Historically, among church-going Orthodox Christians, there has been a special perception of death as an inevitable phenomenon that should always be remembered. At the same time, death only precedes a new, eternal life. The sequence of the funeral service for priests and bishops differs significantly from the order for the burial of the laity. The most important role in the spiritual and social life of the church, including the Russian Orthodox Church of the Synodal period, was played by the metropolitans. The study of their posthumous social impact can help to amplify the lore about the collective memory of the Orthodox clergy and laity. At the same time, the practices associated with burial, mourning and commemoration of the metropolitans and other hierarchs have not been sufficiently studied. The aim of this paper, based on the principle of historicism, is to identify the key features of the coverage of the death of the Metropolitans of Kyiv and Halychyna in the main church magazine of their eparchy. Kyiv is the main focus as a significant sacred centre for the Orthodox believers. During the publication of “Kyiv Eparchial Herald” in Kyiv, the second Orthodox Jerusalem, 6 metropolitans died: Arsenius (+1876), Philotheus (+1882), Platon (+1891), Joanicius (1900), Theognostus (+1903), Flavian (+1915). All publications in the magazine concerning their death and burial were analysed. In relation to the death of the metropolitans, the editorial board promptly posted news reports on the death itself, burial and commemoration; obituaries; funeral speeches of clergy and secular persons; sympathetic letters and telegrams from different dioceses on the pages of its magazine. The mentioned letters and telegrams were most imbued with the spirit of sorrow. The other materials, although they contain this motive, are more focused on describing the life and ministry of the deceased, their contribution to the spiritual and material well-being of their eparchy, as well as on the solemnity of farewell to the archpastor, various details of funeral and memorial ceremonies. Therefore, it is possible to argue that the main goal of the editorial board of “Kyiv Eparchial Herald” was not to mourn the metropolitans, but to perpetuate their memory for all subsequent generations of the readers. The author sees a prospect in further consideration of the case of Kyiv eparchy periodicals in the wider comparative context.