On the false attribution of an essay to St. Joseph of Optina

On the false attribution of the essay "May We Orthodox Christians Pray for the Heterodox, and if so, How?" to St. Joseph of Optina (+1911)

 

Two appendices are attached to the book [The Elder Joseph of Optina, published by Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Brookline, MA, 1984]: one a presentation of the cell rule of the Optina Pustyn’ and the other a treatment of a question —can Orthodox Christians pray for non-Orthodox Christians and, if so, in what manner is this allowed by the Church?* The latter appendix is attributed to the Optina Elder Joseph. It is interesting for us to speculate about the basis upon which this attribution was made. And it is such speculation which will form the bulk of our review of this book.

In order to establish whether this second appendix was indeed written by the Elder Joseph of Optina, we undertook a careful examination of his life. Here we encountered no evidence whatever —unlike that in the life of Elder Nectary, who, in addition to prayer, devoted many years of his seclusion to secular learning— that the Elder Joseph was occupied with literary or scholarly works. Whereas the Elder Nectary achieved a high level of attainment through self-education, even learning French (for which his solitude was a necessity), as regards the Elder Joseph, he was, after all, “among the people,” in his direct service as an Elder or starets. In fact, he had no time for the study of secular learning and literary works.

With this in mind, it is difficult, therefore, to believe that the Elder Joseph left behind a literary legacy which was otherwise lost, save for a preserved fragment now published, in this new book, as his work. No written works by him actually exist. Furthermore, this fragment, on careful examination, does not carry the “stamp” of his spirit; moreover, it was obviously written by someone from the “intelligensia.” It was written, not by the Elder Joseph of Optina, but by a certain “Hieromonk Joseph.”

It is not possible to accept two men for one merely on the basis of the fact that they lived in the same epoch and carried one and the same name. In the eyes of God, no two people are identical. To each man is given individuality. In the Divine Revelation (2:17), it is written: “I... will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth, saving he that receiveth it.” That is, no one’s own name and no one’s individual identity can exist differently in two people. Moreover, the spiritual uniqueness of each individual is imprinted not only on his spiritual make-up, but on his works and labors.

At the beginning of the article in question (Appendix B), the author indicates the significance of the Church’s Mysteries in the lives of believing Christians. Corporate Church prayer (the ekklesia in prayer), in conjunction with the sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ, aids Christians who have departed in the Faith to attain to the blessed Resurrection. There is, however, a different circumstance with regard to those who do not correctly believe (such are referred to as heretics). On the first Sunday of the Great Lent, the Church anathematizes those who have fallen away. Church prayer on their behalf is forbidden. How is it possible, then, to pray for them? To offer public prayer or to sing, “With Thy Saints give them rest” is impossible, for in the grave there is no repentance. Such are the author’s words.

Is it possible to accept this very correct and elevated speech, this dry and formal language, as consistent with the manner in which the Optina Elder Joseph expressed himself? When the author of this article speaks of the Fearful Judgment, he insists that even among Orthodox —let alone heretics—, only the exceptionally righteous will be saved. Is it truly possible to speak so boldly concerning this matter? Is such boldness consistent with the humility of one of the Optina Elders?

In the conclusion of his article, moving from the question of public prayer for the departed, the author touches on the question of private prayer for the departed non-Orthodox, as well as for Orthodox Christians guilty of grave sins. Can Orthodox pray privately for these and, if so, in what manner? Let us see how an Optina Elder answers this question and then reflect on our would-be Elder Joseph (in reality, Hieromonk Joseph). Here, too, as in the question of public prayer for non-Orthodox and those anathematized by the Church, we see a great difference in tone between the Optina spiritual tradition and that presented in the spurious appendix.

We offer here a rather complete and extensive answer to this question, taken from the life of Optina Elder Leonid (Lev in the Great Schema). [Taken from The Works of Optina Elder Leonid (in Schema, Lev), Moscow, 1876, p. 210.]

“A disciple of Elder Leonid, Paul of Tambov, receiving from the Lord a certain vision in a dream, related it fully to the Elder. [In the dream], he was lifted up on a cross and suffered severe torment, as though he were being crucified. But after suffering these intolerable torments —yet hanging on the cross—, a condition of inexpressible heavenly bliss overtook him. In this vision there was revealed to him the awesome punishment of extreme mortal sins by God and, simultaneously, an understanding that the punishment of a sinner is to be grasped only in the limitless will of the Lord.

“The Elder, Father Leonid, predicted that Paul’s dream was a harbinger of some trial that was coming to him. Not long after this, a trial did overcome Paul: his father ended his life by suicide. ‘Tell me, Father,’ said Paul, turning to the Elder, ‘how can I console myself in this present grief?’ ‘Entrust yourself, as well as the fate of your father, to the will of God, which is all-wise, all-powerful,’ answered the Elder. ‘Do not pry into the wonders of the Most High. Endeavor with humility to strengthen yourself within the limits of moderate sorrow. Pray to the most-blessed Creator, thereby fulfilling the duty of love and the obligation of a son.’

“‘But in what manner may one pray for such?’

“‘In the spirit of righteous and wise men, pray thus: “Seek, O Lord, the lost soul of my father and, if possible, have mercy! Thy judgments are unsearchable. Do not account this prayer a sin to me, but let Thy will be done.” Pray, then, simply, without testing, delivering over your heart to the right hand of the Almighty. Of course, it was not God’s will that your father should have met such a grievous end, but now he is completely in the will of Him Who is able to throw both body and soul into the flaming furnace, and Who humbles and exalts, grants death or enlivens, sends into hell or raises up. Yet, He is so merciful, all-powerful, and filled with love, that the good qualities of all born here on earth are as nothing before his most-exalted goodness. Therefore, you should not overly grieve. You will say, “I love my father, so how can I grieve without some comfort?” This is natural. But God loved and still loves him incomparably more than you do. Therefore, it remains for you to place the eternal fate of your father before the goodness and mercy of God, Who has mercy as He wills, and Whom none can resist.’”

Ostensibly the foregoing answer coincides with the words of the author of our disputed appendix. However, the author of the appendix prefers to elucidate this question in terms of his own personal view, not according to the teaching of the Elder Leonid —something uncharacteristic of the spirit of the Optina Elders. In the first place, he offers a different form of the prayer intended for non-Orthodox: “Have mercy O Lord on the soul of [name], departed in separation from the Orthodox Church, and do not account my prayer a sin. Thy will be done.” Hieromonk Joseph explains: “We do not know, and it has not been revealed to anyone, how much profit such a prayer brings to the soul of the deceased non-Orthodox Christian. But experience has shown that it tempers the burning sorrow of the heart felt by one praying for the soul of the person close to him, even though he died outside of Orthodoxy.” In short, such prayer, according to Hieromonk Joseph, mainly helps the person praying to sustain his soul. If we accept all of this, there immediately arises the question: “Is it possible to accept such a prayer as an example of spiritual prayer for those outside Orthodoxy?” Does not the prayer and one who harshly advocates it rise up against the efficacy of the most great mercy of God? And is this the spirit of Optina?

Clearly and without a doubt, Hieromonk Joseph — whom we cannot confuse with the Optina Elder Joseph—, writing in Orthodox Colloquy, no. 3, did not comprehend the divine spirituality of the Optina Elders.

- Mrs. Helena Kontzevich

* An adaptation of the essay in question is found here:  https://web.archive.org/web/20050404202537/http://www.struggler.org/PrayingForTheHeterodox.html

Source: Orthodox Tradition, Vol. 3 (1986), No. 1, pp. 60-63.