Experts have explained the background behind the church's claims against Alaudinov's religious ideas.

Priest Sergiy Fufayev, in criticizing the ideas in Apti Alaudinov's book, voiced the official position of the Russian Orthodox Church, citing distortions of key tenets of the Christian religion as the basis for his criticism.

As reported by the "Caucasian Knot," Sergiy Fufayev, deputy chairman of the Synodal Missionary Department for Apologetic Mission of the Russian Orthodox Church, pointed out that Apti Alaudinov's book "The Army of Jesus in the Battle Against the Army of Dajjal-Antichrist" mixes Christian and Islamic ideas, which distorts the foundations of the Orthodox faith and leads to heresy. Alaudinov countered that the book is about the joint struggle of Muslims and Christians, and its ideas are presented from an Islamic perspective, but adapted for fighters who consider themselves Orthodox. He emphasized that the book's co-author was the imam of Akhmat, Magomed Khitanaev.

Apti Alaudinov's response to criticism of the book was commented on by the "Caucasian" "The knot" was attended by Sergey Chapnin, Director of Communications at the Center for Orthodox Studies at Fordham University, Archdeacon Andrei Kuraev (included in the register of foreign agents), Director of the Sova Information and Analysis Center (included in the register of foreign agents) Alexander Verkhovsky, and the head of the Civic Assistance Committee (included in the register of foreign agents) Svetlana Gannushkina (included in the register of foreign agents).

The book by Magomed Khitanaev, co-authored with Alaudinov, cannot be considered exclusively within the framework of the Islamic religion, Sergey Chapnin pointed out after reviewing this publication.

The authors are making a rather radical attempt to impose Islamic Christology

"This book, or, to call a spade a spade, a propaganda booklet, is addressed not only and not so much to the Muslim The authors are making a rather radical attempt to impose Islamic Christology, the Islamic interpretation of the person of Jesus Christ, as completely compatible with the Orthodox faith. The heresy in this case is not in Islam as such—Islam is a heterodox faith [relative to Christianity], and this concept is inapplicable to it—but in the specific syncretic construct used by Khitanaev and Alaudinov. In it, the Trinity is dissolved into abstract monotheism, and Christ is stripped of his divine nature and equated with the Quranic Isa. The authors employ a technique that Archpriest Alexander Schmemann called "reduction," that is, reducing Christianity to some kind of general religiosity serving earthly, in this case military-political, goals. I would even say that this is a double reduction—faith is reduced to the need for military mobilization, and at the same time, the individual is called upon to dissolve into a military-political project," he said.

It was precisely this distortion of faith that provoked the reaction of representatives of the official "The authors' views, although supported by Archpriests Nikolai Germansky and Sergiy Ladik, who wrote the foreword to this brochure, are a direct distortion of faith. The 'official church' in Russia has practically forgotten how to speak about faith and has reduced its public statements to promoting Orthodox ideology, which is why the attempt to defend Orthodox doctrine appears so unusual—I would even say exotic," he said.

The synthesis proposed in the book directly distorts Christian doctrine.

Heterodox belief and heresy, he said, are fundamentally different categories. "Another faith is a different religious tradition that exists outside the Christian tradition and does not claim to be its true expression; that is why Islam is an another faith, and, say, Arianism is a heresy. The book by Khiitanaev and Alaudinov is an appeal to the Orthodox with a very specific message: Islamic eschatology and Islamic Christology are compatible with the Orthodox confession of faith. This creates a situation that I would call quasi-heretical. Not because Islam as such is a heresy (although there have been such opinions in history, for example, St. John of Damascus called Islam "the heresy of the Ishmaelites"), but because the specific synthesis proposed in the book is aimed at a Christian reader and directly distorts Christian doctrine. Here's an analogy for you: if "A Buddhist guru will write a book for Christians about how the Resurrection is a metaphor for rebirth. The Church will classify this as heresy, but this will not mean that Buddhism is declared heretical," the expert said.

He noted that the book simultaneously blurs and harshly restructures religious identity. "Theological differences between Islam and Christianity are being erased – but only to create a new semantic construct: 'we' versus 'Dajjal,' versus Satanists (In July 2025, the Russian Supreme Court declared the "International Satanism Movement" extremist and banned its activities. - Caucasian Knot note). This is not a dialogue or synthesis – it is a mobilization ideology using religious language," Chapnin noted.

The book is not addressed to abstract "warriors," but to the personnel of military units.

Sergey Chapnin also shared his opinion on why the Russian Orthodox Church reacted so harshly to Alaudinov's ideas. "The harshness of the reaction is entirely understandable – the book presents a doctrine of the Trinity and the God-manhood of Christ, which is false from a Christian perspective, rather than peripheral issues of ritual or ascetic discipline. Furthermore, the text is addressed to those who find themselves in extreme [combat] conditions. Their brains are already in disarray. […] And the book is not addressed to abstract 'warriors,' but to the personnel of units [participating in combat]. The brazen and provocative title of the brochure – 'The Army of Jesus in the Battle against the Dajjal-Antichrist' – is the ideological support for the [Russian] troops," he pointed out.

Chapnin believes Alaudinov wants to give the book the status of a kind of quasi-official army ideology, at least for his Akhmat regiment.

The Church's silence would be perceived as approval.

"The Church's silence would be perceived as approval not only of the political but also of the theological component of this ideology." It's worth noting that, yes, the book could have been a bid for a new political theology of Islam in Russia—an attempt to understand interreligious coexistence within the context of a common state project. However, the quality of the text is extremely low—the number of slogans, propaganda clichés, and superficial judgments is simply off the charts, making it impossible to talk about theological development. And yes, when the Church serves state ideology for decades, it loses the ability to resist, and ideology dictates the Church's theology. The reaction to the book is a rare case where the "official church" has discovered that its symphony with the state has its limits," he emphasized.

As for the question of whether Sergiy Fufayev's criticism is a personal opinion or reflects the position of the entire Russian Orthodox Church, he believes the answer is obvious. "His position should be taken as official," he said.

Sergei Chapnin also saw no contradiction in the dismissal of Schema-Abbot Gabriel from his post as head of the Sochi courtyard of the Valaam Monastery, who stated in a sermon that Muslims, on the orders of a mullah, could slaughter all Muscovites, with Patriarch Kirill's condemnation of Islamophobia and Fufayev's words.

"I don't see any contradiction here. Moreover, there is an internal logic: the Church simultaneously defends both its own faith and the possibility of peaceful coexistence with non-believers. Schema-Abbot Gabriel was punished for Islamophobia—for inciting hatred, for asserting that Muslims, 'on the orders of a mullah, would slaughter Muscovites.'" "Fufayev is not inciting hatred or calling Islam a 'wrong religion'—he is offering an apologetic assessment of a specific text, arguing that the 'theological synthesis' it proposes is incompatible with the Orthodox faith," he explained.

Archdeacon Andrei Kurayev is surprised that representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church don't criticize Alaudinov's very idea of ​​joint jihad, but instead argue with him on theological issues.

A peace treaty with "Satan" is impossible. This already rules out the possibility of a truce.

"The concept of jihad, as outlined in this book, is not subject to criticism. That is, on the most important moral question today, the status of [a military operation], which some church leaders call a sacred military operation, there is complete unity. The desire to ascribe the highest religious and sacred status to [a military operation] is very serious, because if enemies are declared Satanists, then, according to the rules of all religions, reconciliation with Satan is impossible. A peace treaty with "Satan" is impossible. This already rules out the possibility of a truce. This is very bad. Essentially, they agree, to a small extent, that the Muslim concept of holy war is no different from the Orthodox Christian concept," he said.

Representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church can call something close to Christianity heresy, but not another religion, he confirmed. "Those who say that if Alaudinov's ideas are heretical are right, it is only within the framework of Islam. In this sense, Buddhism, for example, cannot be heretical. When you call something heretical, you acknowledge that it is close to Christianity. But since General Alaudinov's book is addressed not only to Muslims but also to Christians, asking them to agree with certain theses, the reaction of the Orthodox clergy is completely understandable," the archdeacon noted.

In turn, Alexander Verkhovsky saw no ideology in Alaudinov's book. "Frankly, I don't see any ideology here. It's simply a statement that 'we' believe in God. One, of course, from the Muslim point of view. But they, in the West, don't." The Patriarch and Putin, in essence, have said something similar. But Alaudinov got carried away and wrote in such a way that one might think that Muslims and Orthodox Christians have a fundamental religious unity. Which, of course, is not the case. And it is important for the Church to remind people of this. But not at a high level, so as not to escalate the dispute," he said.

In his opinion, Alaudinov was attempting to present a Muslim version of the official doctrine of a "special Russian civilization" with his book.

"Russian ethno-nationalists and Russian imperialists have different views, after all. And their relationships with religion can be very different. Even anti-Westernism isn't all that common. Alaudinov's book, perhaps as a hypothesis, is intended to present a Muslim version of the official doctrine of a special Russian civilization, opposed to the West. "But an overly religious foundation is repugnant to this doctrine, because it was created within a very secular society and for people who are primarily non-religious, but only 'respect religion,'" he noted.

Verkhovsky believes that there was no need to coordinate with the Kremlin when writing and publishing Alaudinov's book. "This is within the bounds of acceptable pluralism. In general, the Kremlin has no intention of so openly interfering in religious discussions, I'm sure," he noted.

Criticism of theological distortions doesn't prevent the Russian Orthodox Church from supporting security forces, one of which is headed by Alaudinov, noted human rights activist Svetlana Gannushkina.

All their discussions and struggle are only for a place closer to power.

"Both the Russian Orthodox Church and Alaudinov support the federal government in all its actions. All their discussions and struggle are only for a place closer to her. Therefore, supporting Russian policy and the security forces is perfectly compatible with protecting their place in power. And Apti Alaudinov has encroached on their territory," she said.

She agreed that Alaudinov doesn't need approval for this kind of religious activity because he is Kadyrov's representative.

"The federal authorities have long been uninvolved in what's happening in Chechnya. There is only one law there—an order from Ramzan Kadyrov. Apti is very close to Ramzan. "He doesn't need approval from Moscow," Gannushkina noted.

As a reminder, in the Akhmat special forces, which initially consisted only of Chechens, they now make up only 25% of the personnel; 50% of the fighters are Russian, and the rest are of other nationalities, said Apti Alaudinov, explaining the appearance of the Orthodox cross on the unit's flag. The Orthodox cross on the Akhmat special forces flag clashed with Russia's declared secularism, but it demonstrated the unit's real state of affairs and loyalty to the country's leadership, analysts believe.