Letters of Abbot Nikon

You must have read the article by Aleksandr Osipov in Pravda of December 5.(Aleksandr Osipov, a professor of Old Testament at the Leningrad Theological Academy, who before his apostasy had been under suspension for his second marriage) I have no doubt about what your opinion or that of any person with some wits is. I would like to know, if possible, in detail, about the reaction of the students. Do they see that this poor man revealed himself as an absolute moral nullity in this article – and what is important, himself being unaware of this. The article’s effect is the opposite to the expectations of the author. The article has neither justified the author, nor caused any harm to the religion, but it has clearly showed that the Lord uncovers disguised “judases” and casts them out from the Church.

I wonder if you have noticed that in the section about prayer, three dots precede the word “worship. “ I don’t doubt that some dirty word was in that place. Even the newspaper’s editors found it impossible to have it in print. The spirit moving the author’s pen has poured all its spite on the worship and on the Jesus Prayer. Take this to notice! At the moment of a heartfelt and sincere prayer, a fallen man comes into community with the Creator of the world and receives from Him great good gifts and power to push away the mighty spirit imagining itself equal to God. Is it possible for this spirit to tolerate such indignity?! That is why he pours down his spite and hatred on prayer and worship. Let them (students) comprehend the significance and power of prayer and of God’s mercy to us, the fallen! Poor Aleksandr has showed by his words about prayer that he never prayed and therefore never believed in God. His is not abandonment of God or Christianity, but of the vision of religion and of God he used to have.

The reasons which caused his “doubts” and renunciations were as shallow and superficial as his superficial faith was.

His apostasy as such is not a result of his sincere reservations and strivings. He has showed himself as a pragmatic man of this world. As long as his situation was more or less stable and as long as he received a good salary, he disguised himself as a religious believer, kissing hands of hierarchs, whom he despised, and “training young man for pastoral service.” But when his position began to shake, he decided to look for a better position for himself in a different front. He hurried to do so before it is late and when his apostasy is still working and could serve the purpose of him being accepted elsewhere.

When Jesus Christ, after feeding five thousand, began to talk about the bread of life, many people departed Him, because they could not assimilate His words. They acted honestly. Their fleshly wisdom could not rise up to the Spirit of the Truth. But Judas did not depart from Jesus Christ, because he was in charge of carrying the box with money and because he used this privilege to use this money for his own needs. Besides, he hoped for more. Like others, Judas expected the Messiah to become the King and ascend the throne, which suggested certain advantages for him too. But on finding out that Jesus Christ was not going to establish His Kingdom on earth and that death awaited Him, Judas used these facts to his own advantage: he defected to the camp of the enemies and betrayed Him and received his thirty pieces of silver – Why not? Jesus was to die anyway!

It is not without reason that those giving up Christ nowadays are likened to Judas. This is done not to insult such people – they deserve to be pitied – but because in both cases, they followed Christ seeking their own advantages and betrayed Him also seeking advantages for themselves. However, traitors were never trusted and less so respected anywhere. “The Moor has done his job, the moor can go…”

Aleksandr was not sincere before the apostasy, nor is he sincere afterwards. He is a psychologically “touched,” who has built a house on sand. A minor temptation pulled it down, and the damage was great.

* * *