Lights of Orthodoxy and culture in the history of the Romanian Church

[Rec. on:] Arseny [Stadnitsky], bishop. Pskovsky. Research and monographs on the history of the Moldavian Church. St. Petersburg. 1904. Pp. 1–583. The named book of His Eminence Arseny, Bishop of Pskov, which crowned him with the academic degree of Doctor of Theology, is a scientific and literary work that deserves wide dissemination and very close attention not only by learned specialists in church history and law, but also by enlightened people of business, especially at the present time - a time of fermentation of minds that has gripped all classes of our society. What the book dedicated to the history of the Romanian Church conveys is of current interest to Russian enlightened society - it is rich factual material for illuminating and resolving one of the most important issues of domestic policy - the relationship of Orthodoxy to state and civil civilization and culture. The extensive erudition of the author, a specialist in the history of Romania, in the book under review somehow naturally naturally harmonizes with the firm, clear, noble style of the bishop of the Russian Church, openly proclaiming the truth, historically scientifically verified, about the significance of Orthodoxy in the development of civilization and culture of the Romanian people from the beginning of their historical life to the present. The sympathetic images of the fighters of Orthodoxy, which vividly appear when reading the book, irresistibly attract one to themselves, and those principles of church life, for the implementation of which they advocated to the point of self-sacrifice, impart immediate practical interest to the book of the Most Reverend Arseny. Yes, we will not be mistaken if we say that it should be a reference book for the Russian hierarch and church and public figure. What especially pleasantly and unexpectedly strikes the reader in these types of Orthodox hierarchy is the amazing combination of strict personal asceticism, enlightenment and their infinitely broad social and political activity. These are not only saints - shepherds of the church, but also enlightened, progressive and courageous citizens, selfless patriots. They take an active part in the spread of schools, patronize the arts, and surround themselves with gifted people of eternal callings. Not only that; They are sometimes the initiators of a national and political movement, inspire its fighters in word and deed, distribute appeals, speak inspired speeches, compete in constituent assemblies and group an immeasurable majority around themselves, conduct relations with representatives of foreign powers, and are part of deputations for relations with them. For them, the word of Christian teaching and enlightenment is inseparable from deeds, from their private and public life. They are the planters of Christian culture. This characteristic feature of the Romanian saints receives special weight for the Russian reader precisely at the present time, in the moments of general anxiety and vague fermentation of minds that are now being experienced. What will be the outcome of this anxious mood? And what does it essentially signify? Does it mean our enormous step forward - our outgrowth of those state, religious and other forms of community life that fit our moral personalities as uncomfortably as a worn and dilapidated suit fits a grown person, or does our very moral personality become so shredded, so degenerate that an internal renewal or revival is required, which, if it does not come, the Russian nationality will have to prepare to disappear from the face of the earth in order to leave it in the possession of healthier nations. In both cases, the present time is a time of doing, not inaction. So what? Are we taking action? In response to this question, a strange answer is obtained: very few act and quite energetically, compared with the disproportionate, million-strong majority of those who are inactive, waiting, contemplating. To the greatest horror, this must include the very flower of our nation, the core of the future - young people, even children and their teachers and educators: they went on strike and are inactive. It is unlikely that the history of any cultural nation will indicate on its pages an example of such a terrible general strike!.. The matter of internal moral renewal of a nation, as well as an individual person, is the work of God, it is the work of Him in whose hands are the unknown destinies of individuals and entire nations. And, if the turn of extinction has come for us, then we must bow with humility to the command of Providence. But who can foresee His ways and the means by which He leads, and the goal to which He leads people and nations?! We must leave this question completely aside: we cannot understand the times and seasons... But with all the more attention, we must take up the first question, discuss it comprehensively and impartially, and try to immediately act in accordance with this or that situation. Let us assume for a moment that the reason for the present confusion or fermentation of minds lies in our moral outgrowth, that new wine is fermenting within us, for which the old wineskins are becoming completely unsuitable. What should follow from this? Obviously, only one thing: with joy, enthusiasm and energy we must begin the saving work of building our new bellows. And this work should be started by none other than our church, in particular its representatives - our hierarchy. After all, it is not a fiction, but a real fact, one might say, a historical law, that each more or less major stage of our progressive march began with the blessing of the church - the metropolitans, archbishops, patriarchs and the entire consecrated council. Open the documents, our political charters or state constitutions of the periods of Kiev, Suzdal, Moscow, our free cities of Novgorod and Pskov, even the last period of St. Petersburg - was it not with the blessing of our rulers and with their active participation that the Russian land was built, each time new wineskins were prepared to replace the old ones?! But where to start? - From the streamlining of the working issue, the academic issue and, penetrating them, the more fundamental one - about improving the state structure and a better legal civil order? No and no! Why would our hierarchs invade here? There are people here who are prepared for this by upbringing, heredity, and practical experience. For the hierarchy there is a lot of work to do, very important, urgent, having completed which, it will perhaps provide such a service, render such a service to the state, which neither it nor itself even suspects. What kind of things are these, what questions? Oh, there are a lot of them: it’s impossible to count them all. Let's start with the main thing, which has to wait a long time for its turn, and without which, strictly speaking, it is impossible to start any business. This question is so important and, at the same time, so simple that it may seem strange to many readers why it has never occurred to them to pose it. The question is: do we, the sons of the Orthodox ruling church, understand, and does its hierarchy clearly understand where and how the limits of its own sphere are outlined, in which it can rotate freely and legally, and where are the limits beyond which it should not go, so as not to find itself taking on someone else’s business, not its own? Yes, we do not have two clearly distinguishable spheres - the state and the church - as two social units and legal orders sui juris; in our country, as one official put it, both spheres have merged into one. And this strange phenomenon serves as a source of terrible confusion in our lives and, instead of a union of church and state that is beneficial for life, there is a mutual brake on the life of both. Our Church very often suffers great adversity due to the fact that government officials interfere in its most important affairs and cause very undesirable disturbances in it. The filling of vacant places of episcopal, priestly, deaconal, archimandrite, dismissal, resignation of unfit, or useful and respectable persons sometimes occurs in our country at the arbitrariness of powerful people. And this is done so simply, everyone is so accustomed to it, that no one really cares about it except those directly interested. “Nowadays everything and everywhere is done under patronage! “This is an axiom of our modern morals. To truly appreciate the incongruity of such disorder, we ask the reader to imagine... a perfectly constructed and tuned musical instrument. In the hands of its amateur owner, it produces harmonious chords and wonderful melodies. But then, an uninvited gentleman invades and, on a whim, hits the keys at random. It turns out that everything rings, but for the musical ear it causes unbearable suffering... We have become accustomed to creating such arbitrary disharmonies in church life. And, meanwhile, with what care the canons and statutes of the church protect the right of local communities from this kind of intrusion into the lives of outsiders... Our church hierarchy must energetically fight against such disorder. In the book under review by the Most Reverend Arseny, the Russian reader will find edifying and admirable examples of such zeal... But, in particular, our ruling, de jure, church has suffered and is suffering a lot and heavily from disrespect for its fundamental organizational principles that determine its spiritual and moral nature, as a social institution created by Christ for the benefit of the human race. According to the fundamental principles of its organization, the church is a teacher of love for God and neighbors in mutual human relationships. All its institutions must be permeated with the spirit of this love; They must direct their activities towards this goal. Meanwhile, turning to the reality of the past and present, we see that in a number of church institutions and in their structure, purely state institutions with the nature of gross physical coercion, cruel torture, or torture, and purely criminal punishments (lifelong imprisonment, torture with lashes and hunger, etc.) were and are being transplanted - without distinguishing between God and Caesar. Church courts - these spiritual clinics, were at times supplied with prison cellars and executioners, monasteries - with terrible prisons and pits; the saints turned into unlimited earthly rulers and “spiritual commanders”, in church courts the decisive voice was given to lies and perjury (witnesses - eyewitnesses of the fact of adultery). In general, we have exercised a lot of arbitrariness in the Orthodox Church, reforming it in our own way, instead of carefully observing its original beautiful statutes, studying and developing the principles underlying them to the demands and demands of life. Yes, we have never treated with contented respect the main sources of church structure and discipline, which are the word of God and church canons. It is not uncommon to hear about the latter, for example, that it is high time to abandon them completely and reform the church according to the laws and institutions developed by European civilization for various forms of human coexistence. But this path, so to speak, the method of arbitrariness, has always led, and will inevitably lead, to the disappearance of the church from the environment of political and social unions, from the environment of the human race. In order to avoid this evil, to protect ourselves from this terrible temptation, we must firmly remember that the church is not our property, but a heavenly haven on earth, established by Christ for the benefit of the entire human race and entrusted to us - its members, for the protection not only of our suffering and burdened contemporaries, but also in future generations and generations. We do not have the power to arbitrate in it, but are obliged to preserve its God-given purity, we are obliged to carefully preserve those wonderful gifts of creativity that its true creators and edifiers, its apostles, its prophets, its confessors and martyrs, its singers, its teachers, its fathers, brought into it. Thus, by carefully protecting the nature of the church, distinguishing its sphere as community life and moral order from the sphere and legal order of the state and civil, our hierarchy will provide an unappreciated service to the state in its aspirations for improvement. In many respects, the church, merging with the state, constrains it. In our state there are many subjects of different religions who occupy and always have the opportunity to occupy an important state position: when merging together the highest administration of church and state, these persons must always find themselves in a false position. On the other hand, Orthodox high-ranking officials themselves should be aware of themselves being very uncomfortable, citing and defending the principle of freedom of conscience and religious tolerance - mandatory for a cultural state. After all, being Orthodox and, at the same time, defending the interests of Catholicism, Protestantism, Jewry, etc. as a powerful government official, is very inconvenient. Let the representatives of each religion themselves represent and defend these interests before the state. In this situation, a purely state institution, consisting of at least some confessors of Orthodoxy, at least from different confessional persons, but in the capacity of only state, and not church officials, can conveniently take the position of a third party and consider the religious matter at hand objectively and impartially. Yes, the management of each religion, and especially the dominant one, should be completely left to itself. But this, of course, does not in the least prevent the Emperor from patronizing each of them according to His favor. In such a situation, relations between the Orthodox Russian Church and representatives of the Orthodox churches of Turkey, Slavic and Austrian-Serbian, would not present such great political difficulties as they have always caused and continue to cause to our government: these relations would become purely ecclesiastical, devoid of any political significance and would not give reason, at least, legal grounds to suspect any political aspirations in them. With the liberation of the Orthodox Church from the constant pressure on the sphere of its management by the authorities of the state, which is inevitable given the unclear distinction between the spheres of church and state, and with the establishment of living and constant relations between the Russian and other Orthodox churches, Orthodoxy will be revived in its strength and in its great moral influence on our society. Freedom of action is a necessary condition for the prosperity of Orthodoxy. And this prosperity is extremely necessary in our age. The entire civilized world urgently requires moral refreshment and renewal: despondency, pessimism, loss of the meaning of life, satiety, disbelief in the afterlife, lack of idealism and high inspiration in poetry and other arts - these are the companions of the enormous successes of natural science and the materialistic worldview. But these are companions of the highest levels of civilization: the luminaries, the most educated and best representatives of civilization, are obsessed with this mood; the middle and lower strata of society use the borrowed light of knowledge and culture for a grossly egoistic and more or less refined waste of life. Unbridled debauchery, comfortable gluttony and drunkenness, predation on labor, exploitation of the weak by the strong, boundless selfish aspirations - these are the characteristic features of the mood of these levels, these layers of civilized society. Religion is increasingly losing trust and respect for itself on the part of representatives of all these layers of culture. If in all of them there is still something that feeds idealistic and altruistic aspirations, it is faith in the power of science, knowledge, in the power of the human mind, which in the distant future, through a series of scientific discoveries, will create a new breed of people, supermen, to whom the sorrows of life, inevitable in the current stage of culture, will be alien. As before, so now only the Christian religion can inspire cheerfulness and vigor. And so, concern for its prosperity, which is possible only by providing the church with freedom from state coercion and restrictions on its action by its inherent means, should call upon our hierarchy and our pastorate to energetic activity. This activity should be directed, most of all, among the intelligentsia. Our ruling church should not be at enmity with the intelligentsia, but try in every possible way to earn their trust in itself; and the latter can be achieved by improving church institutions, and, even more, by implementing in personal life, monastic and family, the principles of Christian morality and a dogmatic-idealistic worldview. Our hierarchy and our pastorate are inclined to act only through earnest worship and abundant outpouring of words in sermons and interviews. But this is not enough. It is necessary to educate through deeds and creative influence on the forms of cultural life of modern humanity. The Church must gain respect and love for itself among cultural citizens and a cultural state. These are the considerations; that arose in our consciousness under the influence of reading the book of the Right Reverend Arseny. Experiencing the formidable events and phenomena of the modern social life of our fatherland, we found considerable moral reinforcement in the work of the highly revered author, vividly contemplating the past destinies of the Romanian people and the patriotic activities of their luminaries. As an example, we present abbreviated characteristics of some archpastors of the Romanian Church who seemed to us the most sympathetic. Dosifei Metropolitan of Moldavia and Sochava (1671–73; and 1675–1691) He was born in Moldavia, in Iasi, between 1623 - 30; His father, Nektariy Barul, or Borilovich, was an official or merchant and in his old age entered a monastery. In his youth, Dosifei received an excellent education, first from private teachers, and then at the school at the Monastery of the Three Saints, founded in Iasi by Gospodar Vasily Lupu with the assistance of the Kyiv Metropolitan Peter Mogila. Here he fully mastered Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Church Slavonic, Romanian and Polish. At the age of 20, he entered the Pobratu monastery, where he was tonsured a monk and, soon, elevated to the rank of hierodeacon and hieromonk. Here Dosifei was engaged in book works and was interested in the ancient Gospodar chrisovuls written in the Slavic language. At the age of 30, he was elected to the Khush diocese, which he ruled for about two years, then he was transferred to the higher Roman diocese, which he occupied for about 12 years, after which he was appointed Metropolitan of Moldova. From 1673 to 1675 he was in Poland, where he fled after the battle of the Turks with Jan Sobieski at Khotyn. The second time, in 1686, Jan Sobieski, having ravaged Moldavia, captured Metropolitan Dosifei (and, according to more accurate legends, Dosifei left voluntarily) and took the relics of St. John of Sochava to Poland 1, from where they were returned only at the end of the 18th century. under the Austrian Emperor Joseph II. But he did not live long in Poland, as he soon went to Russia. The reasons for this are believed to be the persecution that the Orthodox were subjected to at the hands of Catholics, mainly Jesuits. He arrived in Russia on the recommendation of Nikolai Milescu Spafari, a Romanian by birth, very learned and who enjoyed great influence under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Peter I. Peter the Great respected Dosifei for his ideas about the liberation of the Romanians from the Turks. During the conquest of Azov in 1702, he was appointed Metropolitan of Azov. The time of his death in Moscow dates back to 1711, where he arrived from Azov before the Prut campaign. "Metropolitan Dositheus is one of the most famous archpastors of the 17th century, mainly for his learning. He was a zealous promoter of the innovations of the ruler Vasily Lupul, with whose name is associated the idea of ​​the era of Romanian national consciousness and the desire to replace the Slavic language, previously used in official relations and the church, with Romanian, without allowing, at the same time, the influence of the Greek element that began to increase ". 2 Metropolitan Benjamin Kostyakov. In the preface to one of his books, this hierarch left the following brief autobiography: "The humble translator of this book was born in December 1768 from the pious parents Gregory Kostya and Maria Konta; 3 the recipient at the baptism that took place on January 1 was Elena Katarzhi; in 1784 he was tonsured a monk in the Bishopric of Khush and ordained a deacon by Bishop Jacob of Khush; in 1788 ordained a hieromonk in the Holy Moldavian Metropolis; in March 1789 he was appointed abbot of the monastery of St. Spyridon in Iasi; on June 27, 1792 he was consecrated to the bishopric of Khush on March 15; 1863 succeeded Metropolitan Jacob upon his death in occupying the metropolitan Moldovan see." Inclined by nature to a contemplative and solitary life, he strove for monastic solitude, especially in the Nyametsky monastery, where at that time the famous elder Paisiy Velichkovsky was at the head of a galaxy of educated and patriotic monks. Having found a comrade, the boy Vasily - this was Veniamin’s worldly name - secretly left home and went on foot to the monastery, intending to join the brethren and then take haircut. After several days of traveling together, they decided to rest and stopped for the night with one “guardian of the fields.” Waking up the next day, the boy, full of joy that he would soon achieve his goal, saw that his companion had run away and robbed him, taking things and a small amount of money of a few kopecks, that is, all his property. This made a depressing impression on young Vasily, and he burst into bitter tears. The peasant appeared as a comforter. He saw the will of God in this, and therefore invited the boy to stay with him, since it was now impossible for him to go to the monastery in this form. But this proposal was not disinterested, because the peasant meant to keep such a healthy boy as his worker. Vasily stayed. The peasant dressed him in simple, rough clothes, put him in bast shoes, and thus, says Mr. Byzanti - “the foundation was laid for that apostolic feat of service, which he later, as a bishop, followed throughout his life.” Here he suffered a lot, both from hard household work and from the constant quarrels that occurred between the spouses; they took it out on him; he was, so to speak, a scapegoat. On dark autumn nights he was sent to guard the fields, and during the day he performed household chores, of which the hardest for him was cutting hemp in water at the most unbearable temperature. With the onset of winter, the unkind and rude owners, now having no particular need for an outside worker and in order to avoid spending on his food and clothing, drove him away from them, ragged and hungry. Knowing how to read and knowing several church hymns by heart, the boy went to the parish priest, who gladly received him, provided him with the necessary things and made him a sexton in his church. The parents found the fugitive, and at first they did not want to hear about his monasticism. Only after great efforts did they decide to fulfill their son’s wish and sent him to the Khush bishopric to Bishop Jacob Stamati, known for his education, piety and kindness, a pupil of the Neamets monastery. Jacob was an outstanding saint of Moldavia, “an educated, ardent patriot, a prudent politician, he, taking advantage of his position and influence, decided to use all means to raise his poor homeland. He rightly considered one of these means to be the education of the people, for which purpose he established a school at his department, to which both clergy and laity had access. The most diligent student of this school was young Vasily, who with his successes and behavior attracted the attention of the authorities, and pleased Saint James, who brought his young pupil closer and closer to himself in order to directly influence him. With the appointment of Vasily as the school librarian, his curiosity found complete satisfaction: with all the zeal of his young soul, he rushed to the rich book treasures in various scientific fields, especially in theology, the study of the Word of God and St. fatherly creations. His closest leader and educator was the Reverend himself. Jacob, who paid special attention to his gifted student, foreseeing in him a future fighter for the interests of religion and nationality. Having served here for three years, Benjamin, with the consent of his patron, went to the Moldavian Metropolis, where he was an archdeacon and senior ecclesiarch, and then, in 1788, in his twentieth year, he was ordained a hieromonk.”4 A concise description of his activities by Prof. Erbiceanu expresses in these words: “In the full bloom of physical and spiritual strength, Metropolitan Veniamin takes the archpastoral staff in his hands, prayerfully turning his gaze to heaven with faith and trust in God’s help in difficult circumstances. His hope did not put him to shame: for 40 years, with great wisdom, patience and love, he led his flock along the thorny path of salvation, bearing on himself all the sorrows and needs of his brothers. Steering the ship of Christ, he, like a skilled helmsman, guided it between Scylla and Charybdis, among terrible forts, unforeseen obstacles, with faith in God, directing it to the saving harbour. As a valiant warrior of Christ, he stood firmly at his post, repelling hostility against the church and homeland with the power of gospel love and the sword of the word of God. In the midst of troubled times, he sought day and night the proper means to awaken his people from sleep and slumber: he called them to a national revival through the church, to see them on an equal footing with civilized nations. His valiant Christian spirit burned with the desire for happiness and prosperity for his unfortunate fatherland. Therefore, from the very beginning of his archpastoral activity, he boldly offered his breast to a stranger or a native, fighting for the