Baptists in the U.S.S.R. Some Facts and Hopes, J. H. Rushbrook, 1943

vers were anxious to form these under conditions that would further, and not hinder, religious fellowship. It is charged against them that many “ appeared to be more concerned with their own future than that of the people as a whole ” — a statement which really implies that they attached supreme importance to religion, and therefore their approach to the question differed from the purely economic or administrative. We may recognise in this confused struggle elements of justification for the views both of the evangelical believers and of their opponents; and misunderstanding — ^perhaps tinged with fanaticism — played a part on both sides. As in the con¬ troversy over pacifism, circumstances conspired to suggest that the “ sectarians ” might be cherishing counter-revolutionary motives. The situation which developed at this period led to 12 Baptist Growth; Strained Relations (1928-9). the promulgation of the law of 1929, directed primarily against the evangelical churches. This law is still in effect, and the claim that absolute religious liberty exists in the Soviet Union must be judged in its light. It is published in full as a White Paper,*^ and should be carefully read; the study of its provisions is essential to the understanding of the legal situation in the U.S.S.R. In effect it regards religious bodies as existing for one purpose — the performance of rites. Cultural and economic activities are forbidden them — even to to the extent of possessing libraries or Legal and ^ organising lectures. Sunday schools had been illegal from the first ; now services for child- Evangelical forbidden. No meetings for Bible Liberty (1929). study may take place, nor special prayer meetings, nor meetings for women ; and organised gatherings and excursions for social enjoyment are likewise suppressed. Already we have noted the contrast between the Baptist church and the Orthodox congregation. On the latter such restrictions did not bear heavily ; for the former, almost everything that gives warmth and reality to Christian fellow¬ ship is lost. Nor must it be overlooked that at this same time a revision of the Soviet Constitution excised the right of propaganda for religion, whilst retaining the right of propa¬ ganda against religion. “ Freedom of worship ” was left — hedged round with restrictions. Evangelistic activity was ended. The “ Stalin Constitution ” of 1936 holds by the limitations introduced in 1929.® In close connection with these changes came certain administrative acts. The continuance of the Preachers’ School in Moscow was made impossible