II. Состояние церкви по внутреннему устройству

A) State of spiritual enlightenment and teaching The first teachers of the Orthodox faith were our first shepherds, the Greeks and partly the southern Slavs 109. There is no doubt that among them there were a lot of educated men, especially among Metropolitans and Bishops: for to preach the Gospel in a new country, prudence always forced them to choose people who were the most capable and prepared for such an important task; and it is not without reason that some of our chronicles call those Greek priests who were sent out by St. Vladimir in all Russian cities and villages 110. It may even be that many of these shepherds, preaching the word of God orally, also presented their sermons in writing. But only a few and small works of our five then-Metropolitans, who were from the Greeks, have reached us: Leontius, John II, Nicephorus I, John IV and Cyril I. The first is attributed to the letter to the Latins on unleavened bread, stored in the Moscow Synodal Library in two copies 111. The authenticity of this message is guaranteed by: a) the fact that it was sent to Russia from the Patriarch of Jerusalem Dositheus, who died already at the beginning of the 17th century 112, and therefore, sent at a time when there was no incentive to forge such a work and attribute it to the ancient Russian Metropolitan, and from such a person in whom it is difficult to imagine the very (moral) possibility of forgery; b) the fact that both copies of the message, indeed, do not date back to the 18th or 17th centuries, when Dositheos lived, but to the 14th century 113; c) finally - the incorruptible testimony of the apostate from Orthodoxy Lev Allatsiya, who devoted himself wholeheartedly to Latinism, who himself saw the last copy of this message, even wrote out its beginning 114, and considers it to be the work of Leo or Leontius the Russian Metropolitan 115. The work of John II is recognized as one message, found in various lists of the Helmsman's book, and printed in the first part of Russian Monuments under the title: John the Russian Metropolitan, called the Prophet of Christ, who wrote the Church Rule from the Holy Books in brief to Iakov Chernoritz; but is recognized only with a probability of 116. Metropolitan Nikephoros wrote two beautiful letters to Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh: one about the Latins, how they were rejected from the Eastern Church 117, and the other about fasting and abstinence of feelings 118, and another (handwritten) teaching on the week of raw food 119. From the writings of John IV, only a reply letter to the Pope of Rome, who asked him about the essence of faith, has survived 120. Finally, from Metropolitan Kirill I, known as the philosopher, about whom the chronicles testify that he “was taught many languages ​​and sciences, theology, philosophy and all wisdom, for which he became very famous,” only a few words survived between the manuscripts of the Joseph Volokolamsk Monastery 121. Meanwhile, with the assistance of our first shepherds, the Slavs and Greeks, schools appeared in Rus' to train shepherds of the Church from among the very Russians. Many of these initial seedbeds of enlightenment, on the advice of Metropolitan Michael, were started by St. Vladimir at the parish churches, entrusting the education of children to the priests of those churches and clerks 122; and on the advice of Metropolitan Leonty, according to Strykovsky 123, he even established two school monasteries. The wise Yaroslavl, distinguished by his love of education, while still a prince in Novgorod (1010–1016), started a school there, in which up to 300 youths, children of the clergy and boyars studied 124. Having become the Grand Duke, in all likelihood, he did the same in many other cities, as one can guess: a) from the words of the teacher. Nestor: “Yaroslavl... created by St. Sofia... and other churches were established by city and by place, and appointing priests, and giving them a lesson from their estate, telling them to teach people” 125, and b) from the fact that in Kursk, before 1032, there were already teachers from whom the teacher studied. Theodosius, still a youth, together with other children 126. Under 1097, professor. Nestor seems to be talking about himself that he went to Vladimir in Volyn to supervise schools and instruct teachers 127. The memorable zealot of education, Smolensk Prince Roman Rostislavich, not wanting to have unlearned shepherds in his principality, devoted all his wealth to the establishment of schools and the maintenance of mentors, so that, after his death in 1180, there was nothing even to bury him with, and the grateful Smolyans saw the need to make voluntary offerings for this, and at their expense to bury their beloved Prince 128. The multi-learned Yaroslavl Vladimirovich Prince of Galicia (died in 1188), jealous of the improvement of the church clergy, the eradication of superstition among the people and the spread of the right faith, charged the Monnoris with the duty of teaching children the sciences and devoting part of the monastery income to this 129. Another, equally enlightened of his time, Prince Konstantin Vsevolodovich of Rostov, called wise by his contemporaries, transferred the ancient Yaroslavl school, located at one of the monasteries, to his own courtyard, supported it and the teachers at his own expense, and at his death (in 1218) bequeathed to him his entire house, many volosts for the maintenance of teachers, and his entire library, rare at that time, 130 containing more than a thousand Greek books, although soon (1228), unfortunately, this school with its entire courtyard and library became a victim of flame. The subjects of instruction in these schools were: a) without any doubt, Slavic reading and writing, in accordance with the very place and purpose of the establishment of the schools; b) Greek alphabet and grammar: this is clearly confirmed by the words of the chronicle, according to which in the Novgorod school a certain Ephraim, a student of Bishop Joachim, taught children the Greek language 131, and also in the Smolensk and Yaroslavl schools, among other mentors, there were Greek teachers 132; c) Latin language: among the teachers of Smolensk schools, Latin 133 are also mentioned; d) the law of God, the church charter and musical singing: this was also required by the very purpose of establishing schools; e) finally, in all likelihood, the beginnings of other higher sciences, at least in some schools, such as: Rhetoric, Logic, History and Theology 134. In these schools, indeed, many quite educated and learned people were brought up, some of whom were even, by the standards of that time, wise philosophers and marvels 135 . But of all of them, only a few are known to us. Known: The Society of Translators, gathered at the St. Sophia Cathedral by Grand Duke Yaroslav, most likely, was made up of students from our own schools. On his instructions, it accomplished two important things: it translated many books from Greek into Slavic, which served as the basis for the first Kiev-Sophia library in our country, and compiled many books for teaching the people, perhaps catechisms and other textbooks needed in schools 136. Metropolitan Hilarion (died in 1071), who is now credited with: a) an exposition of the faith, written by him, at his ordination to the rank of Archpastor of the Russian Church, and b) two words showing in the author a deep knowledge of Christianity, a bright and educated mind, a strong religious feeling and, at the same time, the art of oratory 137. Venerable Theodosius (died 1074), second Abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, born in the city of Vasilkov and educated in Kursk. This monk owns - a) many instructive words to the brethren and people, of which one more extensive one is printed in the first part of the Sophia Temporary 138, and the rest are partly in the Pechersk Patericon, partly in other collections of handwritten 139, and b) a response to the Grand Duke Izyaslav about the Varangian faith, found in some old written patericons 140. Luke Zhidyata (died 1059), Bishop of Novgorod, originally from Novgorod, in which, in all likelihood. He was also educated, a very learned man and a translator of many church books from Greek into Slavic. Nowadays he is credited with only one lesson to the brethren 141. Lecturer Nestor (1056–1115), the father of Russian History, who acquired his education either in Novgorod 142 or in the Kiev Pechersk Lavra, where he arrived in his youth (at the age of 17), and where he spent his entire life in the labors of asceticism and chronicle writing. In addition to the Russian Chronicle, which he brought up to 1110, which shows in the author a sound natural mind and a wide variety of information, Nestor also owns: a) a legend about the life, death and miracles of St. martyrs Boris and Gleb, and b) the life of St. Theodosius, which served as the beginning for the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon: two more wonderful works of the narrative kind, imbued with warm religious feeling and living faith 143. Daniel, the Russian Abbot, who composed an extremely curious and pious description of his journey through St. places in Palestine, called Pilgrim, which he made at the beginning of the 12th century, as can be guessed from the very content of this work 144. Nifont (died 1157), Bishop of Novgorod, according to Tatishchev, one of the successors of Nesterova’s chronicle from 1116 to 1157, describing mainly the events of Volyn, where he was abbot for several times. His answers to some questions of the Novgorod Deacon and Domestic Kirik 145 are also known. John the priest, and then, as some believe, the first Archbishop of Novgorod (died 1186), is also Nesterov’s successor and author of the chronicle, mainly the Novgorod one. In the monuments of Russian literature of the 12th century one can see two church rules established by this Saint, together with the Bishop of Belgorod: the first, about the Priest’s forgetting to pour wine into the chalice, and the second, about the eating of a lamb by a mouse; as well as up to 28 answers to questions from the same inquisitive Kirik 146. St. Cyril, Bishop of Turov (died in the last quarter of the 12th century), our ancient teacher of gold, as the Prologue puts it about him, shone in Russia more than anyone else and enlightened the ends of Russia with his radiant teaching 147 . To great regret, of the many writings of this saint, only twelve eloquent words have been discovered to this day, of which three are attributed to him by one guess, up to ten prayers, distorted by copyists in syllable and often even in meaning, and three more articles: a) a legend about the monk rank... b) a story with a parable about a white man... and c) a parable about the human soul and about telesi... 