Глава двадцать первая. Гефсиманский скит 1842–1844

The more activity a person exhibits in his life, the more friends and associates he has, but also enemies, envious people, dissatisfied with his creations. Saint Philaret experienced a lot of hostility. Someone was his enemy due to misunderstanding, disagreement, like the unforgettable Alexander Semenovich Shishkov or his follower Count Nikolai Alexandrovich Protasov. Someone out of outright envy, like Bishop Filaret (Gumilevsky) of Riga. Life is life. Alas, we often have to observe how two worthy figures, equally dedicated to the good of Russia and the Church, do not find love and humility in relation to each other. What can I do? Even the apostles Peter and Paul were at times at enmity with each other, although in the memory of their descendants they will forever remain as two inextricable friends... The vicar of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, Archimandrite Anthony (Medvedev), always remained a faithful and invaluable friend for Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow. An amazing thing: he was ten years younger than Filaret, but he would live exactly ten years after him and, like Filaret, he would die in his eighty-fifth year! So the Lord measured out to them equally: for you - the same, and for you - the same. Archimandrite Anthony, in the world Andrei Gavriilovich Medvedev, was born on October 6, 1792 in the village of Lyskovo, Nizhny Novgorod province. His parents were serfs of the landowner Countess Golovkina, to whom she gave freedom when dying. Andrei's father served as a freelance cook for a wealthy and influential landowner, Prince Gruzinsky. As we remember, through a secret inquiry, Filaret found out that Andrei was in fact the son of Prince Gruzinsky himself. He studied under the apothecary at the local hospital and showed extraordinary aptitude for medicine. Before his death, the doctor Debshe bequeathed his entire library to him, and Gruzinsky entrusted Andrei with managing the hospital. So subsequently Andrei Medvedev, having become a monk, Archimandrite Anthony, was not only the rector of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, but also its chief physician! I. Khibyapin in his essay on the life of Archimandrite Anthony (Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. 1954. No. 7) writes: “Already three years into Fr. Anthony of the former Lavra could not be recognized. In the years following the death of Metropolitan Platon, much of the Lavra fell into disrepair. There were less than 100 brothers. There was no proper discipline; there was no decorum and splendor during the divine service. The wall fence of the Lavra became fragile in many places, and the buildings and churches required urgent repairs. The roofs of the towers threatened to fall. In the corners, on the inside of the fence, there were dumping areas. At times, such dirt accumulated on the territory of the Lavra that it was impossible to walk in other places. The icon-painting workshop eked out a miserable existence.” “From the very first days of his management of the Lavra, Fr. Anthony took up its improvement. During the first 12 years, he put in a lot of work to put the walls of the Lavra in order; all weak places in them were corrected, and part of the wall, 40 meters on the southern and northern sides, was rebuilt to the base, and new ceilings were made on the towers. Residential and service buildings were also completely renovated. Restoration work affected all churches without exception, which were decorated inside and out. Before Fr. Anthony, only two churches - the Refectory and the Hospital - had heating, and he insulated other churches, which attracted a large number of pilgrims in the winter. The back corners of the Lavra, which served as dumping areas, were cleared, and paved paths were built throughout the territory of the Lavra; and where there was dirt and garbage lying around, tree and flower plantings appeared (especially near churches). At the northern wall, for the sake of the peasants who came here, a well with abundant water was dug; also all Lavra buildings received a good water supply. At the same time, Fr. Anthony cared a lot about streamlining the liturgical life, introducing decorum and splendor into it. With him, both church singing and church reading were raised to a great height. According to contemporaries, the services performed by Fr. Anthony, made an indelible impression. His majestic appearance, ability to hold himself, unhurried and immediate service, pleasant voice, excellent diction, richness of vestments, harmonious and touching singing, good reading - all this created true splendor. Father Anthony introduced in the Lavra special weekly services on special days and the reading of akathists during the all-night vigil on great holidays. With rare exceptions, Fr. Anthony was present at all services, no matter what hour of the day they were performed. For the most part, he himself took part in church services. The leg disease that developed in old age did not keep him from doing this. Fr. put in a lot of work and money. Anthony on the revival of icon painting in the Lavra. Under him, the icon-painting workshop turned into an exemplary one. Soon a school of icon painting was opened, which produced many skilled masters of their craft.” Anthony was for Philaret both a sincere friend and a confessor, to whom Philaret brought his confessions and from whose hands he received the Holy Mysteries, and a confidant in all matters, a faithful assistant, an executive subordinate. Filaret's letters to Anthony are full of all kinds of orders, instructions, advice on how and what to arrange. Here, for example, is one such letter in its entirety, with so much of everything listed in it: “Thank you, Father Viceroy, for the blessing from the monastery - prosphora and blessed bread. My journey, although undertaken after an illness, was completed safely. Kellys at the hospital need to be protected. I promised them to Eminence Yaroslavsky, if needed. May his health and vision last; but it is necessary that, if necessary, he is not deceived in what he promised. I don’t know what kind of secretarial cells they are. Prepare them, and then we’ll see if the Reverend will be pleased. If he has entrusted himself to our care, it is necessary to justify his trust by the possible promotion of his peace and pleasure. If you find a good opportunity, plant apple and cherry trees. But now, I think, time has passed. Is it in the fall? Silence, of course, is a good thing. But I think whoever is called to serve in society should not leave this without special instructions from the providence of God. If God wills, we will talk about this only mouth to mouth. How did you go to Pesnosh without introducing the abbot? Is it possible to explain this by saying that they wanted to see the monastery as it is without preparation and waiting for the dean? In that case, you are right; and the abbot was to be asked whether the guilt of his absence was blessed. I forgot to ask the steward and maybe I’ll forget again - did Filaret come to the Lavra, as he promised in the consistory? - He didn’t come to see me. But I haven’t had the time to look for him yet. God's peace and blessings to you and your brothers. Bring me to the feet of our venerable father Sergius. What kind of silence is this letter talking about? Having much in common with each other, Filaret and Anthony, both approaching the age of fifty, began to get sick often. Filaret suffered from colds, Antonia suffered from leg disease, either arthritis or varicose veins. Feeling a lack of strength to simultaneously fight the disease and carry the burden of worries around the Lavra, Anthony in 1838 asked for advice on whether to go into seclusion or become a hermit. Filaret dissuaded him from such an intention, but two years later Anthony again asked to release him from his difficult position, and again did not receive a dismissal. On February 3, 1840, from St. Petersburg, Filaret wrote him a letter full of despair: “Your desire to retire brought me such a thought of sadness, which is reluctantly resolved in reasoning and words. You can guess that it is not easy for me to let you go: firstly, because, by the goodness of God, I see you as very useful for the monastery, and secondly, because, having full power of attorney for you and believing your power of attorney for me, I find a lot of relief and peace in this management. Moreover, my soul finds benefit in communicating with you. Remember that you asked for my friendship, while I already had it for you and accepted your request as a pledge and promise on your part of sincere communication with me. With your sudden intention to leave me and deprive me of your help, I cannot grumble, respecting your intention and recognizing my unworthiness; but I can’t help but feel deep sadness.” Having paid tribute to his friendly displeasure, Filaret, realizing that he could lose such an excellent governor, then switched to an openly bossy tone in his letter: “But let’s put aside extraneous things, and especially me, and begin to talk about the matter as if I were obliged to decide your dismissal or non-dismissal from someone else, and not from me. Having thought to the best of my ability, I find that I am obliged not to agree to your dismissal, because the need for your service is obvious; Your summers are not those in which the law now adopted gives the right to rest from service; Your health, with God’s help, can be maintained if you use it with frugality, without losing your position, in which, I hope, the current treasurer will help you.” And again a turn to a friendly, cordial intonation: “Do me a favor, accept this with patience, for the sake of obedience. The Lord will accept the sacrifice of your intention), and will give you blessing and grace, and will not allow you to suffer deprivation because you delay the fulfillment of your intention for the sake of obedience. Do not run from St. Sergius; His mercy is towards you, and his prayers are strong, so that for the patience of your service he will reward and measure to you what you are looking for in a distance.” And having already finished the letter, putting the date, Filaret wrote in a postscript: “The days are evil. - There are few doers. - During a battle, how can we not keep soldiers in their places who require protection and security? Consider also that I myself do not have the power to fire you. And if I present it to the Holy Synod, it may happen that it will attribute your desire to be removed to the disagreement between you and me and will give you another service, rather than dismissal.” The power of Philaret’s letter turned out to be such that St. Anthony had enough of this power for another thirty years of service as vicar of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra! Having received such a touching and at the same time decisive refusal, Anthony humbly accepted it, but planned to create a separate monastery at the Lavra, in which one could find solitude, the desired silence, and repose from righteous deeds. Two and a half miles from the monastery, behind the Korbushny pond, was the village of Korbukha. In the old days, korba or korbukha was a lowland overgrown with spruce trees. The “Brief Description of the Lavra” of 1808 states that “to the east along the Alexander Road from the Lavra, about two miles and a half, there is a country house with a garden and a large birch grove; they have two large ponds. This whole place, which is called Korbukha, from the southern and western sides to the upper pond (of course that part of the upper pond, which now forms a special middle pond) and from the eastern side is surrounded by a stone fence, about 650 fathoms according to the current year 1808, 3 arshins and a half high, thanks to the care of the Right Reverend Metropolitan Plato. This place was previously unknown: for on it there was, on the side closest to the monastery, a wooden courtyard with an attic and a cattle yard; but since 1742, during the reign of Archimandrite Kirill, the side closest to the Lavra began to be put in order; a large wooden house with services was built on it, and on both sides of that house there were regular gardens and flower beds and gazebos were built in decent places and the whole place was surrounded by a front garden; but Archimandrite Gideon, who was the rector of the Lavra, in 1759 ordered the construction of a wooden house on a stone foundation on 20 fathoms behind the pond on the far side of Korbukha (the place is much more elevated), which was built in 1760, and with all the internal cleaning completed, it was brought to its present state in 1762 already under Archimandrite Lawrence. And His Eminence Metropolitan Platon decorated this place with long clearings in the groves, placing arbors and pyramids at the ends of them. This place was always visited by their Imperial Majesties during the highest presences in the Lavra of the blessed and eternal memory of the worthy Empress Elizaveta Petrovna and Empress Ekaterina Alekseevna.” Anthony spoke out in favor of creating a monastery there, to which Filaret responded in a letter dated September 18, 1841: “The idea of ​​a monastery is very desirable, but requires a lot of thought. – Korbukha is not quite silent, although it was fenced off. Bethany would be quieter if not for the Seminary. If the noise of the reeds, as one of the fathers noted, is not conducive to silence, is not much more audible on Korbukh, both from the settlement and from the nearby road, especially when driving along it after bargaining and drinking wine? “I would like to talk about this more personally.” The doubts expressed here turned out to be only indirect; in fact, Filaret liked the idea of ​​a monastery on Korbukh. He was simply afraid that someone would read his letters to Anthony, would report it to the Synod, and there, in order to once again humiliate the Moscow Metropolitan, they would begin to build obstacles. Having personally met with Anthony and gone to Korbukha, Filaret examined the area and approved the governor’s plan, and came up with the name Gethsemane for the new monastery in memory of the Garden of Gethsemane near Jerusalem, where Christ loved to be with his disciples. There are also many coniferous trees there. It was decided at first to build a cemetery here for the monks of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, to build a chapel at the cemetery, then a church, to establish a monastic settlement, and only then to announce that a monastery was born there. Returning from St. Petersburg in 1842, exhausted by colds and troubles related to the case of the transfer of Archpriest Gerasim, as well as an actual quarrel with Protasov, Filaret began to think even more about the future structure of the Gethsemane monastery. In August of that year, Orthodox Moscow mourned another Philaret, a famous elder who labored in the Novospassky Monastery. Yes, until now there have been two Filarets in Moscow. The first is a bishop, Moscow ruler, church ruler, incomparable preacher. The second is an old man. Fyodor Pulyashkin was born on the day of memory of the miracle worker Nicholas, May 9, 1758 in Vyazma into a wealthy merchant family. He lost his father early, and his mother Matrona Nikitichna became a nun in the Moscow Novodevichy Convent in 1786. But Fyodor was ahead of her in the monastic feat. At the age of thirteen, he entered the Alexander Nevsky Monastery to live, and six months later, on the advice of his mentor, he moved to the Sarov Hermitage. His spiritual formation took place under the influence of the great Sarov elders - St. Seraphim of Sarov, hieromonks Ephraim, Pachomius, Pitirim. For three years Fyodor was a bell ringer, for three years he worked in a bread and kvass factory, for three years in a prosphora bakery, and then served as a sexton. From the Sarov Hermitage he moved to the Moscow Simonov Monastery and here on April 4, 1786 he was tonsured a monk with the name Filaret, just like Filaret (Drozdov) - in honor of the righteous Philaret the Merciful. Since 1788, Hierodeacon Filaret has been a monk of the Alexander Nevsky Monastery, which since 1794 has become the St. Petersburg Alexander Nevsky Lavra, and in 1791 he was appointed to manage the courtyard of the Novgorod Yuryev Monastery, located in Moscow's China Town. In September 1794, Hieromonk Filaret was assigned to the Novospassky Monastery to undergo obedience at the hospital, and soon he became the confessor of this monastery. But in 1799 he became seriously ill and “due to extreme exhaustion and bodily weakness” he was relieved of all positions. He prepared for death, but survived, and from that year he began to perform the feat of silence, constant prayer and reading the works of the Holy Fathers and other spiritual books. In 1810, his senile service began. This meant that he had acquired the gift of providence and could give people useful advice on how to act in life, what to expect, what to be treated for, etc. He almost never left his cell, where every day many people from all over Moscow and the surrounding area flocked to him, people came from other parts of vast Russia. The disease that once almost brought him to the grave was a hernia. She continued to torment Elder Philaret every day throughout his life. But he never refused to receive visitors and often, when there was a special influx of sufferers, he refused to eat, so as not to be distracted from his daily feat. The elder predicted possible illnesses and misfortunes, could say whether it was possible to hope that the missing person would be found, warded off fortune tellers, by force of persuasion forced people to leave Masonic lodges, and healed the possessed. Sometimes a person just comes to ask about something, and the elder already announces to him from the doorway: “Do such and such.” Some people who received advice from Metropolitan Philaret, in urgent cases when the Bishop was absent in Moscow, went for advice to his namesake, Elder Philaret. One of the elder’s spiritual daughters was Natalya Petrovna Arbenina. In 1834, she married Ivan Vasilyevich Kireyevsky, who at that time was keen on German philosophy, was far from church life, and did not even wear a cross. Natalya Petrovna constantly begged him to at least put on a cross. One day he answered her that he would do this if only her elder confessor would send him the cross. Natalya Petrovna came to Filaret, and he, already taking off his cross, greeted her with these words: “May it be for Ivan Vasilyevich’s salvation.” His wife’s story had a strong effect on Kireevsky, he fell to his knees and, putting the cross on himself, admitted: “Now I have the tea of salvation for my soul, for I have put it in my mind: if Father Philaret takes it off himself and sends it to me, then it will clearly be that God is calling me to salvation.” After that, he changed dramatically, became a diligent parishioner of the church, went to confession, and took communion. Such a change in his life led Ivan Vasilyevich to Slavophilism and to the realization that the crisis of the so-called European enlightenment was caused by the Europeans’ departure from Christianity. Elder Filaret foresaw his own death. Exactly two weeks before his death he said: - My time is near. I'll be sick for two weeks and then leave. Soon his condition deteriorated sharply. On the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God, Metropolitan Philaret was informed that Elder Philaret was very ill and would probably soon go to the Lord. The next day, the bishop arrived to the elder, and he, anticipating his arrival, was already crying with joy. “It’s time for my bones to rest.” What is determined by God, he said. The Metropolitan blessed the elder, he confessed, received the Holy Mysteries, and on August 28, as he predicted, with prayer on his lips he died peacefully and quietly. His burial took place on August 31. A great many admirers of the elder gathered in and around the Transfiguration Cathedral of the Novospassky Monastery. Not only the inside of the monastery, but also the bell tower, the roofs of the cells and the fences were filled with people. The Metropolitan himself arrived to perform the funeral liturgy and funeral service according to the monastic rite. When they sang the antiphon “I let the eyes of my heart go to You, Savior...”, Bishop Philaret could not resist and began to cry, so that everyone who saw it burst into tears. “We had two Filarets, now there is only one left,” said the Orthodox Muscovites. In those same days, apparently regretting that he rarely saw and communicated with the elder of the same name, Moscow Chrysostom preached a sermon on human communication in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin: – The special way of expression in the Apostolic exhortation is noteworthy: let us understand each other in encouraging love and good deeds. This indicates our knowledge of each other, and through it the path is paved for mutual encouragement to virtue. In fact, how many people we know, whom we meet, see, spend time unconsciously indulging in entertainment, often without even thinking to ask ourselves about the benefits of our communications! Why not make this knowledge more reasonable? Why not give dating a more elevated direction? Let us understand each other, not only according to the visible image, but even more so according to the invisible image of God in us, not by affectionate greetings, but especially by the words of truth and chastity, not by earthly kinship only, but also by the heavenly kinship of the children of God, not only by connections of temporary needs, benefits, pleasures, but much more by holy union in the search for eternal blessings, not by types of curiosity, but by the desire for honors of the highest calling in Christ Jesus. Understanding each other in this way, how much time and activity, sometimes so carelessly wasted on idle conversations, on amusements, on vanities, could we save and turn to use consistent with the dignity of a person and a son of the Church and the Fatherland, to reasoning about the true good of each and everyone, about our own and mutual improvement, to edifying and soul-helping reading, instead of fruitless and irritating passions, and finally to the deeds themselves kind, and encouraging others to do good! But would this mean changing the direction of the prevailing customs in society? Who can do this? - Yes, you and I cannot do this: that is why the apostolic wisdom does not address you or me with the command to encourage others to do good, but commands everyone collectively: let us understand each other in encouraging good deeds. In September, on the day of remembrance of St. Sergius, Metropolitan Philaret read a sermon on imitation. In it he said: – Imitation is one of the most commonly used tools for education and direction of life and activity, in all forms. This is a means no less effective than the word of teaching, sometimes even more, and sometimes almost the only one. Imitation is older than the word of teaching, and the word itself is revealed and formed through imitation... Whoever, in childhood, based on a bad example, formed his ability to write letters, usually writes poorly throughout his life. There can also be bad imitation of a good example, when the imitation is not attentive, not judicious, and not constant. If we choose for ourselves examples of activity that are worthy in subject matter, perfect or at least approaching perfection in the manner and degree of action; and if we follow them carefully, judiciously, constantly: then we too are on the path to perfection, open and true... Brothers! Imitation is so human that none of us can live without it. The difference is in the objects and in the jealousy of imitation. – Who prescribes the laws of vanity, luxury, self-interest, self-honor? - Nobody. How do vanity, luxury, self-interest, and self-honor intensify and spread? - most of all through reckless imitation. What power should imitation have when it is applied to lawful and blessed objects? – Let us, brethren, think that we are jealous of what is good (Gal.4:18); and just as a lofty example elevates the imitator, so a low one humiliates. In the summer, as usual, the royal family came to Moscow, and the bishop received the most important guests in his diocese. This time the sovereign did not tell him anything whether he should go to St. Petersburg in the fall or not, and Filaret was glad that he was not invited there: “We met the sovereign emperor, it seems, safely. The rumor about my upcoming trip to St. Petersburg is not confirmed by any signs. My weakness is satisfied with this.” The Church of the Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian in Bronnaya Sloboda was one of Philaret’s favorites. Built in 1665 in the Moscow quarter of gunsmiths, by the middle of the 19th century it was almost on Tverskoy Boulevard, a favorite place for Muscovites to walk. In 1838, with the blessing of Philaret, the chapel of St. Mitrophan of Voronezh appeared in it. In 1842, repair work was completed in the church, and the Moscow Metropolitan re-consecrated the church, delivering a sermon on how one should be reverent about going to the church of God: - Neglect of the Church of God, or in other words, inattention and disrespect for it, denounced by the Apostle among the Corinthian Christians... consisted in the fact that the rich among them, bringing bread and wine to the church for the Lord's Table, consumed them in the church at the meal of love, without order, with excess, with disdain for the poor. To make them feel the indecency of such behavior, he draws their attention to the high dignity of the Church of God, contrasting it with simple houses... If you usually admit that the house of a master requires respect and respect primarily before the house of a slave, the hospitable church of a house primarily before his vestibule, the royal house primarily before the house of a subject: then you cannot help but admit, and it is not difficult for you to feel that the house of the King of kings and the Lord of lords requires reverent respect, reverent reverence... Doesn’t it happen in our churches of God that those who come to the Divine service, forgetting about God, Whom they stand before, turn to each other, greet each other, and enter into conversations about worldly affairs? They think that things are still in order when they speak quietly; sometimes they are forgotten to the point that the sinful noise of idle talk fights with the holy sounds of church reading and singing... Do you really have no houses for your meetings, greetings, conversations and disputes? The bishop rejoiced, Moscow rejoiced that Petersburg did not take away its ruler this winter and that his heart-penetrating sermons sounded more often than usual. And from St. Petersburg to Moscow came the sound of new thunder. This time they nailed one of Filaret’s favorite students, Archimandrite Macarius (Glukharev). If Filaret had been there, the Holy Synod would have given him a hard time! Archimandrite Macarius, in the world Mikhail Glukharev, was, like the recently deceased Novospassky Elder Filaret, a native of Vyazma. Since childhood, Popovich Misha surprised everyone with his passion for foreign languages ​​and at the age of seven he could translate from Latin into Russian. At the age of eight he was sent to the Smolensk Theological School. While studying there, he survived Napoleon's invasion. Then he entered the St. Petersburg Theological Seminary, and after graduating from it, he entered the academy. Naturally, the gifted student was immediately noticed by Filaret, who was then the rector there. This was the same student who came to him to sell a friend’s watch and to whom the rector gave 500 rubles in exchange for the two hundred he asked. While taking care of Glukharev, Filaret made sure that he, being carried away by Western literature, did not fall under bad influences, especially not get carried away by mysticism. Having an excellent knowledge of European and ancient languages, after graduating from the Theological Academy, Mikhail taught them in seminaries, first in Yekaterinoslav, then in Kostroma. In 1818 he became a hieromonk under the name Macarius, and three years later - an archimandrite. At the end of the twenties, he went on a mission to Altai, where he preached Christianity among the pagan local population. Here he actually experienced what it was like not to have a Russian translation of the Bible. The Altaians were able to master Russian speech, but not Old Church Slavonic writing. Converted Christians demanded Holy Scripture, but it was available only in an ancient dialect incomprehensible to them. The missionary could only seek help from his mentor. In 1834, Macarius sent Filaret a letter in which he expressed bewilderment at the suspension of the translation of the Bible; and attached to the letter a report on the need to continue translation activities with a request to Filaret to transmit this report to the Synod. This was just when Filaret refused to consecrate the Triumphal Gates. It was pointless to bother about the reasoning of the Altai missionary. Filaret did not proceed with the report, but wrote to Macarius: “It seems necessary to begin the conversation with you with your thoughts about a complete translation of the Bible into Russian. You have spent a lot of effort in expressing these thoughts, but your sowing did not come to ready ground and not at the time of sowing.” Having received such an answer, Glukharev was not consoled, but decided to voluntarily continue the translation of the Bible from the place where it was interrupted after the ban in 1826. Macarius translated the books of Job and Joshua, after which he sent his translation to St. Petersburg. “Russian literature has already reached that age of maturity when the Russian Church can and therefore must have the complete Bible in Russian,” he stated in the accompanying letter. But I did not receive any response from the Synod. Then Macarius undertook to translate the entire Old Testament from the Hebrew text, using translations from the Bible Society and Archpriest Gerasim Pavsky. On January 20, 1839, he sent several newly translated books and letters to Emperor Nicholas. In the letter, he angrily accused those who alienate the Bible from the people for all the social and natural upheavals of recent times - the death of Alexander I, the Decembrist uprising, the St. Petersburg flood, the cholera epidemic and the fire of the Winter Palace. “Is it really possible that the Word of God,” he exclaimed, “in the vestments of the Slavic letter ceases to be the Word of God in the vestments of the Russian dialect?” In 1840, Macarius himself came to St. Petersburg to treat his eyes and learned that his translations and letters were under censorship review. He was summoned to the Synod, where he firmly stated: – I am absolutely convinced that the complete Bible in Russian is very useful for church missions. The Synod’s resolution of April 11, 1841 read: “Archimandrite Macarius exceeds the limits of his rank and contradicts the highest authority, the justifications for the work he has undertaken are unfounded, sinful and absurd, but, looking with condescension at his daring and absurd leap, the Holy Synod leaves him in missionary service with the appointment of prayerful penance with bows according to strength and discretion His Eminence Bishop of Tomsk." He returned to Siberia, where the Bishop of Tomsk imposed a penance on him - to serve the liturgy daily for forty days in a row for “providing the government with his thoughts and desires in reasoning the complete Bible in Russian translated from the originals.” However, the archimandrite, punished in this way, did not abandon his work. In November 1841, Moscow Governor-General Golitsyn received from him a manuscript of selected translations from the books of the Old and New Testaments and a letter in which Glukharev asked Dmitry Vladimirovich to publish all this in Moscow. The seventy-year-old governor-general, naturally, did not fulfill this request, but, as expected, sent everything to the chief prosecutor in St. Petersburg! A new trial began, the peak of which came at the autumn session of the Synod of 1842, and on November 13, 1842, a decision was issued regarding the restless Altai educator, in which it was charged to “reaffirm Archimandrite Macarius through the Right Reverend Tomsk, that if he continues to violate the duty of humility before the church authorities with an arbitrary explanation of the Holy Scriptures and according to such completely spiritual objects should be addressed past the spiritual authorities to outside authorities, then for this you will inevitably be subject to legal punishment.” Filaret, of course, was very worried about the fate of his beloved student. But he didn’t like much of his views either. Macarius was known as a freethinker and almost a heretic. Who does not dream of the reunification of all Christian Churches? But Glukharev sometimes went too far in these dreams. For example, he suggested: “Why not build a church in Moscow in which, like in Jerusalem, the sacred rites of the three main Christian faiths would be performed in three chapels: Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Lutheran? Such fraternal tolerance would serve the common Christian unity more quickly and reliably than verbal disputes.” Filaret and other pastors of the Russian Orthodox Church hospitably welcomed foreign priests, but at the same time observing the necessary limits of communication. Macarius communicated with some challenge with the Lutheran pastor Dietrich, the French abbot Autrand and the English Quakers Allen and Grelier. In addition, he communicated in Tobolsk with exiled Decembrists, whom he attracted to his ideas, and they even helped him translate texts of interpretation of the Bible. And thus he even more incurred the wrath of the Synod, which spilled from the student’s head onto the teacher’s head, and Filaret more than once had to hear reproaches: “Whom did he educate!” Meanwhile, another milestone in Filaret’s life approached. On December 26, 1842 he turned sixty years old. And again - no celebrations on this occasion, no magnificent congratulations or celebrations. Although it would have been possible, because the Nativity Fast was over, the Nativity of Christ was celebrated, and no one would have blamed the Moscow Metropolitan for celebrating his anniversary. But no traces of any celebration! On December 27, in the cathedral church of St. Alexis, he ordained Bishop Joseph of Dmitrov. Not a word about the fact that he turned sixty yesterday. Filaret spoke about the celebration of birthdays a little later, in 1844, in his “Conversation on the New Birth from Above”: “It is not surprising if the birth of some people, whose lives are especially pleasing to God, and beneficial for other people, is envisaged with the promise of joy, and is remembered with a holiday. Thus, an angel predicted the birth of the great Forerunner of the Lord: many will rejoice at his birth (Luke 1:14). But when we see that custom makes every person’s birthday a personal or household holiday, then thoughts of bewilderment and even surprise are born. Is birth, followed by fleeing life and inevitable death, worthy of celebration? A man, says Job, is born of a young woman, and full of anger (Job 14:1): is this something to celebrate? I was conceived in iniquity, says David, and in sins did my mother give birth to me (Ps. 50:7): what is there to celebrate? - Blessed is he who can celebrate that birth, by which shortcomings are filled, imperfections are corrected, the disasters of this first birth are ended - a new birth, a spiritual birth, a new birth. It is fitting for you to be born again: the Lord said to Nicodemus in a nightly, solitary conversation with him. He did not say: you must be born again, although he spoke to only one person; but he said: it is fitting for you: so that it can be seen that this is not about the need of this or another person in particular, but that the law is spoken to all of you who want to be true disciples of the heavenly Teacher Jesus Christ. It is fitting for you to be born again.” During his sixtieth birthday, the Moscow Metropolitan again suffered from a severe cold. Here is Philaret’s letter to Anthony dated December 28: “Thank you, Father Viceroy, for the word that shares with me the joy of the Nativity of our Savior. May He give His peace to you and the brethren; and from you may His glory arise early, as the righteous David awakens. You wanted to write me an encouragement to speak, but you wrote a reprimand for not having my word on the holiday. I accept and condemn myself, but I could not avoid it. For about three weeks the cold has been preventing me from doing everything. Meanwhile, on the Sunday preceding the holiday, I had the need to speak in the Church of Florus and Laurus, to which the sovereign heir donated an altar cross...” And again, not a word about the anniversary! To a modern person, who treats the birthdays of his loved one with special trepidation, this may seem wild. Apparently, it seemed quite natural to Filaret not to highlight the memorable dates of his own life. And in St. Petersburg, on January 17, 1843, Metropolitan Seraphim (Glagolevsky) died. It is difficult to call him a friend of Philaret, but in a letter to Andrei Nikolaevich Muravyov, the Moscow metropolitan responded to this death in the following way: “The death of Bishop Seraphim, although his life before that did not seem quite vital, produced in me a feeling of orphanhood. I found consolation in the fact that not long before he wrote a letter to me, which upon receipt made me happy... Meanwhile, I invited the clergy of the diocese entrusted to me to perform a fourty-day church commemoration for him, which I began in my home church the day before his burial. As if to express this favor, he saw me a few days later in a dream, at first as usual, and then during the dream itself I had the consciousness that I was seeing the deceased, while others who were right there, in the altar of the Kazan Cathedral, did not see him. May the Lord place him in the Church written in heaven!” Warsaw Archbishop Anthony (Rafalski) was appointed to replace the deceased Seraphim. Filaret knew him for a long time and himself at one time blessed him to become a monk. In the mid-thirties, as the vicar of the Pochaev Lavra, Anthony became famous for successfully converting Uniates to Orthodoxy; in 1834 he headed the Warsaw diocese, where his fame grew even more - he not only continued to convert to Orthodoxy, but also did a lot to improve relations between Catholics and Orthodox. Both of them loved him, but in Warsaw this fame began to destroy the bishop - he was accustomed to good-natured communication with people over meals, which became more and more plentiful every year. Filaret had not yet heard too much about Anthony’s feasts and therefore heartily welcomed his appointment as Metropolitan of Novgorod, St. Petersburg, Estonia and Finland. Then it was such a vast single diocese. At first, Bishop Anthony actively began to inspect all St. Petersburg churches and subordinate institutions, he himself performed liturgies, and visited educational institutions a lot, where he tested the knowledge of students. But having shown himself at his best, after Lent he returned to the lifestyle acquired in Warsaw - he began to organize lavish feasts, defiantly luxuriously decorated the metropolitan house, filling it with gilded furniture. What was especially striking to St. Petersburg residents was the Vladyka’s excessively luxurious life when he went anywhere in a magnificent carriage drawn by six or even eight horses, with a coachman, two postilions and two guides. All this began to cause discontent, and very soon Metropolitan Anthony developed a feud with Chief Prosecutor Protasov. Although Nikolai Alexandrovich was accused of insincere religiosity, he still had many virtues, for example, he fought against excesses, and could not tolerate excessive wealth, especially when it was put on display and especially when people of clergy were guilty of it. And by the middle of 1843, Metropolitan Anthony, with his intemperance in luxury and feasts, absorbed Protasov’s dislike, which he felt for the rebellious Filaret. And Filaret, fortunately, was far from all this, enjoying Moscow life. On the way from Warsaw to the Northern capital, the new ruler of St. Petersburg passed through Moscow and visited the Moscow bishop at Maslenitsa, and as soon as he left, the joy of Great Lent soon came. Candles were no longer lit in churches, services were held in dark churches - only lamps burned in front of the icons. In those days, Filaret wrote: “The spiritual world does not easily enter into the usual shell of our earthly concepts... After the service by candlelight, the service by icons, it seems, there is some ascent, but what do these local images mean? Is it that the soul first illuminated the light for itself, and then with it received the opportunity to contemplate heavenly images? In churches the Great Canon of Andrew of Crete was read, after which people knelt down many times, saying the prayer so wonderfully translated into verse by Pushkin in the last year of his life: Lord of my days! sad spirit of idleness, Lust of power, this hidden serpent, And do not give idle talk to my soul. But let me see my sins, O God, Yes, my brother will not accept condemnation from me, And the spirit of humility, patience, love And revive chastity in my heart. On the feast of the Annunciation in the Miracle Monastery, the divine word of Moscow Chrysostom, full of poetry, sounded: “Wonderful are Your works, O Lord!” Wonderful are Your secrets, Mother of God! Who hears Your quiet word in Your closed prayer church? Who can foresee what enormous deeds Your little word will lead to? Does the world feel this moment, at which a turning point is made in its entire destiny, at which the relationship between earth and heaven changes? Does Rome, dreaming of world dominion, know that in one of its distant regions, a certain daughter of the kings, calling herself the handmaid of the Lord, pronounced a sentence that is preparing for the world a new, better, highest Ruler, and for Rome the destruction of a proud and capricious dominion? And on the day of Easter joy in the Assumption Cathedral, Filaret urged not to turn Easter into a convenient occasion for excessive amusements and frantic feasts: “I advise and pray that the joy reverently revered at the beginning should not be disgraced in the future. Is it proper to turn such joy into play and fun that we have acquired through sacrifice and suffering? Again and again he had to struggle with pomp in church life. The church should be decorated and tidy, but not overwhelm the believer with an abundance of gold and jewelry. The French writer, literary historian, translator and traveler Xavier Marmier, having visited Russia, published critical notes, to which Filaret responded in a letter to Viceroy Anthony: “You should have listened to what a Frenchman, who was in your Lavra on the Tenth Friday, wrote about our clergy and monasticism. There is too much wealth in the churches, he says. The white clergy are uneducated and disreputable. The Lavra monks are full; novices tidy up their hair beautifully. There is little reverent attention in singing. – The government is tempted to see this read in Europe; and the thought may come to you whether this is really true. For me, one remark of the Frenchman seems worthy of attention: the lack of reverent attention in singing. This sin hardly ever happens, especially on holidays, when, while trying to sing well, one’s external attention harms one’s internal one. It is necessary to tell those who sing that skillful singing is pleasing to people for a short time, but reverent singing is pleasing to God and to people and is useful, introducing into them the spirit with which it breathes.” Anthony answered with offense that the visiting Frenchman, like the recent Marquis de Custine, was blatantly lying, and Philaret had to justify himself: “You, Father Viceroy, seem to be quite angry with the Frenchman, and you almost suspect me of being shaped by the thoughts of a Frenchman,” and further he admitted that Marmier “wrote a lot on Russians ignorantly or dishonestly,” but something still follows listen, because there is no smoke without fire. And in order to make amends for Anthony’s anger, in the summer the bishop came to the monastery and spoke to Anthony about their intimate secret - the Gethsemane monastery. The governor proposed to set it up as a dormitory branch of the Lavra, and the Metropolitan approved this proposal. Having stayed in the Lavra for several days, Moscow Chrysostom read a sermon on the prayerful communication of man with God on the day of the discovery of the relics of St. Sergius. In it he said: “Prayer is one of the highest needs of the human soul, one of the essential accessories of reverence for God.” The soul, immersed in sensuality, scattered in the world, darkened by sin, does not feel that, in its beginning, it is the breath from the mouth of God: but the power of this feeling, without its knowledge, arises from its depths and moves the heart towards God, even if it were towards the unknown, or only erroneously known. Therefore, in all worship, from the spiritual to the sensual, from the enlightened to the ignorant, the essence and soul are usually the invocation of the Divine, and consequently prayer. Although in the Old Testament institutions the most important solemnity of the divine service was sacrifices; but the sacrifice was always either a mediator or a representative of prayer, and the rising smoke of the burning sacrifice was represented as a chariot on which prayer wanted to reach heaven... Truly, in human nature there is a strange duality and contradiction of directions: on the one hand, a feeling of need for the divine and a desire to communicate with God, on the other, some kind of secret reluctance to engage in the divine and an inclination to run away from an interview with God. And it’s not difficult to understand why this is so. The first of these directions belongs to pristine nature, and the last to nature damaged by sin. This is the continuation to this day of the movement that appeared in the ancestors after the first violation of God’s commandment... Let us admire, brethren, God’s generosity and long-suffering. Let us be ashamed of our laziness and inattention. Let us raise ourselves to spiritual activity, rousing the mind from inattention, collecting from distraction, cleansing from evil and vain thoughts, and the heart from passions and vicious desires. Be patient in prayer, watchful in it with thanksgiving. That same summer, Filaret came to the Lavra more than once and each time talked about the future monastery. Anthony said that he wanted to buy a wooden church for the monastery in the neighboring village of Podsosenye, dismantle it there, bring it here and assemble it here. The villagers agree, since they are going to build a stone church. And the church is nice. And ancient - it was a monument to the once existing Mother of God Assumption Convent, destroyed by the Lithuanians during the Time of Troubles. On the site of the monastery that was burned to the ground, the Monk Dionysius of Radonezh built this Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in 1616, and in 1619 Abraham Palitsyn built a chapel in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Philaret also agreed to transport this ancient monument to the Gethsemane monastery. I chose a place for the church. And yet he was afraid that, in view of his disgrace, the Synod would express some unexpected displeasure regarding the monastery. In September, the bishop wrote to Anthony: “It would be good if the Mother of God blessed the Gethsemane monastery. But is it possible to make a start this fall? If this is not possible, is it safe for a wooden church to wait until spring? There is another question: should I ask for permission to move the wooden church? In terms of application to the law, it would not be unnecessary, but it would not be safe, so as not to confuse matters. Isn’t it better to just do something innocent, with the intention of not getting angry later if they reprimand you?” The bishops could not take a step without the consent of the Holy Synod! The Lavra paid the residents of Podsosenye two thousand rubles for the Assumption Church. Philaret really liked this wooden church, he asked to make it warm so that he could serve in winter, and he wanted to have his own cell nearby: “I want to have small cells for me; Is it possible to tie them with close and convenient communication to the Assumption Church, if there is no other? Is it possible to make the stonework under my cells a little higher than just for the foundation, and arrange in it lower housing for the cell attendant and for cooking?” Probably, after last year's troubles in St. Petersburg, the Bishop feared further persecution from the Synod, foresaw the possibility of leaving the Moscow see and moving into the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, which he once dreamed of in his youth. Thus, he prepared the Gethsemane monastery as the future place of his prayerful feat. In his letters he constantly discussed all sorts of details, what kind of wood should be used to renovate the Assumption Church, what kind of flooring should be laid, how to connect it with his future home. He worried about the Assumption Church, truly, as he worried about his bride! In the fall, the bishop again began to be haunted by hateful colds. And then the holy fool in the Serpukhov Vladychny Monastery alarmed him and predicted a long trip to St. Petersburg. Blessed Euphrosyne in the world was Princess Evdokia Grigorievna Vyazemskaya, graduated from the Smolny Institute of Noble Maidens, became a maid of honor to Catherine II, but suddenly disappeared, wandered through monasteries, and with the blessing of Metropolitan Platon (Levshin) accepted the feat of foolishness. When Filaret visited her in Serpukhov in 1843, she was already eighty-five years old. Seeing him, the blessed one asked for a blessing. He blessed. – Now bless you again, sir! He blessed again. - One more time! He blessed again. But when she again asked for a blessing, the archpriest, who saw this, began to contradict her. Filaret asked: – Why do you need so many blessings from me? “You’ll go to St. Petersburg and maybe you won’t arrive for a long time,” answered Euphrosyne. I didn’t want to go to St. Petersburg. Especially for a long time. “If I’m not mistaken, what he doesn’t want to go to St. Petersburg is not wounded pride, but weakness and confidence. More than ever, for traveling in St. Petersburg, I need virtues and virtues, which I lack for the service here, and even more so for the service there. The thought that they don’t need me there is just as convincing for me as it is reassuring.” It turns out that the predictions of holy fools do not always come true - Euphrosyne only frightened Filaret, and he was never called to St. Petersburg. Apparently, the Chief Prosecutor had someone to practice his lust for power on - Metropolitan Anthony, with his broad nature, more than replaced Filaret for Protasova. The Emperor, while in Moscow, never mentioned his desire to see Filaret in St. Petersburg in winter. In the presence of Nicholas of Moscow, Chrysostom delivered a speech to the soldiers collected from indefinite leave - a war was breaking out in the Caucasus against the successful Imam Shamil. This sermon is one of the best sermons explaining the Orthodox attitude to war and peace: – What was the first use of the cross of Christ, which he had just learned, for what did Tsar Constantine, Equal to the Apostles, first of all? - For battle and victory. So, God loves a good-natured world: and God blesses righteous warfare. For since there are non-peaceful people on earth, peace cannot be achieved without military help. An honest and trustworthy world must, for the most part, be conquered. And to preserve the acquired peace, it is necessary that the winner himself does not allow his weapons to rust. So, Orthodox warriors, in the word of David the Holy Church speaks to you, inviting you at the same time to speak with her: Blessed is the Lord our God, train your hands for militia, your fingers for warfare! The autocrat of Russia loves peace: but for this very reason he firmly guards it with the guard of a strong, faithful, skillful army... Do not forget that a good warrior, a lion against his enemies, must be a lamb among his own. Live meekly and lovingly: and save anger and thunder for the enemies of the Fatherland. Above all, do not forget that a good warrior of the most pious king must be equally a good warrior of Jesus Christ... That warrior is truly invincible, to whom the crown of martyrdom for the Faith, the Tsar and the Fatherland is as dear as the crown of victory. He is the best servant of the kings, and the most reliable defender of the Fatherland, who in a heart faithful to God, in a clear conscience, carries the true hope of the Heavenly Fatherland. Remaining very pleased with the speech of the Moscow bishop, the tsar left for the Northern capital without calling him along. Despite his illnesses, Filaret did not give up his writing. In addition to sermons, he wrote essays on the history of the Church, and that autumn he completed the life of St. Nikon, Abbot of Radonezh. Among the amusing incidents mentioned by Philaret in his letters, one cannot fail to ignore the invasion of the Ryazan diocese by many monks from Jerusalem in 1843, who very successfully collected tribute from local residents for the construction of a large Russian monastery at the Holy Sepulchre. Some people thought this was suspicious, and when several “Jerusalemites” were detained and interrogated, they, as one might expect, turned out to be swindlers. Some particularly enterprising gypsy camp sewed monastic robes for themselves and started such a profitable “business”. And for a long time in the Ryazan province they treated every dark-skinned and black-eyed monk with distrust. On Christmas Eve 1843, Filaret consecrated the Church of the Mother of God, the Discoverer of the transit prisoners who died at the castle, and addressed the prisoners with a sermon: – Purity and holiness belong to the house of God above all other places, although, however, they are not devoid of their purity. On the contrary, the prison, and especially the prison of the condemned, is not a place where human society casts moral impurity from itself? So, will the purity be preserved, will the holiness of the house of God not be offended when we place it in contact with the prison of the condemned? The Rules of the Saints remove people burdened with grave sins from the Holy Mysteries of Christ and barely allow people burdened with grave sins to cross the steps of the holy church until repentance, tears and time, sometimes quite long, clear their consciences. And this severity is not surprising when the human law of the same people, for the same sins, which it, having discovered, calls crimes, removes blameless citizens from their homes and villages, even forever. How can now the holy church, with the holy Mysteries, itself come to these people, to whom the strictness of the sacred rules does not give the right to approach the holy Mysteries and barely allows them to enter the church? Be merciful to the weak servants of Your shrine, the One Holy One, the One Lord, Jesus Christ... Didn’t You come to earth to found Your living church, Your holy Church! For what is the whole earth, after paradise, if not a spacious prison? What is a person, if not a convicted criminal of the law of paradise, an exile of paradise, a captive of sin, a prisoner of mortal flesh that burdens the soul? And Thy purity was not disdained; Thy holiness was not shunned. You have come; and in this prison, for this criminal, exile, captive, prisoner, Thy Calvary altar of the cross was erected; Through Your suffering and death He performed Your universal Divine Liturgy on him; brought Your eternal sacrifice, which is the same, both here and now, and who were closest to this altar of Yours? - The thief is at the right hand; robber with an eye... And you, whom law and justice have made alien to us, but whom Christian love encourages us to call brethren! Understand this love in its experiences that are before you. Why did these free, wealthy people, people of honor come to you, the prisoners? Just as you would gladly escape from your prison, so they gladly tore themselves away from their affairs and occupations and hurried to you in prison. Don't they have any need for you? - Without a doubt, none. What force drew them here? – The power of Christian love. Apparently, this force is powerful; apparently, it is pleasant to follow her attraction... Why did the Church Council appear so solemnly among you, and place the shrine of the Christian church so close to you? Why is church justice not as decisive and inexorable for you as civil justice, although the Church demands not only integrity in external relations, but also in internal holiness, and therefore could judge the guilty more strictly? Why then, just as civil society expels you, does the Church seem to be chasing you? One explanation for these surprises is Christian love... Brethren, even in this humiliated state of yours, beloved to us for Christ’s sake! Do not be inattentive and cold towards this love. If you have some disposition towards gratitude, as there is in our general nature, will you really allow yourself to be unkind to those who are so actively kind to you? Wouldn't you like to bring some comfort to those who care about your comfort? Take some care, too, to give them the consolation they are looking for - in your moral and spiritual improvement... Who has not heard of the young, innocent Joseph, torn away from his father, sold by his brothers into captivity and slavery, carried away to a distant country, among foreigners, slandered, thrown into prison? “You also know, of course, that so many disasters could not humiliate the young man’s spirit or shake his virtue, but even in slavery she was free, and in prison she shone. Don't you see that you can be in prison and imprisonment without loss of spirit, not without hope, and even with dignity and glory? I didn’t go to St. Petersburg, but even in the Moscow cold, Filaret caught a severe cold. And he complained only to his confessor, Anthony: “My cold allowed me to celebrate the holidays, and then it put me at home again, and I don’t know if I’m fit for anything tomorrow. I don’t want to undergo treatment, but meanwhile the pain in my teeth, ear and left side of my head interferes with both doing and sleeping.” And twenty days later: “The cold is reluctant to leave me. The day before yesterday I went out into the air, but the next night and yesterday the pain in my teeth and head again turned out to be severe.” And only during Lent the disease subsided. In the spring of 1844, at the insistence of Andrei Nikolaevich Muravyov, the publication of selected sermons by Philaret began. Filaret himself resisted this for some time, saying that he most often wrote words and speeches in a hurry in one sitting, but then, after re-reading the accumulated sermons, he decided that they were not so bad, and decided to publish some of them in printed form. Honorary Moscow citizen, merchant Alexey Ivanovich Lobkov, took the publication into his care. “The hunters are beginning to publish my words (if not idle talk) to which you encouraged me. If this should not have happened, then you are not innocent of this either. “Wish that not empty weeds are sown,” Filaret wrote to Muravyov on February 23, 1844. When the first volume came out, Chief Prosecutor Protasov unexpectedly reacted favorably to this and even sent a letter with a proposal to print a further edition for the money of the Synod. “You offend, Vladyka,” Lobkov said to this. - I’ve already taken it, I’ll print it. And one can imagine what pleasure it was for Filaret to politely answer in St. Petersburg that he could well do without synodal services in this case. But many envious people slandered this publication. This is evidenced by the Bishop of Riga Filaret (Gumilevsky), who that year wrote bitterly to the professor of the Moscow Theological Academy A.V. Gorsky: “Is it true that the bishop decided to publish his words? “Moskvityanin” raised expectations, and even the Germans are asking me. They deeply respect him. What about the Russians? They throw dirt at him. There will be a time when they will repent greatly, but without benefit for the Church.” Meanwhile, the arrangement of the Gethsemane monastery continued. They brought and assembled a wooden church from Sosensk in a new place, and began to restore it, as they said then instead of the foreign word “restoring.” Next to the Assumption Church they began to build a large house for twelve brethren with separate rooms for the bishop, as well as a smaller house for the governor. But only two people knew that the Gethsemane monastery was being built - Philaret and Anthony. “The less said about the monastery, the better,” the bishop wrote to the governor. “If God blesses the work, it will speak for itself.” When they ask me about this, I say that I am preserving the ancient, memorable church, finding for it a place where it would be decent and useful for it to be, instead of the previous one, where it could not remain. I also told some that there are thoughts of starting a continuous reading of the psalter there. I received the icons and thank you. It is advisable to quickly close Korbukha from idle travelers. You can start working on the ditch and shaft.” In June and July, the Metropolitan again suffered from colds, toothaches and headaches. He wrote pitifully to Anthony: “My health is improving poorly, and the dilapidation of the bodily church is felt more constantly than before.” But in August I felt better and came to the Lavra - I couldn’t wait to see how things were going with Gethsemane. I was very pleased. He proposed that the annual main celebration of the monastery be held on the third day after the Assumption, August 17, when the Ascension of the Virgin Mary is celebrated. He established an all-night vigil on the night of August 17 according to a special Jerusalem rite. He promised to find the text of this sequence. It turned out to be not easy, and he will fulfill his promise only in two years. Thinking about what kind of statute to give to the monastery, Filaret and Anthony compiled it partly from Athonite regulations, partly from those that were adopted in Moldavian monasteries. It is no coincidence that at that time monks from Moldova became frequent guests at the Lavra. It was decided that the monastery would be closed to women. Anthony could not forget the happy years he spent in the Sarov desert under the wing of the unforgettable elder Seraphim, and asked to introduce some of the tunes customary in Sarov into the monastery services. In the fall, work on the restoration of the ancient church was completed, and on September 28, on the day of remembrance of Schemamonk Cyril and Schemanun Maria, parents of Sergius of Radonezh, Philaret consecrated this main church of the future Gethsemane. “This ancient church stood for two hundred and twenty-seven years, having been created by the Lavra of our venerable father Sergius, under the leadership of our venerable father Dionysius,” he said in a solemn speech. - And then it was also presented under the patronage of our Most Holy Lady Theotokos, in memory of Her glorious Assumption, so that, in this memory, She would look upon him with favor, as if upon Her Gethsemane.