Saint Philaret of Moscow [Drozdov] in letters to Stepan Dmitrievich Nechaev

Contents Note without title and signature, 1831, July 17. July 26. Aug. 6. Sep. 12. November 3. November 13. 2 December. December 14. December 16 (no title). Dec. 16. Dec. 21. (About the Tatishchevs, see Mal 81. Letter without appeal). 1832. Genv. 10th Gen. 20th. Genv. 25. (About Archpriest Skopin’s pension)… Feb. 1. Feb. 2. 11th Feb. Feb. 12. March 23.... June 17. (Copyright) Sep. 3rd. ...Oct. 27. Nov.4. Dec. 9. As a close relative of Ober - Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Prince P.S. Meshchersky S.D. Nechaev was at first the prince’s alter ego in the Synod, and then for a short time he himself was the Chief Prosecutor. By his comprehensive, penetrating, careful and thorough mind, by his amazing and selfless diligence, by the breadth and versatility of his education, even by the accuracy of his language and thoughtfulness of words - for all these qualities Stepan Dimitrievich had the right to special attention from the ever-memorable Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret. This explains the friendly rapprochement between the Saint and the secular official of the Holy Synod. Therefore, the correspondence of Metropolitan Philaret, which is semi-official and semi-friendly, but completely business-like, is all the more precious. In this correspondence, Metropolitan Philaret acts primarily as a senior, church and state, administrator, and, moreover, not in official papers or resolutions, but as if in a homely, simple and intimate conversation with an understanding and trusted person. The printed letters belong to the children of Stepan Dimitrievich - Dimitry Stepanovich Nechaev and Yuri Stepanovich Nechaev-Maltsev, who added the family surname of his mother to his father's surname. D. S. Nechaev found the letters in his archives, carefully described them and put them in order. So far he has found about 200 letters; but one might think that there will be more, because for some years there have been too few letters or none at all. Some of the letters were given to the publisher of the Russian Archive P.I. Bartenev, who began, by choice, to print them from the January book of this year, prefacing them with an extract from Stepan Dimitrievich’s form. We print only those letters that were omitted by the publisher of the Russian Archive, and equally those that were not previously known to him. In order to quickly print these letters, which we copied from their owner D.S. Nechaev, who kindly gave us permission to do this, we postpone the notes on the letters until the next books of the Theological Bulletin. However, these notes will only be of historical interest, but will not add anything new regarding the great personality of Metropolitan Philaret. For the saint's admirers, every word of his is precious and instructive, without any notes. Note without title or signature First-class Bishops 500 rub. the salaries were garnished. It is in vain to write per capita money for ministers: for in relation to cash ministers it is an empty paper account, but to which the State pays nothing, and monasteries and ministers receive nothing. May 31. At the beginning of the letter, we talk about Tatishchev’s marriage and its illegality, and then about the case of the secretary of the Moscow Consistory, who wasted government funds. Ask the S. Synod what I presented about the secretary of the local consistory in the case of the corolla money. It seems there is nothing to do here other than to humbly ask you to help me in my difficulties by transferring a reliable secretary from another consistory. Help! Help! You see what it’s like for me when I have to rummage through the original file when I’m sick and come up with a true certificate and conclusion, instead of false ones, on a case about which I twice previously reminded the consistory in strong terms. The consistries present with me are good people, but the older ones are bad and already unstudied, the middle ones are bad and uneducated, and among the younger ones there are reliable ones, in whom there was no time to finish studying. On the appointment of Shchastnev as secretary of the consistory. Attached here: the relationship of S. D. Nechaev to Nik. Petrovich Danilov - to find, at the urgent request of Prince Peter Sergeevich, the representation of the Metropolitan of Moscow about the embezzlement of money and send it to him (the prince) today - and a report that, according to information, there was no such representation from the Right Reverend of Moscow. (Danilov's certificate dated July 24, 1831). Dear Sir, Stefan Dmitrievich! According to your letter, you will find the information you expected in the attached list with my resolution given to the Academic Board. It was intended to obtain information from the Diocesan authorities whether he could 1) combine a school position with a Diocesan position: this question seemed insincere to me, when the archpriest had already combined it within a year; The information that I had from you about the dignity of the archpriest prompted me to act decisively. That’s what I did: but I don’t know if there’s a mistake here either; After my resolution, I received information worthy of belief that the archpriest was lazy in his position as a teacher, and this holds little promise for the position of caretaker. Would you like, through advice to the archpriest, to protect me, so that, while correcting one mistake, I would not end up making another? In my resolution you see how I argue with the Academic Board. This often happens, both officially and privately, both in writing and verbally: - and all this is a consequence of the mercy of K.D., U., 2) which granted the faulty rector of the St. Petersburg Seminary to the faulty Rector of the Moscow Academy - as experience shows not only to me, but also to K.D.U., among other things, in the case of the Bethany Librarian. K.D.U. finished this matter*, and now the Novosilskoe and Epifanskoe affairs, strange and terrible, by the grace of the same Rector of the Academy, can cause trouble for someone even further than the Rector. However, I say this not as a complaint against anyone: but to say that we need to think about caution in the future. (Later: speech about cholera, which keeps the Saint in Moscow, respect to Prince P.S. and about the attached copies of the resolutions of the Academic Board). It seems in vain that the Academic Board doubts the unfortunate truth about Joasaph’s drunkenness, which was revealed not only by the Governor, but also confirmed by the Seminary Board. The following seems to be the case: 1. Joasaph should be removed from school positions; and now is not the time to talk about defining it again, as the Academic Board says. 2. As according to the charter of the Schools, the Inspector must participate in the storage and issuance of amounts: then in case of waste of these, due to mental damage to the Overseer, the Inspector should be held accountable. 3. Due to the resignation of the Overseer, and due to the Inspector’s involvement in the matter, the school has an extreme need for a trustworthy boss; and Archpriest Gumilyovsky was already the caretaker of the Epiphanian School, and therefore the consent of the Diocesan authorities to his appointment existed, but he was dismissed without a request, he has a certificate of his supervisory service, and now he wants to re-enter this service: then he will immediately be appointed again as the caretaker of the Epiphanian Schools. 4. I cannot help but express regret that the Academic Board, apparently unapproved in his behavior, recommended a monk to be the head of the schools, and, moreover, to a place where there is no monastery at all, and where he happened to live in an apartment in a lay house, which would have been quite indecent, had there not been the unfortunate incidents that have now emerged. My report to the S. Synod, at the end of May, about the incorrect certificate from the secretary in the case of the wasted amount, is not in your possession for a reason that can almost be called a mistake. Since the matter is about money belonging to K.D.U., the report says: according to K.D.U. But I didn’t look at that. Tomorrow I hope to send a message about this to Prince. P.S. I wonder if he would consider reporting this matter directly to the S. Synod. The appointments you write about are reliable. The idea that one can rather entrust a small Diocese to Vicar Timothy than to Vicar Kirill seems fair to me, judging by what is seen in Timothy and what is heard about Kirill... Further complaints about the slowness and malfunction of Secretary Smirnov, even in correspondence with the Governor General. Please accept my deepest gratitude for the obligatory letter. The Reverend Gabriel is not happy with Mogilev, even before the assassination attempt he asked for resignation. I persuaded him to follow the will of Providence and Authority. I hope he goes. The dedication of Mogilevsky truly delays me: for he is still not in Moscow. But my health delays me no less, so that, after a difficult return from the Lavra, I was forced to spend the time of grateful prayer for the capture of Warsaw on my bed. I don’t know whether a new case should delay me too. The day before yesterday I received the request for my sermon on August 22 at the Highest command, and yesterday I sent it. I don’t understand what she is guilty of, I didn’t hear before the demand, and when I tested it, I didn’t find it until yesterday evening, on which I finally heard someone’s remark from the Military General-Governor, which, however, he does not share, why didn’t I turn to the Sovereign at the end of the sermon, and didn’t separate from his person the shortcomings mentioned in the speech, such as arrogance, self-reliance, superstition. I started writing on September 11th. I* and am returning to this letter already 12. It does not seem to me that I am guilty of the above remark. The introduction of my speech, which was quite long, was all devoted to the presentation of the generosity with which the Sovereign Emperor overcomes difficulties through the power of trust in God, which is the speech. There was no longer any reason to turn to the Emperor. If we were to make it a rule for every vice that the preacher mentions, to say that the Sovereign does not have this vice, this would express some kind of lack of confidence in the Sovereign’s virtue, which requires protection every minute. Finally, I also learned that people who were not at the Council during my sermon and did not read it afterward say that it was in vain that Nebuchadnezzar was mentioned. But I don’t know what the big deal is when Nebuchadnezzar is rebuked almost every day in church in the seventh and osth cantos of the canon. I applied his example to everyone in general, and not to kings. However, let judgment come from Zion. Thank God, I await him in peace. (Next we talk about the Seminary House). I am returning the magazine about 10,000 for printing wreaths. The requirement is plausible. However, the Synodal Printing House, especially its head, needs eyes. G. Voitsekhovich's letter is excellent. What I thought was a guess is what is evident in the Volyn Diocesan authorities - a petty, fussy character who wants more to have treasures on the mountain (in the world?) than to hide treasures in heaven. Pochaev can truly wish for something better. I read the speech of the Right Reverend Smaragd in the Christian Reading. It, if I’m not mistaken, shows that in St. Petersburg he thinks more about himself than before, but does not make him think more about him than before. You can guess how this idea came to me now. Let us pray to the Lord of the harvest, that He may bring forth the laborers into His harvest. Yesterday’s meeting in the hot and cramped room of the Bishop, where I got a seat right next to the stove, was so draining that today I got up from my bed later than I needed to, in order to read the papers on reducing office work, and even in order to be in time for the Synod. And so I stayed at home with these papers: and again I got tired of them, especially of how the ruler of affairs, K.D.U., strains out mosquitoes 3). I am still saddened, seeing how the darkness of this enlightened age is spreading, and ignorance of affairs is engulfing business people. And Von Breuer philosophizes about the parallelism of spiritual and secular offices and officials, * he flies (?) in the field of theory so that the Captain of the Police Officer and the Dean 4 equally remain under his feet; but when he deigns to descend to the solid ground of experience and deeds, he does not see where to stand with a firm foot and where to go with a firm step. Take the trouble to skim through my comments written on his note. Am I unsatisfactory for you, as von Beyer is for me: please tell me; Perhaps I will still find it possible to better explain and defend some thoughts, so that, under the guise of reducing office work, I will not increase it and not burden both superiors and subordinates. However, there are articles in this note that I agree with, and sometimes with additions. What you proposed in your note in the second part, I agree with, except for one unimportant article; I very much agree with some articles. The note on the K.D.U. of the ruler of affairs has already been mentioned above. I agree with your comments in almost everything. I agree to your note on K.D.U., except for one article, on which a remark is written in pencil. In my opinion, it is better to keep the D.U. Commission in unity with the Synod, rather than letting it hang its head to the side like a harness horse. I have no objections to the note on the separation of Spiritual affairs (there is a need to talk about it, because it was put there right away;). Forgive me if I sometimes joke to ease the grief. (The title begins with this letter: Your Excellency, instead of the previous: Your Highness). I return the papers communicated by Your Excellency. I hope to keep this warning to the letter. It is with consolation that I notice in these papers the State’s view of subjects. But the subjects are difficult: and therefore some conclusions that follow are also difficult to implement. How will you send students from one Diocese to the school of another? It is impossible to overtake everyone: who among all? What open reason can you give for this that would convince but not offend? Will you take only from Volyn to Kyiv: here they will say: we have a lot of our own. Will you take them from Kyiv to Volyn: why will you Polish them when you want to Russify others? “We need to think a lot about how to get out of this.” But here is a means for the same thing that can be used with convenience, speed and benefit: to immediately carry out the proposed change of Bishops, and at the same time to accept and implement the rule, to appoint Rectors, Inspectors and teachers of the Great Russians to the Polish Dioceses without fail, and to appoint those who studied in the Academies from the Polish provinces to teaching positions for several years in the Great Russian Dioceses, whatever they are, whether there are will want to return to their homeland, they returned Russified. To send the Kursks returning from military service to Chisinau is, in my opinion, a good idea. Your Excellency's humble servant Filaret, Metropolitan of Moscow. (Copyright) Eminence Podolsky apparently wants to get away with silence in response to the Bishop’s letter. Please be polite to people who do not understand this. I am returning the reported papers. It seems that judgment about the Pochaev printing house should be postponed until what the Eminence says by decree of the S. Synod. Then the double testimony of His Eminence and G. Voitsekhovich, perhaps, will be quite strong in order to resist and not pay extra money. A bishop who gives an apartment to a secular person in his house is acting strangely. For a Pole it’s even stranger. A bishop who knows that a Pole hangs out with a gendarme colonel and attends all meetings knows too many secular affairs for a bishop. Everything that His Eminence of Vologda says to justify his actions is accompanied by stretches that sometimes extend to the point of absurdity. For example, Prince Gedroits was sent to Ustyug, but not under the strictest supervision 5 ), the Eminence notes, and thinks that he was victoriously justified; and does not notice that he was again sent to Ustyug 6) already contain almost the entire meaning of the following words: under the strictest supervision 7) because there is no reason to send to Ustyug from Vologda otherwise, unless for elimination, no longer from Polish, but from Vologda connections, therefore, under stricter supervision than what was in Vologda. And doesn’t the Vologda Bishop know better than the head of the gendarmerie corps who has been placed under surveillance, or not? – In my opinion, the Vologda Bishop gives reason to give him a strong admonition. To speak less at random about the Eminence Mitrofan, one would have to know the previous correspondence. I don't dare not believe it. Zemlyansky and the dreamer, in the most modest way, with discriminating questioning, to listen, in my opinion, would not be superfluous. I am glad to see G. Voitsekhovich: only tomorrow and the day after tomorrow are no longer at my disposal. Your Excellency your humble servant Filaret M. Moskovsky. Should not the news of the Most Reverend Voronezh, as an article of reports on incidents, be brought to the Highest information, with the opinion: would it not be ordered to secretly ask the persons mentioned in order to discover the truth at the end, in order to take precautions against unfounded disclosures, and against the wrong direction of public opinion? Dec. 21. (About the Tatishchevs, see Mal 81. Letter without appeal). I am returning the papers about the Tatishchevs. It is true that closeness is less than kinship: but the trouble is that for the prohibition of the 4th degree of kinship we have the rule of the Ecumenical Council, and for the resolution of any case closer to this degree we do not have a single rule, but perhaps an example from the cases of the Synod of that time, when they tried the case of the Beketovs, and made a decision, which was finally overturned by the State Council in a shameful manner for the Synod. However, I am not in the least inclined to insist on a decision that I have approved, but will unquestioningly accept whatever it pleases me to do. Explanation Ex. Irenaeus, it seems, could have been clearer if he did not try to explain too much. The failure to send a printed decree to Irkutsk, after he had one in Penza, gives some plausibility to his cause. It seems that it would not be superfluous to question some people in Irkutsk about certain circumstances before making a decisive conclusion (The letter ends with the message that both St. Philaret himself and Vladyka Seraphim cannot be in the Synod due to illness). In the presentation of those leaving the clergy, I allowed myself to propose to Your Excellency the change of two or three words, and the exclusion of several words: - so that purity of morals would be recognized as a necessary need for the white clergy, - so that the whip would not be an execution, but a punishment; - so that those who have not disgraced themselves, leaving the priesthood due to widowhood, have permission to immediately enter service in another province. This was the reasoning before. However, I agree with the presentation. Genv. 25. (About Archpriest Skopin’s pension)… Genvar or December mean this magazine, your will... The case of the dead Seminarist is obviously confused. How to untangle it? Is it possible to entrust His Eminence Ryazansky with reconnaissance? The article on permission for Diocesan Bishops to allow, except during the annual probation period, the dismissal from the Seminary to the Diocesan Department, for illness or other valid reasons, of students below the theological department - for the best, I believe not to be included in the number of reductions. For this permission will be subject to abuse. It’s a different matter, but the Synod should allow the already expelled students, except for the theological department, to be transferred to the secular department, at the discretion of the Diocesan Bishops: here the presentation to the Synod is one form and continuation of the matter. It is necessary to take care of students in schools so that they are not taken from them on whims and occasions: for they would also kidnap the good ones. A student who is thrown out during a public test is already lost to the school; and it is not expensive for the Diocese. So, let the Bishop have the power to transfer it beyond the boundaries of the Diocese. So I think, being ready to obey a different judgment when I see the reasons. I return: a curious report, and an unnamed note. The Pochaev discovery leads to a not very pleasant conclusion. Have you found it convenient to not only bury many and large things under the floor, but also move them into the cellar: what should be done with things that can be carried in your pocket and bosom? Among the living finds that the Right Reverend boasts of, there are not as profitable as among the silver ones. For example: Master - from Chernigov. This is Evgeniy, who was removed from school service so many times, who sought to be personally presented to the Sovereign Emperor for denunciation, etc. I am surprised at the Eminence of Chernigov, who treats V-na (Wolsman?) in such a way. The untitled note shows the miserable state of the boss who must rule in such a region. The venerable person who handed it over really doesn’t see her as an owl in flight? - Be that as it may, it is necessary to convey this note to the Most Reverend Meletius, partly in order to have true and detailed information from him, especially in case of further similar notes, partly so that he better knows the situation in which he finds himself. “Son of man, you live among the scorpions” 8): this was said to the prophet Ezekiel, not to frighten, but to warn. This is how the Most Reverend Meletios should guard this. Ah! Irkutsk needs a healthier person to endure the heavy influences of the physical and moral climate. The thought of being appointed to Irkutsk from the Vicars is aimed at the Moscow Vicar, who was the Rector in Irkutsk. The writer, apparently, hopes to gain importance with this Bishop (Across the field) Who is Father Peter, I either don’t know or I can’t guess. Regarding the matter of hereditary vestments, I admit that the road indicated by the definition of the Holy Synod leads to the forest: but we must take into consideration, 1) that it is difficult for the Synod to pronounce in order to attach the vestments to the inheritance; for according to ancient church rules, church property was always separated from personal property; and it is not heard of the omophorion being passed on to heirs or heiresses; 2) that our laws prohibit inherited icons from being sold at public auction, but are ordered to be given to the church; although an icon may also belong to a layman’s household utensils, but not church vestments. 1. Items not delivered by the niece are left to her conscience and responsibility, in accordance with the opinion of the Dicastery. 2. To keep existing church things in the Church until the civil authorities consider the spiritual will, in which case this authority would be pleased to accept the above-mentioned law into consideration. Upon receipt of the civil decision and the will, the Minsk Consistory will again present its opinion to the Synod. However, it seems to me so, but if you please, do it the best way. I forgot about *. The rest of the candidate, it seems, needs to be used. Lapchkovsky's case has been heard; and it speaks poorly of the vigilance of the Kishinev Archpastor. The informer, a gendarme officer, seems to have become a victim of his denunciation innocently, because Lapchkovsky knew how to catch a senior gendarme official. (On a special sheet, on which there is an inscription by S. D. Nechaev about the resolutions of February 11, the Saint wrote on February 12. In the case of those returning from the Academy, I excluded the costs of maintenance: it would be difficult to collect even these. About the members of the Conference, I would think: 1. Ignatovich should be approved as having taught the Hebrew language at the Academy and having been awarded for his practice in composing sermons, and therefore having signs of scholarship, which is necessary for a member of the Conference. 2. Keep silent about Maksimovich; for he was not a teacher, and there are no signs of his learning in comparison with the previous candidate. 3. Report about Archimandrite Auxentius with a certificate from the case of 1821, according to which he was dismissed from school service, or with the original case. As far as I remember, there are no small miracles here. I return the paper about St. Ambrose to Your Excellency. There is nothing to object to here. And if this had been said earlier in such terms, and brought to the Highest attention: then, perhaps, there would have been one less choice. And you can get tired of elections: especially when a third-grader is elected to the third grade, and they take from the place a person under whom it has not yet had time to warm up. I agree with His Excellency’s thoughts that you convey to me. But I don’t know how better they can be executed. It seems that the Lord holds on a lot to his thought about Pr. Penza. But I don’t know how to persuade myself to sign this part of the choice, having previously been glad that I did not sign the choice to Penza. However, Vladyka and Prince P. Sergeevich should know more about the Rector of the Academy, John, than I do: and more will be asked of them. Let us at least take this into consideration: - Nizhny Novgorod to Tobolsk, Volyn to Nizhny, Kursk to Volyn, Penza to Kursk. Will there be an end to this rope of Bishops, which stretches and tangles back and forth from one vacancy? – I humbly ask you to present to His Lordship the three protocols attached to this, on which it seemed necessary for me to express my thoughts. The letter of His Eminence of Perm is worthy of attention. About the skufia 9), and especially about the hat 10), the most holy patriarchs testify too much. That skufia in the Middle Ages was a distinction of the priesthood, we see in ancient images and *). I doubt that it would also be assigned to deacons. The hat, with the permission of their Holiness and Beatitude, came to the Church from the Turkish turban. The Komandursky monastery represents the genus of ancient monasticism. I wish we had this. How boring it is to see that monasteries all want Bogomolets and income from Bogomolets, that is, they themselves seek entertainment and temptation. It is true that sometimes they lack methods: but what is lacking more is not acquisitions, simplicity, hope in God and a taste for silence. Today, His Eminence Metropolitan Jonah visited me. I invited him to serve in the Assumption Cathedral, which he did, it seems, with exarchish importance. He wears only the Vladimir ribbon, and not the Alexander ribbon, while secular gentlemen usually wear the Alexander formally, as the eldest, and the Vladimir ribbon under the caftan, as the statute specifically orders; He also wears, together with the panagia, a cross granted to him when he was still an Archimandrite. And I have not heard of this, that later in his time he was given the right, which is given to the metropolitans of Novgorod at the special Highest discretion. Mikhail, being Novgorodsky, nor Varlaam, being Exarch, had this. Princess Dolgorukaya, daughter of Countess Vasilyeva, asks permission to inherit the house church after her mother. His Eminence Parthenius presented this to the Holy Synod. Help this cause, in which there seems to be nothing wrong. About my persecution on Fr. Melchizedek is inconvenient with the spoken word. Is there anyone who told Vladyka and Prince Peter Sergeevich: I also said that before as a warning about. Archimandrite. Do the Lord and the Prince remember: let them judge, should I have said *) differently? Upon my arrival in Moscow this summer, Fr. The archimandrite spoke to me about his famous letter in such a way that I believed that I was at peace with him as before. Having recently heard that he responded to the Grand Duke in the sense of a complaint against me, I did not want to believe it. Your words bring me closer to this faith, making it clear that Fr. The archimandrite in St. Petersburg extends complaints about my persecution. It seems to me to prevent the spirit of suspicion and talk to Fr. Archimandrite: but still not possible. As for the question: won’t rewarding him be unpleasant for me? - I answer: it won’t, whether they find it fair and decent; and this is not so that I will not be known as a persecutor, as you wish, but so as not to be, but to be known: for if this is the case, then this decision in my absence will, of course, be interpreted as evidence of my persecution, which has reached (? as far as?) S. himself. Synod, which found it necessary to take advantage of my absence and intercede at an unusual time. I agree that the acquisition of an important donation and the feat of peacemaking deserve expression of favor from the authorities, by some sign according to custom. I call upon you the consolation of a blessed and undisturbed world. Your Excellency's most humble servant (Copyright) Now I have received papers from the Academy, from which it is clear that, due to previously unforeseen cases, a change is needed in the orders approved by the Commission of Theological Schools; but I have not been given authority in this case, as was previously given. What to do? Execute without permission? Or stop the execution for a month and a half, and leave places without people, and people without places? I stood on the stump. God knows, did you forget to say in the order what you said before, or did you repent of the power of attorney that you gave me before? Maybe this is a punishment for my opinion about Imereti Rhetoric. Really, I don’t know how to figure this out or what to do. Do not consider me a rebel against K.D.U., if I agree with the opinion of the Academic Board. Sorry for delaying the papers. It's kind of inundated with them. Although the Governor General said: some Archbishop 11): but how is he alone; then announced personally. In my opinion, not everything that His Eminence Kirill wrote should be transmitted, but an extract. But it's done. The Governor General's measure looks like this: but will it work? And therefore, is there a hurry to spread it? – The reasoning belongs to you. I haven’t finished reading the book about Doukhoborts yet. The student did not invent everything that is written here. I return to Your Excellency the legislative papers.... Thanks to one member who gave this matter such a direction that it could be reconsidered. – According to these provisions, it is not prohibited even for those who have retired from the priesthood to wear skufia and kamilavka. Recently, I also read an amazing law in the newspapers: a Protestant adulterer should be admonished and put under arrest from 3 to several days, it seems, up to 14. You may say: the law is lenient. But it seems to me: cruel for innocent spouses and marriages. For a hundred rubles, those kidnapped are awarded civil death: therefore, at how many kopecks is the purity of a marriage valued when it is kidnapped? To Nechaev’s note: I have prepared a very extensive resolution on the case of portraits and other images. Would it please Your Eminence to approve it? 1 Prince P. S. agrees to this project, Filaret writes on the same sheet on November 5: Isn't it too late? The Highest Will was announced: then they did not introduce a special modification when it was announced. They reported on the Most Reverend Iliodor: and here they did not imagine a special method of execution. Why did you come up with this idea so late? Is it good, in a case in which a withdrawal from the Highest Order has already been reported, to report again on another withdrawal? It’s as if, as we condescend to the presentations, we become more bothersome, presenting a second cancellation on the same matter, Then on November 8th it was written: Isn’t it better to get out of the difficulties of this matter by giving the decree the following form: - the day it was announced to the S. Synod that the Sovereign Emperor, having seen in some Churches images that do not belong to the number of reverent worship revered in the Church, and were supplied to arouse the spirit of prayer, according to His Majesty’s characteristic feeling of reverence for the holy church and humility before God, he deigned to command that there should be no images in the Churches except holy images, and paintings from sacred and church history, representing sacred events; and in particular, so that portraits of His Imperial Majesty and His August Family should not be placed in the Church. They ordered: about the due execution - – - Is your project preferred: then it needs to be shortened. There is no need to talk about Bishop’s portraits. There is no harm in them being carried out, and it is not decent to stand for them. Tomorrow I will send you a resolution on the Oryol and Minsk audits. When you compare it with the case, please know that it follows the order of the auditor’s report, and in the end it already moves on to the subjects of the academic presentation. I think I tried to soften my expressions as much as possible. And there are still some absurdities that are completely silent in the resolution: for example, that Sobkevich, a previously known sneaker and former teacher, is now being nominated for an award, saying that he was lying at the risk of his life. It is underlined in the original. Commissions of Theological Schools. Emphasized in the original. You might be interested in: