1818 г.

March 29. Opinion of a member of the main board of schools, Bishop Filaret of Revel, about academic degrees The supremely approved position of the committee of gentlemen ministers on November 7, 1816, held on the occasion of the illegal promotion of Walter and Weber to Doctor of Law at the University of Dorpat, was given to the Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education, Prince A. N. Golitsyn regarding the exact responsibility, in the future production of academic degrees, to consider everything related to the legalization and submit it to the committee with a special opinion. To fulfill the Highest will, Prince A. N. Golitsyn, this issue was proposed for consideration by the trustees of educational districts and university professors. The reviews received from trustees and professors were submitted to the main board of schools for consideration. Each member of the board was ordered, after considering all the opinions delivered to them, as well as legislation relating to the issue of academic degrees, to present their own special opinions. Bishop Filaret of Revel presented an opinion written in his own hand with the following content: The connection with academic degrees of the right to civil ranks was so solemnly decreed by the Highest Charters given to Universities and the Statutes of educational institutions that to touch this institution now would mean to contradict the goodwill and bounty of the Throne to the state of scientists. In general, it is better not to give rights than to destroy data. And so, while maintaining the right to academic degrees, attention should be paid to ensuring that the worthy receive this right. The following rules on the production of academic degrees can contribute to this: 1) Academic degrees must be awarded according to a strict and impartial test. This can be guided not so much by the testing tables as by the good intentions of those testing and the supervision of their higher authorities. 2) The degrees should be given in order. Only for special distinction can students be promoted directly to masters. 3) The person who has received a degree can apply for another one no less than three years later, as stipulated in the statutes. Publishing a useful work or translation with scholarly notes can reduce this period by up to half. 4) Universities themselves produce only students. The production of masters is submitted for approval to the Main Board of Schools, with an opinion about the type and degree of knowledge of the person being represented. And when presenting the doctor’s approval, they also enclose an essay written for the degree. 5) The title of master and doctor of literature, mathematics and physics, in accordance with the opinion of Professor Lang 303, should be destroyed. For a doctor, for example, of literature, who is not a doctor of philosophy by education, is a language without a brain, if I may put it that way. When a doctor of literature is also a doctor of philosophy in his knowledge, then it is better for him to bear the name of mind rather than the name of language. In general, it is more useful to retain the ancient titles of Doctor of Theology, Philosophy, etc.: for when doctors of departments and sub-departments are admitted, one can be afraid that doctors of the chapter and paragraph of sciences will appear. 6) since the degrees of master and doctor are not preparatory to the civil service, but according to their original purpose should serve to disseminate knowledge: then only those who are in the academic service will be accepted for testing for these degrees, and will take on the obligation of using at least four years from receiving the degree for the benefit of public education. There cannot be general tables: because the classification of educational subjects is not the same everywhere. Of the tables presented, the essence of the Moscow ones is the most understood. In the journal of the meeting of the main board of schools, March 29, 1818, it is recorded that opinions were heard on the issue of degrees, and, by the way, it was decided: to allow member S.S. Uvarov to draw up a detailed outline of the rules for the production of academic degrees, in which to appoint rules for testing for obtaining any academic degree. After he has drawn up such rules in detail, first propose them to the scientific committee for consideration, inviting members of the board to its meetings: His Eminence Philaret and Father Archimandrite Innocent 304. When they have reviewed and approved the rules, then submit them for consideration by the main school board at a general meeting. The regulation on the production of academic degrees developed by the main schools' board was approved by the Highest, January 20, 1819 305. In April. Presentation from the rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Bishop Philaret of Revel, to Metropolitan Mikhail on the state of the academy The internal board of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy after listening to the message of the local spiritual consistory, dated April 6, 1818, No. 882, that according to the personal decree of His Imperial Majesty, given to the Holy Synod last March on the 26th day, with His Majesty’s own signature, which depicts: “Archbishop We have most graciously bestowed upon Michael of Chernigov the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, Estonia and Finland and the Holy Trinity Alexandrine Lavra as Archimandrite.” - the magazine decided: to present to him, the Metropolitan, an outline of the state of the Academy. Attached is the presentation itself. the following content: Performance. The Academic Board, having listened to the decree of His Imperial Majesty from the Holy Synod, communicated to him from the St. Petersburg Consistory, in the list, with the prescription of the highest personal decree about the most merciful award of Your Eminence to the present title, decided upon the entry of the Academy into the main administration of Your Eminence, to draw up, through the rector, the necessary information for initial information, outline of the current state of the Academy, and it is most honorable to submit to the discretion of Your Eminence that this is being carried out. I. About the academic institute It now consists of 39 students of the highest department, among whom is considered one hieromonk, who was formerly a teacher at the Voronezh Seminary, and of 39 students of the lower department. In addition, one candidate who had completed the training course voluntarily remained to attend the higher department course a second time. There are 14 students. 1. Extraordinary professor, Doctor of Theology, Archimandrite Gregory 306, teaching since September 1814. At the beginning of this course I read a general introduction to Theology, and now I read Contemplative Theology. Until now, he has completed the teachings about the being of God, about the Trinity, about the world, about spirits and about man in his primitive and fallen state. 2. Bachelor, Master, Hieromonk Nathanael 307, has been teaching since September of last year. He taught the science of interpretation of Holy Scripture; and now he is preparing to teach convicting theology. 3) Bachelor, Master, Andrey Okunev 308, has been teaching since September of last year. He taught the concept of the four Evangelists, and is now engaged in the interpretation of the Discourse on the Mount of Jesus Christ. Matthew 5–8. 4) Bachelor, Master, Ivan Filaretov 309, has been teaching since September of last year. Until now he has taught: introduction to the science of church eloquence; the dogmatic concept of the church speaker, the historical concept of him; invention and election of the matter of the word of the church; onago location. 5) The current professor, priest, master, Joachim Kochetov 310, has been teaching since September 1814. In this course he taught the history of the Old Testament, now he teaches New Testament history; reached the third century. 6) Occupying the position of 8th grade professor, Herodion Vetrinsky 311, has been teaching since 1814. He is engaged in teaching the history of philosophical systems, and has hitherto taught about the philosophy of the Chaldeans, Persians, Indians, and Egyptians; Ionian philosophers, Pythagoras and his followers, the ancient and new Eleatic school, Plato and Socrates. 7) Bachelor, priest, master, Timofey Nikolsky 312, teaching since 1814. In this course he taught logic, now he teaches empirical psychology; finished the first part. 8) Bachelor, Master, Ivan Ivanov 313, teaching since September last year, he was teaching the theoretical part of general literature, graduated. 9) Bachelor, Master, Alexander Rozhdestvensky 314, has been teaching since September of last year. He has taught so far from ancient history about the kingdoms of Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt; about the Phoenicians, Persians, Greeks, Scythians and Romans. From a new history of the Western and Eastern Roman Empire; about the kingdoms of the Franks in Gaul, the Ostrogoths, the Lombards and the Caliphate of Arabia. 10) Vasily Sebrzhinsky 315, occupying the place of 8th grade professor, has been teaching since 1814. Nowadays he teaches the foundations of Algebra and has taught so far: seven methods of calculating algebraic quantities, solving equations of the first two degrees, in particular; properties and resolution of equations in general. He also teaches French and is now engaged in reading and analyzing the history of Bossuet. 11) Bachelor of 9th grade Stefan Rajkowski 316, teaching since 1814. He taught from the foundations of geometry hitherto: the mutual conjugation of straight lines located in the same plane; pairing a circular line with a straight line; mutual conjugation of planes and straight lines. 12) 7th grade professor and cavalier Christian Friedrich Gref 317 has been teaching since 1810. Having analyzed the last book of Homer's Iliad, Prometheus now analyzes Aeschylus' tragedy and Thucydides' story about the Peloponnesian War. He also teaches German and is currently engaged in analyzing passages from the German Pilz anthology. 13) Bachelor Apollo Ryabchikov 318 has been teaching since September of last year. He taught the beginnings of the Greek language, now he analyzes articles from Kochenovsky’s educational Greek book. 14) Bachelor, priest, master Gerasim Pavsky 319, teaching since 1814. He taught the beginnings of the Hebrew language, now he analyzes passages from the Jewish anthology. The internal members of this class, besides the rector of the academy, are the following named persons: 3) Priest Gerasim Pavsky. 4) Priest Timofey Nikolsky. 5) 7th grade professor H.F. Gref. 6) 8th grade Herodion Vetrinsky. 7) 8th grade Vasily Sebrzhinsky. Of these, the priest Gerasim Pavsky is a member of the censorship committee, and Herodion Vetrinsky is the secretary of the Academy. 1) Seminary rector, Doctor of Theology, Archimandrite Innocent 320. He is also the first member of the censorship committee. 2) Seminary inspector, Archimandrite Polycarp 321. 3) Peter and Paul Cathedral, Archpriest Stakhy Kolosov. 4) Kazan Cathedral Archpriest John Bedrinsky. 5) St. Sergius Cathedral, Archpriest John Dankov 322. There are no ongoing matters related to the conference, except for the consideration of some books entrusted to the censorship committee. III. About the internal academic board It contains: Rector Filaret, Bishop of Revel, since 1810. Inspector, Archimandrite Gregory, since 1816. Housekeeper, Archimandrite Pavel 323, since 1812. According to the department of this board, the state of the educational part is shown above in the article about the institute. Regarding the moral part, the last report was presented this month, 2 days ago. It includes 21 pupils who distinguished themselves by good behavior; and not a single one was identified as having committed reprehensible acts. Economic management, hampered by limited staffing, while saving the remainder from an incomplete set of pupils, according to the report for the past year, had a balance of 40,000 rubles in bank notes. Cash RUR 25,247 59 k. In reserves 6490 rub. 96½ k. Of the 33,500 rubles received for the first half of this year, 16,564 rubles remain for the person. 7½ k. 76 pupils receive full government support, only one receives food. Count Rumyantsev's salary 324 contains one 325. Last month, all government pupils were provided with a new outer dress. A new catalog is being compiled for the academic library according to the classification of the charter. The library of ancient languages ​​is described. This matter slowed down due to the change of the library and their studies in the departments they occupied. 4. About external academic board. Present in it now, in addition to the rector and inspector of the academy, are members of the conferences: Rector of the seminary; seminary inspector; Peter and Paul Cathedral archpriest and hieromonk Nathanael. 5. About the construction committee. Last year, by order of His Imperial Majesty, a committee was established at the Academy to build an academic house, in which members of the internal academic board are present: an architect, a state councilor, Rusko. Novospassky Monastery treasurer Paisiy. The building was removed and covered last summer. This summer, some stone work remains to be completed on some vaults and stairs, and to line the galleries with stone. The carpentry work for windows and doors was completed last summer. This spring, a contract was made to make stoves. The materials for their work have mostly been prepared. Bidding for the plastering work is scheduled for this month on the 8th, 9th and 10th. The amount of construction according to the estimate for the holiday is 756,618 rubles. Of this amount, the committee received 650,000 rubles. Of these, there are now 81,862 rubles on the face. 85 k. 326 June 4. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools, according to the review of the Novgorod district and parish schools The Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education, Prince A. N. Golitsyn, to the commission of theological schools, on April 4, 1818, proposed: “At the end of the present academic course at the Moscow Theological Academy, after testing, professors and teachers should be appointed for the Kazan educational district that is being opened according to the new education. During such a test, it would be useful for one of the members of the commission of theological schools to be present, and I find that this assignment can be made to the Bishop of Revel, His Eminence Philaret 327.” Why do I have the honor to propose to the commission of theological schools, whether it would not be a good idea for them to issue an order to send the Most Reverend Philaret to Moscow for this end, and, taking advantage of this, entrust him with also inspecting the schools on the way to Moscow and in Moscow itself and its surrounding places.” From the affairs of the commission of theological schools, it is not clear about the time when Bishop Filaret left St. Petersburg for an audit. The first report from his commission of theological schools was sent from Vyshny Volochok, dated June 4, 1818, and concerned the review of the Novgorod district and parish schools. Report to the Commission of Theological Schools from Bishop Philaret of Revel. According to the responsibility assigned to me by the Commission of Theological Schools to review some of the Theological Schools, I began the task entrusted to me with a brief review of the Novo-Gorodsky District and Parish Schools. When I arrived in Novgorod on the 31st day of the past, I did not find Maya after noon school hours: being in proximity to the schools, and wanting to save the next day for viewing the Seminary, I was prompted by these circumstances to carry out the review outside of school hours. How this happened, the Commission of Theological Schools deigns to see from the attached list, under the letter A, from the journal, made by me on the spot. This journal also contains some comments about the state in which the District School appeared at that time: I did this, and continue to do so, with the intention that this open testimony would not serve as some encouragement to employees at the Schools to be efficient; and also so that future auditors, comparing the then state of schools with these comments, would more clearly see the rise or decline of well-being, and the more forcefully they could encourage or denounce. As, due to non-school time, I saw not all the students, but only those living in the Bishop's House, and nearby, also the teachers: then the caretaker, in response to my remark about the weak answers of the students in the Latin and Greek classes, expressed a desire for me to inspect these classes again in their entirety, hoping that some of those living in apartments would turn out better. Wanting, for my part, to open a better view of the School than in which it presented itself, I agreed to the superintendent’s demand, and again for the same reason that the next day was to be used for viewing the Seminary, I appointed an extraordinary meeting of the District School not during school hours, before the evening, at a time by which I could return from the Seminary. A list of this meeting is presented in the journal, letter B. Two reasons do not allow me to present a complete and decisive image of the Sofia Schools: firstly, that the review was brief, and secondly, that it was in the middle, and not at the end of the training course. But I believe some comments are correct. The educational part is not in the same condition in different subjects of study. In the classes of Catechism, Sacred History and Geography, good successes of the students are visible: they correctly answered questions proposed in an unexpected form, and, consequently, answered not only from memory, but with the concept. The Latin and Greek classes are weak, as evidenced by the double test. This is all the more unfortunate because in the previous review the Greek was found in a larger structure. To know the reasons for this perverse move, constant monitoring of the state and changes of schools is required, which is impossible for a temporary visitor. It is not without reason, however, that one can complain about teachers. The current teacher of Latin and Greek in the higher department was appointed last fall directly to these classes from the students of the Seminary: and so he had no experience in the lower ones. And that he is directly assigned to the higher classes: there must be no other reason for this than the unreliability of other teachers who were here before, as seen by the Seminary Board. In the educational administration of the Novgorod Schools, I found an order, not approved by the charter of the schools, that more than 30 students, listed on the lists of these schools, study in others. We must be careful that these students are not left without due attention to them: for one authority counts them, but does not teach them, and another teaches them, but not as their own. I suggested that the Seminary Board enter into discussions about preventing these students from going there and counting where they study? I’ll let you know about the consequences later. In terms of morality, nothing special was noticed. The economic part was presented in two forms, due to its dual dependence. 20 students supported at the expense of the Bishop's House, and several more who were added to them by contributing money for themselves, are under the care of the steward of the Bishop's House. This establishment has now been found in better condition than before, and this is due to the recently appointed steward, Archimandrite Gerasim. The two living rooms, ugly due to their ancient structure, are kept neatly. The students' festive dress is a dark green cloth frock coat; and the everyday - a shabby robe. I saw both as neat. This is what the students have in other rooms, where the singers of the Bishop's House are. However, I was not there during the table itself. Economic management, which actually depends on the head of the schools, which consists of the correct admission, release and recording of amounts, is found in confusion. In the list presented to me by the Overseer, due to his own arbitrariness, there is no correspondence between income, expenses and balance. It is attached herewith, under the letter B. In the books of receipts and expenses, instead of the day of reception or issue, there is a number, which has no meaning here; In some places there are no receipts, and, obviously, due to negligence alone, such as in the issuance of money to one sexton. The bursac amount for this year was not recorded in the parish, but the expense was already recorded from it. To this final confusion, the case was brought by the Seminary Board, which, having appointed this amount for the whole year, and sending an order about this to the Overseer, while he hesitated to appear to receive the money, due to an emerging need, decided to keep half of it for borrowed use for the Seminary needs, in anticipation of receiving the regular amount. But the Overseer had to write down what he received. An explanation of this by the Seminary Board is attached here, under the letter G. I proposed instructions for the Overseer to put his affairs in order to the Seminary Board. When inspecting the school writing department, I was convinced by experience of the previously assumed difficulty for the administrators of the united schools from the multitude of writing books. He has for the District School: 1) Book of incoming internal management matters, 2) Book of outgoing internal management affairs, 3) Book of incoming affairs of external management, 4) Book of outgoing affairs of external management, 5) Book of receipts and expenditures of staff amounts, 5) Book of bursatsky and expenditure of staff amounts. 9) Book of receipts and expenditures of staff amounts, 10) Book of bursatsky and expenditure of staff amounts, Of the ways to alleviate this difficulty, the most convenient is to establish a rule: “Where the Parish School is in connection with the District School, and has one head: there for the first there are no special writing books, but everything is entered, according to its affiliation, in the books of the District School, which should be inscribed with the books of the District and Parish School.” The path to this union has already been paved by the charter (Charter of the District School § 73, Charter of the Parish School § 84), by which the sums of the lower schools connected to the Seminary are prescribed to be accepted, stored and used together with the Seminary ones under the direct jurisdiction of the Seminary Board, and by the rule by which a salary is assigned from the sums of the Parish School connected to the District School To the District Inspector. An important, and long-standing, deficiency in the Novgorod Schools is the lack of space for the collective residence of students. The Seminary Board found the proposal to transfer them to the Anthony Monastery, in connection with the Seminary, inconvenient, as far as I know, because there are no comfortable apartments there for self-sufficient students. If they should remain at the St. Sophia Cathedral; then, to improve the premises, two ways are presented: either to the building currently occupied by the schools, add a part of the building now occupied by the services of the Bishop's House, going from this building to the street, which would not only expand the premises of the schools, but would also open up a special entrance to them from the street, to the tranquility of the Bishop's House; or change the current premises of the schools to another separate part of the house, known as the living courtyard. In both cases, costs are required, but more so in the latter; for the buildings of the everyday courtyard are not spacious, dilapidated and partly broken, leaving only one wall. since for these assumptions it is necessary to seek the consent of the owner of the house, which is impossible in the present circumstances, I have not begun to bring them into greater clarity and accuracy, but present only the first thoughts to the discretion of the Commission of Theological Schools. This report, due to the shortness of time, could not have been written on the spot, but on the way. Filaret, Bishop of Revel. Vyshny Volochek. No. 96. June 4 days 1818. Attached to this report are copies of the following documents: A. 1818, May 31, at half past 7 o'clock in the afternoon, we began to review the Novgorod district and parish schools by visiting the rooms occupied by students in the bishop's house. Firstly, the students' home and dress were examined and found neat. Then, the students of both departments of the district school who were here were verbally tested in the languages ​​Latin and Greek, in sacred history, geography and catechism. Questions from sacred history and the catechism were answered satisfactorily for the most part; almost also from geography, and from Latin and Greek grammar, for the most part weakly, but despite the fact that the questions were simple, and the teacher of these subjects who was here was called upon to help the students solve them. This lasted two hours. The rector and inspector of the seminary happened to be witnesses. Then, throughout the evening, school writing was considered. No. 34. June 1, 1818. B. 1818, June 1, at 5 o'clock in the afternoon, the examination of Latin and Greek classes was resumed at the Novgorod district school. The students were tested by assigning short sayings in Russian to be translated into Latin and partly into Greek. This new experience did not refute the remarks made before. The original is signed: Filaret, Bishop of Revel. Caretaker, Archpriest of Sofia, John Velitsky. No. 35. June 2 days 1818. B. List of receipts and expenditures a) In the parish with the remainder from 1817. 1018 rub. 45 k. b) Consumed in the year 1818. 722 rub. 58¼ k. Then the balance is on the face - 295 rubles 86¼ k. 2) By parish school a) Residual from 1817 - 406 rubles. 68 k. b) The seminary board received 1,247 rubles in six months. 49½ k. 4) By parish school a) Residual from 1817 – 11 rubles. 13½ k. b) From the Iversky Bogoroditsky Monastery it was received with a message for No. - 100 rubles. 13½ k. c) Received from the seminary board for the first half of the year - 500 rubles. 13½ k. d) Expenses – 413 rubles. 27 k. e) Then the balance is 197 rubles. 86½ k. a) For Novgorod schools - 35 rubles. 60 k. b) For the Valdai Closed School - 11 rubles. 60 k. About the students of the Novgorod theological school In the higher department, all students are listed as 63. Of these, the face consists of 53, study in other schools – 4. In the lowest department, all students are listed as 104 on the transcripts. Of these, there are 84 of them, study in other schools – 13. In the second grade, all students are listed as 71. Of these, the face consists of 57, In the first grade, all students are listed on their transcripts Of these there are 25 per person study in other schools – 14 Students studying in the homes of parents and relatives – 43 about students who are on the Koshta of His Eminence and receive bursak or half-bursak salaries from the treasury. On His Eminence’s Kost – 20 On a student salary - 61 G. Commission of Theological Schools member, His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel, St. Petersburg Metropolitan Vicar, St. Petersburg Theological Academy Rector, Doctor of Theological Sciences, Moscow Stavropegic Novospassky Monastery, Holy Archimandrite and Knight. A report from the board of the Novgorod seminary. Your Eminence, by your proposal, dated June 1 of this year, No. 93, on the occasion of the discrepancy observed in the Novgorod district and parish schools in the calculation of the parish, the expenditure in the income book of the balance of the student's account for 1818, deigned to order the Novgorod seminary board: 1) to enter into a closer examination of the confusion in the calculation of this amount and the disorderly management a receipt book, in which the same amount of expenditure is shown as a part, but is not included in the parish at all, and let your Eminence know about the consequences; 2) confirm to the superintendent that amounts are always recorded in the book immediately when received or issued, and in the same quantity in which they are received or issued; 3) convey how it happened that the seminary steward, instead of one half of the amount written in the order, sent a receipt? 4) in the future, to avoid confusion, write in the instructions the amount of money that is actually being sent: for it is possible to send not just for a year, but also for only six months, or for a third of a year. As a result, Your Eminence, the Novgorod seminary board, on the 3rd of the mentioned points, humbly informs that from the steward of the seminary, instead of one half of the amount indicated in the order of the seminary board, a receipt was given to the caretaker only to certify that the other half of the amount, which was also supposed to go to him, was stopped by the seminary board for the time being; stopped its board because from the time the order was sent, i.e., from the 18th of April until the day of the caretaker’s appearance with that order to receive this amount, that is, until the 7th of May, unexpected circumstances opened up for the board, due to the rise in prices for food supplies, due to which it, due to the lack of staff and student funds, found the mentioned other half of the amount needed for its turnover according to economic part. Regarding other points of the proposal, proper execution has been carried out and your Eminence will be informed in a short time, when a detailed study of the income books has been done. The above documents were signed by: Rector, Archimandrite Vladimir 328. Inspector, Archimandrite Ambrose 329. Housekeeper, Hieromonk Seraphim. Secretary Peter Nikolaevsky. Writer Timofey Podgaetsky. No. 368. June 2 days 1818 330. June 6. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the review of the Novgorod seminary Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated June 6, 1818, No. 98, reported: Report to the Commission of Theological Schools from Philaret Bishop of Revel. I reviewed the Novgorod Seminary on June 1st. The order thereof and some remarks about the state of the classes are presented here, under the letter E. Since the time of this review is far from the end of the training course and even from the year-long test, I did not preface the Seminary Board with the procedure for inspecting the classes, so as not to distract the attention of students and students from continuing the lessons with preparation for this inspection. In order to be better able to fulfill the duty assigned to the observer of the School 467 § of the Academic Charter, I wanted to hear in each class the part of the lecture that the teacher should have read that day: I don’t know whether it was chance or intention that the reason that this was almost not fulfilled. In the theological class, instead of continuing the lessons, I found a repetition of what I had read long ago; in the philosophical one, where I arrived half an hour before the end of the school time assigned to this class, I also found a repetition of what I had read that very day. I arrived at the rhetoric room after the lesson time had ended. But we could not consider the state of learning at its very basis; I had to collect the more external features in which it presented itself into a general concept. For this reason, the general appearance of the educational administration at the Novgorod Seminary, if not in perfect order, at least does not represent any noticeable disorder. Science courses follow the path prescribed in the Charter; the students seem accustomed to this order; and in them there is already less noticeable burden that was caused by the transformation of schools from the multiplication of educational subjects. The Theological class is one of the best organized in the seminary. What is remarkable in his guidance is the constancy and diligence of the professor, who also writes his own notes for the lessons. From the repetition of the lesson contained in these notes, it was clear that they contained a systematic course of concepts; only the excess in the use of classical language makes them sometimes dry - a defect more or less common in the educational method remaining from the past century. I spoke to the professor about the need to get closer, if possible, to the common language in the educational department. They also talk about another drawback that is noticeable in the students’ answers (which is also noted in the journal), that is, about some enslavement of the reasoning of memory, when reporting on what was heard from the professor. No essays were shown to me. It is difficult to say anything affirmatively about the philosophical class, based on what I have heard. Part of the lecture, or better yet, part of the repetition of the lecture of that day, which I heard, consisted of fragments, which may be due to the student repeating it. The questions I proposed were also answered fragmentarily and incompletely; Perhaps the still immature age of many students hinders the maturity of judgment. No essays are shown either. I have said enough about the Rhetorical Class in the magazine. Despite the professor's news, he is guided thoroughly. Only in the knowledge of Latin literature does the previously noted deficiency continue; but from the presented Latin works it is clear that they are trying to correct the experience. The Church History class, taught by the same professor, seemed quite comfortable. This is what was noted in the magazine. In the General History class the systematic progress of science was not so noticeable. The magazine says enough about the Greek class. In other languages, there was no test for the use of time for testing in the sciences. The professor newly appointed last year testifies to the Hebrew language that not many people study it, but with attention. The Mathematical class, led by the same professor, is guided, apparently, thoroughly, as much as I could conclude from the solid course and logical order of concepts during the test. I was not in the seminary library, and there was nothing new to see in it after my previous review. Its catalog according to the new classification has been completed, but has not yet been verified. In moral management, the order prescribed by the charter is observed. Whether the spirit of this order is always preserved, one incident noted in the journal of the Seminary Board made me somewhat doubtful. For the disobedience of one student in front of the elder (and what it consisted of is not stated in the journal) and for personally insulting the inspector with words in absentia, this one asked the Board to condemn him to bread and water for 7 days. I advised the inspector to be more concerned with the personal behavior of the students than with their personal insults, so that they would not think that they were being revenged in anger, and not correcting their vices. The seminary's economy still shows the same frugality as seen in the previous review. But poverty is increasing. The extract from the seminary journal presented here, under the letter Z, shows that the Board can barely support the students with food; and he refrains from making necessary repairs around the house so as not to go into debt. The rising price of bread brings him into a new difficulty: I think it cannot be done without asking for help from his superiors. The seminary hospital was found in order and neatness. Writing is in good working order; and even it seemed to me in some cases too strict. For example: a student who uses food in the seminary also wants to receive a dress; he writes a request; the board enter it into the journal, and, often, due to the knowledge of the circumstances of the applicant, decide to refuse. Couldn't this have been verbal? Members of the Board respond, which must be in writing, in case of a complaint from a dissatisfied student to the Higher Authorities. So this severity is the caution of the Board, which knows the spirit of its subordinates. Filaret Bishop of Revel. Tver. No. 98. June 6 days. 1818 Two documents are attached to this report, under lit. E and G, as follows: E. 1818, June 1, at 8 o'clock in the morning, he began to review the Novgorod seminary by visiting the theological class, with the beginning of his lectures. It consisted of the students repeating, through questions and answers, the teaching about the fall of man. After hearing this, the observers were asked theological questions most relevant to the subject of the previous lecture. The students' answers showed satisfied attention to the subject of study; although it was not revealed entirely by the free action of reasoning, but in some more by the tension of memory; The viewing of this class lasted an hour and a half. After that, in the philosophical class, part of the cosmological lecture on the supernatural or miraculous was heard; and suggested to the observer some questions from cosmology, psychology and logic. This lasted one hour. Next, we spent an hour inspecting the rhetoric class. The students were tested by the teacher's questions in the science of word arrangement. The observers were offered questions from other parts of rhetoric; material for periodical speech was assigned, and finally, experience in translation from Latin into Russian was required. The students answered the teacher’s questions freely in Latin, but they did not do the assigned translation from Latin freely. Oral experiments in periodic speech were brief, but the works shown at the same time, written by students as prescribed by the teacher, were found to be not meager in both word and thought. The last half hour before noon is used for testing in Greek. It has been noticed that the students of the upper classes, after the beginnings of this teaching, adopted in the lower classes, acquired less than they should have expected due to their time and age. They are not free to translate from the New Testament. At one o'clock in the afternoon the table of students was looked at. At two o'clock in the afternoon the inspection of classrooms resumed. Some experiments in mathematics exercises are shown. The test in both history classes lasted until four o'clock in the afternoon. By gathering them in one hall, an opportunity was given to compare them through a joint test. Students in the general history class took on some details of church history; but they did not always freely answer ordinary questions belonging to universal history. Students of church history, to the questions put to them, answered for the most part with reasoning and freedom. Finally, we looked at some of the students’ living rooms and the seminary hospital. To review the state of seminar writing, a journal for this year was requested from the board. No. 219. June 2 days, 1818 331. J. Copy of article IV of the journal of the Novgorod seminary board, dated February 12, 1818. Reported. Seminary economy, Hieromonk Seraphim, in note No. 5, presents an approximate breakdown of expenses for the seminary in the first half of this year 1818, in which the total expenses are expected to be 8307 rubles. 72 kopecks, in addition to the salaries of the seminary officials and the costs of the library, as well as student fees. Reasoned. According to the first article of the attached schedule, be guided in the 1st half of this year, and according to the 2nd article, since the amount indicated here is much greater than the standard amount from the production of repairs, listed under Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, withheld until consideration, so as not to go into debt; what about. savings and let me know with an extract from this magazine article. Secretary Pyotr Nikolaevsky. No. 220. June 2, 1818 332. June 6. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on his inspection of the Vyshnevolotsk district and parish schools. In a report to the commission of theological schools, dated June 6, 1818, No. 99, from Tver, Bishop Filaret wrote: 4 days of this month I inspected the Vyshnevolotsk District and Parish Schools. The order of this inspection and some of the notes I made are presented here in the list from the journal I made on the spot, under the letter 3. The classes of the Greek and Latin languages, even now, as in the previous review, were not found to be perfect; and the teachers again find excuses for themselves, as shown in the magazine. But the present teacher has already been found guilty of the imperfections of the lower Latin class, and was retained by the Seminary Board only in the hope of correction. According to the Overseer’s remark, it does a lot of harm to the higher Greeks that his teacher is a priest, whose church is far from the school. The lower Greek class is better, due to the diligence of the teacher, although this one is a deacon. There is nothing left to say about the other classes beyond what is seen in the magazine. The school building, in which previously there was hope to see a well-maintained school, is going into decline. The main building, where the classrooms are located, is still strong, but the inside is not tidy. Another building without a roof was presented to the Seminary Board for its sale. The inspector who lived in this house no longer lives in it, and was dismissed from the post of Inspector. Only the 5 poorest students live in the poorest way. The desire to be expelled from school still manifests itself in many students. The superintendent complains about the poor state of the schools, but does not have enough strength to help this. He hesitates between teachers who disagree with each other. The desire to change some of them was not fulfilled by the Seminary Board due to the lack of students today. School writing is not done lazily, but not always with happy reasoning. The caretaker is confused in the concept of external and internal affairs. I left these schools with great regret because I saw students in them with hope. Filaret Bishop of Revel. Tver. No. 99. June 6 days, 1818. A copy of the following journal was attached to this report: 1818, July 4 days, at 8:30 a.m. the survey of Vyshnevolotsk schools began. It began by testing the students of the higher department of the district school in translation from Greek, which at that time they practiced according to the location of the school hours. Meanwhile, grammatical questions and Russian sayings were proposed for translation into Greek. Then, in the same way, this department was tested in Latin. The students' success in these subjects is not found to be at a high level, which the students previously attribute to the former lack of teacher. Test of the same department in St. history, catechism and partly geography were more satisfactory. In the lower department, the students were tested in Greek etymology, partly in syntax, analysis of the text from the New Testament and questions, and some answered satisfactorily. The students of this department turned out to be weak in the beginnings of the Latin language. One student is tested in singing. In the upper class of the parish school there was a short test in Russian grammar, and in the lower class they listened to reading and looked at copybooks. The inspection of classes ended at 11 o'clock. Then we looked at the writing department of the school administration. Vyshnevolotsk religious schools rector, Kazan Cathedral Archpriest Vasily Petrov 333. June 6. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of religious schools on his inspection of Novotorzh religious schools Bishop Filaret, in a report to the commission of theological schools, from Tver, dated June 6, 1818, No. 100, wrote: How the inspection of the Novotorzhsky Theological Schools took place, I present at the discretion of the Commission of Theological Schools a list of the journal, under the letter I. About the state of these schools even now, it would also be necessary to say what was said in my report to the Commission of Theological Schools upon review of them in 1815. There is no need to repeat what was said. In these schools we see and feel with consolation a meek and attentive disposition of spirit that harmoniously unites both teachers and students. They again complained to me about the lack of room for open testing; and citizens love to see these tests, which is useful for establishing their trust in both the teaching and the school. In writing, here too, there is a mistake that the ruling position of Rector, without having separate subordinate Schools, has a book of external affairs. An explanation was made to him about this. Filaret Bishop of Revel. Tver. No. 100. June 6 days, 1818. A copy of the following journal was attached to this report: 1818, June 5, Novotorzhsky religious schools were inspected. This began at 7 o'clock in the morning by testing the students of the higher department of the district school in the catechism with questions from the teacher, and then from the observer. This was followed by a test in sacred history. The test in languages ​​was carried out most of all through the oral translation of Russian sayings into Latin and Greek. One student is tested in singing. In the lower department, after testing in the catechism, students are tested in Greek and Latin etymology, partly in translation into Latin and in the analysis of some Slavic words according to grammatical rules. In the highest class of the parish school there was a test in Russian grammar, and in the lower class they looked at writing and listened to reading. Schools were found in due order. The inspection of the classes ended at 10 o'clock. Then we looked at school magazines. The ruling position of rector of the Novotorzh district and parish theological schools, the Clement Church, priest Alexey Postnikov 334. June 11. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on his inspection of Tver district and parish schools Bishop Filaret, in a report to the commission of theological schools, from Moscow, dated June 11, 1818, No. 101, wrote: Report to the Commission of Theological Schools from Bishop Philaret of Revel. I inspected the Tver District and Parish Schools on the 7th day of this month. The list from the log of this inspection is presented here, under the letter L. The educational schools are in the same order and perfection as those found during the previous inspection. The school house was dilapidated from the inside. The caretaker suggested a correction at the next vacation time. Two living rooms in the school house are occupied by 18 students. There is no more room. The promise of the former Abbot of the Monastery 335 to place several students in the monastery building is considered by the current Abbot 336 to be unfulfillable. Filaret Bishop of Revel Moscow. No. 101. June 11, 1818. A copy of the following journal was attached to this report: L. 1818, June 7th, at ten o’clock in the afternoon, the inspection of Tver district and parish schools began. In the higher department of the district school there was a test in the catechism, sacred history, languages: Latin and Greek, and geography. Many of the answers were satisfactory. In the lower department, the test was in languages: Latin and Greek, and Slavic grammar. The answers for the Latin class were better than for the others. In the upper class of the parish school, some students were tested in Russian grammar and one in musical singing. The lower class watched writing and listened to reading. Then the bursa was examined and found neat; the inspection ended at eleven o'clock. Tver religious schools superintendent, Otrochevsky Archimandrite Gideon. Inspector, higher department teacher, hieromonk Macarius 337. June 11. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools, with a journal attached, on the election of candidates for external members of the conference of the Moscow Theological Academy According to the order given to me by the Commission of Theological Schools, which was set out in its journal on April 27 of this year, I had communication with His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow 338 about the election of candidates for external members of the Conference, which was to open at the Moscow Theological Academy. The journal of this relationship, signed by both of us, in which the elected candidates are also named, is presented to the Commission of Theological Schools at the discretion. It is my duty to explain that if the Commission of Theological Schools deigns to approve the elected ones, then, in addition to the order about this to the Academy, it is necessary to give direct information about this to His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow, so that he has time to notify the chosen ones, and those of them who will not be prevented from arriving at the Academy on the first day of July for the opening of the Conference. Filaret Bishop of Revel. Moscow. No. 102. June 11th, 1818. Attached to this report was a journal about the election of candidates with the following content: His Eminence Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow, and Philaret Bishop of Revel, as a result of the determination of the Commission of Theological Schools contained in its journal on April 27 of this year, which, on the occasion of the approaching end of the first educational course of the Moscow Theological Academy, for the opening of the Academic Conference in its entirety, instructed the Bishop of Revel to enter into preliminary relations with His Eminence The Archbishop of Moscow on the election of external full members of the Conference from the clergy, to present them to the Commission of Theological Schools for approval, based on personal communication and reasoning on this subject, decided: among the external full members having the opening of the Conference of the Moscow Academy, the following persons should be presented to the Commission of Theological Schools as candidates: Stavropegial Donskoy Monastery of Archimandrite Eugene 339, VysokoPetrovsky Monastery of Archimandrite Lawrence 340, Moscow Seminary Rector Archimandrite Parthenius 341, Dormition Council of Protopresbyter Jacob Dimitriev 342, Church of the Three Hierarchs, which is at the Red Gate, Archpriest Nikolai Drugov 343, Church of the Resurrection, in Barashi, Priest Simeon Sokolov 344. This provision, in the original of this journal, was given to the Bishop of Revel to present to the Commission of Theological Schools. Augustine Archbishop of Moscow. The Commission of Theological Schools, in its journal dated June 24, 1818, decided: “The candidates elected by the Archbishop of Moscow and the Bishop of Revel for senior members of the Conference, which is to open at the Moscow Theological Academy, shall be approved 345. June 11. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on his review of the Tver seminary Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated June 11, 1818, No. 103, from Moscow, reported: Commission of Theological Schools from Bishop Philaret. Revelsky's report. I inspected the Tver Seminary on the 6th day of this month. The contents of this inspection and some comments on the state of the classes are presented here in the list in the journal, under the letter K. To this journal and the information I presented to the Commission of Theological Schools after the previous review, I have little left to add here. The educational state of the Tver Seminary generally seems to be rising. The Theological class is now more entertaining than it was before, despite the fact that the change of Rector 346, the long non-arrival of the new one due to long distance and illness, and his illness that lasted for some time upon arrival, slowed down the progress of the teaching. The only consequence of this is that Dogmatic Theology, whose lessons the professor mostly works over again, is unlikely to be completed before the vacancy time; one can hope that everything required by the outline of theological teaching in the seminary will be fulfilled during the second year of the course. The lecture that I heard in this class was repetitive: but since the professor kept the thread of the argument unceasingly, challenging only the students with questions to participate in it, this experience served me as convincing evidence of the professor’s art in teaching. I found the students’ writings shown to me to be carefully censored. The Philosophical class is somewhat constrained by the concepts of the textbook: however, it is guided diligently, and the students’ ability to reason is noticeably improved by the acquired information. The Literature class is in order: and this is all the more important because it is very numerous. 270 students in a class like this are an extremely heavy burden for the teacher, even with the help of a student lecturer. This subject deserves special attention of the Commission of Theological Schools. It would be useful to generally determine how many students should be entrusted to one teacher, so that he can occupy them all properly; and how to deal with those classes whose multitude is beyond the attention and strength of the teacher? The Greek language class turned out to be in good condition in all departments of the Seminary. I am pleased with my progress in Latin in the Rhetorical department. In the other two I heard more Russian than Latin. The Church History class was mentioned in the magazine. And in the General History class, one could see the diligence of the teacher (whom I saw and his own notes to supplement the textbook) and the attention of the students: but what I heard looked like only a simple story, and not a systematic teaching. The circumstances of moral governance are the same now as they were in the past. The old school building has been plastered and the new one is being plastered. The Seminary Board is in a hurry to place students in it: and, of course, it is desirable to see this as soon as possible: but I pointed out to its members that excessive speed of finishing could later turn out to be harmful for the building. The advice may be late, because the terms of the work have already been concluded. It is a pity that the new building does not yet have space for an inconveniently and far away library. Filaret Bishop of Revel. Moscow. No. 103. A copy of the following document is attached to the report. K. 1818, June, on the 6th day, in the morning, at 8 o’clock, the review of the Tver Seminary began by visiting a theological class, in which for an hour and a half a repeat lecture was heard on the primitive state of man, in which the reviewer participated with questions. In this experience one could see a solid teaching, proposed in a systematic manner and carefully accepted. Then, in the philosophy class, part of the lecture was heard on sensual desire and passions, and the students were asked questions related to this subject, and other parts of philosophy that had already been taught. Some students' answers showed attention to the subject and knowledge of philosophical terminology. This lasted one hour. The test in the science of invention and arrangement continued for another hour in the rhetoric class; and material was given for oral periodic speech, in which some students made successful experiments in Russian and Latin. Finally, translations from Clement of Alexandria, Chrysostom and Macarius were listened to in Greek classes for half an hour. The translation was done freely, and the students showed knowledge of the peculiarities of the language. At two o'clock in the afternoon we visited a church history class. The subject of the test was especially the period of Solomon's gram. The answers were copious and spontaneous, although sometimes they followed the textbook too literally. Several questions have been asked about the Jewish class. According to the test in universal history, the inspection of classes ended at four o'clock. Then they looked at the new seminary building and the writing department of the seminary board. On the occasion of reviewing the journal of the seminary board, it was proposed to this board: 1) Do not give the housekeeper a large sum in round numbers without a specific purpose (as the magazine on January 28 of this year was supposed to give him 1000 rubles for firewood without indicating how much of it is purchased and at what price), but only according to § 207 of the seminary charter, not more than 100 rubles for petty expenses; purchases for the most important amount should be made according to the decisions of the board, indicating the quantity and price of things, and then give the money to the sellers with receipts, since the contrary is prohibited to the steward in § 247 of the seminary charter. 2) Regarding the correcting position of rector at the Novotorzhsky district school, consider whether the seminary board will find it decent, instead of the half salary assigned to him for the teaching position according to the regulations of the board, as can be seen from the 2nd article of the journal of the seminary board, April 29 of this year, to assign a full teacher’s salary, as because he teaches four subjects: catechism, sacred history, Latin and arithmetic, and in respect of the fact that when examining the schools it turned out to be in excellent working order. On the morning of the 7th day, we looked at some of the students’ essays in classes: theological, philosophical and rhetorical. No. 188. June 7, 1818 347 June 13. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools about the bachelor of the Moscow Academy Tyazhelov Bishop Filaret of Revel, in a report dated June 13, 1818, No. 105, wrote: Having seen from the examination of the students of the Moscow Theological Academy in the class of the Hebrew language, information improved by experience, a solid way of teaching, justified by the successes of the students, and the diligence of master Arseny Tyazhelov teaching the Hebrew language, 348 and having been confirmed in a good opinion of him by the certificate of the Rector of the Academy, attached here, I made it my duty to immediately bring this to the attention of the Commission of Theological Schools, in that particular assumption, not Will it be considered, in order to do him justice in comparison with others, to include him among the appointed internal members of the Academic Conference that is about to open? Filaret Bishop of Revel. No. 105. June 13, 1818 The following document was attached to the report: Moscow Theological Academy Bachelor of Hebrew Language Master Arseniy Tyazhelov, during his four-year course he held his position with excellent care and skill, both in knowledge and in teaching students his subject. Behavior that is fundamentally kind and honest. Academy Rector, Archimandrite Filaret. 1818, June 13th day. 349 June 13. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the testing of students of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated June 13, 1818, No. 104, reported: Report to the Commission of Theological Schools from Bishop Filaret of Revel. The preliminary test for students of the Moscow Theological Academy began this June 12th. The testing of the Theological class was not started due to the absence of the rector 350 and the professor of Theological Sciences, who was absent due to the position of rector and the will of his superiors; and the test has begun with the class of languages, and specifically with the Hebrew language. I gave the Commission of Theological Schools the duty to inform the Commission about this. Filaret Bishop of Revel. No. 104. June 13, 1818. The Commission of Theological Schools, in a journal dated June 30, 1818, determined: 1) Master Tyazhelov, Bachelor of the Moscow Theological Academy, according to the proposal of His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel, to be appointed as an internal member of the conference that is about to open, and to issue an order to the academic board about this. 2) Take into account the report of his own, Eminence Philaret, about the start of testing the students of this academy 351. June 19. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the audit of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated June 19, 1818, No. 109, reported: Report to the Commission of Theological Schools from Philaret Bishop of Revel. On the 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th days of this month, at seven meetings, a test in the Hebrew, Greek, French and German languages ​​was carried out at the Moscow Theological Academy. Lists from the journals of this test are presented here, under the letters M.N.O.P.R.S. The Jewish class was distinguished by the correctness and thoroughness of its knowledge of the language. In the Greek class there are excellent students, but there are also those who have little knowledge of the very rudiments of the language. In the French class, despite the ease of the language, there are very few knowledgeable people. The German class is small: for that reason, there are not as few successful ones in it as in Greek and French. From the 17th day, a test in the Theological sciences began, and is now continuing, about which it will be reported upon completion. No. 109. June 19, 1818 Copies of the following documents were attached to this report: M. 1818, June 12 noon. The preliminary test of students of the Moscow Theological Academy began at 9 o'clock in the morning. Due to the absence of a rector and professor of theological sciences, it was started not by the theological class, but by the language class, and specifically by the Hebrew language. For special participation in the test on this subject, on the basis of § 385 of the charter of theological academies and the regulations of the commission of theological schools, set out in its journal on May 27 of this year, Master G. Levitsky was elected. Tested through a translation from the book of Ecclesiastes, not read in class by the teacher, with grammatical and philological analysis, the students of the higher department, whose names follow here and whose degree of success in the test is indicated here (which is accepted as a rule for the entire test), by three numbers, of which 1 represents excellent knowledge of the subject, 2 satisfactory, 3 mediocrity, which does not give the right to be a teacher of that subject. Tested in Hebrew 14 students 352. The first meeting ended at 12:30 p.m. The second meeting began at two o'clock and three quarters in the afternoon. This second meeting lasted two hours. After this, through communication between the observer of the academy and the masters who participated in the test and taught, from the comments made by each of them during the test, indications of success were compiled, presented above in the numbers 353. N. 1818, June 13th. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in the Hebrew language continued as before and 14 students of the higher department and 5 students of the lower department were tested. Other students of the lower department studying the Hebrew language, as they must pass the final test in this subject in two years, in order to save time for other test subjects, were left without testing, relying on the certificates of the teacher, of which there are 20. The meeting lasted three hours. O. 1818, June 13th. At three o'clock in the afternoon, a test in the Greek language began with a translation from Clement of Alexandria, with an analysis of words and expressions requiring special attention. Masters G. Levitsky and G. Tazhelov were elected to participate in this test. In a meeting that lasted two hours, 11 students were tested. From 8 a.m. to 12, the test continued in Greek through translation with analysis from Clement of Alexandria, and from the letters of Gregory the Theologian. Tested the higher department of 30 students. R. 1818, June 14 days. From 3 o'clock in the afternoon the test was continued in Greek through the letters of Isidore Pelusiot. 18 undergraduate students were tested; the lower department of 5 students and left without testing, in confidence in the teacher’s certificates, 43 students. S. 1818, June 15th day. At 8 o'clock in the morning the test in French began. For this purpose, Fenelon’s spiritual creations were used; and the inspector of the academy, Archimandrite Hermogenes, was elected for special participation in the test. Tested by the higher department of 31 students; lower division 3 students; 14 students were left without testing, trusting the teacher’s evidence. Then there was a test in the German language, through the works of Arndt, which was given in a special way to the rector of the academy, Fr. Archimandrite Philaret. The highest department of 17 students and the lower department of 1 student were tested; 4 students were left without testing. The meeting ended at the end of 12 o'clock. No. 200 July 17, 1818 354. June 22. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools about the incorrect appointment of members of the Moscow consistory Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated July 22, 1818, No. 141, reported: According to the duty assigned to me, when inspecting schools, to notice and bring to the attention of the authorities any deviation from the rules, I make it my duty to bring to the attention of the Commission of Theological Schools that the 70th and 123rd paragraphs of the Highest approved Outline of the rules on the formation of Theological Schools have not been implemented in the Moscow Diocese, that is, neither the Rector of the Academy, nor the Rectors of the two The seminary was not made members of the Consistory, but on the contrary, the Rector of the District School was made. The reasons for this deviation from the Supremely approved rules can be assumed to be that the Rector of the Academy and one of the Rectors of the Seminaries are stauropegial archimandrites, and that these schools are located outside the capital. However, in the St. Petersburg Consistory there was already an example that the stauropegial archimandrites, according to the Highest approved rules of the Schools, were its members, and the Moscow stauropegial archimandrites did not refuse this. Inconvenience It is not necessary for rectors of schools located outside Moscow to be present in the Consistory. If, following the example of the St. Petersburg Consistory, they were required to be present during the time free from their studies, and were exempt from signing journals on those days when they are not present: then they could be present, at least during vacation times, and the Perervinsky Rector more often. This order would be useful in the fact that no deviation from the rules would be allowed, which, if left unfulfilled one by one, then over time everything will lose force. The connection between the Diocesan and educational administration would be more perfect; The relationship between the Consistory and the School Boards is easier. It is also important that the Rectors would become more familiar with the form of Diocesan administration and would become involved in the practice of Canon Law. I most respectfully present the circumstances for the consideration of the Commission of Theological Schools. No. 141. July 22 days, 1818 The Commission of Theological Schools, in a journal dated July 29, 1818, determined: to allow His Eminence Michael, Metropolitan of Novgorod, to communicate with His Eminence Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow, so that the 70th and 123rd paragraphs of the highest approved outline of the rules on the formation of theological schools, but of whose powers the rectors of academies and seminaries must be members consistories, in the Moscow diocese were carried out, however, so that the rectors of the Moscow Academy and the seminaries subordinate to it, due to their residence outside Moscow, were not forced to be present in the consistory constantly along with others, but when their school position allowed them, and that they were exempt from signing journals and definitions on those days when they were not present 355. June 23. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the audit of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated June 23, 1818, No. 110, reported: This month, on the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th days, in the 8th meeting, a preliminary oral test in the Theological Sciences was carried out at the Moscow Theological Academy. Lists from the journals of this test are presented here, under the letters: T.U.F.H. The state of this class, which, however, can be sufficiently known when a written test is added to the oral test, has hitherto not been presented in the same form, in different parts of the Theological teaching, which should be attributed to the effect of the unequal personal education and preparation of the three persons participating in the leadership of this class. Students show the greatest information in Dogmatic Theology. This information is pure, thorough and abundant: only in them can one sometimes notice the imperfection of the order of truths, and a certain compulsion, resulting especially from the use of a well-known topical method in fragmenting concepts. The information in Hermeneutics corresponds to the textbook. It is not clear that anything was adopted in teaching to improve this part, or to make this teaching more convenient and more accurate. In some of the lessons of theological moral teaching that I heard, one could see abundance and order in concepts. In some lessons about Divine right and Christian prudence, dryness of concepts that are not watered from the source of the Word of God is noticed. The lessons from the Theology of the Convict were presented in order, but not quite ingrained in all students. The denunciation of the schisms in our church has not yet been processed. Discourse theology is not read because it is replaced by the existing special class of church eloquence; in the Theological class, even without her, there are more objects than time. There is no concept of canon law. At the end of the Theological Oral Test, testing continues in other academic subjects of the higher department: No. 110. June 23 days, 1818 Copies of the following documents were attached to this report: T. 1818, June 17th day. At 8 o'clock in the morning the test in theological sciences began. The following were chosen as special participants in the test: Professor of Philosophical Sciences Mr. Kutnevich and Bachelor of Church History Archimandrite Nikanor. The order of the oral test is assumed to be such that students are assigned one question each from Fr. the rector, according to his reasoning, and in another way by lot, and in case of lack of time, only by one, by lot. The answers should require a continuous and, if possible, detailed presentation of a given subject, and then the resolution of private questions and objections related to the same subject proposed by the examiners. In addition to the language of the lessons, that is, Latin, Russian is allowed in some explanations and competitions. 4 students were tested. The meeting ended at 12 o'clock and three quarters. During this meeting, the students of the lower department were busy with a written solution to the question: An Philosophia potest hominem reddere beatum? From 3 o'clock in the afternoon, the test in theological sciences continued in the same order for an hour and a half, and 2 students were tested. Outside the meeting, several essays written that day by students of the lower department were read. No. 211. June 17, 1818 356 U. 1818, June 18th. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in theological sciences continued. 9 students were tested. The meeting ended at 12 o'clock and three quarters. During this meeting, students of the lower department were busy with a written solution to the question: what are space and time? From 3 to 5 o'clock in the afternoon the test in theological sciences continued. 5 students were tested. Outside the meeting, some essays written that day by students of the lower department 357 were read. F. 1818, June 19th day. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in theological sciences continued. 11 students were tested. The meeting ended at one o'clock in the afternoon. From 3 o'clock in the afternoon, for 2 hours, 6 students were tested. No. 213. June 22, 1818. X. 1818, June 20 days. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in theological sciences continued. 14 students were tested. The meeting ended at 12:30 p.m. From 3 o'clock in the afternoon the same test continued. 12 students were tested. The meeting (and this part of the test) ended at 6 o'clock in the afternoon. No. 214. June 22, 1818 358. June 26. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the audit of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated June 26, 1818, No. 121, reported: On the 21st, 22nd and 24th days of this month, a preliminary oral test was carried out at the Moscow Theological Academy in the classes of Church Literature. Lists from the test logs are presented here, under the letters: Ts, Ch, Sh, Shch, Kommersant. The lessons of church eloquence written by the teachers were brief, as can be seen from the fact that almost all of their content was exhausted during the test, which lasted two meetings. But even with this brevity, these lessons, as noted during the test, were not firmly accepted by all students. One reason for this can be assumed that they, although for the most part thorough, did not always seem entertaining because they repeat quite a few rules belonging to general eloquence. It is not visible that the teacher occupied the students with reading and analysis of the exemplary writings of St. father, except for one word of St. Chrysostom on Eutropius. Questions from Church History were answered satisfactorily when the test followed the image and order of the study book, but when it deviated from this image and order, or when the basis of a legend was sought, however, indicated in the study book: then simple questions made it difficult for some subjects. One of the reasons for this shortcoming must be that the teacher adhered too literally to the textbook and represented, so to speak, a historian of historical lessons - and not a researcher and mentor. Having thus completed the oral test in the sciences of the highest department of the Academy, it now continues in the sciences of the lower department: and the students of the higher department are tested, meanwhile, through essays. No. 121. June 26, 1818. Sergius Lavra C. 1818, June 21 days. At 8 o'clock in the morning the test in the science of church eloquence began. Bachelor Archimandrite Nikanor was invited to take a special part in the test. Students are supposed to be given questions in the order of the lessons. 25 students were tested 359 . During this meeting, students of the lower department were busy writing an essay for the class of general eloquence, on the question: should truth be embellished in words? 360 No. 216. June 22, 1818. Ch. 1818, June 21 days. From 3 o'clock in the afternoon the test in church literature continued. 36 students were tested. The meeting (and the test for this part) ended at 5 o'clock in the afternoon. The test included almost all subjects indicated in the lesson notes of this department. Some of the works written on this day were read outside the meeting. Sh. 1818, June 22 days. At 8 o'clock in the morning a test in church history began, in which Fr. rector and inspector of the academy. In terms of the scope of the subject, the examiners’ questions were directed less at the narrative part of the story, and more at the exploratory part and the spirit of the incidents. 27 students were tested. The meeting ended at 12:30 p.m. No. 214. June 26, 1818. Shch. 1818, June 24 days. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in church history continued. 27 students were tested. The meeting and testing for this part ended at 11 o'clock and three quarters. Kommersant, 1818, June 24 days. At 3 o'clock in the afternoon a test was carried out in the mathematical class, with the help of Professor Mr. Kutnevich and Bachelor Mr. Tyazhelov. 5 students of the higher department and 2 students of the lower department were tested. The continuation of this test is left to discretion, due to the little time remaining for testing in other academic subjects of the lower department. The meeting ended at 5 o'clock and three quarters 361. No. 216. June 26, 1818. June 27. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools, with an attached explanation of the Novgorod seminary board, about allowing them to enroll students in one school and study in another Bishop Filaret of Revel, June 27, 1818, for No. 122, from the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, the commission of theological schools wrote: The explanation of the Novogorod Seminary Board about the permission they made for students to enroll in one school and study in another, which was mentioned in my report about the Novogorod schools, No. 96 362, I present in the original to the Commission of Theological Schools for the discretion and resolution of this case. Trinity Sergius Lavra. No. 122. June 27 days, 1818 Attached to this document was a report from the board of the Novgorod seminary to Bishop Philaret, dated June 12, 1818, No. 389, with the following content: Your Eminence to the Novgorod seminary board, on the 4th of this month and year, having forwarded a list of students of the Novgorod Sofia schools, enrolled only in these schools, and studying in others, indicated by the letter d, with your proposal, No. 97, deigned to order entering into reasoning, what could prevent these students from being enrolled where they study, and whether this and it is easier for the bosses and more useful for the students, whom now one boss counts, but does not teach, and another teaches, but not as their own, and let your Eminence know about the consequences of this reasoning; Therefore, the seminary board humbly informs that it is enrolling students only where they study, and does not find any obstacles. They were always registered in those schools where they studied, and detailed reports about them were delivered to those to which they belonged in the districts, and these reports about them were given to the seminary board. Such a means was allowed only for the sake of knowing how many students belong to which particular district and parish school, and for verification: whether all the children who should be in one or another school are represented by parents and relatives in them; The reason for this was that the diocesan authorities, when opening schools, assigned one, two, or more well-known districts to each district and its parish school. Rector, Archimandrite Vladimir. Inspector, Archimandrite Ambrose. Secretary Pyotr Nikolaevsky. Writer Timofey Podgoetsky 363. July 3. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the audit of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated July 3, 1818, No. 125, reported: The testing of students of the Moscow Theological Academy of the lower department, in the academic subjects of this department, began on the 24th day of the last month, at the end of the meeting, in the mathematics class. The list from the journal of this meeting was presented to the Commission of Theological Schools, under the letter B, upon my report, No. 121 364. The test in other subjects of this department lasted 25, 26, 27 and 28 days and ended on the last day. Lists from magazines of these days are presented here, under the letters: Y, B, Kommersant, E, Yu, Ya. In the mathematics class, some of the first-year students, of their own free will, took special interest in the last two years of Academic studies. The philosophical lessons, due to the lack of a philosophical educational book for history, and the dissatisfied perfection of the educational book for the philosophical system, are all handled by the professor, with thoroughness, order and clarity. Particularly noteworthy in them is the professor’s intention to make friends between Philosophy and revealed Religion and, through the research of the former, to prepare the path for the latter. It is desirable that these lessons, with the further exercise of the professor, be brought into such a state that they can be used for the benefit of other theological schools. The foundations of these lessons are firmly accepted by the students, which could be especially seen from the essays they wrote during the test: not all of them are explained freely orally, partly due to the difficulty of the subject itself, to some extent inevitable, especially since the times of critical Philosophy. The professor did not have time to process moral philosophy. General history, as far as one could judge from the trial, which was not quite long, was taught systematically and in the spirit in which the Academic Regulations set it. The lessons of general literature are presented in order, but in some places they lack thoroughness and clarity. They sound like expressions from various modern aesthetics, collected as if in order to drown out rather than instill the truth. Sometimes the most difficult is used to explain the difficult. They pronounce many definitions of one thing in order to say that it has no definition. Beauty is set as the goal of poetry, to the exclusion of truth and goodness. In the students' answers, the limit where their understanding ends and aesthetic contemplations incomprehensible to them begin is often indicated by the words: says Butervek. There are subjects in which they disagree with the teacher's opinion. However, it is worthy of praise that they were given concepts about classical writers; and they analyzed some of them in writing, especially the Latin ones. At the end of the preliminary test, on the 2nd day of this month, we proceeded to the open test, which will be reported at the end of it. Sergius Lavra. No. 125. July 3 days, 1818 Attached to this report were copies of the following documents: Y. 1818, June 25 days. At 8 o'clock in the morning the test in philosophical sciences began. The questions are supposed to be given in order of the system; and an experienced psychologist is appointed for the first meeting. Special participation in the test was given to Fr. rector and inspector of the academy. 16 students were tested. The meeting ended at 12 o'clock. Meanwhile, the students of the higher department were busy writing an essay in Latin to the question: Argumentorum pro veritate 365 religionis christianae quodnam est firmissimum? From 3 o'clock in the afternoon the test in the philosophical sciences, and specifically in logic, continued. 8 students were tested. The meeting ended at 5 o'clock. Outside the meetings, some essays written by students that day were read, of which the student essays were especially worthy of approval: No. 228. June 1, 1818 366 b. 1818, June 26 days. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in philosophical sciences continued. 21 students were tested. The meeting and testing for this part ended at 12 o'clock. During this meeting, the students of the higher department were busy with an essay that required an explanation of the words of the Savior: “believe in Me; the works that I do, he will also do, and greater works than these will he do.” Kommersant 1818, June 26 days. At 3 o'clock in the afternoon the test in world history began. Special participation in this test was given to Fr. rector and inspector of the academy. In a meeting that lasted two hours, 12 students were tested. Outside the meetings of this day, some of the essays written by students this day were read. The students' essays were especially worthy of praise: E. 1818, June 27 days. From 8 o'clock in the morning to 12 o'clock the test in universal history continued. 24 students were tested. Yu. 1818, June 27 days. At 3 o'clock in the afternoon the test began in the general literature class. Special assistance in this test was provided by Fr. Rector of the Academy and Bachelor Fr. Archimandrite Nikanor. In a meeting that lasted 2½ hours, 13 students were tested. Y. 1818, June 28 days. From 8 o'clock in the morning the test in the science of eloquence continued, in the lowest department of the academy. 31 students were tested. The meeting and test ended at 12 o'clock. Students of the higher department, for a practical test of their eloquence, were assigned to write during this meeting: an proclamation for the conference of the local academy, in the event of its opening. Outside the meeting, works written that day were read, some of which turned out to be especially worthy of approval. Vasily Alyavdin (and his own essay, written on 26 days). No. 233. July 1, 1818 367 July 8. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the audit of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated July 8, 1818, No. 127, reported: Returning from the Trinity Sergius Lavra to Moscow, I hasten to present to the Commission of Theological Schools information about the completion of tests at the Moscow Theological Academy. The progress of public tests and the way of compiling a complete list of categories is shown by the lists presented here from magazines, under the letters: a, b, c, d, e, f, g. I also present here the notes from which the preliminary test took place, the program for the decisive test and the reasoning read on it. Regarding the opening of the conference, I owe it to myself to explain that I announced to the Academy its internal members, appointed by the Commission of Theological Schools, as a proposal just before the start of the open test: for the Academy did not receive an order about them from the Commission of Theological Schools. I also found it necessary to announce to the Academy about those persons who were elected and presented as members of its Conference: for some of them, at the invitation of His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow, arrived from Moscow specifically for academic tests; which is why it was necessary to invite them to take an active part in this matter. The approval of these members by the Commission of Theological Schools was received by the second day of the open test. The rank list, compiled in four meetings and presented in parts in four journals, was again considered on the 7th day in a meeting of all teachers at the Academy. After the few changes made in it by this general meeting, I left it, due to the speed of my departure, not brought into this new form; but he allowed this to be done without me, however, on the basis of a special journal made about it, signed by me and all the teachers, from which a copy, also due to the speed of my departure, was not delivered to me. In the journals of my exercises at the Academy, there is no mention of an inspection of parts of the economic, hospital, library and academic writing department. This happened because the magazines were occupied with the subjects of my common exercises with the members of the Academy, with which I did not mix the exercises of my private ones in the matter of reviewing the Academy. I examined the above-mentioned objects in parts, during times free from general exercises. The economic part of the Academy is generally in order. The hospital is found in a tidy position. The difficult task of compiling a library catalog according to the new classification was completed, as it had begun, by the inspector: after which he handed over the library to Bachelor Ogievsky. The part of the Archive of the Academic Board that I looked at was found in perfect order. The book of behavior and success of students is not perfect: the government, not without reason, is justified in this by many studies on the news of the structure and on the structure being carried out. From now on, it is advised and promised that this book will be maintained without neglect. The main building of the Academy and the one built again at the expense of the Commission of Theological Schools are both in good condition, except that the first has an old roof. But the old teachers' wing and the other one, which houses the meeting hall and library, do not correspond to them either in strength or appearance. Filaret Bishop of Revel. No. 127. July 8th, 1818. A. 1818, July 2 days. In the presence of His Eminence Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna, an open test of the first year students of the Moscow Theological Academy took place in theological sciences, in ecclesiastical eloquence and the Hebrew language. It started at 9 o'clock in the morning. First of all, based on the determination of the commission of theological schools, which took place on April 27, the composition of the academic conference was announced, which is announced and open. At the same time, it was announced about persons elected from the Moscow clergy and submitted for approval to the commission of theological schools as external full members of the conference, of which those present were invited to take an active part in the test. After this, student Delitsyn read a discussion in Russian, in which it was investigated: was unleavened bread or leavened bread used during the initial celebration of the sacrament of the Eucharist? Next, the test took place according to a prepared and printed program, partly in Latin, partly in Russian, with questions from the teacher and some of those present. The meeting ended at three quarters of the first hour in the afternoon. Authentic signed by His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel. No. 229. July 6, 1818 369. b. 1818, July 3 days. In the presence of His Eminence Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna, at a meeting of all internal members of the academic conference and some of the external ones: Don Fr. Archimandrite Eugene, Assumption Protopresbyter Jacob and Resurrection Priest Simeon, There was an open test of academy students in universal history, in the universal science of eloquence and mathematics. It started at 9 o'clock in the morning and lasted three hours. Authentic signed by His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel. No. 230. July 6, 1818. V. 1818, July 4 days. In the presence of His Eminence Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna, at a meeting of all internal, and partly external, members of the academic conference, with a considerable number of visitors from the clergy and secular ranks, from 9 o'clock in the morning the students of the academy were tested in church history, in the philosophical sciences and in the languages ​​of Greek, German and French. The meeting concluded with an opinion from the students of the church song: “Glory to God in the highest.” Authentic signed by His Eminence Philaret, Bishop of Revel. No. 231. July 6, 1818. 1818, June 29 days. At 3 o'clock in the afternoon, the undersigned gathered to consider the preliminary rank list of first-year students at the Moscow Theological Academy and to bring it into the state required by the 9th paragraph of the regulations of the commission of theological schools, contained in its journal on April 27 of this year. For this purpose, the following were taken into consideration: 1) rank lists compiled during the introduction of these students from the lower department to the higher one. 2) Student evidence given for this final test. 3) Comments made about each student during the oral test in each subject. 4) Essays written by them during the test. 5) Essays written in continuation of the teaching. 6) Evidence from the internal academic board about their moral behavior. In a meeting that lasted three hours, part of the complete rank list of 370 was compiled. No. 226. July 6, 1818. d. 1818, June 30 days. At 4 o'clock in the afternoon the undersigned met to continue revising and bringing the discharge list to greater accuracy on the basis laid down on the 29th day. In the meeting, which lasted a quarter to four hours, from among the essays written during the test, the following essays were again considered worthy of special approval: Ilya Poroikov (two works). A part of the rank list has been compiled. No. 227. July 6, 1818. e. 1818, July 3 days. Member of the commission of theological schools Filaret, Bishop of Revel, members of conferences: Rector of the Academy, Archimandrite Filaret, Archimandrite Evgeniy of the Stavropegial Don Monastery, Inspector of the Academy, Archimandrite Hermogenes, Bachelor, Archimandrite Nikanor, Assumption Cathedral Protopresbyter Jacob. Professor Vasily Kutnevich. We gathered at 5 o'clock in the afternoon. In the meeting, which lasted three and a half hours, part of the complete rank list was compiled. Three students of the second category are expected to be nominated for a candidate's degree, with immediate right to a master's degree, if they serve in an academic position for one year with success and approval of their superiors, namely: Pyotr Bogoslovsky, Azary Telegodsky and Dimitry Sokolov. No. 228. July 6, 1818. and. 1818, July 5 days. Member of the commission of theological schools Filaret, Bishop of Revel. conference members: Assumption Protopresbyter Jacob, We gathered at 4 o'clock in the afternoon. In a meeting that lasted four and a half hours, part of the rank list was drawn up. The first four are considered candidates with the hope of obtaining a master's degree without testing, namely: Mark Studitsky, Vasily Vinogradov, Mikhail Avtonomov and Vasily Nesterovsky. No. 232. July 7, 1818 371. July 8. Report from the Bishop of Revel Philaret to the Theological School Commission on his review of the Bethany Seminary Bishop Filaret of Revel, from Moscow, reported: In agreement with His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow, I began the review of the Bethany Seminary on the 1st day of this month. The journal of this day is presented here in the list, under the letter z. This matter was interrupted by open academic tests, and resumed on the 6th day, on which, also in agreement with His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow, two assemblies completed the decisive test of the students, with the exception of the mathematics class. The list from the journal of this day is presented here, under the letter and. I did not finish this review, partly because, in accordance with the reasoning of the Diocesan Eminence, I had to rush to the test at the Perervin Seminary, partly because the Bethany government made it difficult for the review to proceed. The preliminary information I requested in advance about the state of the economic part of the Seminar Administration was delivered to me after the completion of the seminar tests, on the 7th day (it is presented here, under the letter i). The preliminary discharge lists turned out to be both incorrect and incorrect. Therefore, to complete the review of Bethany Seminary, I made an arrangement that is shown in the attached list of the proposal I gave to the Academic Board, indicated by the letter k. The state of the classes at Bethany Seminary, which I saw, is partly described in magazines. What they have in common is that there is no shortage of diligent students; but their leadership is not the same. The Theological class is guided by drier scholasticism rather than systemic solidity and living truths. The leadership of the Philosophical class, according to the comments made during the test, moves toward perfection, along with the growing experience of the student. The same should be said about the Rhetorical class. Language classes seem to be ok. The confusion of the teacher Platonov, strange and not previously noticed in him, gave an unpleasant look to the Hebrew and Greek classes. He wants to leave the seminary: and to prevent him from doing so would be inconsistent with its benefit. A deficiency in the class of General History was noticed in the journal, in which, since there is an indication of a summary of the test, I present this summary at the discretion of the Commission of Theological Schools 372. A Church History class taught by the same teacher has the same deficiency. It was written about the insufficient premises of the Bethany Seminary on the occasion of its previous review. There is another drawback omitted: the lack of a warm church that could accommodate all the students. They are thinking of making the cold Transfiguration Church in the monastery warm. It is doubtful whether there will be success in this, due to the nature of the structure. Moscow. No. 128, July 8th, 1818. The following documents are attached to this report: 3. At the top of the document is the litter of archiens. Augustine: “Look. 1818, July 3 days. At 9 o'clock and three quarters the survey of the Bethany Seminary began. It began with a test of the rhetorical class. Questions were asked to the students not only about the subjects shown in the prepared notes, but also about others from all parts of rhetoric. Many of the answers were satisfactory. Then oral experiments of periodic speech on this matter were required: and were pronounced by many students in Latin and Russian. In some of these experiences one could see the abundance and purity of language. The meeting ended at half past two. From 3 o'clock in the afternoon, for an hour there was a test in universal history. To questions about the summary, which contained one history of the Crusades, the answers were partly satisfactory; and the answers to questions from ancient history were mostly weak. During both meetings, the students of the upper division were busy composing from the text: now remain faith, hope, love, these three. love more than these, to the question: why is love greater than faith and hope? The students of the middle department were also busy writing an essay on the question: do passions belong to the perfection of human nature, or do they mean its imperfection? No. 50. July 3 days, 1818. 373 I. 1818, July 6 days. At three quarters of ten o'clock in the morning, an open test of students of Bethany Seminary in theological sciences began, and lasted more than two hours. This was followed by a test in the philosophical sciences. In both subjects, many student responses showed that they firmly accepted the lessons taught. The meeting ended at two o'clock in the afternoon. At four o'clock in the afternoon the test of the disciples of the highest department in church history was resumed; and after that there was a test in tongues. It ended at 6 pm. At the proposal of the reviewer, the Most Reverend Philaret, Bishop of Revel, to the board of the Spaso-Bethan Seminary to provide His Eminence with information on how many students of the seminary are receiving government support and to what extent, and how many orphans there are, or which fathers have children, the seminary board to report that there are 53 people on the full government support of orphans, multi-family clergy children 22 people, a total of 75 people on full pay; there are 18 clergymen on half pay, 8 clergymen, for a total of 26 people on half pay. K. Proposal to the Board of the Moscow Theological Academy. Not having time to complete the review of Bethany Seminary on some subjects, I propose to the academic board: The end of this review will be provided by Fr. to the rector of the academy, who was with me during its trials, so that he would take the trouble to notify me of the consequences of this, for the purpose of reporting, together with my comments, to the commission of theological schools. He can apply for testing in mathematical sciences through Professor Kutnevich. Although, by our general agreement, students from the upper division are already destined for the academy from Bethany Seminary: Pavel Platonov, Nikolai Popov, Nikolai Linkov. Ilya Suvorov, Yakov Mirolyubov, Grigory Nikolsky, Porfiry Smirnov; However, I give a decisive conclusion about this election to Father Rector. He also deigns to take the trouble to believe and correct the grade lists presented here, in which defects are seen, such as in the higher department the category of excellent students is almost equal to the category of ordinary students, but there is no third category at all, contrary to the regulations; Some students are placed in categories in languages ​​they have not studied. It is advisable that Fr. The rector paid attention to both writing and the economic part: for even during my two visits to the dining room, including once immediately after the morning meeting, I could not see the table itself. No. 126. July 7 days, 1818 374. July 14. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on the audit of the Moscow Theological Academy Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated July 14, 1818, No. 135, reports: Commission of Theological Schools from Philaret Bishop of Revel, Novospassky Monastery Rector, report A complete rank list of students who have completed the course of the Moscow Theological Academy, compiled by the Academic Conference, approved by the consent of all students at the Academy and certified by His Eminence Augustine; The Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna, showing what successes each of the students showed in each of the academic subjects, and which of them is considered worthy of what degree, at the discretion of the Commission of Theological Schools I present herewith, under the letter L. Based on the charter, testimonies were taken from students who completed the course as to which of them intended to enter what state. I also present the contents of this testimony in a note signed by the rector of the Academy, under the letter M. Because some of the students at the Moscow Academy and Seminaries want to be dismissed from the school service; then I present the assumption about the occupation of their places in a note under the letter N. Having thus completed the assignment entrusted to me for the Moscow Academy, I am enclosing the preliminary rank lists, showing successes and behavior, as they can serve the Commission of Theological Schools to consider the progress of the whole matter. Moscow. No. 135. July 14, 1818. The following documents were attached to this report: L. Rank list of students at the Moscow Theological Academy, upon completion of the first year. First category, intended for masters Pyotr Delitsyn, from the Moscow Academy. Platon Dobrokhotov, from the same academy. Feodor Golubinsky, from the Kostroma seminary. Pavel Berezin, from the Vladimir seminary. Nikolai Ternovsky, from the Moscow Academy. Vasily Alyavdin, from the Vladimir seminary. Mikhail Sakharov, from the Tula seminary. Nikifor Potapov, from Kostroma Seminary. Matvey Dobrov, from the Moscow Academy. Feodor Golubev, from the Vologda seminary. Ilya Poroikov, from the Yaroslavl seminary. Afanasy Voskresensky, from the Kostroma seminary. Vasily Romanovsky, from Bethany Seminary. Evgraf Ilyinsky, from the Yaroslavl seminary. Mikhail Krotkov, from the Ryazan seminary. Alexey Platonov, from the Moscow Academy. Vasily Kapustin, from the Yaroslavl seminary. Nikita Trotsky, from Kaluga seminary. Andrey Ostroumov, from the Vologda seminary. Vasily Yanovsky, from the Kostroma seminary. Pavel Znamensky, from the Yaroslavl seminary. Second category, intended as candidates, with immediate right to a master's degree, if they serve for a year in the academic service with the approval of their superiors Peter Theologian, from Bethany Seminary. Azary Shlegodsky, from the Vologda seminary. Dimitry Sokolov, from the Tula seminary. Mark Studitsky, from Kostroma Seminary. Vasily Vinogradov, from the Ryazan seminary. Mikhail Avtonomov, from the Tula seminary. Vasily Nesterovsky, from Trinity Seminary. Designated candidates Mikhail Tikhomirov, from the Moscow Academy. Alexey Vishnyakovsky, from the same academy. Timofey Postnikov, from the same academy. Ivan Raisky, from the Tula seminary. Nikita Platonov, from the Moscow Academy. Ivan Platonov, from Trinity Seminary. Vasily Mertsalov, from the Tula seminary. Peter Lubvin, from Bethany Seminary. Pavel Sokolov, from Yaroslavl seminary. Nikolai Ostrovsky, from the Kostroma seminary. Yakov Lastochkin, from the Ryazan seminary. Feropont Surovtsov, from the Vologda seminary. Pavel Izvekov, from Kaluga seminary. Dimitri Areopagitsky, from the Moscow Academy. Ivan Vishnyakov, from the same academy. Grigory Sakharov, from the Tula seminary. Alexander Tumsky, from the Vladimir seminary. Nikolai Alexandrovsky, from the Moscow Academy. Alexey Kolokolov, from the same academy. Ivan Belyaev, from the same academy. Mikhail Benediktov, from Kostroma Seminary. Mikhail Bogoslovsky, from Trinity Seminary. Ivan Sokolov, from the Tula seminary. Grigory Dolgomostev, from the Ryazan seminary. Vasily Sokolov, from Vnean Seminary. Vasily Lebedev, from the Moscow Academy. Grigory Pokrovsky, from the same academy. Theodore of Raisky, from the Tula seminary. Semyon Krylov, from the Moscow Academy. Afanasy Kirillov, from the Vologda seminary. Ivan Solntsev, from the Viean Seminary. The third category, due to dissatisfied successes in theological sciences, are retained in the rank of students: Procopius Gorodetsky, from the Vologda seminary. Petr Daev, from the Moscow Academy. Ivan Gresserov, from the Ryazan seminary. Alexey Rakhmanin, from the same seminary. Grigory Popov, from the Moscow Academy. Vasily Muravyov, from the Ryazan seminary 375. M. Among the students who completed the course at the Moscow Theological Academy, they expressed a zealous desire to enter the monastic rank 9. Expressed a strong desire to enter the secular rank 3. They postponed until time the expression of their desire to enter any rank 3,376. Others expressed a strong desire to enter the white clergy. N. The following are considered dissatisfied with the ability to become professors: Timofey Postnikov 377 is capable, but, due to his health and build, is not entirely reliable. The Commission of Theological Schools, in a journal dated July 29, 1818, determined: 1) Take note of the reports of His Eminence Philaret about the state of classes at the Moscow Theological Academy. 2) Through the academic board, announce to Professor Kutnevich that if he improves the lessons he has written on philosophy so that they can be used for the benefit of other schools, then the commission will not leave him without special reward. 3) Approve the rank list of students in full, and, after leaving a copy of it on file, forward the original one to the academic conference for the preparation of diplomas and certificates. 4) To supply masters with diplomas, deliver to the conference the required number of printed forms of these diplomas. 5) For masters and candidates who have expressed a decisive desire to enter the spiritual state, from the day they are confirmed in these degrees, pay the salaries assigned to the titles of master and candidate, and for this purpose give the appropriate extract from this journal to the economic expedition. 6) To enter the academy as bachelors: a) In the theology class: Master Berezin, who, upon entering the clergy, will be both an inspector of the academy, and Master Mikhail Sakharov. b) In the class of church history - Master Dobrov. c) In the class of philosophy - Master of Golubinsky. d) In the class of church eloquence - Master Potapov. f) In the class of general eloquence - Master of Dobrokhotov. f) In the classes of mathematics, physics and German - Master Delitsyn. g) In the French language class - candidate Izvekov. 7) At the Moscow seminary, appoint masters as professors: a) For the classes of church and world history - Alexei Platonov b) For the classes of eloquence and German language - Ternovsky. c) In the classes of mathematics, physics and French - Ilyinsky. 8) Determine to the Bethany Seminary: a) in the class of church history and Jewish language - candidate Nesterovsky, with the title of professor. b) In the class of general history and Greek language - candidate Tumsky, with the title of teacher. Note: If this vacancy does not open, Tumsky may be left at the academy for a bachelor's vacancy, with assignments to his ability and for further improvement. 9) Based on these provisions, issue an order to the Moscow Academic Board 378. July 14. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools, on his review of the Bethany Seminary Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated July 14, 1818, No. 137, reports: How, according to the order mentioned in my report dated the 8th day of this month, No. 128, the review of the Bethany Seminary by the Rector, Archimandrite Philaret, was completed, I most respectfully present an extract from the journal of the Bethany Seminary Board, under the letter O, at the discretion of the Commission of Theological Schools. Moscow. No. 137. July 14, 1818. The following document is attached to the report: At a meeting of the board members of the Bethany Seminary and its professors, a test took place for the students of the secondary department in mathematics, geography, Paschal and physics. Academy professor Vasily Kutnevich was invited to test in these subjects. After this, the students of the middle and lower departments were tested in the Greek language. The meeting started at 9 am and ended at 12 am. Upon leaving the meeting, the rector of the academy inspected the economic part, which he found to be in fairly good order. After lunch, the rector of the academy examined the writing department and, finding it in order, was busy checking the rank lists. For this purpose, the biennial written tasks of the students, as well as the essays they made from the proposals given to them, were taken into consideration. Students of the higher department were given the request: An bona opera ad salutem sunt necessaria? And the students of the middle department presented an essay on the question given to them: An potest esse vera Philosophia sine vera religione? The following amendments have been made to the rank list of students in the higher department: Alexander Nevsky was moved from the first category to the second in terms of success. Nikolai Mashkov was also moved from the first category to the second in terms of behavior. Students Yakov Briliantov and Mikhail Kudryavtsev were moved from the second category to the third according to their success. In the rank list of the middle department, student Pavel Zayantsky was moved from the third rank to the second based on his success. The rank list of students of the lower department was found in full order and left without any correction. Moreover, the following students were decisively nominated for admission to the Moscow Theological Academy: Pavel Platonov, Nikolai Popov, Nikolai Linkov, Yakov Mirolyubov, Grigory Nikolsky, Porfiry Smirnov and Semyon Arkhangelsky; and Ilya Suvorov was left due to illness. July 14. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on his inspection of the Zaikonospassky district and parish schools Bishop Filaret of Revel, in a report to the commission of theological schools, from Moscow, dated July 14, 1818, No. 139, wrote: The list from the magazine about the inspection of the Zaikonospassky district and parish schools is presented at the discretion of the Commission of Theological Schools, under the letter C. The Zaikonospasskoye District School is one of the best of its kind that I have seen in terms of educational conditions. One class of musical notation was not quite perfect. The experiments in drawing land maps seemed to me worthy of some of them being presented to the Commission of Theological Schools. I am attaching two of them. The Bursa of the Zaikonospassky Schools is insufficient not so much because of its cramped conditions as because of the inconvenience of the buildings. Some of them are damp and dark: because the floor is several steps below the ground, and therefore in the spring it is not possible to protect them from water. However, there is a possible neatness; and full students have good beds. The main building of the schools, despite repairs, is dilapidated; and this dilapidation, combined with the disadvantage of the place, enclosed in a cramped part of the city, gave rise to the idea of ​​​​moving them. There is an assumption to build a building for them in the VysokoPetrovsky Monastery. I made it my duty to inspect this place, and present any comments I encountered to the Commission of Theological Schools for their discretion. The location of the Petrovsky Monastery has the advantage that it is high, and therefore the air here is cleaner. But it 1) is not quite spacious, and, it seems, is more cramped than Zaikonospassky; 2) not in the very middle of the city; 3) open to the boulevard, a place of dispersion. Among the inconveniences of the Zaikonospassky place is that, in the case of a new building there, a large embankment and therefore an expensive foundation must be made, and that during construction it is difficult to maintain decent classroom premises, without which the school may fall into disarray. But many Moscow residents are prejudiced in favor of the Zaikonospassky place, which is the oldest school place in Moscow, and is especially convenient for children to go to school from their parents’ homes. I present these views of this and that place to the Commission of Theological Schools for consideration with that decisive opinion about them, which, of course, will be presented by His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow on the basis of local information, which he can have with greater accuracy than one who observes in a short time. The Commission of Theological Schools is pleased to take into consideration the comments on the Petrovsky place for the question that was already the subject of my discussion with His Eminence the Archbishop of Moscow: whether it would not be possible to change the other Moscow Seminary from Bethany to the Petrovsky Monastery, in connection with the schools, which would not be without benefit for parents with children of different ages. For this, the mentioned place cannot be sufficient except with the extreme constraint of the monastery. And it is not without reason to fear that it will be difficult for a higher school to maintain the same attention to learning in the noise of the capital as in the silence of solitude. The rector is excommunicated from the seminary due to the position of his clergy; the teacher goes to a private house with a lesson; a student who feels his poverty especially vividly in the capital, due to poverty, becomes a teacher outside the Seminary: all this is a loss for the Seminary. There is no need to explain in confirmation of this that these features have been removed from the former Moscow Academy. Philaret Bishop of Revel Moscow No. 139, July 14 for 1818. Attached to this report is a copy from the following journal: 1818, July 11th. The Zakonospassky district and parish schools were inspected. The inspection began at 10 a.m. and ended at 1 p.m. Pupils from both departments of the district school were tested in the catechism, in sacred history, in Greek, Latin and Slavic grammar, in geography and musical singing. The students' responses were for the most part satisfactory and showed the thoroughness of the teaching and the thoroughness of the students. Only in singing and in the higher department is dissatisfied knowledge noticed. The students of the higher department presented quite successful experiments in their own drawing of land maps, and the students of the parish school also had good experiences in penmanship. At the end of the test, the dining room and living rooms of the students and half-students were inspected. Script. magazine signed: Filaret, E. Revelsky. Rector, Epiphany Archimandrite Apollosos 380. Higher department teacher of catechism, sacred history, geography and arithmetic Priest Vasily Platonov. Higher department, Latin and Greek teacher and inspector Ivan Volkhonsky. The lower department of the Greek language, Slavic and Russian grammar and arithmetic is taught by Mikhail Izmailov. The following were preserved in the file: a) a copy, in paint, from a map of Europe published by Alex. Savinkov, and drawn by Pavel Sokolov, a student of the Moscow school of the Russian department and b) 11 maps, drawn with paints, in 1/16th of a sheet of writing paper, of individual European states; These maps are not particularly carefully made and are not as good as the map of Europe 381. July 14. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on his inspection of the Moscow Andronievsky district school Bishop Filaret, in a report to the commission of theological schools, dated July 14, 1818, No. 140, wrote: I most respectfully present the list from the journal about the inspection of the Moscow Andronievsky District School, under the letter Ch., to the Commission of Theological Schools. In terms of academics, this school was found to be at a lower degree of perfection than Zaikonospasskoe. The reasons for this should be sought, if not in its Rector, then in the fact that it receives students from the parish Zaikonospassky, whom the authorities are of course more willing to bring into their district school than to let them go to another. One could notice that the teachers of the Andronievsky School were not entirely equal to the teachers of Zaikonospassky. The premises of the Andronievsky School are not spacious, but they are neat. Decent beds were made with the amount bestowed by the All-Merciful One. About other assistance made to this school, I present a note from the Rector, lettered Sh. To expand the premises of this school, the Diocesan authorities propose to build a new building in a place convenient for this purpose. No. 140. July 14, 1818. Ch. 1818, July 12 days. The Androniyevsky district school was inspected. The inspection began at ten o'clock in the morning and ended at first in the afternoon. The test was in the catechism, in sacred history, in Greek, Latin and Slavic grammar, in geography and in musical singing. There were fewer satisfactory answers from geography than from other subjects; and in singing, for the most part, insufficient knowledge was noticed. At the end of the test, the students' living rooms were inspected and found to be in a tidy condition. The documents were signed by: Filaret, Bishop of Revel. Spaso-Andronievsky District School rector, cathedral hieromonk Macarius. Higher education teacher Mikhail Istrin. Inspector, lower division teacher, Vasily Seredensky. Teacher of the lower department Sergiy Velichkin. Sh. Edinovercheskaya Vvedenskaya, which is behind the Saltykov Bridge, priest Pavel Yakovlev donated to the benefit of the poor students of the Spaso-Andronievsky district school, 1818, January 22 days, 500 rubles. During April, the following was donated for clothing for poor students: Her Excellency Countess Anna Alekseevna Orlova-Chesmenskaya – 200 rubles. Her Excellency Princess Elisaveta Sergeevna Shakhovskaya - 75 rubles. Unknown spiritual person – 300 rub. Unknown person – 25 rub. Unknown spiritual person – 50 rubles. From the spiritual person received 50 arshins of shabby cloth, 50 arshins of linen, 16 arshins of cloth and 12 shirts. Out of 500 rubles, by the will of the donor, 150 rubles were distributed to the poorest students. For 710 rubles, at the benefactors' will, the following were sewn for poor students: 80 shabby robes, 15 nankeen frock coats and 25 black corduroy caps. Signed by: Rector of the Spaso-Andronievo District School, cathedral hieromonk Macarius. The commission of theological schools, having examined the report of the Right Reverend Philaret, Bishop of Revel, on the state of the below-mentioned district and parish schools, in a journal on July 29, 1818, concluded: 1) About Novgorod schools 1) Through the district academic board, order the board of the Novgorod Seminary so that no student will henceforth be enrolled in the school in which they are not studying, and that those enrolled in this way are now expelled from the department of schools to which they belong only by district, to the department of those schools in which they are actually located. 2) The proposal of Eminence Philaret regarding the reduction of the number of writing books in district schools connected with parish schools should be approved, and with an explanation thereof, an order should be made to all seminary boards, through the academic boards. 2) About Novotorzh schools 3) about Tver schools Please take note of reports about these schools. 4) About Vyshnevolotsk schools Instruct the Tver seminary board to pay special attention to the organization of both the schools themselves and the school house. 5) About Zaikonospassky schools and 6) about Andronievsky schools 1) Take note of reports about these schools. 2) To the student of the Zaikonospassky School, Pavel Sokolov, in approval of his art in drawing land maps, send through the academic board a copy of the books published by the commission of theological schools: “The Outline of Church Biblical History and the Outline of Church History after the Time of the Bible” 382. July 19. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools on his review of the Moscow seminary Bishop Filaret of Revel, dated July 19, 1818, No. 138, reported: Review of the Moscow Seminary was limited to the time of open testing, which, by order of the local authorities, took place over two days and two meetings. I present lists from magazines of these days under the letters P.R. To this I am adding a summary of the test, preliminary rank lists and a note about the number of students kept by the seminary under the letters: S.T.U.F.H. The test in the Theological Sciences carried out by the professor did not have a very systematic appearance: just as the same flaw can be noticed in the abstract itself. But some students distinguished themselves by answering unexpected questions, as noted in the magazine. The state of the Philosophical class is similar to the state of the Theological class. The professor in some cases did not take responsibility for the content of the test, pretending that the lessons taught were its predecessor. The test in Theology and Philosophy through essays was carried out, after the end of the open test, in private, which is why it was not mentioned in journals. Some essays were found to be thorough. In Literature lessons, repetitions of general rules are observed where special instructions are promised, adapted to church eloquence. However, the practical test was successful, as noted in the magazine. The status of some other classes is also reported in the journal. The rank list of the higher division, the malfunction of which was stated in the journal, was corrected by separating some students from the first category to the second, from the second to the third. The inventory of the Seminary Library according to the new classification was made by Professor Lebedev, and has already been reviewed and approved by the Seminary Board. The dining room and living rooms of the students were found in a tidy condition. The cafeteria does not accommodate all the students, and therefore they eat lunch in two sections, one after the other. A large house, newly built to house them and some professors, outside the monastery is occupied not only without crowding, but also with some space left over. It is a pity that this spacious building, made of good material, has shortcomings resulting from the architect’s error. The ceilings are bending because the beams are not sufficiently reinforced, the windows are moldy because, instead of two windows, there are two panes of glass in one frame. Self-sufficient students pay less than seventy rubles a year for food and heating. The number of such extends to ninety. The Seminary Board, according to the Rector, finds it very difficult to support government students with the regular amount due to the high cost, which has increased a lot in Moscow in a short time. No. 138. July 19, 1818. Copies of the following documents are attached to the report: P. “That’s right. Augustine Archbishop of Moscow." 1818, July 9 days. At the Moscow Seminary, students were openly tested in philosophy, mathematics, physics and rhetoric. It started at half past ten in the morning. The test in the philosophical sciences lasted two hours. It was noticed that some students answered unexpected questions with happy reasoning. The test in mathematics and physics lasted three quarters of an hour. The test in rhetoric lasted two hours. Some students, even those of the first category, resorted to a textbook to answer questions based on notes. But oral experiences of periodic speech on this matter were pronounced without delay in a considerable number, not without an abundance of thoughts, and not without the purity of the Latin language 383. R. “That’s right. Augustine Archbishop of Moscow." In the presence of His Eminence Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow and Kolomna, at the Moscow Seminary there was a test in theology, in church history, in general history and in the languages of Hebrew, Greek, German and French. It began at half past nine in the morning and ended at three quarters of one in the afternoon. Some students of the higher department responded to unforeseen theological questions with rather free reasoning. Questions from church history about subjects not assigned to the notes, although not incidental, were partly answered insufficiently. The analysis of the Hebrew text and the experience of extemporaneous translation into Hebrew were satisfactory. The list of grades was found not to comply with the regulations, because in the theological department the third grade was not done at all, and the number of students of the first grade, that is, excellent, far exceeds the third part of the entire list, which should consist of three grades: why was the seminary board asked to correct it. The library and student living rooms were examined on the previous day, and the dining room on both days. The following were elected to enter the academy: Mikhail Ternovsky, Pyotr Ternovsky, Sergiy Ternovsky, Moisey Molchanov, Nikifor Zerchaninov. Vasily of Radonezh 384. X. Indication of how many students are kept at the Moscow Perervinsky Seminary on full government kosht, how many on half-kosht, and whose fathers the children are. I. On a full government budget, using food and clothing b) Priestly children – 3 II. On half-cost: maintained in the amount of six thousand six hundred rubles, received by resolution of His Eminence, annually from the Perervinsky Monastery, using only food: b) Priestly children – 23 The Commission of Theological Schools, in a journal dated July 29, 1818, determined: Through the district academic board, instruct the board of the Novgorod seminary so that it strives to improve the success of students in Greek literature. II. According to a report about the Tver Seminary: The commission, having seen from this report that in the lower department of the Tver Seminary there are 270 students, and finding such a large number of them extremely burdensome for the professor, concluded: to order the board of the local theological academy to consider how many students should be entrusted to one teacher, and how to deal with those classes, the multitude of which will exceed the strength of the teacher. III. According to reports about the Bethany and IV Moscow seminaries. Please take note of the reports on the state of these seminaries 386. July 24. Report from Bishop Philaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools, with the appendix of a statement about the persons in charge and teaching in theological educational institutions, audited by him in 1818 Bishop Filaret of Revel to the commission of theological schools, dated July 24, 1818, No. 142, reported: In pursuance of paragraph 467 of the academic charter, I most respectfully present herewith a statement about the persons in charge and students in the schools I examined. Since, in order to acquire the most thorough information about the state of places and persons during this review, I took into account the comments made in the previous review that I had made: then in the current evidence about persons I often point to previous evidence about them. This evidence is more or less definitive, depending on how the circumstances allowed me to acquire more or less definitive information about those being testified. Filaret Bishop of Revel. No. 142. July 24 days, 1818. About the persons in charge and students in theological schools, examined in 1818, with certificates from the examiner: The Commission of Theological Schools magazine, dated July 29, 1818, determined: According to the Novgorod diocese. Novgorod district school, the higher department of the teacher of history, geography and the long catechism, the Courtyard Cathedral, Archpriest Alekseevsky, for the faithful leadership of the classes entrusted to him, express approval on behalf of the commission. The seminary also expresses approval to Professor Ramensky for his successful teaching of church history. For the Tver diocese: the manager and teachers at the Novotorzhsky district school, for the planned arrangement of classes, must express approval from the commission of theological schools. Teachers in the higher department of the Tver district school, for the educational structure of this department, express the approval of the commission of theological schools. The rector of the seminary and theological sciences, professor Archimandrite Athanasius, for the skillful and careful leadership of the class entrusted to him, express special approval to the commission of theological schools. The inspector of the seminary and professor of philosophical sciences, Archimandrite Vladimir, due to his trustworthiness for higher positions, should be considered for filling the rector's vacancy in one of the converted seminaries of the Kazan district. Candidate Greshishchev, who teaches Greek at the seminary, should be confirmed as a professor of that language for his service in this position. For the Moscow diocese: the rector of the academy, Archimandrite Philaret, for excellently diligent performance of the positions of rector and professor, for the formation of the general moral character of the academy through the edifying action of his own character and for the successful completion of the first academic course, to be presented to the Sovereign Emperor for awarding the Order of St. Vladimir 2nd degree. A petition for this should be submitted to the Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education, Prince Alexander Nikolayevich Golitsyn, and for this purpose, a list of this conclusion, with a service record about the said rector, should be forwarded to him, the Minister. The inspector of the academy and theological sciences, bachelor, Archimandrite Hermogenes, due to poor health, which prevents him from fulfilling this title with due effort, is to be dismissed from the school service, subject to discretion; as a reward for his labors, recommend him for the abbot's vacancy that has opened in the Moscow Androniy Monastery; about what kind of movement and make a presentation to the Holy Synod. Professor of Mathematics Kutnevich, who teaches philosophical sciences at the Academy, should be renamed Professor of Philosophy, in accordance with the proposal of the Right Reverend Philaret; and to give him, for his careful and skillful leadership of the class entrusted to him, excellent approval from the commission. Bachelor of the Hebrew language Tyazhelov, for excellent art and diligence in teaching it, should be made a professor, and for his willingness to remain in the school service, with the donation of the benefits that the former priestly place presented to him, be given from the total sums administered by the commission, his annual salary of 600 rubles. Bachelor of Church History, Archimandrite Nikanor, was appointed rector of the Bethany Seminary, with the remaining active member of the academic conference and external board, and with a presentation to the Holy Synod, about his transfer by archimandry to the Novoglutvin Monastery, so that, through this, he would be free from the position of vicar in the laurels, which he now holds, he could more freely exercise his ability to serve in the school. Bachelor of World History, Master of Kherson, who should also be called a professor, out of respect for the fact that he, with excellent abilities and zealous performance of the position, having served the required number of years, and henceforth wishes to remain in the academic service, petition the Sovereign Emperor, through the Privy Councilor Prince Alexander Nikolaevich Golitsyn, rank of 8th grade, based on the report of the commission, in 25 day of August 1817 Highly approved; for which purpose, forward to him, the Privy Councilor, a copy of this conclusion, with the appendix of the track record of the Kherson list. Bachelor of Greek Language Ogievsky, according to his ability to continue this position, should be made a professor, and for his diligence in it, an annual salary of 600 rubles should be given to him from the general school capital. Bachelor of Mathematics and Physics Pokrovsky, as a reward for his labors and obedience, will be given an annual salary of 600 rubles from the same capital. The rector of the Bethany Seminary, Archimandrite Veniamin, is to be considered for occupying the rector's position at the Orenburg Seminary. The same seminary, professor of eloquence Lil'ev, and the Perervinsky seminary, professor of Greek and Hebrew languages ​​Bogdanovich, express approval for excellent diligence in the position. The economist of the Pererva Seminary, for a malfunction, should be replaced by another of the most capable. Zakonospassky district school of the higher department to the teacher of catechism, sacred history, geography and arithmetic, priest Vasily Platonov, for serviceability in class, express approval. The inspector of the same school and teacher of Greek and Latin, Ivan Volkonsky, for excellent diligence in the position, will be given an annual salary of 200 rubles from the amounts mentioned above. The rector of the Androniyevsky School, Hieromonk Macarius, should be considered for appointment as an inspector at the Orenburg Seminary. Two thousand rubles allocated for distribution to the mentioned bachelors and teachers should be transferred to the Moscow Academic Board. An order on this subject should be provided to the Minister of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education; Why give the academic expedition a proper extract from this journal 421? September 13. Note from Philaret, Bishop of Revel, rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, on the issuance of a monetary reward to Nikolai Ushakov for his work in writing, during a review of theological educational institutions Filaret, Bishop of Revel, rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, submitted to its board, dated September 13, 1818, No. 190, a note with the following content. To the Board of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. The clerk Nikolai Ushakov, who served under the local Construction Committee, who sent writing with me during the review of schools this year for eight weeks, sent this assignment with excellent serviceability and suffered a lot of work, both because, given the variety and haste of the affairs, he had no one to help him, and because during my long stay at the Moscow Academy he carried part of Academic Writing, which was done to ensure that comments about the tested students were not made public between them ahead of time. Presenting this to the respect of the Academic Board, I find it necessary to add that a decent reward for the clerk Ushakov, based on his limited salary, could be monetary. The Academic Board can, according to calculations, turn in its favor the amount that I should have received under the new decree on increasing the running fee, which decree was already in effect everywhere on my return journey from Moscow. Filaret E. Revelsky, Rector A. No. 190. September 13, 1818. There is no information in the case as to what order was followed by the board regarding this note 422. For his work on the revision of theological educational institutions, Bishop Filaret was awarded the Order of St. Anne, 1st degree, which was transmitted to him with the following rescript from Emperor Alexander I dated August 26, 1818: “New works, upon the assignment of the commission of theological schools, raised by you this year during the testing of students of the Moscow Theological Academy, and in general during the review of the academy and seminaries: Moscow, Veanskaya, Tver and Novgorod, as well as some district and parish schools, acquire for us new rights to Our excellent favor and mercy, which you have already attracted to yourself through your services to the Church and the Fatherland in terms of the education of spiritual youth. Wanting to express Our gratitude for these merits, we rank you with the Order of St. Anne of the first class, whose signs, transmitted herewith, we command you to place on yourself and wear as prescribed, being favored by Our Imperial mercy.”423 Professor of Kharkov University Joseph Lang, in his opinion presented to the university council, on November 8, 1816, among other things, wrote: “In this case, I consider it necessary to repeat two other proposals that I had already made, that is: 1) so that philosophy, as a science that should be taught in the general course, should be added to the faculty of literature, the department of juridical-political should be established by the faculty of legal-political. 2) So that the titles: masters and doctors of literature, mathematics and physics, etc., are destroyed, and only masters and doctors of philosophy are promoted, but the sciences from which the test was made are shown in the diploma.” Case of the Ministry of Public Education, 1816, map. No. 208, No. 9553, sheet. 25 rev. Innokenty, Smirnov, rector of St. Petersburg Seminary; passed away Oct 10 1819 in the rank of Bishop of Penza. Business minister. people. education, 1809, No. 39160, map. No. 1037. Grigory, Postnikov, 1st year master of the St. Petersburg Academy; from 1816 inspector, from 1819 rector of the same academy; 1822, May 7, Bishop of Revel; June 17, 1860, died in the rank of Metropolitan of Novgorod and St. Petersburg. Nathanael, Pavlovsky, 2nd year master's degree in St. Petersburg. academy. 1830 Bishop of Poltava: 1834–Pskov; mind. in Aug. 1849 Okunev, Andrey Ivanovich, 2nd year master of St. Petersburg. academic; in 1819 he was assigned as a priest and teacher of law to the 2nd Cadet Corps; then he was the archpriest of the Peter and Paul Cathedral; passed away December 23, 1860 Filaretov, 2nd year master of St. Petersburg. academic; in 1819 he left for the Tver diocese; died 1836 Kochetov I.S., 1st year master, Sub. acad. from 1814 he taught general civil history at the academy, and from 1817 to 1851 church history. Scone March 16, 1854 in the rank of archpriest and rector of the Peter and Paul Cathedral. Vetrinsky, N.Ya., 1st year master of St. Petersburg, acad. from 1814 to 1826 he taught history of philosophy and philosophy at the academy; then he was a censor of the main censorship committee, and from 1834 he was the director of the Mogilev gymnasium. Nikolsky, T.O., 1st year master of St. Petersburg. acad. He died in 1848 in the rank of archpriest of the Kazan Cathedral, in St. Petersburg. Ivanov, 2nd year master of St. Petersburg Academy; from 1824, after receiving holy orders, he taught church literature. Rozhdestvensky, 2nd year master of St. Petersburg. academic; in August 1819 he was transferred to the St. Petersburg Seminary to study history and French. Subsequently he was the archpriest of the Trinity Cathedral, on the St. Petersburg side. Sebrzhinsky, V.I., 1st year master of St. Petersburg. acad. passed away June 30, 1833 with the rank of collegiate adviser. Raikovsky, Andrey Ioanovich, candidate of St. Petersburg. acad. 1 course; from 1833 ordinary professor; passed away October 29, 1860 Gref (Grefe), Master of Liberal Sciences, and then Doctor of Philosophy. In 1819, he moved from the academy to St. Petersburg University to the department of Greek and Latin literature. passed away November 30, 1854. For more information about him, see East. SPb. d. acad. I. Chistovich, St. Petersburg. 1857, pp. 253–255. Ryabchikov, 2nd year master of St. Petersburg. acad. Pavsky, G.P., first 1st year master of St. Petersburg. academy. After many years of educational and scientific work, the deceased. Apr 7 1863. For his scientific works, see “Review of Russian. spirit. Literature" Philaret, Archbishop. Chernigovsky, ed. 3., St. Petersburg. 1884, pp. 494–95. Innokenty, Smirnov, deceased. in the rank of bishop Penza, 10 Oct. 1819 Polikarp, Gaitannikov, 1st year master of St. Petersburg. academic; from 1814 inspector of St. Petersburg. seminaries; in 1819 rector of the same seminary; November 4, 1824, appointed rector of Moscow. spirit. Academy and abbot of the Novospassky Monastery; in 1835 he was dismissed from the post of rector: January 19th. 1837 died. Prot. Ioann Semyonovich Dankov, known in his time for his intelligence and enlightenment, has passed away. July 22, 1833 (The text has been amended according to the list of edits at the end of the volume. - Editorial of the ABC of Faith). From the hieromonks of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. State Chancellor, Count Nikolai Petrovich Rumyantsev, deceased. in 1826, January 3. Grigorovich, Ioann Ioannovich, later archpriest of His own Emperor. Velich. Nicholas Palace, corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences, member and editor-in-chief of the Archaeographic Commission, and friend. scientists in general... died November 1, 1852. See Pager, 1861, June. The matter is internal. right St. Petersburg spirit. Acad., 1818, No. 27, pp. 1–4. The Commission of Theological Schools, by order dated May 6, 1818, No. 329, notified the internal board of the Sib. Theological Academy, so that, on the occasion of the departure of the Right Reverend Philaret to Moscow, to inspect the local Theological Academy and the schools closest to it, it would give him driving money for 10 horses, a total of 750 rubles. 90 kopecks, from the amount allocated by the state for travel for auditors. The matter is internal. are right. St. Petersburg spiritual Acad., 1818, No. 32. See above, p. 287, note. 1. See above, p. 288, note. 1. Affairs of the spiritual commission. schools, storage in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1818, Nos. 45 (1461) and 75 (1491). The determination of the commission of theological schools for this audit, see below, No. 125. This document was signed by: rector, Archimandrite Vladimir; inspector, Archimandrite Ambrose; housekeeper, hieromonk Seraphim; secretary Pyotr Nikolaevsky and clerk Timofey Podgaetsky. Case comm. spirit. schools, 1818 No. 84 (1.500), pp. 1–7. Definition of comm. spirit. revision schools of the Novgorod seminary, see below, No. 126. Case comm. spirits taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1818, No. 75 (1491), l. 25–27. Definition commission spirits learned. For this revision, see below, No. 125. Case comm. spirit. taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod. 1818, No. 75 (1491), pp. 17 and 18. Determination of the commission for this audit, see below, No. 125. That is, Otrocha, Archimandrite Theoktist. See above, p. 212, note. 1. Archimandrite Gideon, in 1823 transferred to the Kalyazin Trinity Monastery. Case comm. spirit. taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1818, No. 75 (1491) pp. 21 and 22. Definition. commission spirits learned. for this revision, see below, No. 125. Evgeny, Kazantsev. See above, p. 268, note. 2. Lavrenty, Bakshevsky, from 1819 bishop. Dmitrovsky, vicar of Moscow; 1820–Chernigov. passed away May 17, 1837 at rest in the Pereslavl Danilov Monastery, Vladimir. Ep. Parfeniy, Chertkov. See above, p. 263, note. 1. I. D. Nikolsky, a student of Trinity Seminary; from 1816, protopresbyter of M. Assumption Cathedral; passed away 1 Dec. 1839 He was distinguished by his excellent knowledge of the Greek language. Metropolitan Plato instructed him to compose Greek letters to the Eastern patriarchs. For his translated works, see Review spirit. liter. archbishop Filareta, ed. 3, St. Petersburg. 1884, p. 452. Drugov, N.P., student of Moscow. Slavic-Greek-Latin academician. For his writings and translations, see ibid., p. 440. About him, see Notes of N.V. Sushkov on the life and times of Filaret, M.M., p. 10 et seq.; also in the Spirit Review. liter. archbishop Philaret, p. 489. He is deceased. May 30, 1860 Case of the commission spirit, schools, 1818, No. 1493, pp. 1–3 and 7. History Moscow. Spirit. Academician S. Smirnova, M. 1879, p. 409 et seq. The rector of the Tver Seminary until half of 1817 was Samuil Zapolsky-Platonov, August 19. that year he was ordained Bishop of Kostroma. (See above p. 291, ex. 1). Samuel's successor was the rector of the Kazan Seminary, Archimandrite Afanasy Protopopov, later Archbishop of Tobolsk; died Sept. 21 1842 The document was signed by: rector, Archimandrite Afanasy; inspector, Archimandrite Vladimir; economist, Archpriest Ioann Alekseev and candidate Nikolai Greshishchev as secretary. Commission case. spirits schools, 1818, No. 84 (1500), pp. 9–12. Determination of the commission for the audit of the Tver seminar. see below, No. 126. Tyazhelov, A.I., 1st year master of St. Petersburg. academic; from 1814–1820 bachelor, then professor in the class of Jewish language. Leaving the academy in 1820, he died. in 1855 to the rank of Archpriest of Moscow. Archangel Cathedral. Case comm. Spiritual Schools, 1818, No. 80 (1496), l. 1–3. For the definition of commission, see below, No. 113. Archimandrite Philaret (Amphiteatrov). See above, p. 247, note. 2. The Komi case. Spiritual schools 1818, No. 80 (1496), l. 3–5. See above, no. 112. This and subsequent documents, under the letters: M, N, O, P, R, S, are signed by: the rector, Archimandrite Philaret; inspector, Archimandrite Hermogenes; Bachelor, Archimandrite Nikanor; Bachelor of Hebrew, Master Arseny Tyazhelov; master Grigory Levitsky and secretary Vasily Khersonsky. Lists, both this and others, do not fit here; they are kept in the comm file. spirits taught., 1818, No. 86 (1502). The matter of the commission of spirits. schools, 1818, No. 86 (1502), l. 1–14. Definition of the Spirit Commission. schools for this audit, see below, No. 122. The matter of the commission of spirits. schools, 1818, No. 93 (1509). This document was signed by: the rector, Archimandrite Philaret; inspector, Archimandrite Hermogenes; Bachelor, Archimandrite Nikanor; master Grigory Levitsky and secretary Vasily Khersonsky. This document and subsequent ones were signed by: the rector, inspector, bachelor of archim. Nikanor and professor of mathematics Vasily Kutnevich. The matter of the commission of spirits. schools, 1818, No. 86 (1502), pp. 15–20. Definition of the Spirit Commission. schools for this audit, see below, No. 122. Sinsky students are not placed here; they are kept in the comm file. spirit. taught., 1818, No. 86 (1502). This and subsequent documents, under the letters I. m. signed by: rector, Archimandrite Philaret; inspector, Archimandrite Hermogenes and secretary Vasily of Kherson. This document was signed by the rector, inspector, bachelor Archimandrite Nikanor, professor, master Vasily Kutnevich, bachelor, master Arseny Tyazhelov and secretary Vasily Khersonsky. Case of the commission of theological schools, 1818, No. 86 (1502), pp. 25–35. For the determination of the commission of theological schools for this audit, see below, No. 122. See above, no. 105, p. 373. Case comm. spirits taught, stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1818, No. 73 (1491). 11. 13–15. Definition comm. spiritual schools for this audit, see below. No. 126. The text has been amended according to the list of edits at the end of the volume. – Editorial of the ABC of Faith. This and subsequent documents, under the letters: ы, ь, е, е, ю, я, are signed by: rector, archim. Filaret; inspector, archim. Hermogenes, bachelor, archim. Nikanor; professor, master Vasily Kutnevich and secretary Vasily Khersonsky. Case of the commission of religious schools, 1818, No. 86 (1502), pp. 37–49. The definition of the commission of religious schools for this audit, see below, No. 122. The notes, due to their multitude and vastness, do not fit; The decisive test program was printed under the title: “Indication of items for open testing of students of the Moscow Theological Academy, at the end of its first academic course, in the month of July on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th of 1818.” Moscow, in the Synodal Printing House, 1818." A copy of this publication is on file. The discussion, entitled: “Research on the day of the Last Supper, and what it had in common with the Passover of the Jews,” read during the test, belongs to student Pyotr Spiridonovich Delitsyn. This and subsequent documents, under the letters: a, b, c, d, e, f, are signed by: the rector, Archimandrite Philaret; inspector, Archimandrite Hermogenes; Bachelor, Archimandrite Nikanor; professor, master Vasily Kutnevich and secretary Vasily Khersonsky. Document under lit. and. signed by the same persons, with the exception of Archimandrite. Hermogene. At the top of the documents, under lit. a, b, c, there is the following note: “Correct. Augustine, Archbishop of Moscow." Bit lists do not fit here. They are kept in the comm file. spirit. taught., 1818, No. 86 (1502). Case comm. spiritual schools, 1818, No. 86 (1502), pp. 68–80. Determination of the spiritual commission. schools for this audit, see below, No. 122. This summary is on file, but is not placed here, as it did not belong to the seminary inspector. Documents, under lit. h, i and i, signed by the rector, Archimandrite Veniamin; inspector, professor Naumov and secretary Nikolai Shuisky; copy go lit. signed by Secretary Vasily Khersonsky. Case comm. spirits schools, 1818, No. 84 (1500), l. 13–18. Definition of comm. spirit, taught. for this revision, see below, No. 126. The discharge list was signed by: Filaret, Bishop. rerelsky; Academy Rector, Archimandrite. Filaret; inspector, archim. Hermogenes; bakk., archim. Nikanor; sealed the secret., bakk. Vasily Khersonsky. Augustine, Archbishop, testified. Moscow. Document under lit. m. written in his own hand and signed by the rector, archimandrite. Filaret. Beginning of the document under lit. and is not included here because it is printed verbatim below, in the definition. comm. spirit. taught, in Art. 6 and 7. Case of the commission of theological schools, 1818, No. 86 (1502), pp. 135–147. The document was signed by the seminary authorities: rector, archim. Veniamin and inspector, prof. Naumov. Case comm. spirits schools, 1818, No. 84 (1500), 23 and 24. Definition, comm. on the audit of Bethany Seminary. See below, No. 127. Apollos, Alekseevsky, in 1821 was transferred to the Resurrection (New Jerusalem) Monastery, and in 1837 moved to Novospassky; in 1851 he was retired to the Rostov Yakovlevsky Monastery, where he died in 1859. About him, see above on page 219 note. Case comm. spirit. taught, stored in the Archives of St. Synod, 1818, No. 75 (1491) pp. 29–48. Definition spirit commissions. schools for this audit, see below, No. 125. Coma case. spirit. taught., stored in the archives of the Holy Synod, 1818, No. 75 (1491), l. 49–51, 67 and 68. Document under lit. and the following, except for the plans and lists, are signed. seminary rector, Archimandrite Parosniy. Inspector, Abbot Theoktist and secretary Alexander Kandorsky. Following this document are the plans for the public testing of students of the Moscow seminary,” under lit. y and s, as well as lists of students, under lit. t, y and f are not included as they do not have any special meaning. The test notes are not included here as they are not of particular importance. The matter of spirit comms. schools, 1818, No. 84 (1500), l. 31–52. See above, p. 388, note. 2. See above, p. 391, note. 2. Abbot of the Assumption Monastery in Staritsa, see above, p. 291, note. 2. See above, p. 247, note. 2. See above, p. 247, note. 4. See above, p. 299, note. 2. See above, p. 299, note. 1. See above, p. 299, note. 4. See above. p. 299, approx. 5. See above. p. 299, approx. 6. See above, p. 300, note. 1. See above, p. 299, note. 3. See above, p. 300, note. 2. See above, p. 268, note. 3. See above, p. 301, note. 2. See above, p. 300, note. 5 See above, p. 300, note. 8. See above, p. 263, note. 1 and page 300. See above, p. 299, note. 7. Case of the commission of theological schools, 1818 No. 92 (1508), l. 1–12. The matter is internal. right SPb. spirits acad., 1818, No. 28. The case of St. Petersburg. spirits acad., 1818, No. 34.