Fr Vasily Zenkovsky's

"Prominent People I have Met"

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Berdyaev

[The Reminiscences of V.V.Zenkovsky are from the Bakhmetiev Archive in the Rare Book and Manuscript Library of Columbia University. They were published by the Association of Russian-American Scholars]

I first met N. A. Berdyaev in 1903 at my teacher's G. I. Chelpanov.

I was still a student and was interested about everything which the then "leaders" of the Russian intelligentsia were writing (Berdyaev, Bulgakov, and others).Since that time until the year of Berdyaev's death (1948), I was able, during the different periods of our relationships, to observe and feel N.A. I do not intend to write here in detail about our relations but I cannot avoid this. Thus I will first describe our relations, their ups and downs, and then move on to Berdyaev's characteristics.

My meetings with Berdyaev in Kiev were always at Chelpanov's and this naturally placed a stamp on our friendship. Berdyaev enjoyed coming to Chelpanov's but his primary interests were in no way in agreement with those by which Chelpanov lived, whose total creativity was directed towards scholarly pursuit (primarily in psychology but in part, in general philosophical themes). Berdyaev liked to talk about general philosophical subjects but his primary interest at that time, and later, was completely tied to religious philosophy. It became clear to me that Berdyaev, in some respects, "condescended" towards Chelpanov, as if constantly sensing his limitations, i.e. his indifference towards religious themes. Berdyaev was very handsome at that time, his large head with its shock of black hair, his clothes (he always dressed, as far as I can remember, like an artist). All his impressed me and his well-known physical handicap did not affect me then or later.

I was still a young man (age 22) but was somehow "on the side" in my relationship with Berdyaev. Berdyaev impressed me but at the same time I literally was afraid to lose myself. Nonetheless these Kievan meetings are still vivid in my mind, his multifaceted range of interests, his attentive fascination with all current philosophic directions, all this made me favorably disposed towards him. At Chelpanov's I frequently saw L. I. Shestov during those same evenings and listened to their discussions with utmost attention. Berdyaev soon settled either in Moscow or St Petersburg and the personal meetings almost ended. Chelpanov likewise soon settled in Moscow but I continued to keep up constantly with Berdyaev's literary activities. He had an unquestioned influence upon me in the years from 1903 to 1908. His religious and social sensitivity was very close to me. I myself was developing along the same lines. Many years passed. I went abroad, leaving Russia at the end of 1919 and became a professor in Belgrade.

I met A. M. Lazarev in Berlin whom I knew well in Kiev (likewise through Chelpanov). Lazarev introduced me to D. M. Kachen, an original philosopher in the social sphere. Here we thought about an association of Russian philosophers who were abroad and, I believe, in September 1922, a small meeting took place in Berlin at which I was elected chairman of the then organized Russian Philosophical Society. At that time a collection of articles "Orthodoxy and Culture" was published under my editorship.

But by November of 1922 a significant group of Russian philosophers was expelled from Russia, including Berdyaev. Along with them came Frank, Vysheslavtsev, I.A. Il'yin, Karsavin, and they organized an Academy of Religion and Philosophy in Berlin which was headed by Berdyaev. It was subsidized by the American YMCA. Since, from 1922 I had been in close contact with the religious groups of young people, we decided, in 1923, to organize the first assembly of the Russian Student Christian Movement. Naturally we (the organizers) invited Berdyaev to attend. At the assembly Berdyaev came across with a bang. Along with Bulgakov, Kartashev and Novgorodsky, he was the assembly's inspiration. However, our personal relations somehow and unexpectedly deteriorated. I had been elected the chairman of the Movement at the assembly. By that time I had relocated to Prague. The directors of the YMCA who had already began to subsidize the Academy of Religion and Philosophy and had decided to increase their publishing venture (YMCA Press), were present at the assembly and were quite favorably impressed with it. In the late Fall of 1923 I received a letter from G.G. Kullmann, at that time the director of the YMCA's work among young student groups, with a request that I come to Berlin to go over "certain problems." At the first meeting it became clear that the YMCA wanted to link the activities of the Academy of Religion and Philosophy with that of the Russian Student Christian Movement. We agreed with Kullmann that he would call a conference of all YMCA secretaries for the next day.

I immediately sensed a kind of discomfort since this would lead to some kind of a change in the work of the Academy of Religion and Philosophy. My meeting with Berdyaev at the student assembly was most cordial but on the basis of a few incidental remarks I felt a tinge of jealousy on Berdyaev's part towards the Philosophical Society mentioned earlier, of which I was chairman. Thus when the possibility arose in a change in Berdyaev's work in the Academy of Religion and Philosophy, with my participation, I felt that this could result in a complete rupture of our relationship. Thus on that same evening when I met with Kullmann, I went to Berdyaev to inform him about the meeting, asking him under what conditions and in what directions would he consider changing the work of the Academy of Religion and Philosophy. As soon as Berdyaev heard from me about the earlier meeting he became extremely agitated. I am not sure whether he was afraid for his material situation in the event of a change in the direction of the Academy of Religion and Philosophy, especially if the Academy would be linked to the Movement thus jeopardizing its independence, or he was simply unhappy that someone other than himself would pass judgement on the work of the Academy of Religion and Philosophy, whatever the case, he went to see Kullmann that very evening. I don't know what he told him, only that Kullmann told me on the next day "Why did you disrupt our planned conference? Why did you have to inform Berdyaev about it?" I told Kullmann that this was called for by academic courtesy from me.

Although the conference never took place but as the result of this unpleasant episode Berdyaev treated me with distrust and at one point unkindly. Thus when I asked him to arrange sole lectures for me at the Academy of Religion and Philosophy (at that time I was in dire material difficulties and the lectures there were well compensated) Berdyaev, without any hesitation answered me in the negative. Overall, Berdyaev was a well-meaning and proper man and thus his relationship to me offended me greatly.

In 1925 the Academy of Religion and Philosophy, along with other American YMCA activities, relocated in Paris. Here my relations with Berdyaev improved. He needed me as a lecturer and "respondent" at the open meetings of the Academy of Religion and Philosophy (as in the past, there was no room there for me to give individual lectures). I submitted my articles to the journal edited by Berdyaev and even came to his house.

I don't remember when and why I suddenly stopped visiting Berdyaev although these were rather infrequent, as in the past. Suddenly and unexpectedly, during one of the Movement's assemblies (around 1928-29), Berdyaev who was there, turned to me with some strange remarks. "You moved away from me. You stopped coming to see me. Why?" I must admit that Berdyaev, as a thinker has disenchanted me for some time. I lost interest in him and his writings. By that time he became extremely repetitious. I could not tell him that and passed this off with some harmless phrase. But after several years Berdyaev renewed and intensified his attacks against me but completely under a different motivation.

It so happened that by the beginning of the Thirties there was a movement to the "Right" within the Russian society and especially the youth. I shared no sympathy with this but I did not view this as some kind of a catastrophe since no one was in the position to put a stop to this process. But it turned out that Berdyaev's lectures at the Academy of Religion and Philosophy had less and less young people in attendance and this was extremely annoying and upsetting for him. He could find nothing better than to place the blame on me. He accused me of not attracting young people to him (what a strange and simply stupid pretension!), that I don't oppose the Rightist tendencies in the Movement, etc. I was enraged by his letter and I responded sharply, that as the chairman of the Movement I do not consider myself to have the right to pressure the youth nor to inculcate them with ideas and that if anyone could be held responsible for the young people it is not I, as chairman of the whole Movement, but the Executive Secretary of the Movement in France F. T. Pyanov (a rather fiery and passionate supporter of Berdyaev). My incredulity at Berdyaev's strange pretensions was shared by Fr Sergei Bulgakov. When I read Berdyaev's letter at the Movement's ecexutive session Fr S. Bulgakov warmly supported me and Berdyaev's letter remained without any influence on the work of the Movement. I deeply regret that during a search, when all of my correspondence was confiscated, Berdyaev's letter fell into the hands of the police. It is not surprising that after this my relations with Berdyaev completely deteriorated and we never met again.

There was another incident. Berdyaev considered himself, as a publicist, entitled to call our clergy to task for any indication of conservative tendencies and once wrote such a pointed and particularly unsubstantiated article, full of exaggerations, attacking our bishops, that the most reserved and humble Fr Sergei Chetverikov told me that as far as he was concerned, it is not possible to take part in any assembly in which Berdyaev participates (at that time Berdyaev had for some time been an honorary member of the Movement and as such would be invited to all of the Movement's meetings). There was no hesitation on the part of the Movement's executive committee to decide who was closer and more valuable: Berdyaev or Fr Sergei (it should be pointed out that earlier Fr Sergei wrote protests to "Put'" in response to some of his pointed articles which Berdyaev published in his journal without hesitation). It had been decided beforehand simply not to invite Berdyaev to the committee's meetings. To our good fortune Berdyaev, sensing his distancing from the Movement, resigned and was no longer an honorary member of the Movement.

The final episode in my relations with Berdyaev was in connection with the Theological Institute. The Institute's council charged me and Fr G. Florovsky, in the Summer of 1939 to compile a White Paper giving all information with respect to this episode. But the war came in 1939 and there was no thought of publishing any kind of a White Paper. At the end of the war in 1945 it was decided to include all this material as part of a book about the Theological Institute which was to be printed on funds donated for this purpose by Dr. Mott. So far, the book has not been printed and all the material remains unused.

The episode consisted of the following. The political passions in Europe with respect to the war in Spain were aroused. The Russian emigration was affected as well. A member of our faculty V.N. Il'yin began to publish trenchant articles in the paper "Vozrozhdeniye" at first against Milyukov and then Berdyaev. Fr Sergei Bulgakov summoned Il'yin and demanded that he either cease his attacks against Berdyaev,( to whom we were all linked through the Academy of Religion and Philosophy) or devote his full time to journalism and resign from the Institute. V.N. Il'yin agreed to restrain himself from his provocative articles.

At the same time a more difficult conflict arose with G.P. Fedotov, also one of our Institute professors. Fedotov was a man of many gifts. We were all impressed with his scholarly accomplishments but at the same time he was a political publicist of an extremely Leftish bend (earlier he had been a Social Democrat of a leftish persuasion and in Paris he factually came close to the Social Revolutionaries of the types of Fundaminsky, Rudnev and others). He published brilliant satires, extreme in their bite, in "Novaya Rossiya" (published by S[ocial] R[evolutionaries]). The civil war raging in Spain made of him an irreconcilable enemy of Franco. But his articles, highly talanted in style, irritated the Russian society and created unpleasant rumors around the Theological Institute. Once Metropolitan Evlogy, during a faculty meeting, gently addressed Fedotov, apologizing for attempting to meddle in his literary ventures, and asked him to tone down his writings and his adulation of La Passionara (a heroine of the Red Spaniards), as well as his rancor against Franco, for the sake of the Institute's interests. Fedotov frowned but promised to be more restrained. Alas, he quickly became taken up by the political struggle. His articles became more provocative and uncompromising.. The Institute's faculty, while not at all inclined towards Franco, became concerned and upset by Fedotov's articles who just then departed for England for half a year of academic work and from England sent his thundering articles to "Novaya Rossiya".

The Institute's council was under pressure because of Fedotov's high-handed disregard of the Institute's interests and Fr Bulgakov, relying on his cordial closeness to Fedotov, wrote him that the Institute decisively requests Fedotov to choose between his work as a political publicist or or his work in the Institute in view of the extreme provocative tone reflected in Fedotov's writings.

Fedotov responded with a rude letter where he stated that he deems that the faculty council is not competent to judge to what degree his position as a faculty member is compatible with his work as a writer and that he does not accept the dilemma presented by the Institute, that he considers himself as in the past, a professor in the Institute and that he has no intention to change anything in his literary output. The faculty council had no alternative in its response to Fedotov's cynical and rude declaration except to relieve him of his work in the Institute. We were all extremely upset by these events but could see no other way out since Fedotov's extreme articles in support of La Passionara and her revolting pronouncements which created a bad atmosphere around the Institute..

Only a month went by when the next issue of "Put'" carried Berdyaev's article against the Institute wherein (excluding Fr Bulgakov, just so so) he called all of us "ignoramuses", daring to infringe upon Fedotov's freedom to write. This is when the Institute's council charged me and Fr Florovsky with preparing a "White Paper" with a detailed presentation of all events along with all documentary evidence. I don't know what would have happened from all this but the war exploded in 1939. One thing remained: our mutual break with Berdyaev. After this I saw Berdyaev only once when we buried Fr Sergei Bulgakov.

Such were my relations with N.A. Berdyaev over a forty year period. After being freed from the Germans, Berdyaev for a time sharply turned towards the Soviets and this permanently tore us apart. To be sure, he gradually moved away from his Sovietophilia but the chasm between us remained. When Berdyaev died I could not find in within me to go to his funeral but instead I began to commemorate his name permanently in prayers for the dead.