148 Some of these small works, indeed, are of high dignity, both in external form and in content, and would not at all be unworthy of Chrysostom himself. Simon (d. 1226), the first Bishop of Vladimir, another of the successors of Nesterova’s chronicle, especially concerning the affairs of the Rostov and Suzdal region, a teaching and bookish man. He also wrote a very historically important message to the Monk of Pechersk Polycarp, which contains two main subjects: short lives of several saints of the Kiev-Pechersk, combined into one whole, and a legend about the miraculous construction of the great Pechersk church. This message served as the main basis for the entire first part of the current printed Kiev-Pechersk Patericon 149. Polycarp, a Monk of Kiev-Pechersk, to whom Simon wrote the mentioned letter, and who himself, following the model of this letter, wrote another letter to Archimandrite Akindinus of Pechersk, where he outlined the lives of some other Kyiv ascetics, which he heard from Simon 150. This message served as the main basis for the last part of the Kiev-Pechersk printed Patericon. A new society of translators, which was maintained by the Rostov Prince Konstantin Vsevolodovich. It was engaged, at his command, in translating Greek books, with which his library was so rich 151. However, no matter how numerous our spiritual writings of that time were, from them we can see, at least in general terms, the then state of Orthodox teaching in our Church. The Dogmatic Teaching can be seen: 1) in two brief statements of faith, one of which was taught to St. Vladimir upon his baptism in Kherson 152, and another was compiled by Metropolitan Hilarion. In these expositions it is proposed: a) to believe in the sacrament of St. Trinity, into the sacrament of incarnation and redemption and into the ever-virginity of the Mother of God, exactly as the Orthodox Church has always taught and teaches about this; b) take seven St. sacraments; c) accept church traditions; d) worship honest icons and the honest Cross, St. relics and sacred vessels; e) follow in all respects the seven Ecumenical Councils, with all their laws and rules. 2) In many places in the writings of the Saint of Turov and the chronicle of Rev. Nestor. For example teaching: a) about the origin and fall of man, also about the entire economy of our salvation: this is set out in detail in the speech of the Greek Philosopher to Vladimir, transmitted to us by Nestor; b) about the reasons for the incarnation of the Son of God: these reasons, according to St. Cyril, the mercy of God the Father for the fallen human race, the love of the Son himself for man, and the dignity of the image of God in man 153; c) about the fruits of the Savior’s death on the cross: with such fruits the Saint of Turov recognizes the nailing of human sins on the cross, the destruction of the curse that man bore on his forehead since his fall, the victory over death and the ancient serpent, the removal of the universal Adam from hell, the renewal of man, his elevation to heaven and the deification of his nature 154; d) about good and evil angels. Angel, says the teacher. A chronicler assigned to every land, let him observe it, even if it were unfaithful; among Christians, each one already has his own special Guardian Angel 155; and the Saint of Turov, also confessing the existence of a good Angel with every believer, admits at the same time that each of us is, as it were, assigned to an evil special angel, who assumes power over us as soon as we indulge in vices 156; e) about the descent of Jesus Christ into hell: Christ entered hell for this reason, argues St. Cyril, in order to free the souls imprisoned there, and really freed them with his cross and death, with which he killed death and trampled the kingdom of demons 157; f) about ordeals and private trials: this is revealed by the Saint of Turov in all detail 158; g) about the state of the souls of those who died before the general judgment: souls do not receive from this judgment, the Saint says the same, the final reward, although they already know their fate, and sinners are kept in a secluded place 159; h) about the resurrection of the body, which is proved by St. Cyril first in clear places St. Scripture, and then by reasoning about the omnipotence of God 160; i) about universal judgment, eternal bliss of the righteous and eternal punishment of sinners: this is clearly stated in the speech of the Greek philosopher to Vladimir; i) about the relics of the Saints: “if you see the miraculous relics of the Saints, do not do the wrong thing with your soul, teaches St. Kirill, but understand God’s grace, thus glorifying His saints: glorifying Me, I say, I will glorify 161 “and so on…. Moral teaching can be seen: a) in the teaching to the brethren of Novgorod Bishop Luke Zhidyata, where in brief words all the most important rules of Christian moral teaching are contained; b) in many edifying reflections found in the chronicles of the teacher. Nestor; c) in the message of Metropolitan Nikifor to the Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh - about fasting, where, in addition to other instructions, it is mainly instilled in the Prince not to trust slanderers; d) in many words, especially in the parables of St. Kirill Turovsky. Ascetic teaching a) in the instructions of the teacher. Theodosius, who taught his brethren: unceasing prayer, guarding oneself from evil thoughts, deep humility and obedience, abstinence from overeating and sleep, physical hard work both to strengthen the strength of the body and spirit, and to gain food, etc.; b) in the legend about the Black Ribs, the rite of St. Turov: here it is instilled in those coming from the world to the monastery: “first of all in the art of being; listen to your image and life and know yourself; not to have one’s own will, to plunge one’s entire self into submission; endure tribulations and struggle; to surrender oneself to a husband who has the spirit of Christ, cutting off all one’s will; abstain from everything, etc.” 162 The teaching is polemical, directed exclusively against the Roman Church: a) in the letter to Latin of Metropolitan Leontius, denouncing them for the use of unleavened bread; b) in the church rule of Metropolitan John II, who looks at the papists almost as pagans because they are not baptized through immersion in St. font, but through pouring, and therefore when converting them he commands to immerse the convert; further prohibits the Russian princes from marrying off their daughters to them, and all Orthodox Christians from even having communication with them in order to avoid temptation; c) in the answer Vel. To Prince Izyaslav, teacher. Theodosius, who calls the Varangian faith an evil faith and an unclean law, and then lists various innovations of the papists; d) in many places in the Chronicle of Nesterov, where the teachings of the Latins are called corrupt teachings 163; e) in the letter about the Latins of Metropolitan Nicephorus to Vel. To Prince Vladimir Monomakh: having listed and briefly refuted up to twenty deviations of Roman Christians from Orthodoxy, the writer concludes: “those who divided the wines and many others rejected it from the holy Church”; f) and finally in the response letter of Metropolitan John III to the Pope of Rome, where our high priest denounces the Roman Church, mainly, of six errors, and very thoroughly refutes all these errors on the basis of the Holy. traditions and teachings of Ecumenical and local councils. The canonical teaching is in the church canon of Metropolitan John II and in the answers of our Novgorod Hierarchs to the questions of the famous Cleric. Metropolitan John pronounces in this rule excommunication from the Church for those who “without labor and without fear and without shame have two wives,” who perform sorcery and sorcery, who eat demons, swamps and wells, who enter into marriage without a church blessing and dissolve it arbitrarily, who never partake of St. secrets, marry relatives in the fourth degree, etc. However, he commands that all such criminals be excommunicated from the Church not suddenly, but after they stubbornly remain in their sins, despite all the instructions and admonitions from the shepherds of the Church. He also utters an eruption against the priest who gave the blessing to the husband to marry his third wife, and in general makes some comments and instructions regarding the behavior of clergy and monastics; regarding old icons, crosses and altars, which he commands to have in full respect, and in case of need, bury them in the ground in church fences and other decent places, and not burn them; regarding food, prohibiting eating animals and birds that have been torn to pieces and strangled, etc. In the answers of the Novgorod saints, it is allowed, for example, a) a husband and wife to bear part of the penance for each other; b) the priest, if necessary, serves the Liturgy, even if he does not have to attend Matins and Vespers; c) commands that prosphora should only be baked for a clean wife; d) baptize a person who himself does not know whether he is baptized or not, etc.; e) it is prohibited to bury after sunset; who gave birth before 40 days to enter the church; wash antiminds... and so on. 164 Theological-historical teaching - in the chronicle of the teacher. Nestor and his successors, as well as in all the biographies of the saints of Pechersk: a true Christian teaching, in which the most correct, biblical view of all events in the physical, political and moral world prevails everywhere. It is clear that our writers, just as they themselves were deeply convinced of God’s fatherly providence over the human race, also wanted to instill this in their readers at every opportunity. God, they said, erects kingdoms and destroys them, raises up kings and brings down; Through His permission there are devastating wars and terrible civil strife. He sends famine and pestilence, poverty and drought to the earth for our sins; He, like a father, punishes and has mercy on us, depending on whether we are in sinful bitterness or humble ourselves before Him like obedient children. Our time books written in this spirit, always constituting one of the favorite readings for our ancestors, greatly contributed to the education and strengthening of religious feeling in them. Finally, it must be added that, in addition to the writings of Russian pastors, our ancestors also used other important guidance for edifying themselves in the Orthodox faith and morality: we mean the translations of the ancient saints. Fathers. One might think that we already had quite a few such translations back then: because even to this day lists of some of them from the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries have been preserved; eg List of thirteen words of St. Gregory of Theology of the 11th or 12th century 165 ; lists of the Psalter, with interpretations of St. Athanasius of Alexandria and Blessed. Theodoret of the 11th and 12th centuries 166, the theology of St. John of Damascus 11th and 12th centuries 167, Ladders of St. John Climacus of the 12th century 168, sixteen catechumens of St. Cyril