Soviet Evangelicals Since World War II, Walter Sawatsky, 1981

charges. In numerous cases the primary charge seemed to be that the accused leaders of the local congregation had refused to accept the statutes of the AUCEGB. One of the worst instances occurred immediately after the 1963 1 i | | i i i i | ! | | i 1 Dissent Begins, 1960-1965 194 congress. During the Christmas holidays, four persons were put on trial in the Altai regional court, where they were declared guilty of reactionary activity harmful to society because “they analyzed various biblical texts, permitted arbitrary incorrect interpretations, criticized and did not accept the new constitution of the AUCECB.’’8 The presbyter received a five-year sentence, while the two, brothers Nikolai and. Vasilii Khmara_ were sentenced to three years and Mrs. Liubov Khmara received a suspended sentence, Nikolai Khmara’s name soon became famous because he died two weeks after the trial after gross torture.”9 This was the worst case where local zealots had utilized the antire- ligious propaganda and restrictive instructions from Moscow to engage in bestiality. But this act involved the unregistered Baptist congregation in Barnaul which had been blessed with a large number of younger men with courage and the deep conviction that as long as a congregation maintained solidarity, state authorities would have to give in. The Barnaul congregation had been among. the first. to begin writing Samizdat documents in 1961, after their officially registered church had been closed by the authorities be- cause the congregation refused to accept an immoral man as presbyter. Now they. took documentary photographs which were later circulated around the world and dispatched a delegation of twenty-one persons to Moscow to demand an official investigation. The AU-CECB at first sent I. 1. Motorin to Barnaul in February, who urged the believers to rejoin the newly opened registered congregation. A commission of investigation was finally sent at the end of May and Alexander Karev also visited Barnaul at this time.®° Local believers remembered that Karev in the presence of the state officials had grilled them with a series of questions asking them. why they were not obeying state law. This permanently soured the Barnaul rela- tionship to Moscow. The commission, on the other hand,.confirmed the.ae- curacy of the torture and murder charges and the prison superintendent was at least suspended although no one was prosecuted. Nor did the. au: thorities agree to a public acknowledgment of the crime. nN Much more widespread were other aspects of state interference, In their letter to Khrushchev, the reformers complained that secret police and other government agents were constantly asking church members the following questions: Where is the next church service to be? ‘Who will preach? ' mS Which preachers have come from outside? 192 Soviet Evangelicals Since World W