development of his fatherland. When his strength turned out to be insufficient to resist evil, then crying and sorrow softened the most hardened hearts and defeated his most terrible enemies. Throughout his archpastorship, he was the center around which all national figures of that time, boyars, scientists, artists, professors and the poorest common people were grouped. He was the warming sun, the shady tree under which travelers found refuge, the sweet fruit from which they ate; he is the joy, consolation and hope of all patriots. The power of his loving soul attracted even his enemies to him. Like a magnet, he attracted everyone to himself with his sweet voice, heartfelt feeling of love and affection. He was a good shepherd, who laid down his life for his sheep, and they knew his voice; he was not a mercenary whose voice the sheep do not know and run away. The Romanian people did not have a greater metropolitan in the evangelical spirit; Our country has not had many patriots like Metropolitan Benjamin, who treated their people and the heritage of their ancestors with such love; It has been a long time since the entire Orthodox Eastern Church had such a zealous defender of the church and its divine institutions. For him, church and fatherland were one word, one concept; pronouncing one word, he, at the same time, meant another" 5. The attitude of this saint towards the means of spiritual revival and development of the national consciousness of Romanians is characteristic. It began under the influence of the Transylvanian Romanians, who were called by Metropolitan Benjamin as teachers in the schools he created, and found strong support in him. Of these, George Lazar and George Asaki had a particularly decisive influence in this regard. The latter, the son of a priest, who studied at Benjamin’s expense in Lvov, Vienna and Rome, founded a school in Iasi, where teaching was carried out in a purely national Romanian spirit. A similar school was opened in Bucuresti on the site of the ruins of the monastery of St. Sava Lazarus, and at first he taught only philosophy and mathematics. The novelty of teaching attracted many listeners to him, which is why he soon expanded the range of subjects he taught with readings on national history. In these readings, he enthusiastically developed for his listeners historical memories of the ancient dominions, depicting for them the dark and bright sides of the political life of their ancestors. These readings had a strong influence on arousing the national feeling of the Romanians and gave rise to many “nationalists”. Some of them, not content with the school education they received, went to the West to complete it. Metropolitan Benjamin sent many young people from Moldavia to this famous school of Lazarus, thus preparing the spiritual unity of the principalities on the basis of a common national revival and the associated self-awareness. For the same purpose, Metropolitan Benjamin assisted Asaki in the creation of a national theater, where plays, although at first far from important, were performed in Romanian. The theater was located in a private house. The Metropolitan himself sometimes honored him with a visit, giving this, as it were, sanction to the theater as a school of national identity. In general, Metropolitan Benjamin was the center around which the figures of the national revival were grouped 6 . Metropolitan Benjamin was an energetic fighter for the rights of monasteries against the secularization aspirations of the government. This struggle led him to the decision to submit his resignation and removal from the affairs of the board. This “news of the Metropolitan’s resignation spread with lightning speed throughout Romania, and, like thunder, struck all true patriots.” The Metropolitan’s farewell to the people represented one of the most regrettable and, at the same time, threatening scenes. The courtyard of the metropolis was filled with thousands of people who cried bitter tears as if for the dearest dead person. Everyone entered the doors that were open all the time, the elder hugged him and with tears asked for forgiveness for his voluntary and involuntary sins. In conclusion he said: “Forgive me, good people, my children, forgive me, the humble and wretched monk Benjamin, who now takes nothing with him from the glory that he had, except for the sins he committed in this world.” Metropolitan Benjamin chose the Slatina monastery, located at the foot of the Carpathian Mountains, as the place of his forced rest, where “having accepted the great schema, he gave up his righteous soul to God in 1846” 7 . Bishops Neophytos and Filaret Scriban The Scriban brothers - Neophytos, titular bishop of Edessa, and Filaret, titular bishop of Stavropol - provided so much benefit to the Romanian state and church that their name will not be erased from the memory of the Romanians throughout their historical existence. Their activities for the benefit and defense of the church were caused by the anti-canonical legalizations of the Moldovan ruler Cuza and earned them the title of “defenders of Orthodoxy” from the Great Church of Constantinople. Their political activity is closely connected with the so-called unionist movement 8, at the head of which they stood and earned them the title of “great patriots.” This “two” of the Scribans should be considered as a “one” in all areas of their activity: political, literary, religious and national. They were of one spirit, one thought; worked in harmony under all the difficult circumstances with which their lives were full. Different in temperament - one (Neophyte) was choleric, the other (Filaret) phlegmatic - they were completely harmonious in ideas, complementing each other in the way they acted. That is why every action performed by one of them was not performed without the participation of the other. The first is known primarily as a public figure, the second – as an armchair scientist, a contemplative monk. The Scriban brothers came from the town of Burdujan, Botosani district in northern Moldova, on the border with Bukovina. Their father served as a priest here. a) His Grace Neophyte, in the world Nicholas, was born in 1803. He received his primary education in Sochava, the ancient capital of Moldavia; then he studied at the monastery of Theodoreni, worshiping 9 the Greek Athos Xiropotamus, located in his native Burduzhany and founded by the ruler Simeon Mogila, brother of the famous Peter Mogila. From 1817 to 1821, Nikolai Scriban studied at the Greek Academy, at the Monastery of the Three Saints in Iasi, founded by Hospodar Vasily Lupu. Since 1821, on the occasion of the Greek heteria, Scriban was forced to leave the Greek Academy and continued to study theological, philosophical, historical and philological sciences with private teachers, and studied the latest European languages, including Russian. In 1828, Metropolitan Benjamin Costakis, noticing the outstanding abilities of the young Scriban, brought him closer to himself, tonsured him as a monk, ordained him a hierodeacon and appointed him as a teacher of Greek and Latin at the Three Hierarchs School, and soon elevated him to the rank of hieromonk. With some breaks spent in Bucuresti, where he completed his education at the Collegium of St. Sava, Neophytos remained in this position until 1841, enjoying general respect and fame. In the same year, his enemies slandered him before the Metropolitan, accusing him of atheism, of reading the works of Voltaire, “of playing the violin,” as can be seen from a letter to his brother Philaret, who was studying at the Kyiv Academy at that time. His library, containing more than 300 volumes, was taken away from him and he was sent into captivity in the Sekul monastery, which depended on Neamts. A year later, he was sent to the city of Folticheni, in the Sochava district, where he founded a school that contributed to the revival of the Romanian people. But his enemies, seeing Skriban’s success here too, again slandered him before the Metropolitan for all sorts of crimes, and Skriban was again exiled to the Nyametsky monastery, where he founded a school for young monks, in which he himself taught theology and Greek. At the end of 1846, he was called to Iasi, where he was appointed director of the Three Hierarchs School and rector of the Church of St. Basil. From 1848 to 1862 The neophyte was a teacher of history, rhetoric and philosophy at the Iasi Sokol Seminary (where his brother Filaret, who graduated from the Kiev Academy, was rector), first with the rank of archimandrite, and from 1857 - Bishop of Edessa, and from 1862, in addition, the rector of this seminary, for which he did a lot with his brother 10 ... As a political figure, Eminence Neophytos acts in the cause of national unification and revival of Romania and in the fight for the rights of the church