of Jerusalem XIII century 169, books called Izbornik, from many Fathers interpreted, interpreted, XIII century 170, and others. B) State of worship Churches of God arose in our fatherland as quickly as Christianity spread in it. St. Vladimir, according to the chronicle, ordered to build churches and bring people to baptism in all cities and villages 171. Yaroslav, another zealous distributor of St., also built many churches in cities and villages. faith between their subjects 172. Many churches, out of zeal for the faith, were erected by other princes, especially Vladimir Monomakh, Yuri Dolgoruky and his son Andrei Bogolyubsky, Vsevolod III, Konstantin Vsevolodovich, Rostislav Mstislavich and David Rostislavich Smolensky 173; and after the princes, Metropolitans, bishops and some private wealthy people 174. And all this happened so quickly that in Kyiv alone, even in the days of Equal-to-the-Apostles Vladimir, according to the testimony of his contemporary Dietmar and the Eckardian Chronicle of Saxony, there were already from 300 to 400 churches 175, and in 1124, when almost all of Kyiv burned down, according to our ancient national chronicle, about 600 churches burned down there 176; Likewise, in Vladimir (on the Klyazma), in 1185, 32 churches burned down, although this city then counted only 70 years of its existence (founded 1114); seven years later (in 1193), 14 more churches burned down, although the fire affected only half of the city; six years later (in 1199) another 16 during a fire that also affected only half of the city; finally, twenty-eight years later (in 1227) another 27,177. Some of the most noteworthy churches of that time include: Arranged at St. Vladimir: a) church in the name of St. Martyr Turov (probably Theodore Tiron), which was erected on the site of the baptism of the Kyivans, which was called a holy place at that time, and which the Degree Book calls the first in Russia after the baptism of Vladimir; b) a church built by the enlightener of our fatherland in the name of his Angel, St. Basil, on the Kiev hill, where Perun formerly stood and where now, as they think, the Tresvyatitelskaya Church stands; c) the Tithe stone church in the name of the Most Holy. Mother of God, founded in 989, on the site where the courtyard of the first Christian martyrs in Rus' was, and built by Greek artists, and d) the Church of the Transfiguration of the Lord, erected by St. Vladimir in 996 in the city of Vasilevo, according to a vow for salvation from the Pechenegs 178. Built after St. Vladimir under other princes: a) a church in the name of the Most Holy Theotokos in Tmutarakan, erected by the appanage Prince Mstislav, in memory of the special help he received from the reverend. Virgins, during his duel with the Circassian Prince Rededey; b) the Cathedral of St. Savior in Chernigov, founded there by the Prince, the oldest of all churches currently existing in Russia; c) the famous St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv, created by Yaroslav, on the model of the Cathedral of Constantinople, in memory of the great victory over the Pechenegs, on the site of the battle itself, the second oldest among those existing today; d) St. Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod, founded by Yaroslav’s son, Vladimir, is now the third oldest in our fatherland; e) St. Michael's Cathedral in Pereyaslavl, built by Metropolitan Ephraim; f) St. Sophia Cathedral in Smolensk, erected in 1101 by Vladimir Monomakh; g) stone cathedral church in the name of St. Michael with a golden dome, built (in 1108) in the Kiev-Mikhailovsky Monastery. Prince Svyatopolk; h) the richest Vladimir Cathedral in the name of the Most Holy. Virgins, built by Andrei Bogolyubsky (about 1158), who called German craftsmen to build it; i) also the richest Smolensk Cathedral in the name of St. Michael, built (at the end of the 12th century) by the local prince David Rostislavich, and also the equally rich Rostov Cathedral - in the name of the Most Holy. Virgin Mary, renewed and decorated in 1231 by the local Bishop Cyril 179. Thus, it is revealed that the motivation for building churches, in addition to the need for them for Christians, was very often among our ancestors feelings of gratitude to the Lord and His Most Holy One. Mothers for their special mercies, and feelings of the most ardent zeal for faith, which forced the builders to take all measures to take care of the splendor and wealth of the houses of God. It is also clear that the places for their construction were chosen with Christian prudence, such as: places where idols had previously stood, from which it was now necessary to raise the mind and heart of the people to the true God; sacred places for new Christians, such as: the place of their baptism and the place stained with the blood of the first holy martyrs in our homeland; finally, places of special blessings of God, as is known from the construction of the Kiev-Sophia Cathedral. It is impossible not to notice that our first Christians had a special zeal for the Most Holy One. To the Virgin Mother of God, to whom they dedicated almost all of their best churches: in this, without a doubt, zeal, passed on from our ancestors and to all Orthodox descendants, we should primarily look for the reason and special protection of the Queen of Heaven, which at all times she so visibly showed over our fatherland. The sacred times, without any doubt, from the very beginning were accepted by our Church the same as they were in the Greek Church; but in addition, we have established some of our own festivals, which are: Day of consecration of the church (November 26) in the name of the Great Martyr George in Kyiv. The reason for its establishment, in all likelihood, was the special significance of this church both for V.K. Yaroslav, and for our Archpastors: it is known that this church was built by Yaroslav in honor of his Angel and was designated for the dining of Russian Bishops. This could also be accompanied by the importance of St. Day itself. George in civilian life: St. George's Day, as it was called among the people, has long been the limit of all autumn work for us, the time for collecting taxes, ending the war, etc., etc. as if predisposing to some kind of celebration 180. The day of the transfer of the venerable relics (May 9) of St. Nicholas from Myra Lycia, on the occasion of the extreme devastation of Lycia by the Saracens, to the Apulian city of Bar, in which Roman Catholics and Orthodox Greeks then lived 181. This holiday was established in our country by Metropolitan Ephraim (1091–1096), and was established not out of any respect for the papal bull and unity with the Roman Church, as the papists want, but solely out of the greatest respect for the saint of God Nicholas. For - a) we did not have unity (union) with the Roman Church at that time: this was clearly evidenced ten years later (in 1207) by Pope Innocent III himself in his letter to our Bishops, clergy and people, telling them: hitherto you were removed from your mother’s breasts, like alien children, and then convincing them to submit to the Roman seat 182...; b) it is not known from anywhere that the then Pope Urban II took care to establish this holiday for all his flock and issued some kind of bull for this purpose 183: on the contrary, it is undoubtedly known that in some churches subordinated to the Roman tiara, this holiday was not celebrated and is not celebrated 184; next, if between the Apulians themselves and their neighbors, he certainly became famous from the very transfer of the relics of the Pleasant of God, i.e. since 1087 185, then, no doubt, only as a local holiday; c) and since it is not clear from anywhere that the pope then cared about the spread of this holiday even in the churches under his jurisdiction, it is all the more unfair to assert that for this very purpose he sent to us his own, some Greek Metropolitan Theodore with the relics in 1091 186, when the chronicles say nothing about the purpose of the embassy; d) The Russians, instructed in the faith by the Greeks, among whom St. Nicholas, even from the day of his death, was in the greatest respect for his many miracles, while in the Roman Church until the transfer of his relics he was barely known and little revered 187 - The Russians, having, in addition, experienced, even before this transfer, the repeated miracles of the saint of God in Kyiv itself 188, to such an extent began to reverence him, that, in addition to the designated holiday, they decided to perform a service for him weekly on Thursday, which the Roman Church does not allow 189. Day of Transfer of Relics (May 2) of St. Martyrs Boris and Gleb in the Vyshgorod Church of St. Michael, - a transfer that was performed very solemnly by Metropolitan George, in the presence of many of our archpastors and pastors, with the active participation of the Princes themselves - Izyaslav of Kiev, Svyatoslav of Chernigov and Vsevolod of Pereyaslavl, and which was accompanied by many miracles 190. Memory of the teacher Theodosius of Pechersk, established as a result of many miracles from St. his relics, according to unanimous desire, he led. Prince, Metropolitan, Pechersk monks and all the people. The memory of this St. The marriage of the husband is celebrated by the Church on May 3 and August 14,191. Memory of St. Leonty, Bishop of Rostov, on the occasion of the discovery of his relics incorrupt in 1164 May 23,192. Finding the relics of St. (Vsevolod) Gabriel Mstislavich, Prince of Pskov, around 1193 November 27 193. The origin of the honorable trees and the life-giving Cross (on the 1st day of August). On this memorable day he led. Our Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, entering into battle with the Bulgarians, and the Greek Emperor Manuel, attacking the Saracens, both saw their regiments overshadowed by the light emanating from the Cross of the Lord and from the icons that were with the army, and both had complete success over the enemies. After mutual notification of both winners about such a miracle, this holiday was established in both the Greek and Russian Churches 194. Feast of the Sign of the Blessed Virgin Mary (November 27), on the occasion of the miraculous liberation, through her intercession, of Novgorod from the siege of V.K. Andrei Bogolyubsky 195. Having received from the Greek Orthodox Church St. celebrations, our Church received from her and St. fasts that were generally observed by our ancestors with the greatest jealousy. Unfortunately, around that time, strong disputes arose in Greece about fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays, when on these days there is a feast of the Lord or some deliberate Saint. These disputes, which worried the Greek Church especially in the 11th and 12th centuries, about half of the latter, also appeared here in Russia. First, they were started in Rostov by two Bishops, Nestor and Leonty, then they penetrated into Kyiv and spread throughout the southern region, where the Kiev-Pechersk Archimandrite Polycarp, Bishop Anthony of Chernigov, the Kiev Metropolitan himself, many other Bishops, some princes and very many people of all classes took an active part in them. The essence of the disputes was as follows: the dioceses of Rostov, Chernigov, with their princes, and several other bishops adhered to the idea that fasting on Wednesday and Friday should be allowed, as soon as any of the Lord's and special Saints' holidays occur on these days, and also during the entire Pentecost: these are the thoughts of the Rostov priest Theodore and the Kiev-Pechersk Archimandrite Polycarp. Others, although their number was smaller, argued that in no case should such permission be allowed: the opinion of the Rostov Bishop Leon. The opinion of our Metropolitans, supported by the Patriarchal, was that for the holidays of the Nativity of Christ and Epiphany. It is permissible for the laity to eat meat, and for the monks to eat fish and other foods that are allowed to them; but on other holidays, in similar circumstances, such permission would be a violation of the commandment to fast. These disputes outraged our Church for about 10 years from 1157 to 1168), served as a temptation for many Orthodox Christians, and, remaining unresolved even at the Kiev Council of 1168, were revealed more than once in subsequent times, although not to the same extent 196. The entire order of external worship and sacred rites, the image of the celebration of St. sacraments and all church rituals came to us with St. faith from Greece: for from there were our first clergy, and from there our liturgical books were borrowed. However, some of the church and priestly services. songs were composed in our Church: let us only remember the creator of the canons, the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Georgy, a contemporary of the teacher. Nestor 197, and about the service to Equal-to-the-Apostles Vladimir, which, as can be seen from its very content, was undoubtedly written even before the Tatar enslavement 198. Only, without any doubt, according to the ancient law and custom of the Church, these songs and services were accepted for church use and included in the liturgical books only with the permission of the Metropolitan or the primates of the Church in general, and not at all at the discretion of each individual believer 199 . It goes without saying that Slavic translations of liturgical books did not come to us from Greece. Those of these books that the Slavic first teachers Cyril and Methodius did not have time to translate, in all likelihood, were translated little by little, and sometimes only corrected either in Bulgaria and other Slavic lands, or here: either by the society of translators under Yaroslav, then by the society of scientists under Constantine the Wise, or by some private scholars. It is impossible to determine with complete accuracy the whole matter of this translation. But we would be extremely unfair if we began to deny the existence in our country at that time of this or that liturgical book in the Slavic language solely because its lists or any other documents have not reached us since that time 200 . We also cannot say anything definite whether any books of St. were translated in our country at that time. Scriptures, or were not; because the question of how to understand the testimony of John, Exarch of Bulgaria, about the translation of the sixty statutory books of St. Cyril and Methodius: - Do these books mean only the canonical books of St. Scriptures, or together and non-canonical 201. If the latter, that is, if the entire Bible was translated by the first Slavic teachers, then there is nothing to talk about translating any of its books in our own country 202 . But on this score, only modest guesses are possible so far, and not decisive evidence 203. Church singing was brought to us first by our first shepherds, the Greeks, and, according to the chronicle of Joachim 204, by the Bulgarians: this is also indicated by two tunes, known from ancient times in our Church under the names of Greek and Bulgarian. Since 1053, there has been a significant improvement in our church singing: then, the chronicle notes, three skilled singers from Greece came to us from their generations and spread in Russia angelic singing, considerable octal voices, especially tripartite sweet voices and the most red demestial (from δομεϭτιϰος) singing 205 . Subsequently, talented singers 206 from Greece did not stop coming to us: thus, in the first half of the 12th century, Manuel (elected Bishop of Smolensk in 1137) came with two of his comrades, and taught his art to the Russians. By chance, the names of two domestics have been preserved to us and from the Russians, Stefan, who was the former Abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk after the teacher. Theodosius 207, and Kirik, who was a deacon of the Novgorod Anthony Monastery in 1134, and several stichirari of that time survived 208. Our ancient legends are rather scant about sacred things, both those that were then used in our church during services and for the splendor of churches, and those that constituted objects of reverence and worship for Christians. Here is some news regarding St. icons Equal-to-the-Apostles Olga brought with her from Constantinople the honorable cross and St. icons, along with other saints. things 209. This cross, with the inscription: the Russian land was renewed to God by holy baptism, which was received by the blessed Princess Olga, was kept for a long time in the altar of the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral, but later it disappeared unknown where 210. Many St. Equal-to-the-Apostles Vladimir brought icons and honorable crosses with him from Kherson, and gave them to the Tithe Church. Among these icons were: a) the image of the all-merciful Savior and b) the image of the Mother of God, which were later transferred by Vladimir himself to Novgorod, and from here by John IV to Moscow, to the Assumption Cathedral, where they still stand in the altar behind the throne; also, c) the image of the Holy One in Jerusalem. Theotokos, according to ancient legend, written by St. The apostles in the fifteenth summer, after the ascension of the Savior, in Gethsemane: he was taken from Kherson by St. Vladimir to Novgorod, and from here John IV to Moscow, to the Assumption Cathedral, where, during the invasion of Napoleon, it was stolen, and is now preserved only in a faithful ancient list 211. Greek skilled craftsmen, miraculously sent from Blachernae to Rus' to create the large Kiev-Pechersk Church (about 1073), brought with them the miraculous icon of the Dormition of the Most Holy One. The Mother of God, which was handed to them by the Mother of God herself, who appeared to them before departure, bequeathing: “let that vicar be.” This icon, indeed, remains local in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra to this day 212. In 1046 received from Greece by the Prince of Chernigov. Vsevolod Yaroslavich, then inherited by Vladimir Monomakh, the icon of St. Theotokos Hodegetria, now known under the name of the Smolensk Mother of God. This icon, according to ancient legend, is considered to be the first painted by St. Evangelist Luke, and is still kept in the Smolensk Cathedral Church of the Assumption of the Most Holy. Mother of God 213. At the beginning of the 12th century, Vladimir Monomakh was brought from Constantinople by the Ephesian Metropolitan Neophyte a life-giving cross from the life-giving tree itself, on which the only begotten Son, the Word of God, was crucified in the flesh for the sake of our salvation, as evidenced by the inscription made on the top board of the icon case of this cross. It (under the name of the Monomakh Cross) is now kept in the sacristy of the Moscow Annunciation Cathedral 214. Around the half of the 12th century, another icon of the Mother of God, painted, according to legend, by the Evangelist Luke, was brought from Constantinople to Russia by the guest Pirogoshcheya. Initially, this icon was placed in Vyshgorod in the Devichy Monastery, then (1155) it was transferred by Andrei Bogolyubsky to the magnificent Church of the Mother of God in Vladimir, and since then it has been known among us under the name of Vladimir; now it is located in Moscow 215. In the second half of the 12th century, professor. Euphrosyne, Princess of Polotsk, through a special ambassador, asked the Greek Emperor Manuel and Patriarch Luke Chrysovergo for an icon of the Ephesian Mother of God, painted, according to legend, by the Evangelist Luke 216, and placed it in the Church of the Savior. Where is this icon now? Of the various answers, the most likely is the one found in the written act of the Toropets Cathedral: it says that when in 1239 good. Prince Alexander Nevsky was married in Toropets to the daughter of the Polotsk prince Bryachislav, then this princess took with her from Polotsk the Ephesian Icon of the Mother of God for the wedding and placed it in the Toropets Cathedral Church: it is still located here today under the name of Korsun 217. In 1161, the Monk Euphrosyne brought a gift to the Polotsk Spassky Monastery of St. Cross. This cross, which contains some precious monuments of the suffering of Christ, particles from the relics of Saints and other objects of Christian reverence, according to local tradition, was built in Jerusalem, and then richly decorated by the venerable woman herself. He is intact to this day in the same monastery 218. Let us also mention some of the revealed miraculous icons that have become famous since that time, such as: a) the Novgorod miraculous icon of the Holy Sign. Mother of God, through whose intercession in 1170 Novgorod was miraculously saved from the attack of Andrei Bogolyubsky: now she is in the Novgorod cathedral church 219; b) about the miraculous icon of the Mother of God of Feodorovskaya, which appeared in 1239 and is still located in Kostroma 220; c) about the miraculous icon of St. Nicholas of Korsun or Zaraisk, who appeared in 1224, and is now in Zaraisk 221; d) about the miraculous icon of St. Nicholas, called the warrior, was located before the Tatar invasion in one monastery near the village of Korenka or Ustinka (Kursk province), and is now located in Belgorod 222. Various mosaic images in the Kiev-Sophia Cathedral, the St. Michael's Monastery and in other Kyiv churches, and paintings in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and other churches were made by artists called from Greece, from whom our compatriots tried to adopt the art of painting. The first and oldest Russian painter is the teacher. Alypiy Pechersky. He learned this art from the artists of Constantinople, who, under Hegumen Nikon, painted the great Pechersk Church, and one icon of him, as legend says, is still kept in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral 223. Regarding St. relics and remains of the Pleasants of God, it is known that we already had at that time: a) the relics of