Soviet Evangelicals Since World War II, Walter Sawatsky, 1981

en- tion. This article, printed in 1970, had been presented by the general secretary Alexander Karev to the All-Union Congress in 1969, It had elicited considerable debate. Negative attitudes toward this paper were re- membered by people from the provinces almost a decade later, Perhaps he was not a free agent in composing it, but he had misjudged the sentiments of the Union membership. As a result of the discussion at the congress, the published version was heavily revised with the patriotic language toned down, offensive sections omitted and others restated to produce a different emphasis,3! Karev adopted Zhidkov’s argument that Jesus was a fervent patriot and cited Jesus’ instructions to the 70 followers to go to the lost of the House of Israel only (Matthew 10:6). The revised version introduced an extended discussion which argued that nationalism and Christianity had nothing in 114 Soviet Evangelicals Since World War II common, and “true Christianity cannot be nationalist.” This was followed by an extended argument noting that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, that Jesus liked to be designated Son of Man because he came to be the Savior of all mankind. Christ loved all the people, and “this is also the task of all Christians: like their teacher, Christ, to treasure all people, all races, and all mankind in their hearts.” In 1945 Zhidkov had stressed that one must love one’s country, faults and all, and stated specifically that this meant obeying the laws and direc- tives of the government. He based his claims on Romans 18 and Jesus’ remark in Matthew 22:21 to give to Caesar what was Caesar's. Restating this rather baldly in his paper to the congress, Karev affirmed that “Rodina is the state and the state powers and laws, and it is also the task of the Chris- tian to have a right relationship to the powers.’ This straightforward state- ment was retained in the printed copy but some of the significant support- ing argumentation was omitted. In arguing that the Christian must give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, Karev had noted that in Christ’s time, the cult of the emperor had developed in Rome. But, he added, “in time this cult passed, and now there are no countries in the world where rulers claim divine prerogatives and demand worship.”* Karev’s fellow delegates managed to expunge this remark from the published version because, even if Soviet rulers did not claim to be God, their ideology insisted on worship- ing the god of materialism. Another more critical paragraph also not allowed to stand was one in which Karev had suggested that, at an unspecified time earlier, Soviet Christians had not taken a proper attitude toward the authorities. In spite of these revisions, the thrust of the published version still focused exclusively on the concern to give to Caesar what was Caesar's, with no recognition that this involved deciding what belonged to God and what