Soon readers will finally see the Bible translated into the Tuvan language. But the story does not end there. Nikolay Kuular, with the help of Vitaly Voinov, has already translated and published three books by C. S. Lewis from the Chronicles of Narnia series, and this work continues. He also says that Tuvans need manuals that help them understand the biblical text. The Bible does not live in culture alone, by itself. One can be sure that the fate of the people who receive this book in their own language is changing forever – and it is certainly changing for the better.

17. Mission for Muslims: Talking About the Wrong Thing

The murder of priest Danniil Sysoev caused a lot of controversy: why he was killed, whether he was worthy of canonization... He has already appeared before the One Who alone can decide his fate in eternity. And all our arguments are about the wrong thing, about the wrong thing at all.

Of course, it is of no small importance for the Church who will be canonized and on what grounds, and what such canonization will tell us about the lives of the newly-glorified saints. In my opinion, there is every reason to believe that Father Daniel was killed for his preaching of Christ and therefore became a martyr. On the other hand, there is absolutely no reason to think that in the event of canonization, his statements and actions, including his missionary approach itself, are no longer subject to discussion or doubt. It is quite possible to turn to a saint with a prayer and at the same time assert that he was wrong in something specific.

But behind all this talk about the merits and demerits of individuals, something much more important is lost. Christ said, "Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19). This is not just a quotation from a biblical book, it is Christ's farewell commission to His apostles, these are the final words of the very first book of the New Testament. Sometimes referred to as the "great commission," they can indeed be understood as the primary task of the Church in this world. In any case, to ignore them, to pretend that they do not apply to us, or to reinterpret them in some other sense: we will not teach all peoples, but only some, or even not peoples, but their individual representatives, or we will only baptize those who wish, and then let them learn themselves – after all, it is impossible without obvious violence against the spirit and letter of the Scriptures.

All peoples – this sounds provocative, politically incorrect, and simply inconvenient. And what if the people already have their own traditional religion, and many of its zealous followers are ready to tear off the head of anyone who seduces fellow believers from the true path? It is no coincidence that in the official documents of the present time we are talking about the "small indigenous peoples of Russia", which are understood as the inhabitants of the Far North and the Far East: they certainly do not blow up the infidels and do not declare holy wars.

Here again we could go into lengthy arguments about the fact that all world religions actually teach goodness and tolerance, and only those who understand them incorrectly are fond of terrorism, but this will not be a conversation at all. Maybe ideally it is so, but in practice everything is somewhat different. It is given: different peoples with different traditional religions live on the canonical territory of our Church, and there are people among them who are extremely intolerant of other faiths. It is required (in the Gospel, let me remind you): to teach and baptize these peoples without the slightest exception. What is the proposed solution?

At the moment, in fact, there is none. I know several Protestant organizations engaged in missionary work among Muslims, but among the Orthodox I have not seen anyone who would seriously do this today. Father Daniel was an exception, and in many ways. His missionary work, no matter how you treat him, was rather polemics and apologetics – he saw Muslims on the streets of our capital, as a priest and simply as a Christian, he understood that he was obliged to accept this challenge, and he accepted it without a shadow of a doubt. But it is impossible not to notice that this is quite different missionary work from that which was shown to us by St. Stephen of Perm or St. Macarius of Altai—each of them lived among a different people, learned its language and customs, invented a written language for it, translated the Scriptures for it, and created a truly national community as part of the one universal Church. Father Daniel reacted to what he saw around him, to the change in our usual life – they themselves went to people they had never seen before to change their lives. Very different approaches!

To repeat the unique experience of Father Daniel, you will need a fiery character, complete fearlessness, and confidence in the righteousness of your own cause. There are never too many such people, and most importantly, now anyone who wants to follow in his footsteps will clearly understand what can await him at the end of the path. You can demand obedience and diligence from a seminary graduate, but you cannot demand martyrdom from him, so this path will remain the path of bright loners.

How do Protestants manage organized missionary work? There are many answers. Among them, there are also ardent loners who begin their preaching with the words "no, Islam is a false religion" – but there are also very few of them, and their fate is no less tragic. Those who do missionary work in an organized way can start small—with books and pamphlets, even wall calendars, that introduce Muslim audiences to the texts of the Tawrat, Zebur, and Injil, as the Pentateuch, the Psalter, and the Gospel are called, respectively in this tradition (the Qur'an considers them holy books). They tell listeners and readers how the prophets Ibrahim and Musa lived and what they proclaimed, how Yahya washed all those who came to him as a sign of repentance, and what Isa, the Son of Miryam, taught, how He was killed by evil people and then resurrected.

With this approach, the missionary seems to say to the audience: "Yes, I respect your religion very much, and therefore I would like to supplement your knowledge of God and His messengers." After all, many people do not even know that all these people – Ibrahim, Musa and Isa – are spoken about in both the Koran and the Bible, but the Bible is much more detailed. There is also an approach when the missionary rejects any overtly Christian symbolism, does not even call himself a Christian – he talks about God and the prophets, remaining as if within the framework of Islam, but speaks as much as he can in a Christian way.

The latter, perhaps, is not applicable to the Orthodox mission, but does this mean that the only possible approach for it is an open and deliberate confrontation in the spirit of Father Daniel? Not at all sure. Listeners and circumstances are different, and preachers are not the same, so it is impossible to demand any one template from them. In addition, the tasks of teaching and baptizing can be understood as interrelated, but still separate. Then you can think about the fact that a patient and friendly story to Muslims about Christianity will be of great value: even if not all listeners will be baptized, at least they will learn what their neighbors really believe. Perhaps then there will be fewer people who want to wage holy wars.

That is why I do not see much point in arguing about "how right was Father Daniel in what he did?" He has already given an account of this to his Lord, and we should consider another question: What are we doing, what are we ready to do? The harvest field in front of us is simply huge, there are not so few workers – they are practically invisible. Personally, I am sure that in this field there will be a place for quiet conversation, and for heated polemics, and for scientific research, and for rhetorical brilliance, and for much more. Apparently, we do not have to wait for any explicit instructions from above - this is too delicate a political matter, the protocol makes too many demands. But not everything is regulated from above!

We habitually talk about Russia as an Orthodox country. But for a considerable number of its inhabitants, Orthodoxy remains the ethnic religion of Russians, but they hear about Christianity as the truth for all peoples in their native language only from Protestants. And if they agree with the truth, but do not want to become Russians, they pass by us and go to those who are ready to accept them. And for some reason, we do not say a word about this.