Eastern European Baptist History: New Perspectives, 2007

interpret the political activities of some Baptists, however, as a turning away from theological and social conservatism. David Bebbington characterises the political activity of British Nonconformists in the nineteenth century in a similar way, stating that “the politics of chapels were primarily determined by the Evangeli- calism that still gave them their reason for existence, their message, their energy.” 6 Osvalds Freivalds, Latviesu politiskas partijas 60 gados (Copenhagen: Imanta, 1961), pp. 125-126. However, we should not stress class orientation too much. As written by historian William Reddy, “Class’ is simply one additional less-than-adequate social term available to historians, with its own advantages and drawbacks.” William Reddy, Money and Liberty in Modern Europe: a Critique of Historical Understanding (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), p. 23. 7 Voldemars Freimanis, “Kapéc més saucamies par Kristigo darba Jauzu savienibu’, Kristigo Darba Lauzu Balss, no. 3 (January 1928), p. 4. Freimanis was a Baptist minister since 1924. He also occupied the post of Secretary of the Central Board of the Union of Christian Work- ing People. 28 Evalds Rimbenieks, “Ko kristigums var dot darba Jaudim’, Kristigo Darba Lauzu Balss, no. 3 (December 1927), p. 3. ? Rimbenieks, “Ko kristigums var dot darba Jaudim’, p. 3. *© See for example an article written by Janis Kronlins, one of editors of the Christian Voice: Janis Kronlins, “Reformét pasauli’, Kristigd Balss, no. 6 (1931), pp. 120-121. 31 D.W. Bebbington, The Nonconformist Conscience: Chapel and Politics, 1870-1914 (Lon- 108 In the early 1920s, a group of Christian Socialists in Riga began publishing Kristigais Socialists [Christian Socialist] as an appendix to the newspaper Evangélists [The Evangelist]. Kristigais Socialists was edited by Martins Tiltins,** who had worked as Christian publisher already before World War I, and its articles provide information on the main tenden- cies among members of the group. It criticised other socialists, and rather than promoting revolution as the means to bring about radical changes in society, its members promoted Christian values, claiming that “only through renewal of nations in the spirit of early Christianity can come true improvement’. They viewed Christianity as strictly separate from secular- ised socialism, holding that “nobody can be simultaneously Christian and Social Democrat’.* At the same time, contributors to the publication, in the fashion of the Pietist and Holiness movements, spoke about the way of sanctification. The group did not have a unified view of how to bring about social change. While one article claims that it is enough to practice inner mission,” in another text, such attitude is viewed as unsatisfactory because, “through it is possible to smooth the consequences of individual and social sins, their causes remain untouched’. The group did not have the intellec- tua