St. Pope Clement and his disciple Thebes, taken away by St. Vladimir from Kherson, probably with many other remains of Saints received by Vel. Prince in Kherson from the Greek and Roman ambassadors, and laid in the Tithe Church 224; b) the relics of St. Martyrs Artemia, Polyevkta, Leontius, Akakios, Arefas, Jacob and Theodore: they were brought around 1073 by architects who arrived from Constantinople for the construction of the Kiev-Pechersk Church in the name of the Most Holy. Mother of God and laid the foundation of this church 225; c) the relics of St. Equal-to-the-Apostles Olga, solemnly opened and transferred to the Tithe Church by Metropolitan Leonty with other clergy, in the presence of St. Vladimir and numerous people 226; d) the relics of St. martyrs Boris and Gleb, lying in the Vyshgorod St. Michael's Church: another time they were transferred from the wooden one to the new stone Vyshgorod church in 1115, at the request of Vladimir Monomakh, with an extraordinary gathering from all the most distant ends of Russia - princes, clergy, governors, boyars and common people 227; e) the relics of St. Theodosius of Pechersk, found incorrupt 17 years after his death, and in 1091 August 14 by the Council of Russian Bishops solemnly transferred from a distant cave to the new cathedral church of the Dormition founded by him. Mother of God; they were placed on the right side of the chapel; e) the relics of St. Great Martyr Barbara, transferred from Constantinople in 1110 by her wife Vel. Prince Michael Svyatopolk Varvara, daughter of the Greek Emperor Alexei Komnenos and laid in the St. Michael's Monastery, where they miraculously rest to this day 228; g) the relics of the Rostov enlighteners, Isaiah, found in 1162, and Leontius, found in 1164; h) the relics brought in 1218 by Bishop Vladimir of Polotsk to Vel. Prince Konstantin Vsevolodovich in Vladimir, and received with the greatest triumph: these were some part of the passion of the Lord, both hands of St. Martyr Loggin the Centurion and the relics of St. Mary Magdalene 229 ; i) the relics of some of the Kiev-Pechersk Saints, although it is not known which ones: for these relics, during the invasion of Batu, were hidden by the brethren of the Lavra, and then, after the dangers had passed, although they were taken out, not all of them, and accurate information about them from that time was not preserved 230. Here, finally, is some news regarding the utensils and decorations in our churches of that time. Our princes and princesses, and following their example, no doubt, their subjects, loved to endow the churches of God with rich and magnificent utensils, gold, pearls and other expensive stones 231. So, Yaroslavl decorated the St. Sophia Church with gold and silver and a church vessel 232. About the main church of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra we find the following evidence in the Synopsis: “this heaven-like church... all of gold, that is, gilded stones, various patterns and motleys, was wonderfully planted, and beautifully painted with icons; The entire church platform was planted with various containers (paints) with stones and all sorts of patterns; The domes were gilded byahu, and a cross was placed on the versa of the church of the Great Vagi, made from gold itself” 233. In the cathedral church of Vladimir, built by Andrei Bogolyubsky, there were silver chandeliers, gold and silver vessels, clothes embroidered in gold and studded with pearls, wonderful icons decorated with forged gold and expensive stone and great pearls, an pulpit upholstered in silver, and the church gates in gold, and the entire top was gilded 234. The same Andrei Bogolyubsky, to decorate the icon of the Ephesian Mother of God, forged into it more than thirty hryvnias of gold, in addition to silver and stone, precious stones and pearls 235. He also created the stone church in Bogolyubovo, in honor of the Nativity of St. Mother of God, surprised more than all the churches, he decorated it with valuable icons, gold and precious stones and great, priceless pearls..., gold and valuable vessels..., gold and silver chandeliers, pillars forged with gold..., and he gilded its five tops, bound the doors with gold... and so on, so that everyone who saw her marveled and did not found words to express their amazement 236. It would be unnecessary to give similar reviews about some of our other churches of that time 237. Among many other church-building princes, the wife of Grand Duke Vsevolod Georgievich, Maria, was then famous for her special generosity and wealth of gifts for decorating churches - for which, as well as for other deeds of piety, the chroniclers call her Elena of Russia, Theodora and the second Olga 238. From the very beginning, we adopted as the helmsman’s book for church government the same Nomocanon that guided the Greek Church. It was used among us then both in the Slavic translation and in the Greek original. The first is partially vouched for by the reference to the Nomocanon in the church statutes of St. Vladimir and Yaroslav, and more the testimony of the student of Maxim the Greek, the Novgord monk Zinovy (who lived around 1560), who in 52 and 53 of his conversations on the heresy of Theodosius the Oblique says that she herself saw the charate lists of the Slavic Helmsman, written under the Grand Dukes Yaroslav Vladimirovich and Izyaslav Yaroslavich, and even mentioned the contents of rules 16, 73 and 82 of these lists. For the latter - the fact that almost all of our first Metropolitans and very many Bishops, who were actually guided by the Nomocanon, were natural Greeks, who naturally, and sometimes even necessarily, preferred reading the original Greek rules to reading them in Slavic. It was used among us both in the form in which it came from the hands of the Patriarch of Constantinople John Scholasticus, and in the form given to him by another famous Patriarch of Constantinople, Photius. For the Slavic translation of the Helmsman originally came to us from the Bolgars, and there it was made soon after their conversion to Christianity, when the Nomocanon of Photius had not yet been accepted by the Church for use; on the other hand, the Metropolitan and Bishops who came to us from Greece, of course, brought with them, for their own guidance, a collection of church rules, which were then predominantly used in the Greek Church: and this was the Photios collection 239. On the basis of the Nomocanon, for our Church itself, St. Vladimir and Yaroslav have two special charters, where the subjects of church government are presented in a briefer and more specific outline. Both of these statutes, despite all their similarities, differ significantly from each other, and, despite some inconsistencies in them, without sufficient reason they are recognized by some as fraudulent. According to the statute of St. Vladimir, the actions of all Christians in general are subject to consideration and ecclesiastical judgment, on the one hand, but only a few, such as: a) all crimes against St. faith and the Church, idolatry, desecration of shrines, magic, poisons, church and grave crimes, etc.; b) all family unions, discords, duties and crimes, such as: marriages, divorces, adultery, fornication, abandonment of illegitimate children, incest, family fights, litigation about the division of estates and inheritances, disrespect for parents, etc.; c) all trade transactions carried out using weights and measures, or more precisely, the correctness or incorrectness of the weights themselves. And on the other hand, in particular the actions of clergy and church persons, and already all actions, except for those cases when these persons will be tried for crimes or litigation with the laity, and when a common court of ecclesiastical and civil judges was required to examine the case. The charter of Yaroslav differs from Vladimirov in that it is - a) about crimes against St. faith and the Church, as well as trade weights and measures, does not mention at all; b) family crimes: divorces, incest, insults to female chastity and, in general, offenses committed against the weaker sex, he lists them in much greater detail; c) subjects some new cases to the ecclesiastical court, such as: arson, cutting of the head or beard, certain types of theft, murder and murder; d) for each crime he assigns a special penalty, and determines how much of this penalty should go to the Bishop and how much to the prince, while in the charter of St. Vladimir, a fine for crimes is not a designation at all, and from it, no matter what faults it is paid for, one tenth is always assigned to the Bishop; e) mentions the Episcopal lords or judges, whom, following the example of the Greek Church, our Metropolitans and Bishops from the very beginning had in different cities of their dioceses, and to whom they entrusted the consideration of spiritual matters. Track. The charter of Yaroslav is nothing more than an addition and explanation of the charter of St. Vladimir. The authenticity of these statutes is partly guaranteed by the fact that the inconsistencies found in them, which gave reason to reject them, can either be eliminated or explained in their favor, and predominantly positive evidence is guaranteed 240. Such inconsistencies include: a) The beginning of the charter of St. Vladimir, where this prince says that he was baptized by Patriarch Photius (who had died 90 years earlier), and took from him the first metropolitan of Kyiv, Leontius 241. But instead of the name Leonty, the name of Michael 242 appears in many lists. The name of Patriarch Photius could have been included in the charter or due to a misunderstanding of the copyist, as Zachary Kopystensky believed, who mixed the baptism of the Kyivans under Photius and Emperor Basil the Macedonian with the baptism of Vladimirov, which also took place under Emperor Vasily II and his brother Constantine. And the most important thing is the remark that all this beginning can be considered a late addition: because in some lists, and the shortest ones at that, perhaps those closest to the original, there is no such beginning 243. b) The fact that in these statutes some cases are subordinated to the ecclesiastical court, which in Russian Pravda are submitted to the court of secular power, for example. in the charter of St. Vladimir - litigation of children and brothers about inheritance, in Yaroslavovo - cases of incendiary attacks, beatings, theft, etc. 244. In general, it can be noted that the Russian Truth was changed more than once after Yaroslav by later princes, who could very well transfer some laws from ancient church statutes to secular ones; in particular, regarding the law on inheritances, firstly, that it really is not in some lists of Russian Pravda 245, and secondly, that in those lists where it is found, it is expressed conditionally: (if the litigants want to ask the prince for a trial, and not the clergy...). c) In Yaroslav’s charter there is supposedly a disproportion in the price of fines with