against the violence of Prince Alexander Cuza. The nature and size of the article do not allow us to present in detail this type of activity of the Orthodox bishop, and therefore we will limit ourselves to communicating the moments that seemed to us the most characteristic, referring those interested in details to the book under consideration. On March 8, 1856, at the Paris Congress, the foundations were laid for the unification of the principalities: “to discuss the question of the unification of these provinces with full knowledge of the circumstances of this matter..., taking into account their wishes.” To resolve this and other issues relating to the organization of the principalities, at this congress it was proposed to the Sultan to convene ad hoc diwans in each of the two provinces from representatives of all classes of society, as spokesmen for the desires and interests of the entire country. On October 1, 1857, the Sultan issued a firman on the convening of these diwans. The Scriban brothers were also deputies in the Moldavian Divan, despite the opposition of the anti-unionists, who saw the Scribans as the most dangerous and powerful opponents. But the Scribans had a whole army of their pupils - priests and teachers, imbued with the idea of ​​unity, who accepted the instructions of their teachers as holy law. Being at the head of the deputies, Neophyte Scriban makes a wonderful speech at a prayer service on St. Nicholas Day before the start of the meeting. Pointing to the policy of Stephen the Great, who stood up for the greatness of the united Romanian nation, he turns to the patriotic feeling of modern Romanians, whose glorious future is determined solely by their unity. “Think, brethren, here before the altar erected by the first hero of our country, where we now place our prayers and thanksgivings, where we come now to break completely with our sad heritage - here stand and look at us not only our contemporaries, not only Europe, but a whole series of centuries, centuries of heroism and glory, light and darkness, wounds and, of all kinds, suffering of the Moldovan-Romanians, who are now awaiting the resurrection of their fathers virtues, restoration of trampled rights and the glorious future of our dear homeland... We will be grateful to the great powers that have taken us under their protection, but at the same time, we will be more fair to each other in our future affairs. Let us be more Christians, better politicians, more prudent patriots than we have been for some time (a hint to non-unionists). Let us not wander in the labyrinth of passions, personal and caste interests, let us not be patriots in name only. Let us not treat Romanians as ignobili, since all Romanians are noble (nobili), and the condition of this nobility is deeds, merits in relation to God, nation and fatherland... The salutary balm for our wounds at the present time, brothers, are civic virtues aimed at creating the unity of the fatherland, a united and autonomous Romania. All our aspirations should be directed towards this, even if for this we had to sacrifice our personal rights. With all our might we must promote the unity of the principalities, since this is the condition for their prosperity, the guarantee of our salvation and the good of others, and any disunity and selfishness, both among the people and in the individual, lead only to destruction. Brothers, please note that our responsibility is great, since we are responsible for the entire future of our nation, which through us, through our present assembly, will be exalted or diminished, happy or unhappy forever, will either bless us forever or curse us. Let's choose between these two alternatives. Romania now places all its hope in us. She awaits her resurrection, the restoration of her rights. She is looking forward to a bright future full of greatness and happiness." There is no doubt that this speech, said, according to contemporaries, with the ardent enthusiasm characteristic of the ardent nature of Neophyte Scriban, had the proper effect. Archimandrite Neophytos was elected chairman of one of the commissions in the ad hoc divan, on issues of reforms in Moldova. The reforms proposed by him, and adopted by the commission and then by the general assembly, are the following: a) the unification of the Romanians, b) the autonomy of the country, c) the deviation of the ancient unwritten customs of the country; d) national representation; e) succession to the throne; f) correction of the country's borders; g) free conclusion of commercial agreements with neighbors; j) organization of troops; k) freedom of worship within the limits of the law; l) the question of venerated monasteries; m) establishment of the Synod; o) equality before the law; n) personal freedom; p) political rights only for local Christians; f) separation of legislative power from executive power; r) independence of the judiciary from the administration and s) responsibility of ministers” 11. The actual unification of the principalities took place in 1859, after ad hoc assemblies of divans in Moldavia and Wallachia almost simultaneously elected Colonel Alexander Cuza as ruler of the principalities..., and Cuza officially announced the unification of the principalities on December 23 (11), 1861. It was a great national celebration. On this occasion, Archimandrite Neophytos Scribanus greeted the ruler Alexander Kuza on behalf of the entire clergy. According to eyewitnesses, “his great spirit was reflected in this final speech and in his entire majestic figure, since he, like the second Simeon, saw the dreams of his youth come true, the national ideas realized, for the implementation of which, together with other revivalists of the Romanian state, he fought for decades.” This remarkable speech, deep in content and brilliant in presentation, expresses the joyful feelings of the entire nation and clergy, as well as the hopes that the entire people and the church place on the new ruler of the united principalities 12 . But, alas! These hopes of the “clergy” and “church” were not justified. Cuza was considered a highly educated man in the European sense: he spoke fluent French, German, Italian, Greek, but for the church and clergy he was “Julian the Apostate, Leo the Isaurian and Constantine Copronymus.” Under him, a war began against the church, and in general, against everything churchly 13. For the zealots of Orthodoxy and, in particular, for both Scribans, persecution began that did not stop until the end of their lives. New laws were issued regarding the church, and a Synod called “General” was established. Government appointments (instead of the previous electoral ones, according to the canons of the church) of bishops to the see followed. Bishop of Edessa Neophytos Scribanus was appointed Bishop of Arges. In 1865, on November 19 (December 1), a Synod was convened, at which, among other things, the following issues were to be discussed: the introduction of the Gregorian calendar; translation of Holy Scripture and other church books into ordinary spoken language, half mixed with French words; introduction of new organs in all churches. Although, according to the law (Article 4), all bishops had the right to attend meetings of the Synod, bishops Philaret Scriban of Stavropol and Joseph of Sebaste, known for their devotion to the Orthodox Church and opponents of Cuza’s innovations, were not invited. Despite this, they decided to appear without an invitation to personally protest against the anti-canonical decrees of the pseudo-Synod, but on the way to Bucuresti they were arrested by order of Cuza and returned under escort from Focsani to Iasi. Bishop Neophytos accepted the invitation, but in order to solemnly refuse at the Synod his appointment as Bishop of Arges and to protest against anti-canonical church innovations, and at the same time to expose other members of the pseudo-Synod of blind obedience to their government to the detriment of St. churches. On the morning of December 7, 1865, His Eminence Neophyte, dressed in a cassock made of coarse cloth, put on a hood with a panagia on his chest and, with the bishop's staff, went with his nephew Romulus Scriban to the meeting of the Synod and put his protest on the table, which he had previously read by heart before the members of the Synod. Then he slowly left, accompanied by the undignified antics of the minister Dmitry Karadzhi, who was present here. By the same time, protests arrived by mail from Filaret Scriban and Joseph Bobulescu, who were not allowed to attend the Synod. The protest of Bishop Neophytos is as follows: “Neophytos, by the grace of God, Bishop of Edessa, and formerly of Arges, and so on. Brothers and fathers! By the grace of the Almighty Lord, I - one of the unworthy hierarchs of the Romanian Church - am deeply aware that the indispensable duty of bishops is to preserve and protect the eternal definitions contained in the power of the Holy Spirit in the Holy Spirit. canons, in the unshakable tradition of St. church and in the teachings of St. her fathers. But, to my deep regret, I see that now the civil government is giving St. The church has something that it does not have - self-invented church laws, thereby trampling on St. canons, church traditions and teachings of St. fathers. These laws are as follows: 1) The non-canonical law on the appointment of diocesan bishops. Therefore, having received a decree appointing me Bishop of Arges, I immediately renounced this bishopric, seeing in such an appointment an encroachment on the episcopate and the enslavement of the church, even contrary to the principles now professed by enlightened Europe of a free church in a free state. 2) The law trampling on the sacrament of marriage is one of the dogmatic establishments of the Orthodox Church. 3) The Synodal Law, which is not canonical: a) since it destroys some Ecumenical canons; b) because it contains elements incompatible with the right and calling of the true canonical Synod; c) since some of the bishops included in its composition were not canonically assigned to dioceses. Therefore, in the name of the Holy Mother, the Orthodox Eastern Church, in the name of more than 10 million Romanians, her children, in the name of those seven glorious monarchs of Europe who guaranteed the rights and benefits provided for in the treaties concluded by the Romanians with the glorious Ottoman padishahs, in which treaties our Orthodox religion and church are guaranteed - because of all this, I, as the bishop of the Romanians, solemnly protest against the above legal provisions, as wrong and hostile to our Orthodox Church, since no government in the world has the right to give any laws to the Church, which alone has its own eternal laws, given in Revelation, in the canons of St. apostles and 7 ecumenical councils, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So, everything that will legitimize this non-canonical meeting, called the Synod in our church, I, by virtue of the power with which, as a bishop in Jesus Christ, I am vested, I consider in advance insignificant and of no importance for our church, which was and is the palladium of our nationality at all times, and I ask for the complete and complete freedom of the church, St. the canons of which, from its very existence as our national church, have not been violated by either Romanian law or princely regulations to this day: Bukurest 1865 December 7." This protest, together with the protest of Philaret Scriban and Joseph of Sebaste, made a strong impression on the members of the Synod, who did not approve the proposed church laws. Then Cuza closed the Synod, and expelled the Scriban brothers and Joseph of Sebaste from the Synodal members. His Eminence Joseph sent these protests: in Greek to the Ecumenical Patriarch, and in French to the European consuls in Bucuresti. The Patriarch of Constantinople approved and praised the “selfless activity in defense of the Church of His Grace Neophytos and two other saints” 14 . b) His Grace Philaret Scriban, in the world Vasily, was born in 1811; He received his initial education in his parents' house and from Greek monks in a local monastery. Then he went to Iasi, where he brilliantly completed the course at the Iasi Academy, where he remained as a teacher of geography and French. But Filaret could not be satisfied with this situation. Love for his homeland and the church completely took possession of his soul and constituted the goal of his life. And so, in the silence of his modest office, the young professor is intensely engaged in reading and studying the Word of God, also studying the fate of the once glorious fatherland, but now unfortunate, poor, ruined. For this purpose, he often travels around Romania in his free time, getting acquainted with ancient monuments that testify to the ancient glory of the Orthodox Church and the fatherland. From studying the history of his homeland, he concluded that the Orthodox faith was the strongest stronghold of the Romanian nationality: it merged with the people, under its influence their life took shape, those characteristic features and that moral personality were formed, without which the people are unthinkable. Therefore, it is necessary to support this strength, which preserved his fatherland in unfortunate times, and not undermine it, risking in this case striking a blow to the nationality itself. Under the influence of the same thought, Vasily Skriban decides to throw off his professorial toga in order to study as a modest student at the Russian Kiev Theological Academy. For the seeker of Orthodox truth, happiness, this time, smiled very welcomingly. The Kyiv Metropolis at that time was ruled by the famous Filaret (Amphitheaters). The venerable Metropolitan Benjamin addressed this metropolitan with a written petition. Admission to the number of students took place. What the Kiev Academy gave him can be judged by his next speech, given at the end of the course. “I am a foreigner here,” he said, justifying his good fortune to speak on behalf of the students. “My family, my fatherland is far from here, and our language is different. But here, in this cradle of faith and enlightenment, the greatest monarchy in the world, I am accepted as one of my own, and perhaps more than one of my own. I spent two years here under your fatherly patronage (Metropolitan Philaret), under the guidance of good mentors, in the friendship of everyone around me - and I consider these two years the best in my life. Who more than me owes the deepest gratitude to this sanctuary of sciences and, especially, to yours, most gracious archpastor, care and Christian love? My comrades in science, brothers in faith, friends in soul and youthful friendship challenged me on the word of thanksgiving, but I told them: “you are your own, you have the right to benefits, to gratitude: give me, the wanderer, the last minute and the last word of thanksgiving for the outpouring of the sacred feelings of a deeply grateful soul. They provided, and I consider myself quite happy that I can express before you, most merciful archpastor and father, those feelings with which I will leave this unforgettable place for me, where I found the treasure of true wisdom of the Christian and Orthodox teachings of the faith, which I did not find anywhere. If I return to my homeland and my fatherland asks me: have you learned true wisdom and Christian piety? - I will tell him: I not only knew, but also saw them, - and I will point to you, pious hierarch. If a proud Muslim neighboring my Fatherland asks me: why is your faith better than others? - I will tell him: Christian selfless love, - and I will point to you, Christ-loving hierarch, to the generosity and hospitality of the great Russian people, brought up in the Orthodox faith and, apparently, overshadowed by the favor of the Almighty. If a European who boasts of omniscience comes into competition with me, I will tell him: maybe you know everything, but you have not seen the Orthodox Church in its ancient purity and splendor, and I have not seen Orthodox persons among you. So, gracious archpastor and father, in your flock and academy I studied the extensive science of the Orthodox faith; here I saw the order and structure of the true Church of Christ; I saw the splendor of the church in all its ancient beauty and purity; During your priestly service, I prayed in the most ancient churches of Orthodox Rus', and everything that I could know, could see - I will take everything to my dear homeland and I will try to turn everything into edification for myself and my compatriots. This is my holy vow, and other than fulfilling this vow, I have nothing to thank you with, most merciful archpastor. And I have a ruler, a reverent and venerable elder. Oh, how his spirit will rejoice when I come to him and bring him your love and your Christian kiss! How desirable it will be for my entire fatherland when I bring him the fruits of Christian enlightenment from that very garden that was planted by one of his sons, so famous for his zeal for the Orthodox faith (Peter Mogila is Romanian by birth). Most Gracious Archpastor and Father! Sanctify my vow and my desires with your holy blessing." Immediately upon completion of the course, Vasily was tonsured as a monk in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and named Philaret, after the Metropolitan of Kyiv, who tonsured him with the consent of the Moldavian Metropolitan Veniamin 15. With an enormous store of knowledge, with fully developed and established convictions, the monk Scriban returned to his homeland, to whose service he devoted himself entirely. Philaret Scriban was received with open arms by the elderly Metropolitan Veniamin, who soon ordained him as a hierodeacon and hieromonk and elevated him to the rank of archimandrite with the appointment of rector and teacher of theology at the Sokol Seminary, which he himself founded. From then on, the fruitful activity of Archimandrite Philaret and his brother Neophyte Scriban began - pedagogical, as rector and professor of the seminary, scientific, patriotic and ecclesiastical, as a defender of the canonical structure of the church. Filaret served as rector of the seminary for 18 years and two months from September 20. 1842 to November 10, 1860, first in the rank of archimandrite, then from 1852 in the rank of titular bishop of Stavropol. As rector of the seminary, Filaret was an excellent administrator. He put in order all the seminary affairs launched by his predecessors, enlarged the seminary buildings, making them more convenient for educational activities; he planted an extensive garden at the seminary, acquired rich gifts for the seminary and the seminary church, enriched the library with many books, sparing no expense on his own to purchase rare publications, so that the Sokol Library was considered one of the richest in Romania; founded a printing house at the seminary for printing useful books, himself engaged in literary works and encouraging teachers to do the same. According to his proposal, approved by the Iasi Metropolitan, teachers were to preach in churches in the city of Iasi on all Sundays and holidays. He himself trained his students in composing sermons, teaching them to recite. An excellent connoisseur of church singing, he paid special attention to it, diligently encouraging those who practice it and punishing those who are careless. Realizing the inadequacy and inexpediency of the seminary charter of his day, he drew up a new charter with detailed explanatory notes on all subjects. He was the first to transform his seminary according to the new charter, introducing a full eight-year course of science 16. How great was the influence of the Reverend. Philaret on his students, this can be evidenced by the following reviews: “In this school - says Constantin Erbiceanu, a member of the Romanian Academy - all the rich gifts collected by Philaret over many years of study and self-education were applied. Having been the rector of the seminary for a long time, he spread the light of the Gospel teaching among the students, dispelling, at the same time, the deep darkness of ignorance among the members of the clergy... Which of his students, who had the good fortune to listen to the inspired lessons of their teacher, imbued with a deep religious feeling, did not strive to embody the truths he communicated in practice? He fully deserved the title of “Professor of Professors.” Streams of gold flowed from his lips, another student testifies. “In what city, in what village, in what corner of Moldova are there no students of his who would not learn useful lessons for the rest of their lives from his teaching?” “The Reverend Philaret,” testifies the third, “during the period of his rectorship, he did so much for the mental and moral development of the clergy and the people that no one now can even imagine it” 17. During the rectorship of Philaret, his church-political activities began for the benefit of the Romanian people and in defense of the Orthodox Church, although it was somewhat overshadowed by the personality of his brother: the Reverend Neophytos. But both brothers acted unanimously in this regard until their death. "The Sokol Monastery (from the very beginning of Philaret's rectorship) was the site of a secret meeting of unionists. Various projects were drawn up here, printed appeals calling on Romanians for unity were scattered from here, new adherents of this idea were recruited here, fighters for this idea were tempered here, which met with opposition from the local government and many anti-unionists, as well as from some powers. The soul of all this were the Scribans, especially Neophyte. After the Sevastopol War, he published two brochures: “The Unity of the Romanians” and “The Benefits of Unity,” which created a great sensation in Romania and in Europe, and the ideas contained in them were the subject of discussion at the congress in Paris” 18. As can be seen from the data presented to characterize both Scribans, their political banner bore the motto: “Orthodoxy, enlightenment and political freedom of the Romanians.” The first act of their activity under this banner was crowned with complete success. But, in the future, the reader must - contrary to expectations - gradually prepare for the deeply tragic denouement of the activities of both fighters who remained faithful to their banner. The second act of activity began with the moment of national triumph - with the accession to the princely throne of Alexander Cuza. This national elected official turned out to be an ardent enemy of Orthodoxy. During his reign, he managed to deal a sensitive blow to the canonical system of the Orthodox Romanian hierarchy and destroyed the monasteries (especially the famous Neametsky) with the mercilessness and cruelty of the Byzantine iconoclasts or our Tatars in the 13th century. We will not dwell on this moment in the life of the Scribans, as it is quite famous in our literature, and will move on to a brief depiction of the third moment in the activities of both Scribans. On the night of February 10-11, 1866, Alexander Cuza was dethroned. Charles, Prince of Hohenzollern, a Catholic, was elected prince. Although, in his speech, he declared his intention to restore the Romanian Church, establishing it again on canonical grounds, but, in essence, his internal policy towards the Orthodox Church remained the same as under Hospodar Cuza, only it was pursued more restrained and diplomatically. Neophytos opened the struggle for the rights of the church by presenting a memorandum to Charles, in which he outlined in detail the present troubled situation of the Romanian Church and argued that all church activities of the former ruler Alexander Cuza were illegal and anti-canonical. Neophyte further insisted that for the good of the government and the people it was necessary that the Romanian Church should resume its former direct relations and spiritual union with the Ecumenical Patriarch. For 7 years then, both brothers, either verbally or in print, fought for the canonical rights of the church, defending these provisions, this church-political program of theirs. And, despite great obstacles from the government, as well as from the rationalist revivalists, who did not hesitate to shout that for them, as the descendants of the ancient Romans, the statue of Trajan was more valuable than the Cross of Christ, and the Scribans were called backward, rusty - despite all this - the truth finally triumphed: after a seven-year struggle, victory was on the side of the Scribans. The 1865 law, directed against the canonical institutions of the church, was repealed and replaced by the 1872 law, edited by the Scriban brothers. The name of the Synod “General” was abolished, as it was borrowed from the Protestant church structure. The Synod included metropolitans (2), all diocesan bishops (6) and 8 titular, or suffragan, bishops. Further, this law significantly limited the previous state intervention in church affairs, expressed in the publication of church laws, in the appointment of leading clergy and their removal from office as ordinary officials. The power of the Minister of Confessions is limited by granting him only an advisory vote in meetings of the Synod members, as well as the right to submit a resolution of the Synod to the prince for consideration. But for this reason, for example, the election of bishops is not granted to the Synod, but to a special “meeting of voters”, in which, in addition to bishops, all deputies of the chamber participate, with the exception of non-Orthodox ones. In any case, the new church law of 1872 is a historical monument to the great and glorious activity of the Scriban brothers. And, if the Romanian Church is restored after the humiliation in which it was under Cuza, if it received a greater or lesser canonical structure, if a canonical Synod was established in it, then this, if not entirely, then mainly, it owes to the Scriban brothers, who all their lives fought against the enemies of the church, and together with the fatherland, sacrificing their personal good to the common cause. Yes, it was a complete sacrifice of the individual for the common good. It would seem that after such a triumph of the Orthodox Romanian Church, those who worked the most to achieve this triumph would be honored. But - in is sow, and in is reap. I worked for others, and entered into their glory. When, by virtue of the new Synodal law, new appointments to episcopal sees followed, the Scriban brothers were excluded from candidacy for any place. The departments were occupied by their students: Melchizedek, Gennady Enacheanu, Silvestre Balanescu and others. From now on, the church and social activities of the Scriban brothers should be considered completed. Old age, and with it physical weakness, mental fatigue after so many years of intense struggle, moral fatigue and disappointment - all this taken together did not dispose to activity, but rather to peace and rest from work. When the brothers separated in 1873, Filaret, at the age of 62, said sadly to his brother: “Brother! Let us die virtuously, just as we lived virtuously.” Having said goodbye, Filaret left for Iasi, to the dacha, to the vineyard. But he did not have to rest in this life for long; a month later, on March 23, 1873, he died. Deep sorrow, according to eyewitnesses, was etched on his face. The burial was performed with rare solemnity. The metropolitan served with two bishops, in the presence of consuls of European powers and a countless crowd of people. After 7 days, his body was transferred to his native village of Burduzhany and buried next to his parents in the church built by the brothers. Reverend The neophyte poured out his grief over the loss of his brother in a highly artistic poem: “The Hermit’s Lament or “Sorrow for Romania” 19. Some time after the death of his brother, Rev. The neophyte lived in Bucuresti, thinking, perhaps, to be useful to his fatherland in some way. But he soon had to see that his stay here was useless, both for him and for others. Then he went to his native village, to the grave of his dear brother, to spend the rest of his many-rebellious life here. In this bent old man, gray-haired, sick and weak, dressed in a simple robe made of coarse cloth, it was difficult to recognize the former Neophyte, strong in spirit and body, a seasoned fighter for the homeland and the church, whose brave voice was listened to by the greats of this world, the rulers of the country and representatives of the European powers. A witness to the last days of his life, a deep admirer and relative of him, the scientist G.N. Samuryan describes the decline of the life of the Right Reverend Neophyte as follows: “he spent all this time in strict solitude, work and prayer, he was always a great Christian ascetic and ascetic. His humility reached the point that no one saw on him not only an order, but also clothes befitting the rank of bishop. He served in church, usually alone with the deacon, performing priestly service. Not only did he distribute all his money to the poor, but, shortly before his death, he gave away regalia and clothes, leaving only an old robe to cover his body after death. Calmly awaiting the last hour of his earthly life, Bishop Neophytos placed the cross and the gospel in the long-prepared coffin. His huge library, Reverend. The neophyte bequeathed the Iasi “Veniaminovskaya” Sokol Seminary, where he spent the best years of his life, full of anxiety, sorrow and sadness. He bequeathed his parents' house, in which he lived in Burduzhany in recent years, to be converted into an almshouse, which was exactly done, and the 2 thousand Napoleons he sent to the Kyiv office of the Russian State Bank back in the 70s were intended for the maintenance of the Trinity Church he built in Burduzhany and the almshouse attached to it. He died at a ripe old age on October 9, 1884 and was buried in a common grave crypt with his brother Philaret, whose body, according to the testimony of the Right Reverend Jeremiah Dyrtsu, Bishop of Galicia, who performed the burial of the Right Reverend. Neophyte turned out to be incorrupt, which was reported to the Moldavian Metropolitan, in whose diocese the town of Burduzhany is located” 20 . Here we will pause with our extracts from the book in question. We believe that for the reader unfamiliar with it, the types of hierarchs of the Orthodox Romanian Church have been revealed with sufficient clarity, who cannot but be called “lights”, and who act as types unexpected for our church consciousness, accustomed to seeing in hierarchs only “humble pilgrims” who are alienated and disdainful of everything worldly. As can be seen from these examples, the path that the most famous of the Romanian hierarchs followed in their lives is uniform: this is the path of comprehensive school education, together with a natural religious mood. The school, not only domestic and spiritual, but also abroad, fully revealed their mental powers: every branch of knowledge, works of art interested them and, in no way, did not prevent religious and patriotic feelings from developing, strengthening, and moral character from being strengthened in the formation of strong convictions, in order to then influence life with unremitting energy in carrying out reforms that have in mind the good of the fatherland in all respects. The combination of faith and knowledge, the purity of Orthodox faith and the benefits of European culture is amazing. But, if these individual great personalities produce a soothing, soul-elevating impression on the reader of the book by the Right Reverend Arseniy, then, on the other hand, their mostly tragic end, and then the general plight of the Romanian Orthodox Church at the present time, produce a painful impression, and this latter involuntarily raises an alarming question in the mind: isn’t our Russian church, and together with our entire nationality, threatened by the same thing? The current state of the Romanian Church Reverend. Melchizedek (d. 1892) characterizes it as follows: “The dominant church suffers from a lack of intellectual and moral development of the clergy, from a constant decline in religious feeling, both among the people and in the educated class, due to the spread of anti-Christian and anti-national doctrine; from the improper education of the clergy, from the fact that churches are not only not visited, but are destroyed, even those maintained by the government; from the material and moral poverty of the church. Under the influence of the modern desire for liberalism and civilization, many young people are sent abroad for education. Many French and Poles have opened boarding houses in the country, but these foreigners do not give the new generation either a national or religious education, but instill in it a cosmopolitanism that is most beneficial to them. The majority of Romanians, brought up abroad, have adopted the most absurd ideas, have completely lost Christian and national feelings, have become imbued with the systematically instilled hatred of absolutism and the tendencies of papism, and, upon returning to their homeland, apply these views to their national church, and in all cases secretly and openly discredit it, harm it, some considering the Orthodox religion a prejudice, others under the political pretext that the Orthodox Church can to promote the aggressive forces of Russia; still others returned with socialist ideas against property and Christian morality, and therefore find their triumph in the destruction of churches and the suppression of Christian feeling among the people 21." We have similar phenomena too. And our youth are rebelling against the Orthodox Church, as a force supposedly hostile to culture. And it becomes inexpressibly difficult for this enmity between the two forces; she is the fruit of a sad misunderstanding. The benefit of individual cultural individuals and humanity lies in the harmony of these forces, and not in enmity. N. Zaozersky. During this captivity, His Eminence Dositheus completed a wonderful work - a Slavic translation of the ancient monument of Christian writing Λιατα ϒ αί τάν ά ϒ ίων Αποστόλων. In the library of the Kievosophy Cathedral there is an excellent manuscript of this translation, which we will try to publish in a short time. Author. Arseny Bishop of Pskov: Monographs and Research, pp. 52–53. At the same time, these were aristocrats who belonged to the ancient boyar family of Boldur. Monographs and Research, p. 348. Monograph. and Research, pp.351–352 Monograph. and Research, pp. 355–356 Monograph. and Research, pp. 374–375 Monograph. and research, p. 395 That is, a movement for the political unification of the two principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia into one kingdom of Romania. This was the name of the monasteries subordinate to the Patriarchate of Constantinople or other Greek churches. Monograph. and Research, pp. 397–399 Monograph. and Research, pp. 419–422 Monograph and research. page 423. Monograph. and research, p. 254 Monograph. and Research, pp. 437–439 Monograph. and Research, pp. 404–405 Monograph. and research, p. 407 Monograph. and research, p. 415 Monograph. and Research, pp. 419–420 Monograph. and research, p. 454 Monograph. and Research, pp. 479–480 You might be interested in: