A collection of opinions and reviews of Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna, on educational and church-state issues. Volumes 1-5

Volume 1 • Volume 2 • Volume 3 • Volume 4 • Volume 5. Part 1 • Volume 5. Part 2 Alphabetical index to the collection of opinions and reviews In the host of hierarchs of the Russian Church of the current century, the leading place undoubtedly belongs to the High Hierarch of the Moscow Church, Metropolitan Philaret. In terms of his spiritual gifts, the ever-memorable saint stands among those great ascetics and zealots of truth, whose works and exploits are reverently preserved in the memory of posterity. Placed by the Providence of God on the candlestick of the Moscow church, the great hierarch shone and shone with the light of spiritual wisdom far beyond the borders of not only Moscow, but also the entire Russian church. For half a century, both the Orthodox East and the heterodox West listened to his powerful, archpastoral, instructive word and guiding advice with love and surprise. It is understandable, therefore, the desire of contemporaries to become more closely acquainted with the great personality of the saint, to understand his moral character and to determine his significance in the history of the church. But all the works undertaken so far in this regard represent only attempts, more or less successful, to get closer to the subject of research. The time for a complete, comprehensive history of the life and work of Metropolitan Philaret has not yet come, and it will come when all the written works of the saint become the property of science. This publication was undertaken precisely with the aim of filling the incompleteness of the existing literature about the great Moscow archpastor. At the beginning of 1809, a modest teacher of rhetoric at the Trinity Seminary and preacher of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, the young hierodeacon Filaret Drozdov, by appointment of the highest spiritual authority, was summoned to St. Petersburg and took up the duties of a teacher of philosophy at the theological seminary and then higher rhetoric at the newly opened theological academy. From here begins the broad and prolific activity of the future great hierarch of the Moscow Church. In the ranks of hieromonk (from March 28, 1809), archimandrite (from July 8, 1811) and bishop of Revel, vicar of the St. Petersburg diocese (from August 5, 1817), he held positions: inspector of the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary (from February 23, 1809) and at the same time rector of the Alexandronevsky Seminary theological district school (July 31 of the same year), Bachelor of Theological Sciences of the Academy (from February 8, 1810), rector of it (from March 11, 1812) and member of the St. Petersburg Theological Consistory (from March 27 of the same 1812), the Commission of Theological Schools (from August 30, 1814), the Imperial Philanthropic Society (from July 16, 1816) and the main board of schools (since April 7, 1817). And in all these fields of service, the ever-memorable saint left a very significant trace of his activity. On March 15, 1819, by personal Highest Decree, His Eminence Filaret was appointed Archbishop of the Tver Diocese and, at the same time, a member of the Holy Synod. In this last title, the great saint, until his blessed death on November 19, 1867, for forty-eight years, took close, direct participation in the discussion and resolution of the most important issues relating to faith and church government, and not only our domestic church, but also the Church of the Ecumenical, and sometimes, at the call of the Supreme Authority, participated in the resolution of matters of national importance. A visible monument to this are the 580 autographs of the saint, which remained in his office after his death. The great works of the great saint could not, of course, remain in oblivion. In the same 1867, following the death of the hierarch, the former Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Count D. A. Tolstoy, realizing the importance of the papers of the Moscow archpastor, demanded them from Moscow and instructed Academician M. I. Sukhomlinov to publish them. In the January book of the magazine of the Ministry of Public Education for 1868, an article appeared entitled: “From the papers in Bose of the late Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret” 1. Here, from among the papers, the following were printed: a) two letters from Philaret to Metropolitan Seraphim of Novgorod and St. Petersburg; b) several letters to Philaret from the Right Reverends: Gregory, Bishop of Revel, later Metropolitan of Novgorod and St. Petersburg, and Philaret, Bishop of Kaluga, then Metropolitan of Kyiv, and Prince A. N. Golitsyn; c) a letter from Count M.A. Miloradovich to the Moscow Governor-General, Prince D.V. Golitsyn; d) memories relating to the accession to the throne of the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich, and e) a copy of the proposal of Prince A. N. Golitsyn to the Holy Synod regarding the Highest Award, Philaret’s parent, Archpriest Mikhail. Further publication of the papers of Metropolitan Philaret in the same year 1868 was suspended, and the original manuscripts with related papers and appendices in the languages: Armenian, Greek, Latin, French, English and Bulgarian, by order of Count D. A. Tolstoy, were delivered, sealed in one box, to the archives of the Holy Synod, for storage in secret department 2, where they remained until the appointment of K. P. Pobedonostsev to the post of synodal chief prosecutor, who immediately ordered the seizure of papers from the secret department of the archive and the compilation of a detailed inventory, and when the inventory was completed, he instructed the head of the archive and library of the Holy Synod, N. I. Grigorovich, with the assistance of the official E. A. Rezukhin, to prepare them for publication, which was supposed to be entitled: “Collection of opinions and reviews of Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna, on educational and church-state issues.” Subsequently the task was expanded. It is proposed to include in the publication not only papers stored in the synodal archive, but also papers that were in the archives of other institutions with which the activities of the Moscow hierarch came into contact. In accordance with this formulation of the case, the papers of Metropolitan Philaret were extracted from the following archives: A) the ecclesiastical department, in St. Petersburg: 1) the seminary; 2) academies; 3) consistory; 4) commissions of religious schools; 5) Bible Society; 6) the office of the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod; 7) The Highest Established Presence for the Affairs of the Orthodox Clergy; 8) the office of the Metropolitan of Novgorod and St. Petersburg; in Moscow: 9) Bethany Theological Seminary; 10) Moscow Theological Academy; 11) diocesan library; 12) offices of the Holy Synod; B) other institutions: 13) imperial philanthropic society; ministries: 14) foreign affairs; 15) internal affairs, and 16) public education. In addition, copies were taken from the papers of Metropolitan Philaret from two collections stored: in the library of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy and in the Moscow City and Rumyantsev Museums. The present collection includes the papers of Metropolitan Philaret, found in the papers of the deceased: Metropolitan of Kyiv and Galicia Arseny and Archbishop of Olonets and Petrozavodsk Arkady, as well as copies of papers delivered by: Archbishop of Tver and Kashin Savva; Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod K. P. Pobedonostsev, Privy Councilors: P. G. Tersinsky and I. A. Chistovich. All collected material is arranged in strictly chronological order. This method is recognized as the most convenient, since, on the one hand, it explains with greater accuracy the origin, development and implementation of assumptions and thoughts, and on the other, it also has the very important advantage that it eliminates the arbitrariness of selecting papers by events and greatly facilitates the search for documents compiled over a certain period of time. At the top of each opinion or review there is a sequential number, year, month and day in which the document was compiled, as well as a detailed table of contents. In cases where an opinion or review is drawn up on the basis of papers received by Metropolitan Philaret, the contents of these latter are placed before the opinion, to the extent required to clarify the opinion. Behind the explanatory text is the opinion or review of Metropolitan Philaret, with all the notes that are on it, and in the form in which it came from the pen of the archpastor. It is known that Metropolitan Philaret wrote in his own way, partly adhering to modern, generally accepted spelling, and partly to what was peculiar to him alone. To familiarize those interested in all the peculiarities of the saint’s spelling, the first 13 pages of this edition are printed with strict adherence to his spelling. The subsequent sheets, starting from 14, p. 219, were printed according to the spelling now commonly used, but at the same time the accuracy of the saint’s thoughts and turns of speech was certainly maintained. No abbreviations, changes or additions were allowed during publication. Abbreviated words are expanded for clarity and ease of reading; expanded words are enclosed in parentheses. The text of Metropolitan Philaret's papers is printed in large cicero; the documents attached to the texts, as well as the editor’s explanations and decisions of certain institutions, in contrast to the saint’s papers, are printed in small print, that is, in ordinary font. The necessary explanations and instructions from Filaret’s previously printed papers are placed below the line, in the form of special notes. At the end of each opinion or review, also under the line, it is indicated from which document it was copied, i.e. from one’s own handwriting or from a copy, and it is shown where this or that document is stored. For the most convenient use of opinions and reviews, as well as for combining them on homogeneous issues into one whole, for this publication, alphabetical indexes will be compiled for each volume separately: a) personal names and b) objects. This volume includes the papers of Metropolitan Philaret during his spiritual and educational service and service as a member of the spiritual consistory, the imperial philanthropic society and the main board of schools, namely: from January 26, 1809, the time he occupied the department of higher rhetoric at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, to March 15, 1819, the time of his appointment to the department of the Archbishop of Tver and Kashinsky, with the title of member of the Holy Synod. The main editor of the undertaken publication, on behalf of the Holy Synod, belongs to the Most Reverend Savva, Archbishop of Tver and Kashin, who is present at the Holy Synod, who has already worked hard to publish the papers of Metropolitan Philaret. The indexes of personal names and items for this volume were compiled by N. P. Grigorovich. In the city of Kolomna (now a district town of the Moscow province), the deacon of the cathedral 3, Mikhail Feodorovich Drozdov, on December 26, 1782, gave birth to a son, who was named in holy baptism Vasily 4, in honor of St. Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea, whose memory is celebrated on January 1st. The youth Vasily Drozdov received his initial upbringing and education in his parents' house 5 ; then, upon reaching the age of nine, in December 1791, he was assigned to the Kolomna Seminary, where he studied Latin grammar, poetry, rhetoric, general history, philosophy, philosophical and natural history. From the Kolomna seminary, on the occasion of its closure along with the abolition of the diocese, Drozdov moved, in March 1800, to continue his seminary education, to the Trinity Seminary at the Sergius Lavra. In this latter, Drozdov completed the course in 1803, with the title of student, and after that, on November 21, he was appointed teacher of Greek and Hebrew at the same seminary; 1806, August 30th, transferred with the rank of teacher to the teaching class; January 14, 1808, approved as a teacher of higher eloquence and rhetoric 6. In the same year, on November 16th, according to the petition, he was tonsured into monasticism with the name Philaret 7, and on the 21st he was ordained a hierodeacon. Meanwhile, at this time in St. Petersburg, the Commission of Theological Schools 8, approved by the Highest on June 26, 1808, began to implement the plans of a special committee 9, also approved by the Highest on the 29th day of November 1807, 9, on the improvement of theological schools. The transformation was supposed to begin in the St. Petersburg educational district, namely, to organize for the first time, according to a new plan, an academy, seminaries and schools for this district. First of all, the commission was concerned with finding teachers for the newly established academy, and how it was impossible to find capable and worthy persons from among the capital's St. Petersburg clergy to replace all the academic departments: then, according to the members of the commission, the Eminences - Metropolitan Ambrose of Novgorod and Archbishop Theophylact of Kaluga, it was necessary to request from the seminaries of other dioceses teachers known for their ability and reliability for teaching at the Academy of Higher Sciences. Moreover, the same members of the commission included, for the first time, teachers of seminaries: Trinity at the St. Sergius Lavra, Hierodeacon Philaret, Semyon Platonov and Feodor Alexandrov; Yaroslavl - Shiryaev and Kaluga - Hieromonk Leonid Zaretsky. As a result of the presentation of this to the Holy Synod, the bishops of the said dioceses were ordered to send the indicated teachers to St. Petersburg, providing them with certificates from the seminary boards, which they, upon arrival in the capital, were to present to the first member of the commission of theological schools, the Right Reverend Metropolitan Ambrose 10. The teacher of the Trinity St. Sergius Lavra Seminary, Hierodeacon Filaret (Drozdov), having arrived in St. Petersburg at the beginning of January 1809, presented to Metropolitan Ambrose the certificate issued to him from the board of the said seminary, dated December 29, 1808, No. 120. This certificate depicts: “By decree of His Imperial Majesty Sovereign Alexander Pavlovich Emperor and Autocrat of All-Russia, and so on and so forth and so on.” The announcer of this Trinity Seminary of Rhetoric is the teacher Hierodeacon Philaret, by decree from the Holy Governing Synod of this 1808, December 9th, held, and by the resolution of that Synod, a member, the Most Reverend Platon, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna and Cavalier, sent to the commission of theological schools, for the discretion and determination of it accordingly. knowledge and ability, studied at this seminary, after transferring it from Kolomna, philosophy and theology, church history, Elophesian and civil, and the Greek and Hebrew languages; 1803, November 21, was appointed teacher of these languages; 1806, August 30, teacher of poetry and preacher at the Lavra; from 1808, January 14 until now, he taught higher eloquence and rhetoric. He was tonsured a monk this November 16, 1808, at the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius; and on the 21st day of the same month he was ordained as a hierodeacon in the Spaso-Bethan monastery, in the Cross Church of the Descent of the Holy Spirit. Throughout his time at this seminary, he behaved very honestly; He held his positions in an approximate manner 11; 31 years old. In testimony of which, from the Trinity Seminary Board, with the following signature, with the attached seal of the Board, this certificate was given to him, Hierodeacon Philaret. Trinity Seminary rector, abbot Anthony. Prefect, cathedral hieromonk Samuel 12. Meanwhile, the Moscow Metropolitan Platon, who had a special affection for the young and gifted teacher of the Trinity Seminary Vasily Drozdov (now Hierodeacon Philaret 13), did not want to let him go to St. Petersburg, and repeatedly asked the Holy Synod to return him to the Trinity Seminary, meaning to appoint him here to the position of rector 14: but this petition was not respected. Filaret was left in St. Petersburg. After this preliminary information about the teacher Filaret Drozdov (later the famous Metropolitan of Moscow), we will proceed to a consistent presentation of the written documents at our disposal about his future fate, and about his many years of fruitful work and exploits for the benefit of the church and state. Journal of the Ministry of Public Education, 1868, January, vol. 137, pp. 1–38. Instruction, dated February 24, 1868, No. 74. In Kolomna, from the half of the 14th century until the end of the 18th century, there was an episcopal see, which in 1799 was abolished and moved to the city of Tula, and Kolomna was added to the Moscow diocese (See lists of hierarchs and abbots of the monasteries of the Russian Church, P. Stroev, St. Petersburg, 1877, pp. 1030–1034). The event of the birth and baptism of baby Vasily is recorded in the metrics of the Epiphany (and not the Cathedral Assumption) Kolomna Church, for the reason that the wife of Deacon Mikhail Drozdov, Evdokia Nikitichna, was delivered of her child in the house of her parent, the priest of the Epiphany Church, Nikita Afanasyevich, to whom, on the occasion of the Feast of the Nativity of Christ, she came with her husband for the usual congratulations (Notes on the life and times of St. Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow, N.V. Sushkov, M. 1868, appendix XII, p. 20, and XVII, p. 29). His maternal grandfather, the aforementioned priest Nikita Afanasyevich, also took an active part in the religious and moral education of the youth Drozdov (See Letters of Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow to his relatives, M., 1882, No. 117, p. 127). Quite detailed information is provided in the articles about the circumstances of Vasily Drozdov’s admission to Trinity Seminary, about his successes here in the sciences, about his initial experiences in preaching, and finally about his zealous pursuit of a teaching position. 1) S. Smirnova “Teacher of the Trinity Seminary V.M. Drozdov”, placed in the Modern Chronicle of 1867, No. 44, and 2) I. Korsunsky: “The preaching activities of Vasily Mikhailovich Drozdov (later Philaret Metropolitan of Moscow), 1803–1808”, published in the magazine "Faith and Reason", 1884 Feb., pp. 286 et seq. The request for tonsure as a monk was submitted by teacher Drozdov to Metropolitan Platon of Moscow back in July. Here is the content of this petition. “Studying and then teaching under the Archpastoral patronage of Your Eminence, I learned to at least find pleasure in learning and benefit in solitude. This disposed me towards the rank of monk. I thoroughly tested myself in this position during the almost five years I spent as a teacher. So, Your Eminence, Most Gracious Archpastor and Father, I most humbly ask with your Archpastoral favor to fulfill my desire by honoring me with the monastic title. July "" day, 1808. Teacher Vasily Drozdov has a hand in this request of Rhetoric.” Two weeks before he was tonsured a monk, precisely on November 1, 1808, Vasily Mikhailovich wrote, among other things, to his father, then already the archpriest of the Kolomna Cathedral: “Father! Vasily will be gone soon; but you will not lose your son, a son who understands that he owes you more than his life, feels the importance of upbringing, and knows the value of your heart” (Letters from Filaret to his family, No. 100, p. 106). The members of the commission were: Ambrose, Metropolitan of Novgorod and St. Petersburg, Osofilakt, Bishop (from December 25, 1808 Archbishop) of Kaluga, confessor, protopresbyter, Pavel Krinitsky, Chief Priest John Derzhavin, Prince Alexander Nikolaevich Golitsyn and Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky. The committee was made up of the same people who later joined the commission of theological schools, with the exception of Protopresbyter Krinitsky, who was replaced by Protopresbyter Sergius Krasnopskov. The matter of the commission is spirit. schools, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1808, No. 18, l. 1. The words printed in italics are inscribed in the certificate by the hand of the rector, abbot Anthony. The matter of the commission is spirit. taught., 1808, No. 18, fox. 16. This is what Philaret himself wrote to his father, shortly after accepting monasticism, precisely on December 14, 1808, about Metropolitan Plato’s relationship with him: “His Eminence honors me with such favor that I did not dare to wish. This month and last month I visited him several times, either here (i.e., in the monastery) during his visit, or in Bethany, where I spent the night several times. In all these cases, I rarely saw my boss, more often my father, my mentor (Letters from Filaret to his family, No. 101, p. 107). The matter of the commission is spirit. study, 1808, No. 18, l. 9, 11 and 12. Secondary, from December 26. 1809 See the case of the Holy Synod, preserved. in his archive, 1810, No. 809. At the same time, Metropolitan Platon wrote from Bethany to Moscow to his vicar, Bishop Augustine: “So they are taking Prefect Eugene! Whenever Philaret was returned” (Letters of Metropolitan Plato to Augustine, p. 131, in the appendix to the Orthodox Review, 1869). The prefect of the Bethany Seminary, Hieromonk Evgeny (Kazantsev), following Philaret, was summoned to St. Petersburg and appointed a bachelor to the academy, in the class of philosophical sciences. Metropolitan Platon did not cease to pester whomever he should about the return of Philaret to him. So, he wrote on January 2, 1810 to the Novgorod Metropolitan Ambrose: “I ask you to let Philaret come to me; I have an urgent need for a rector” (Letters from Metropolitan Plato to the Reverend Ambrose, in Orthodox Review, 1869, p. 87). But instead of Philaret, Eugene was returned to him, who, by decree of February 14, 1810, was appointed rector of the Trinity Seminary, with elevation to the rank of archimandrite.