the importance of the crimes 246. But a great price of fines could deliberately be assigned for small vices, which were only too prevalent at that time, in order to stop the evil; this penalty could be changed from time to time by the princes, and in the lists of the charter by scribes; then they had their own concepts of justice, in many ways different from ours, as can be seen from many laws and the Russian Truth itself. d) Finally, the dissimilarity of different lists, especially the Vladimirov Charter, with each other, and the news of the style, according to which it is impossible to attribute them to the 11th or 10th century, but perhaps to the end of the 12th 247. But this dissimilarity and news only prove that the statutes, as being constantly in use, were at all times updated in style either at the discretion of the scribes, or by order of the Bishops themselves, for whom they were copied, as our scribes sometimes did with the Russian Truth and the Russian Chronicles. Positive evidence in defense of the authenticity of the charters we are considering can be indicated as follows: a) All cases and courts granted to the clergy in these statutes (except for a few that have already been mentioned) were completely silent in the then code of our civil laws - in Russian Pravda: why? Is it not most likely because in their reasoning there already existed a special church code? b) St. Vladimir and Yaroslav directly say in their statutes that they borrowed them from the Greek Nomocanon; and in the Nomocanon, precisely, all these matters are left to the ecclesiastical court, and the Nomocanon, undoubtedly, was accepted by our shepherds for guidance from the very beginning 248. The question arises: by what motive could our clergy invent false statutes, taking advantage of the rights already specified in them? c) What is spoken of in detail in the Vladimirov charter, although briefly, but quite intelligibly, is expressed in the chronicle: “and to him who prayed to him (i.e., Vladimir, after the construction of the Church of the Tithes), he said: I give to the church of this holy Mother of God a tenth of my property and from my cities, and write an oath in this church, the river: if anyone this one judges, let him be damned" 249 . Isn’t it obvious here that we are talking about a written charter, specifically concerning church courts, and providing tithes to the clergy? And this is the charter of Vladimirov. d) The statutes of Vladimir and Yaroslav are repeated, although somewhat in modified forms, and seem to be confirmed by other Russian princes of the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries, who gave similar statutes either to the entire Russian Church or to their local Bishops. These are the church charter of V.K. Vsevolod I (1078–1093), no doubt, to the entire Russian clergy, recently discovered, although not yet published 250; charter of the Novgorod Prince Svyatoslav Olgovich (1137) to the St. Sophia Cathedral 251, Prince of Smolensk Rostislav Mstislavich (1150) of the Smolensk bishopric 252, and others. e) It is undoubtedly known that the rights mentioned in the statutes of St. Vladimir and Yaroslav, our clergy enjoyed: for example, they enjoyed the right to supervise weights and measures, as shown by the charter of the Novgorod Prince Vsevolod (at the beginning of the 12th century) 253 and the agreement of the Smolensk Prince with the Gotlanders 254; judged disputes over inheritances until the very publication of the spiritual regulations, and so on. 255. On the basis of the Nomocanon, or more precisely, one (37th) of the Apostolic canons contained in it, which commands the convening of councils to consider the most important matters, there were councils in our Church 256. Exactly: Kyiv, convened by the Grand Duke Yaroslav in 1051. The purpose of this council was the election of a Metropolitan of their natural Russians; the motivation for this, according to the chronicle, was the war with the Greeks 257, which, although concluded peacefully in 1046, ended with the most inhumane act on the part of the Greek Emperor (who ordered to blind up to 800 Russian prisoners, along with the commander Vyshata himself, and then released them to their fatherland), remained, without a doubt, still very memorable in 1051 year both for all Russians, and especially for Vel. Prince 258 ; The fruit of the council was the elevation to the Metropolitan throne of the former priest of the Savior Church in the village of Berestov, famous for his learning and virtues, Hilarion. The time of continuation of the council, the number and names of the Bishops present at it remained unknown 259. Kiev, convened by order of the Grand Duke Izyaslav in 1147, again to elect a Metropolitan from the Russians, without relation to the Patriarch of Constantinople. The confusion that was occurring at that time on the patriarchal throne of Constantinople and, perhaps, the just displeasure of Vel. The prince against our former Metropolitan Michael, who voluntarily left Russia for Greece and died there, were the reason for the convening of this council. The assembled six, and according to the legend of the Patericon, nine Bishops, were first divided into two halves, of which one, following the opinion of the Novgorod Bishop Nifont, did not agree to elect a Metropolitan by the council, considering this matter to belong to one Constantinople Patriarch, and the other, the head of which was the Chernigov Bishop Onuphry, on the basis of the cathedral rules, argued the opposite, and little by little she bowed to herself all the hierarchs who disagreed with her, except Niphon alone 260. According to Vel. Prince, the recluse and schema-monk Kliment Smolyatich, famous for his extraordinary wisdom, was elected to the metropolis, and at the suggestion of Bishop Onufry. The newly elected one was ordained by the head of St. Clement, Pope of Rome, who was in Kyiv, in the image of the supposed installation of the Greek Patriarchs by the hand of St. John the Baptist 261. Kyiv, convened by Metropolitan Constantine in 1157 against Martin the heretic. At first, among the gathered shepherds there were those who were not ashamed to defend both the heretic and his teaching; but soon the detailed and thorough denunciation of all his errors by the Metropolitan forced these defenders to repent - and the council, unanimously recognizing Martin as heretics, decided, before his final trial, to submit the whole case to the Constantinople Patriarch for consideration. The Council of Constantinople completely confirmed the decision of Kyiv, and, having anathematized Martin, demanded that he be sent to Constantinople for a worthy execution. The anathema, repeated over Martin and the Kyiv Cathedral in his presence, shook his stubborn soul, and she asked herself for three days to repent. After this period, he appeared at the council with tears of tenderness and renounced all his delusions, except for the two most important ones: that Jesus Christ has one nature, and brought his flesh from heaven, passing through the womb of the Virgin, like through a pipe. When nothing could convince Martin to abandon these false thoughts, either in Kiev or in Constantinople, in the latter he was burned 262. Kiev in 1168, to resolve disputes about fasting on Wednesday and Friday, when on these days the feast of the Lord or a deliberate Saint occurs, a council convened by Vel. Prince Mstislav Izyaslavich. There were up to 150 ecclesiastical persons, besides princes and nobles, at this council. But great disputes and disagreements between those present prevented the issue from being finally resolved and any decisions made: everyone remained unconvinced; and therefore the debate about this matter worried the minds and consciences of simple-minded people for a long time 263. Kyiv in 1169 to Theodore, Bishop of Rostov. Ordained by the Patriarch himself in Constantinople, it was the Bishop who did not want, upon arriving at the flock, to appear before the Kyiv Metropolitan, accept his blessing and be dependent on him, despite all the convictions of the Metropolitan and Prince Andrei Yuryevich of Belarus. And when the Metropolitan commanded the Rostovites with a deliberate letter to obey Theodore, he, in an extreme frenzy of pride and anger, caused unheard-of and almost incredible unrest and cruelty: he cursed all the abbots and priests of his diocese, in many cities and villages he sealed all the churches of God, plundered church and monastery areas, and cut some of those who opposed into pieces and boiled them in cauldrons, or crucified on boards, cut off the tongues of others, gouged out the eyes of others, etc. To complete his wickedness, he also dared to openly spew blasphemy against the Most Holy Virgin Mother of God, against the Pleasers of God and against the Orthodox Church. For such crimes, never heard of in our country, for which the unfortunate villain never wanted to repent, he was condemned by the council and given a terrible execution 264 . Our first six Bishops, who spread among us under St. Vladimir Christian faith, according to Tatishchev's list, were all Bulgarian Slavs. Tatishch. II, pp. 79 and 110. Demolished. words about the same chronicle of Iakim. Tatishch. I, page 38. Of these, one is headed: περι των αζυμων, and the other: περι τ8 οτι 8 δει τελειϭαι τα αζυμα - under No. No., according to the catalog of Matthew, 353 and 355. According to Mattei in the same catalogue. Sn. Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. tom. X.pag. 516. The same according to Mattei’s remark in the said catalogue. Aνδρες Pωμαιοι αϰ8ϭατε, λυχνος τοις ποϭι μ8 ο νομος μ8, ϰαι φως τοις τριβοις μ8. De perpet. consensu Eccl. Orient. Et occident. lib. II, cap. 18, § 18, pag. 872. In this last list, Leonty is named Metropolitan of Pereyaslavl in Russia. It is inscribed: Λεοντος Μητροπολιτ8 της εν Ρωϭια Πρεϭθλαβας. Russian The hon. part 1. page 86. It was published in Memory. Russian Slovens. XII century Printed in part 1 Russian. Hon. Dictionary Spirit. Pisat. M. Evgeniya, under the word: Nikifor. Printed in Memory. Russian Words. XII century. According to the testimony of Metropolitan Eugene. See his Dictionary under the word Cyril I. Chronicon – Lithuano – Moscow. ed. to Königsber. in 1582. Radzivil. letop. under 1037, Koenigsber. Letop. page 106. Life of the teacher Theodosius in the Patericon leaf. 29. Tatishch. III, 416. It is known that other princes also loved to have libraries with us at that time, for example. Yaroslav I and Svyatoslav Yaroslavich of Chernigov, who filled his cages with collected books (see Afterwords of Clerk John in the Collection of 1073). Tatishch. III, 238–239 and 416. In general, the study of languages was quite strong among us at that time: for example, Vladimir Monomakh’s father Vsevolod knew five languages, and Konstantin Vsevolodovich Rostovsky spoke Latin as his natural language (Dukhov. Vladimir Monomakh, ed. 1793, pp. 27–28). As one can guess: 1) from Svyatoslav’s Collection (written in 1073), - this Russian encyclopedia of the 11th century, which contains the most important articles on rhetoric, philosophy, history, and theology (descriptive manuscript. Rumyants. Museum. No. CCCLVI): why not admit that similar collections translated from Greek existed then in many of our copies, and judging by their very composition, short, clear, were mainly used as textbooks in schools? 2) From the fact that there were already some manuals on all these sciences, translated from Greek into Slavic back in the 9th century, namely, theology, philosophy and grammar of St. John of Damascus, translated by John, Exarch of Bulgaria, and the Church-Civil History, translated by Hieromonk Gregory: that these translations were definitely used among us in the 11th, 12th, 13th and subsequent centuries is proven by their lists dating back to that time, surviving in our libraries (Kalaidov. in John, Exarch. Bulgarian, pp. 15, 28, 56–57, 74–75, 80 and note 42). 3) Finally, from the fact that some of our writers of that period are indeed familiar with all these sciences, for example: Metropolitan Hilarion, St. Kirill Turovsky, teacher. Nestor and others. Even the clerk who wrote the Collection of Svyatoslavs had an idea about Ptolemy, the founder of the Library of Alexandria (see Description of the Collection by Vostokov), and the unknown Kiev Monk, who translated for Prince Svyatosha of Chernigov the Epistle of Blessed. Pope Leontes..., was well acquainted with “secular and rhetorical books,” in his own words (Moskvit. 1843 No. 7. Discoveries for Russian History). “Yaroslav diligently read books, and often read during the day and at night, and collected many scribes and added from the Greek to the Slovenian letter, and having copied many books, you learn from the image of faithful people... This Yaroslav... we love books, and have written many and put them in St. Sophia” (Konigsberg. Chronicles, p. 104, 106 and 113). These words and the statement of faith are printed in Part II, appendix. to the works of St. Fathers in Russian translation. Moscow 1844. From page 170, published. in Moscow 1820. Described. Blush. Museum. pp. 220, 222, 610–621, 686. See Catalog. Tsarskogo No. 49. It is published in the first part of Russian. The hon. View About this writer in the Dictionary of M. Eugene. Defense of the Russian Chronicle Nesterova. Butkova. S. II. B. 1840, pp. 188–194, and Nestor, the first Russian writer. Stories, Kubareva, Moscow, 1842. Its best edition belongs to G. Sakharov. See Travel Russian. People in the Holy Land, frequent. I. C. II. B. 1839. Printed. at Ross Monuments. Literature of the 12th century. See about him in M. Evgeniy’s Dictionary. See his life, placed. in Prologue April 28 These three articles and twelve words were published in Pamyatn. Ross. literature of the 12th century, and the prayers remain unpublished. In ancient handwritten collections there are also some other words that could supposedly be attributed to St. Kirill. See Moskvit. 1843. No. 6, p. 551. See about the Patericon of Pechersk by G. Kubarev in the Journal of Min. People. Enlightenment 1838 No. 10, pp. 13–17. “He was a great reader of books and learned many sciences; For this reason, he also had learned people with him, bought many ancient Greek books at a high price and ordered them to be translated into Russian”... Tatishch. III, p. 416. The names of some of our other scientists and writers of that time are reviewed. in the Dictionary of M. Evgeniy. Exposition it will be printed. on Sunday Read for the IV year on page 231. In memory. Ross. Verbal 12th century word on Pentecost. p. 87; demolished 47. There is also a word on St. Easter p. II and the word about the removal of the body of Christ pp. 37–38. See in Letop. Described. sign that was in the Pechersky Monastery on February 2. Memory Ross. Verbal XII century p. 22. Memorial Russian Slovensk. 12th century pp. 102–104, 107 and 113. See in Memorable. Ross. Verbal XII century pp. 181, 184, 186, 194, 196, 201, 203. Bibliographer. Leaflet Köppen No. 7. Described. handwritten Rumyantsov. Museum. Page 469 No. CCCXXXI and Page 472 No. CCCXXXIV. Ibid. No. CXCII, p. 240, and John, Exarch. Bolgar., Kalaydovicha, pp. 17 and 28. Description hands Blush. Music p. 253. No. CXCVIII. Description handwritten Count Tolstov str. 5, dept. I, no. 8. Ibid. p. 213, dept. II, no. 6. Full Assembled. Russian Chronicle volume I, page 51. St. Petersburg. 1846. Ibid pp. 129, 149, 184, 187 and others. Ibid. pp. 89, 173, 195, etc. Nestor. Schletzer. I, 180 and II, 263–265. Full Assembled. Russian Years. I, pp. 128–138. Demolished. Nikon. Years. II. page 146. Full Assembled. Russian Years. I, pp. 165, 172, 174, 175 and 191. Degree. books. Part I. pp. 141, 152. Nestor. pp. 84, 85 and 87. Pln. Assembled. Russian Letop. I. pp. 63, 65, 69, 89, 117, 149, 15, and 195; II. pp. 12, 88, 111, 151, 285, etc. Regarding the structure of our ancient churches, we will quote a few words from our venerable archaeologist: “The churches were generally small and cramped, and dark inside, because they were illuminated by narrow, slit-like windows, taller than human height, with mica windows and iron bars. They were covered with shingles, rarely with lead, even less often with copper... In Russia, in general, from the 11th century there were churches with two tops in commemoration of the dual nature of I. Christ, about three - the Trinity, about five - I. Christ, as the head, and four Evangelists, or five plagues of Christ, about seven tops - as a sign of the seven sacraments, seven gifts of the Holy Spirit and seven Ecumenical Councils, about nine - nine ranks of Angels, about thirteen - I. Christ and the Twelve Apostles... (Moscow Memorial. Antiquity. Preface. page IX, Moscow 1842). From the time of Vladimir the Great to Andrei Bogolyubsky, our most famous churches were built and decorated mainly by foreigners, Greeks and Germans; but, without any doubt, with the assistance of the Russians, who little by little learned from them the art of construction, so that in 1194, Bishop John of Rostov found capable carpenters and blacksmiths among the Russians alone. Who skillfully corrected the ancient Suzdal Cathedral and covered it with tin, and by the end of the same century the chronicle praises the Russian architect Peter Minoleg, who erected marvelous buildings (Complete Collection. Russian Chronicle. I. p. 173; II. pp. 152–155). Damn it. Church History, Rev. Innocent, II. page 178. Annal. Baroni ad an. 1087, pag. 602, vol. XI. Antverp. 1608. Demolished. Cheti-Min. on the 9th May, where towards the end there is a deliberate scholarly note about this. Hist. Russ. Monum. tom. I, no. 111, pag. 3. There is not a word about this in the extensive chronicles of Baronius himself. See below. year. 1087 and 1097. In Martyrologio quidem, say the Western historian Fleury, haec translation commemorator, sed in nostris partibus nec Festum, nec officium recitatur. Vid. Ad an. 1087, pag. 548–549, vol. XV, Avg. Wind. et Oeniponti, 1761. Nikon. Years. part I. page under 1091, St. Petersburg. 1767. Hist. de I' Eglise Catholic. Par Rohrbacher, vol. XII, pag. 425–426, Paris 1844. See the miracles of St. Nicholas, printed during the service and the akathist to him. True, in the Greek Church proper a holiday was not established at that time on the occasion of the transfer of the relics of St. Nicholas; but this is because at that time, extremely difficult times for her, she had no time for establishing celebrations: they only wanted to save the shrine. And the Russian Church, peaceful and prosperous, had every opportunity to commemorate with a celebration the day of the salvation of the relics of St. Nicholas at the hands of the infidels and their transfer, accompanied by numerous miracles. And we know that in our Church, both then and subsequently, many of their own local holidays were established, not celebrated by the Greeks, without any violation of unity in faith and in everything else, such as, for example. day of consecration of the church of St. George in Kyiv, memory of St. martyrs Boris and Gleb and others. We also celebrate the Intercession of the Most Holy. Theotokos, an event that happened in Greece in the Blachernae Constantinople Church, although the Greek Church does not celebrate it, we celebrate not by order of any pope, or even the Constantinople Patriarch, but simply by the establishment of our local archpastors, because this event deserves to be celebrated. Full Assembled. Russian Letop. I, p. 78, and more details in Step. book I. 199–214. Full Assembled. Russian Years. I, pp. 89–90 and 120; II, 289. See Dictionary of Russian Saints, under the word: Vsevolod-Gabriel. Full Assembled. Russian Letop. I, pp. 150–151, and Step. book I., p. 299. See Discourse on heresies and schism. in Russian Church, Rudneva, p. 39. M. 1838. Print. Paterik. Kiev-Pechersk. sheet 39, 43 and 178. See in Moskvityanin. 1845, No. 12: “some monuments of Slavic writing before the Mongol period...”. These traces are visible not only in the handwritten, but also in the printed service of St. Vladimir. See Min. July 15. Therefore, one cannot agree with the words of the article: Cyril and Methodius, Slavic Enlighteners (printed in No. 4 of Readings in the Imperial. General. Historical and Ancient. Ross. At the Moscow. Univers. for 1846), which, speaking about one liturgical book (the Followed Psalter) in the Slavic language, boldly and decisively, although without any evidence, claims that In a collection of this kind, almost everyone contributed what they wanted (p. 23, note 42). It is not known from anywhere that such disorder has ever existed in the Orthodox Church. Therefore, we cannot agree with the following words of the same article about Cyril and Methodius (p. 23): “we will not say that the General Menaion was translated (by Cyril and Methodius): there are no traces of it among the Slavs even in the 11th century.” That is, we don’t know any traces of it... But a) on such a basis, it seems, one cannot reject the direct evidence of the 16th century (printed in the afterword of the General Menaion 1599–1600) that this book is the creation and collection of St. Cyril the philosopher, teacher of the Slavs and Bulgarians, is evidence that, although not very ancient, is still older than us, and could be based on something ancient. It also seems b) that it is impossible, in a strict sense, to talk about the translation of the General Menaion from Greek into Slavonic, when in its present composition and under its real name it never existed and now does not exist in the Greek language, but is, exactly, as the evidence cited above expresses, partly a collection from other liturgical books and partly a creation... (See Chron. Cht. 1845, III, 277-279). The venerable author of the article already mentioned twice by us says: 1) it is undoubtedly known that for a long time the canonical books of the V. and N. Testaments were considered exactly 60 in the Greek Church (33 books of the V. Z., instead of 22, according to the Hebrew account, and 27 N. Z.), and that for this purpose the teachers of the Church divided the 12 lesser Prophets, considered by the Jews as one book, into twelve (pp. 23 and note 43). But - a) in the Orthodox Church there are up to six catalogs of St. books that were finally approved by the VI Ecumenical Council (in 680, see rules 2 of this Council), and since then, unchanged, as a permanent guide, contained by it (See in the book of Rules..., published by the Holy Synod in 1843, 85 rules of the Apostles, 60 rights of the Laodicean Council, 33 rights of the Council of Carthage, St. Athanasius great. from 39 last about the holidays, St. Gregory the Theologian about what books should be read..., and St. Amphilochius about the same), and in none of them there are books of St. Scriptures exactly 60; none of them say that the books of V.Z. exactly 33; on the contrary, in three it is directly stated that there are only 22 of these books, and in the other three they are counted without an exact designation by numbers; in none of the catalogs where strict numbers are kept, the twelve minor Prophets are not separated; on the contrary, they are recognized as one book; b) we can indicate up to ten more similar catalogs or testimonies of ancient teachers of the Church, such as: Melito (apud Evseb. lib. IV, cap. 26), Origen (ibid. lib. VI, 25), Eusebius (ibid. IV, 26), Cyril of Jerusalem (Cathech. IV, cap. 35), Epiphanius (Contra haer. lib. I, cap. 7), Jerome (Prolog. Galeat.), Ilaria (Prolog. in libr. Psalm.), Rufina (in expos. Symbol.). Leontius of the Byzantine monk (De sectis. ... act. II, pag. 402, Basil. 1578), John of Damascus (in Theology of Scripture), Nikephoros, Patr. Constantinople (Chronolog., edit. ad calcem Chron. Evseb. cap. VII, de eccl.); - but none of them considered St. there are exactly 60 books of Scripture, no one counted the books of the Old Testament - 33, no one divided the 12 minor Prophets; on the contrary, St. Damascene, dividing all the other books, combined in pairs in the Jewish canon, does not separate only the 12 Prophets, saying: There are twelve prophets for one book (in the Theological chapter on Scripture). 2) To prove his point, the author, instead of the ancient Fathers, points to a Slavic article from the Izbornik (XI century), allegedly extracted from the writings of Gregory the Theologian. But a) in this article the books of the Old Testament are counted not 33, but 34 (Daniel 34), and the books of the New are not 27, but 26 (there is no Apocalypse, see Kalaid. p. 136); b) such a number of books does not belong to St. Gregory the Theologian, who, as is known from his canonical rule accepted by the Church, counts only 22 books of the Old Testament. 3) The words of Antiochus about the sixty numerical books of St. The Scriptures, as well as the words of Philip the Hermit, cited below, cannot have any force: because that is the question of how to understand these sixty statutory, or numerical books... 4) It is said that St. The fathers never counted the books of St. The Scriptures did not introduce apocryphal books (that is, non-canonical (8 ϰανονιζομενα), as the Orthodox Church calls them in the canonical epistle of St. Athanasius, which it accepts, calling them apocryphal - heretical books. See in the book of rules, published by the Holy Synod), but strictly forbade the inclusion of books such as the Son into the canon Sirach, Wisdom of Solomon, etc. But a) in canon (rule) 85 of St. The Apostle and the Son of Sirach stand and even the three books of Maccabees; b) in the 33rd canon of the Council of Carthage, Tobit and Judith stand and are called directly canonical: and this is in the canons or rules accepted by the Church itself; c) let’s not even mention catalogs of lesser importance, such as the blessings. Augustine, Pope Gelasius (492) and other ancient Western teachers of the Church and even local councils, where not only one, but all non-canonical books stand alongside the canonical ones... The whole point is how to understand the name: a canonical book, whether in the strict and precise sense, or in a more extensive and less precise sense (i.e., a book called canons, statutes, rules of the Church). In the first sense, the Orthodox Church has always strictly distinguished and distinguishes (see space Catech.) canonical books from non-canonical ones; in the latter, we see that she accepts 33 rights. Karf. Council, where Tobit and Judith are called canonical (See more clearly about this in Chron. Reading 1845, III, pp. 297–303). Neither the biographer Methodiev nor the professor. Nestor, nor Prologue of the 13th century. They do not at all relate, as, on the contrary, they are stated in the mentioned article (p. 2425, lines 2), the translation of non-canonical books to a late time. Biographer of St. Methodius says about him: lay out the whole book and fulfill it, perhaps Maccabeus (only, perhaps Maccabeus!); teacher Nestor: Methodius planted two priests, a great scribe, and transcribed all the books; Prologue: transpose all 60 books of the Old and New Testaments (Details in Chronicles, 1845, III, pp. 284–306). A guess about this has already been proposed in Chr. Thurs. (1845, III), and precisely only as a modest guess, and not at all as strengthened proof that St. Methodius also translated non-canonical books (see p. 302, line 18, where it is said: “however, we can offer some guess,” also p. 305, line 17). With this, you need to take down the note of the mentioned article (about Cyril and Methodius) 46 on page 25. Collection Russian. Letop. II, p. 14. Notes for Church History. singing in Russia, G. Undolsky (in No. 3 Readings in the Imperial General History and Ancient Russia at Moscow University for 1846). About some private small deviations from the true order of the rite, as well as about some perplexities regarding the rites that took place in our Church, see. Degree. book I, p. 217, also in the questions of Kirik and two rules of John of Novgorod Archbishop, printed in Pam. Ross. Words of the 12th century. Degree. book I, pp. 24–25. Thu-Min. under. 11 July. Description Blush. Music pp. 452–453. Memorial Moscow. Ancient Snegireva, 1842, tetra. II, pp. 15–16. Paterik. Pecher. l. 60. Description Kiev-Pechersk Laurels, p. 83. Journal Minister People's Enlightenment 1835 December page 510. Bullfinch. Memory Moscow. Antiquity 1842. theater. 4. pp. 91, 92. Collection Russian. Letop. I, p. 148; Nikon. Letop. II, p. 150. Memory. Moscow. Ancient Page 13 about the Assumption Cathedral Step. book I, degree 5. Ch. II. demolished Cheti-Min. under. May 23. Histor. Swedish about the life of Rev. Euphros. 1841 pp. 11 and 12. See description. of this cross. St. Petersburg 1841 Cheti-Min., 7 Sep. ... in the life of St. John, Archbishop of Novgorod. Prologue, March 14; days of worship Greco-Russian Church Part I pp. 170 and 171. Historical reviewed Ryazan. hierarch. pp. 6–14. Moscow 1820. Brief Histor. tale oh miracle. icon of St. Nicholas, name Ratnym. St. Petersburg 1842. Memorial Moscow Ancient, Snegirev, tetr. 2, page 12. Step. book I, degree I. Ch. 34. Pater. Pechersk sheet. 60–65. Cheti-Min., December 4; Description K.-Soph. Cathedral. page 47; Sunday Thurs. 1837, no. 34. Nikon Letop. Part II. pp. 336, 337, and Step. book I, degree 7, ch. 2. Described. Kiev-Pechersk Lavra pp. 99–100 Kiev, 1831. Assembled. Russian Letop. I, page 66. Synopsis. Kyiv. 1823, p. 65. Assembled. Russian Years. I, pp. 150 and 165; II, p. 88; at Karamz. II. approx. 27. Assembled. Russian Years. I, p. 148; II, p. 78. Ibid. I, 162; II, 111, 112. See, for example, ibid. I, 195. Review of the Helmsman's Book, Baron Rosenkampf, pp. 48 and 49. - One can also guess that the Novgorod Bishop Nifont, who lived in the 12th century, had a Slavic Helmsman's Book: for in his answers to Kirik's questions he cites two rules of St. Vasily completely according to the complete translation, as they are in the so-called Kirillov's lists of the Helmsman. See also in Rosenkam. note 40. In defense of these statutes, some of our scientists have already expressed many fundamental comments, such as: Metropolitan Eugene (in the Description of the K.-Soph. Council, added pp. 7–14), Baron Rosenkampf (in the Review of the Kormch. Books, notes pp. 205–214), Mr. Pogodin (in Research on Russian History, Vol. I, p. 263–274) and the city of Kalachov (in Research on Russian Pravda, pp. 151–153). But this subject awaits further detailed and thorough research. Histor. Review Helmsman book note pp. 205 and 206, and second Add. Catalog of books from the library of A. Chertkov, p. 430. Add. to Description K.-Soph. Sob. page 8; Description Room. Music No. 231, p. 287 No. 225, p. 312. See also special considerations. about this in research. Pogodin T. II, p. 271. Print. in Cont. Ancient Ross. Vivliof. Part I. Histor. Review Helmsman books. note p. 210. Chr. Thurs. 1846, IV, pp. 406–440. Full Sob. Russian Years. I, page 53. Muscovites. 1843 No. 6, p. 551. Print in Russ. Hon. frequent I Additional to Act. Histor. No. 4, St. Petersburg. 1846. Karamz. note 248 No. 28. Karamzin himself admits this, I, p. 238 and III, p. 202. See about the Councils that were in Russia before Ivan Vasilyevich IV. St. Petersburg 1829. Letop. Nikon. I, page 139. The Gustine Chronicle and the Cheti-Minea say that, after this council, there was also a Holy Council in Kyiv in 1108, for the inclusion in the synodik and canonization of the Monk Theodosius (collected. Russian Let. II, p. 288 and Cheti-Minea on August 14). But the Laurentian Chronicle only says that V.K. Svyatopolk, at the suggestion of the Pechersk Abbot Theoktistus, joyfully ordered the Metropolitan to inscribe the Rev. Theodosius into the synodik also ordered that all bishops be included in it, and all the bishops gladly wrote it in, and so on. (Collected Russian Let. I, pp. 120, 121). Until the end of his life, Nifont did not recognize Clement as Metropolitan, did not want to have contact with him and did not remember him even during his service. For this he received a letter of commendation from Patriarch Nicholas IV, and from Vel. Prince Izyaslav was deprived of his diocese for a time and imprisoned in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. Collection Russian Years. I, 137; II, 29–30; Years. Nick. II, 95; Step. book Part I, 250; Karamz. II, 208, 264, 468, 469. The Council Act on the heretic Martin is attached at the end of the Pitirim Sling; and for the defense of its authenticity, see partly in the Sling itself (sheets 168 and 172), and more in the special discussion about this subject by Candidate Lavrov. St. Petersburg 1804. Collection Russian Years. I, p. 150; Tatishch. IV, p. 160; Nick. Years. II, p. 178; Karamz. III, p. 31. At the end of the Council, however, the Metropolitan, with the Bishops of Chernigov and Pereyaslavl, condemned the Kiev-Pechersk Archimandrite Polycarp to imprisonment, thus exposing the incorrectness of his opinions. Collection Russian Years. I, 152; Tatishch. III, 167; Npik. Years. II, 206–209; Karamz. III, 83. You might be interested in: