Bishop's house

Bishops 'houses (or bishops' houses ^{[3] [4]} ) in the Russian Empire and in the Russian Empire have a rather long and volatile history in accordance with the land holdings of the bishops and their administrative rights in judicial rights and duties ^{[4] [5]} .

Vologda Bishop's Court (XX century)

Since the founding of the Russian Church, bishopric departments have owned numerous real estate and entire settlements. Not only economic cares over lands and lands, but also the management of persons inhabiting church lands, and even the trial of them in many cases belonged to the bishop . In addition to persons of the clergy or living in church institutions and on church lands, all secular persons in church matters and many others, such as family ones, were subject to the episcopal court ^{[4] [6]} .

Based on all of the above, it is clear that the House of the Bishop is a very complex institution: with him there were many ranks with different names for the administration of a variety of economic, administrative and judicial duties. Here were their own - episcopal boyars , nobles and lower servants of different names: volosteli - for managing estates, decimal judges ^[7] - for the court of church people for civil matters and for collecting taxes from the clergy and other officials ^{[4] [8]} .

Bishop's house in Tobolsk

The situation of the bishop’s house and the number of officials under it directly depended on the vastness and wealth of the diocese . Rich and influential in all matters of civilian bishop of Novgorod , possessing vast estates, he lived in rich chambers, many nobles, stolniks , treasurers , volostelites and various lower officials were assigned to his house, and even had his own regiment under the command of his governor . The staff of officials was even more diverse under the Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia . His court was arranged like the court of the specific prince . Under him were: boyars, stewards, horsemen , their own regiment, etc. ^[4] .

In addition to managing his diocese, he also managed the entire Russian Church and, besides the usual income for all bishops from churches and estates, he also had income from other dioceses. For all this, a very large staff was needed. The bishop’s court of the patriarch, especially from the time of Filaret and under Nikon , was modeled after the royal court . Here were: candles , cup bowls , tablecloths , bakers , cooks , as well as icon painters , book painters , carvers , gilders , singing clerks of various articles, and also boyars, demeanor , dumas , tyuns , boyar children , noblemen, clerks and others ^[4] .

On the model of the tsar’s orders, patriarchal orders appeared for business, administrative and judicial affairs; in each order sat a patriarchal boyar with a clerk and clerks and decided matters with a report to the patriarch ^[9] . Similar orders from this time appear at the houses of other diocesan bishops. According to Kotoshikhin, the church owned 118 thousand yards, and some foreigners believed that about a third of the entire state territory was in church ownership ^{[10] [4]} .

Since time immemorial, Russian statesmen since the time of Tsar of All Russia Ivan III Vasilievich have sought to limit both the patrimonial possession of the church and its judicial rights. Essentially important in this respect was done under Peter the Great ; under him, the use of income from church estates was noticeably limited, and at the same time, many cases before the court of justice were transferred to secular authorities. This significantly changed the setting of the bishops' houses. Many servants of bishop’s houses now turned out to be “ superfluous, ” and in 1701, the staff of the bishops’s courts began to be reduced: some were taken into military service , others, of a non-gentry kind, were put on a poll. The bishop’s houses left only the necessary house servants and a small number of nobles who were subject to the general laws on nobles ^{[11] [4]} .

Strict control over expenses and incomes , constant new requirements for charitable institutions and special taxes from spiritual property continued under the successors of Peter the Great, for example, under Anna Ioannovna, the bishops’s courts were lined with a special tax for the maintenance of horse factories , which were then opened in large numbers, because Empress Ernst Johann Biron 's favorite for horses. All this greatly influenced the situation of bishop's houses, which quickly became poor ^{[12] [4]} .

The issue of church estates in general, and in particular about the possessions of archieic houses under Catherine II Alekseevna, was finally resolved. In 1764, all church estates, which had more than 910 thousand souls, were removed from the church department. At the same time, staff was established for bishops' courts. Episcopal departments were divided into three classes. 39410 rubles were allocated for three first-class departments with cathedrals; for eight second-class ones - 5,000 rubles each; personally to the bishop - 2600 rubles. For 15 third-graders, 4232 rubles each and personally to the bishop 1800 rubles. For 2 vicarities - 8061 rubles. In addition to the enormous income from church lands, since 1780 the state received an annual quitrent from church peasants - 3 million 370 thousand rubles, and allocated all church institutions (bishops' houses, monasteries , cathedrals , churches , schools , seminaries , etc.) only 403 thousand 712 rubles. These figures clearly show that all church institutions, and in particular bishops' houses, which, as a result of these reforms, lost the lion's share of their income ^{[4] [13]} .

In the late XIX - early XX centuries, bishops' houses owned lands and lands that were then left behind. They were not forbidden to acquire any kind of real estate through the purchase, will and gift of private individuals, but such an acquisition did not receive legal force except by the Highest Order for each individual case ^[4] .

The lands and all property in general were in the full possession of the bishop; he could, through a spiritual consistory, give them to other people for rent, but not more than for 25 years; land revenues were also at his full disposal. The diocesan bishop did not have the right to alienate lands and possessions or exchange them, except for important reasons, without the permission of the Holy Synod and even without the highest permission ^[4] .

The economy of the bishop’s house was controlled by the housekeeper , the determination and dismissal of which depends on the bishop. The housekeeper was obliged to give a full report to the bishop and the consistory. The spiritual consistory checked the economy when the bishop changed economy and the death of the bishop (if the bishop's relatives, after his death, did not appear to receive the property left after him in due time, then it turned in favor of the bishop’s house ^[14] ). When the bishop transferred to another department, the consistory checked the property of the bishop’s house and only in that case issued the bishop a check-out, when the bishop gave explanations regarding the property and, in case of failure , filled in the missing ^{[4] [15]} .

Shortly after the October Revolution ( January 23, 1918 ), the Bolsheviks issued a decree " On the separation of the church from the state and the school from the church" [ ^16], which deprived the church of the right to own land and other property, which put an end to the existence of bishops' courtyards. After these rights were returned in 1990, the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church no longer considered it necessary to restore this religious management institution ^{[1] [2]} .

• Bishops' houses // Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary : 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - SPb. , 1890-1907.
• Gorchakova M. "The history of land holdings and the management of bishops' houses."
• "On the land possessions of the All-Russian Metropolitans, Patriarchs and the Holy Synod" (St. Petersburg, 1871).

• Alekseev A.I. , Florea B.N. Bishop’s House // Orthodox Encyclopedia.