Rev. Ambrose, close to the late Kharitonenko. The heirs of the deceased millionaire benefactor prepared packages with large investments to be presented to the clergy (and there were supposedly up to 100 people), and larger ones to be presented to the more prominent and tall of the clergy. The rector, I. A. Kratirov, was almost the only one of all who refused to hand over the package, explaining that he was going to repay a debt to the deceased for what he had done for the seminary, and it would not be good to accept the package personally for himself... We know this from good sources. Selflessness is also one of the distinctive features of the deceased saint. This was a complete surprise for the deceased. He carefully kept silent about the day of his 25th birthday and was completely sure that no one cared about it, and no one was interested in or knew about this day. The wife of one of the teachers (A. S.) expressed “Thoughts caused by the departure of the revered Fr. rector, in this poem: This poem was found in the papers of the deceased after his death. Not given in full By the way, the editor’s work was then paid in the most insignificant way - 300 rubles. per year, but the rector never raised the question of increasing the editor's fee. He considered it at least indelicate to announce an increase in remuneration, and others, obviously, did not find it necessary... It seems that from 1896–1897 the editorial fee was doubled - to 600 rubles. During this time, the journal included the works of professors of the Moscow Academy: E. V. Amfiteatrova, A. D. Belyaev. V. N. Potapov, A. I. Vvedensky, V. D. Kudryavtsev, P. I. Gorsky, I. N. Korsunsky, L. V. Martynov, P. P. Sokolov, I. A. Tatarskago, P. I. Tsvetkova, A. P. Shostina Eg. archim. Boris, professors: Buzeskul, Nadler, Glubokovsky N. N., Derevitsky, Zelenogorsky, Linnitsky, Ostroumov M. A., Doctor of Medicine Glubokovsky M. N. and many others. etc. The real author of the work under this title is the German pastor Seidel, and the Kharkov Orthodox archpriest passed it off as his own work. At one time, this ugly story was revealed in the press. See about this in the Wanderer 1888, March, and 1898 January. , – in the Church. Vestn. 1888 No. 4. Sn. Right Sob. 1908 May, into the duct. Council of Kazakh acad. The position of chairman of the diocesan school council, both then and to this day, remains free, although very significant sums are spent on the central administration of the parochial schools (in St. Petersburg) and on observers. Especially in this “Department”, for some reason they prefer to leave some positions free, with good remuneration and promotion to other positions. Some chairmen are sometimes given one-time subsidies, but it seems that there is no specific law and order regarding these issues; this is a matter of “discretion”, perhaps of requests and reminders. It is clear that I. L. Kratirov could not go down to this... The consistory found it possible to introduce him, the rector, the editor, the chairman of the school council, even to the pectoral cross, which is now issued to each rector upon elevation to the rank of archpriest, only after 3 or 4 years of taking up these positions, when some students of his Vologda and Yaroslavl seminaries and with him who completed only the seminary course already had pectoral crosses, and others - even higher awards. Of the awards given to the white clergy, only this pectoral cross was dear and valuable to the deceased... See Church. Ved. 1893 No. 18. During his stay at the Kharkov department, Rev. Ambrose (1882–1901) was replaced by six vicars, namely the Reverend Gennady, Peter (Losev), Vladimir, John, Peter (Druhav), Innokenty. In general, there is something dark and mysterious in this “movement” that, hopefully, will be revealed over time. At one important moment, a telegram from the person writing this did not even reach St. John in Kharkov (he himself spoke about this), it is felt that it had something to do with this matter. What was reported in it became known to the deceased St. John, however, several hours later, from the lips of one of the professors of the Theological Academy. God. encycl., ed. magazine Wanderer, VII vol. 160 pp. Church Vestn. 1896 No. 23. Church Vestn. 1899 No. 5. Bell No. 886 for February 15, 1909 This is the word of Rev. Misail printed in Moscow. Church Ved. 1909 No. 8 You might be interested in: