Religion in Russia

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume 33, Issue 12, 1 February 1943, Page 6

Religion m Russia

(By Hon. W. E. Barnard, M.P.)

(Continued from the January Issue.)

PRESENT POSITION AND FUTURE PROSPECTS. " Article 124 of the Constitution read's as follows^— "In order to ensure citizens freedom of conscience, the church m the U.S.S.R. is separated from the State, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship, arid freedom of antireligious propaganda is recognised for all citizens." "The school is separated ' from the church." This is the case m New Zealand where State education is secular. But the separation of school from church m Russia means much more. Says Bolshakoff, "It was forbidden , to open libraries or reading rooms, to organize excursions, children's playgrounds, literary or religious circles, or even groups for Bible study ... All religious instruction of children was forbidden." |Parents may, of course, teach religion to their own children, but to other people's children, and the Church is not allowed to instruct children m the faith. There are no Sunday schools. Religious worship is free; the citizen is at liberty to .go to church and the clergy are free to carry on the oldtime services, but religious propaganda is forbidden, while on the other hand propaganda against religion is permitted. Obviously there is a long way to go- before the Church is free m the sense that we understand religious freedom. It is interesting to note that m .the original constitution- of the Bolsheviks "freedom of religious and antireligious propaganda" was' declared, but m April, 1929, only anti-religious propaganda was made, legal. And this is the position to-day., Thai worship was free was brougtit home to us just before Hitler marched his legions into Russia, when the cables reported that the churches of Moscow^ were filled with praying people. Bolshakoff mentions (p. 69) that, "At the. very beginning of the war, on June 28, 1941, the Metropolitan Sergius, locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne of Russia, supported by 26 priests, sang the solemn service of intercession for Russia ■■ and her army m his cathedral m Moscow, which was filled by 12,000 people. Similar services took place all over Russia, and the pastoral letter of the Metropolitan was read, m which he called upon the faithful to defend the fatherland and appealed to the clergy to pray for and to succour the victims of the ) war. It is said that this event was mentioned m the Soviet broadcast." As the Germans over-ran more and more of Russia, they sought to take advantage of Soviet religious policy by closing Godless museums and re-open-ing churches.that had been closed. The Soviet radio then, began to mention the Orthodox Church m its Russian pro-' grammes, .and a favourable message from a Russian bishop in' America was broadcast. Russian clergy m the occupied areas certainly abstained from

supporting the German cause; nor did the v retreating Soviet armies interfere m any way with the clergy. The Soviet Government became more tolerant: The Anglican Bishop of Fulham, in w the "Church Times" of October 3, 1941, reported that he had recently received a letter from Moscow stating that the Soviet Government allows the Orthodox priests serving m the ranks of the Red Army to act as unofficial military chaplains. This is m line with the custom m the French Army ever since 1906. There was some let-up, too, m the treatment of the Roman Catholic Poles. After the Soviet-Polish agrees ment, 40 or 50 military chaplains were appointed to the Polish divisions that were being formed m Russia, and a French Roman Catholic Church m Moscow was made available for the use of the Polish colony there. Seeking Modus,. Vivetadi. , Boishakoff tells us (pp. 74/5) that "The Soviet diplomatists m .London, Washington and elsewhere understand perfectly well the need to gain the sympathies of Anglo-American Churchmen. Their speeches, .pamphlets, propaganda films and exhibitions are clear witnesses. They are handicapped, however, by the existence of the 13th Article m the Communist Party programme and of the 124 th Article of the Spvie't Constitution, which are definitely anti-religious, barely granting freedom of worship. "Nevertheless," he adds; "it may be taken for granted that the Bolsheviks are genuinely anxious to settle somehow the religious problem and to find a modus vivendi with the Church. The external and internal situation urges them* to do so. In these \ conditions we may expect quite reasonably not only that any return to the era of intense religious persecution is unthinkable, but that the Soviet concessions to churchmen will grow further, and may eventually create real religious freedom m the Soviet Jenny Lee throws an interesting sidelight, on the attitude of the peasantry m the 1 confusion of the times. "The Russian peasant," she says, "with a prudent eye turned to both Ms past and present deities, often does i his best' to reconcile the two. He does' not see why he should not have the blessings of both. An ikon and an image of Stalin hanging side by side on . the kitchen wall is not an unusual sight." One may sum up by observing that the Orthodox Church, through its cooperation with the Tsardom and the growth within it of superstitious and magical practices, plus its early hostility to the Bolshvik movement and government, was bound to be regarded as the enemy of the Revolution and the New Order. Restriction and persecution wa's m the circumstances inevitable. The changing attitude of the Church (Metropolitan Sergius is on excellent terms with the civil authority), plus the need for meeting public opinion m allied -Britain and 'America, has led to

a more tolerant policy, though the limits of tolerance are 'circumscribed by the Constitution of 1936 (Article 124) Stalin Steering Careful Course. Stalin, steering a, careful course, is fettered by the Constitution which, however, has been .modified, and can be altered \again, and also by the philosophy of Communism, m conformity with, which the whole structure of the Soviet. State has, with some : modifications, been built. However, m recent years, under Stalin, the Bolshevik outlook has changed.. World revolution is rid longer envisaged, and a nationalistic • outlook, with increasing attention to the history and values' of- old. Russia, has developed. The. fatherland fills the vision of the Red Army and . the peoples of the U.S.S.L. to-day. Is it possible to reconcile „Bols"nevism With; any form of organised religion? Boishakoff ends his book with these words. "The Church of Christ is eternal. . . . It Christianised the most unlikely, societies and institutions. It may Christianise the Soviet State as well." May it not also' be suggested that institutional Christianity ha's much to learn, is, m fact, learning much, from what has been . , accomplished m the Soviet Union m the way of; human equality and human brotherhood m the development of the creative powersof the common citizen, m the strengthening of the human spirit? It is clear that the world outlookvof Communionsm is hostile to the bases of the Christian faith, but Dean Howlett Johnson suggests that "Communism m its positive aspect is no fundamental enemy of" religion," least of all of the Christian religion. In the long run,"" he says, "unless I am seriously mistaken, it will prove to be a true friend m at least one essential particular. . It provides society with a new moral base, and is m process of achieving on the 'this- world' level those very things that we Christians have too often professed with our lips, but denied m our lives. It has struck the death-blow to aft immoral order m which we have tacitly acquiesced." (The Socialist Sixth of theWorld, pp. 360-1) ■ ' '' The anti-God campaign was a passing" phase; it is over and never likely to be revived. As Sir Bernard Pares observes, "I have always felt that this . . . was a great tactical mistake and a clear confession of failure. Russian children aTe infinitely more critical ' than German, and. therefore far less suitable for spoon-feeding. To be constantly dinning m their ears that there is no God is just the way to stir up curiosity and to suggest that even the teacher at heart half believes that there is one. If there is no God, why give Him all this constant attention?" (Russia, 1940, p. 174) "The Russian mind," he says, "is essentially religious, and , anti-religion is itself ' a religion." (p. 177) The Dean of Canterbury tells. a story which makes the same point "Tolstoy once asked Maxim Gorky point-blank: 'Dp you believe m God?' Gorky re^plied: 'No.' Let me paraphrase Tolstoy's, reply. 'You say you don't, and you believe you don't; m reality you do. Every word you write tells me so. It is not what a man says, or thinks hesays, but what a man is, that speaks:

the truth; your whole being tells me you believe m God.'" "Our life prays more sincerely than our lips." v >' ,;.., A Troublesome Problem. . How to co-ordinate Church and State, the civil and the religious authorities, how to define their relations and their limits, has always been a troublesome problem. The growth of the totalitarian state m our own days has given Jhe matter special point alid urgency. A modern Russian Church writer, Vycheslavtsev, says with truth that "The greatest good is always beyond force and above power. The greatest evil always reveals itself through the exercise of power." And, as the historian, Lord Acton, observed, "All power corrupts." - . But even there be some evil m any form of power, the power is necessary, because it is necessary to preserve order and steadiness m any community. That need was exceptionally great m the case of .Russia, with anarchy atod famine following on disastrous war/and with bitter enemies at home and a hostile world abroad. The power used by the State had to be correspondingly, great and relentless. Vvchslavstev says: "The , stronger the disorder .and evil, the stronger and more inflexible that power must be . . .and yet, above it, there soar the higher prin- , ciples of justice and love which continually remind men that the ideal unity and harmony cannot' be created by the earthly power alone." , Is hot that just where Christianity shows itself moTe profound, and therefore true, than Communism? Communism does riot recognise the inner burdens of men— "the enemies, within," as Prof. Sinclaire reminded us m his broadcast address on Christian Order, "pride and lust, avarice and sefishness and malice." The modern task of the Church m Russia or anywhere else is to realise m social and economic fields the spirit and intention of the Church's Master. Meanwhile, the problem of reconciling Communism and Christianity ' remains. H. N. Brailsford's judgment is sound: "The best hope for the growth of a wider toleration m Russia is that she should emerge from this war victorious." (New Statesman and Nation, 11/11/1941)

(Concluded)