The apparent freedom of Christian churches in Communist countries tends to disarm many Western observers. Churches are open; worship services are undisturbed; and most people are free to exercise their religion.
While the previously dominant position of the large established churches (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Calvinist and Lutheran) has been curtailed, smaller denominations (Baptist, Methodist, Brethren, Pentecostal) have lost comparatively little of their former freedom. Sometimes, in fact, Communist governments favor the latter more than the historic established groups.
Governments are even giving some financial help. After the Hungarian uprising in 1956, for example, the government helped churches to repair their damaged buildings. And in Budapest the First Baptist Church received substantial gifts of money to rebuild its organ.
But there is another side to this picture. Churches are not permitted to teach Sunday school classes or young people’s groups. While worship is unrestricted, ministers are not. They can preach only with permission from the state. The required license must be validated periodically. In some cases these preaching permits are revoked. Although prayer meetings and other smaller meetings may be conducted by any member deputized by the local pastor, only authorized people can occupy the pulpit and conduct services.
Denominational literature, moreover, must serve the state by alloting much space to the so-called Communist peace movement and by supporting government actions. Editors are government-picked fellow travelers or party members. That is the price exacted for government permission to publish materials.
While some Christian leaders are allowed to leave the country for short periods, they must have dependents, and these dependents must stay at home. Such leaders will be under surveillance during their absence and on their return must make a report. They know they can say only favorable things about their government.
The Communist press sharply criticizes any free country which restricts the churches, and the limited or qualified freedom granted to churches behind the Iron Curtain is well advertised all over the free world. When Communists temporarily relax their harsh methods for the sake of expediency they get quite a benevolent treatment in the free world press.
Deep Hatred of Religion
The whole picture is puzzling indeed when one recalls the tenets of Marxism, the announcements of Communist leaders like Lenin, the antireligious propaganda of the Communist government, and the inhuman persecutions of early Bolshevism. During those years, many Russian churches were transformed into museums, culture houses, and storage places. Hundreds, if not thousands, of Christian workers of different denominations were banished to Siberia to die of starvation, cold, and exhaustion.
The ruthlessness of Russian Communism in the first two decades is quite understandable for it regards religion, next to capitalism, as the greatest enemy of “socialist” progress. So the Communists proposed to right both simultaneously. But despite their inflection of cruel persecutions the Russians discovered that although they could confiscate or destroy church edifices, disorganize churches, disseminate antireligious propaganda, and even exile or kill religious leaders, they could not eradicate religion itself. They discovered what the free world knows: that man is incurably religious.
Communists, of course, are not yet ready to admit defeat in the battle between Communism and religion. Unwittingly, however, they have admitted losing the first round. The fact that they have changed their tactics from a policy of cruel persecution of the Christians to one of strict control of the churches proves this admission. What actually happened can be stated in that popular American sentence: “If you can’t lick him, join him.” Communists are students not only of mathematics but also of history. And so they have discovered that if they cannot destroy the churches, they can at least utilize them for their own purposes.
This uilization of the churches has many precedents in the history of Christendom. Recall the great age of absolute monarchies after the decline of feudalism. Kings were regarded as divinely appointed and endowed. Even biblical scholars defended the divine right of kings—among them the eloquent Bishop Bossuet who championed especially the cause of Louis XIV. Those who opposed Bossuet’s thesis that God ordains kings to rule and therefore endows them with peculiar gifts for the task were considered political rebels, heretics, and blasphemers. This story of Louis XIV had its parallels in English history. James I, II, and Charles I, II, enjoyed the ecclesiactical help of learned divines whose writings supported the theory of the divine right of kings. In reading church history, therefore, the Russians have taken special note of such developments and maneuvers.
This report was prepared forCHRISTIANITY TODAYby Dr. Bela Udvarnoki who from 1939–47 was president of the Baptist Theological Seminary in Budapest, Hungary, a post in which he succeeded his father. A native Hungarian, he attended Southern Baptist Seminary, receiving the Ph.D. degree in New Testament Greek under the late Dr. A. T. Robertson. Dr. Udvarnoki also taught Theology and New Testament in Budapest from 1931–39. Presently, he is chairman, social science department, Chowan College, Murfreesboro, North Carolina.
At times the Christian church became an obedient servant of nationalism. Said Frederick Engels, the colaborer of Marx, in his work on Historical Materialism: “Lutheranism became a willing tool in the hands of princes.” Communists read Engels as well as Marx, and thus are learning.
For Christians, Engels is not, of course, an authority on religion. But there are those of us who remember the first World War. We remember how churches in Hungary held special services to invoke God for Austrian-Hungarian victory. Protestant and Catholic clergymen alike blessed the arms and soldiers. Doubtless, the assistance of churches helped the morale of all the nations at war, thereby prolonging the bloody struggle and indirectly causing the death of countless thousands.
Today materialistic capitalism likewise is invading some of our organized churches. Quite a few even owe their existence to the capitalist system. Think of those churches that depend on income from large office and apartment buildings and hotels. What would happen if a socialist government “nationalized” these properties? What would such churches do? Disband? Does it not then appear more sensible to fight for the divine right of possession? It sounds plausible enough: Christianity and capitalism go well together, atheism and communism match well, too. But this is poor logic. Admittedly, Christianity defends human responsibilities and rights, including that of private property as a divine stewardship. But as a personal conviction, a way of life, a spiritual movement and a transforming power, Christianity in no way depends on kings, nations, or capital. For that reason it should in no way be expropriated by any earthly interest.
Is it true, then, that communism has come to terms with Christianity? This is unbelievable. Communism can no more be reconciled to spiritual Christianity than Christianity can be reconciled to atheistic Marxism. These two forces forever exclude each other. What then accounts for the present seemingly peaceful coexistence of the two forces inside Communist frontiers? Simply this: Communists are utilizing the forces of organized Christianity as tools for their own purposes.
The Bait of World Peace
The arsenal of Communist chicaneries is foisting another grand deception upon the world. At one and the same time the Russian bear blows hot and cold; it wants free men to feel only the lukewarm breeze.
This method is simple and plain. First, Communism finds an alluring or acceptable idea around which to gather the church leaders. If they cooperate peacefully, fine. But whoever questions the situation, or objects to it, is promptly replaced. In every denomination, unfortunately, will be those who for money, or prestige or power, are more willing to serve.
The Russian peace movement is one of the baits. After all, who would not work for peace? Is true Christianity not a message of peace? So a number of “peace” priests and “peace” ministers are stationed in Communist lands. But it is no secret that the impressive and lovely title of “peace priest” is nothing more than mere euphemism for “fellow traveler.”
It would be wrong to assume that all church leaders behind the Iron Curtain are red or even pink. I know personally a Calvinist bishop, a Baptist Convention president, and a very prominent university professor and lay church leader, all of whom have genuine reasons for painting a very favorable picture of the Communist system in Hungary. Bishop Berecky is sincere when he states that the changes made by the new regime in Hungary had a salutary effect upon the life of Hungarian Protestantism. Hromadka, the Czech theologian, says the same thing of his country.
One must remember the prewar condition of the Calvinist and Lutheran churches in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania. As established churches they enjoyed the privilege of collecting religious taxes and of legally registering newborn babies on the rolls of the church where their parents were members. It is quite obvious that the Calvinist or Lutheran, even the Unitarian churches did not need to proselyte or even to evangelize. Churches grew with the birthrate. Moreover, there was little financial worry because the churches were supported by compulsory taxation. The soul-withering and spirit-killing effect of this system is apparent, and Berecky rejoices that this is now eliminated. There is no more church tax, no automatic legal registration of babies as church members. A new life, a deeper, spiritual atmosphere, prevails in the churches. And for these blessings praise goes to the Communist government!
The president of the Baptist Union in Russia and the president of the Baptist Convention in Hungary state in effect: “Under Communist rule we have achieved an equality with other denominations that before this system we could never have expected to see.” In Russia the dominant Orthodox church had despised the Baptists; Hungary had discriminated between the historic or established churches (Roman Catholic, Calvinist, Lutheran, Unitarian) and groups like the Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Brethren, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. This situation no longer exists—thanks to the new government! Praise and gratitude are understandably genuine.
A Modern Trojan Horse?
An effective and impressive show window to the world is the First Baptist Church of Moscow. With Russian devotion its several thousand members always crowd the services. State authorities see to it that visitors and tourists notice this church and photograph the throng of worshipers. It should be noted, however, that this is probably the only Baptist church in this city of four or five million people. Surely more Baptist churches would function in Moscow, if there were proper freedom to do so. A strange pattern of one-sided thinking characterizes the Baptist leaders in Russia. While they miss no opportunity to prove their freedom they dare not speak about the past, about the martyrdom of many Christians including Baptists who suffered and died at Communist hands. No one can really blame the Russian brethren for this silence, for it represents part of the price they must pay for today’s meager freedom.
In their hearts certain leaders feel that this Communist variety of liberty is not what they hoped for. Many nurture a deep-seated distrust of Communist leniency, and some are paying but lip service to the government. Although the Communist government does not and cannot trust ecclesiastics, it knows nevertheless that by bribing clerics with position, and power, or by severe or cruel controls it can use the churches for the time being for its advantage.
Some of the Christian leaders secretly hope that Communist authority will cease. At the same time Communist leaders hope that they can weaken the churches and finally do away with religion. Letters from Communist countries betray the uneasy, perhaps temporary, truce of this present hypocritical situation. Each side hopes the other will expire first. But for the time being it is important that hundreds of millions of Buddhists and Hindus in Asia, of Moslems in the Near East and Africa, and even of Christians in Italy or in South America, hear that Communism is no enemy of religion! Do not churches enjoy freedom of worship? Just the mention of God’s name by Khrushchev during his visit to America was enough to make him an angel of light for some pious Americans.
The aims and plans of Communists in regard to Christianity are clear enough: they are using the churches as a means of gaining world domination. In this respect Christianity may become a modern Trojan horse. Definite danger lurks in this Communist softness toward the churches. By strictly controlling the churches and by carefully regulating the education of the clergy, the Communists inject the younger ministers with enough Marxism that they and their churches become harmless. By placing restrictions upon religious life and by means of intensive atheistic propaganda the Communists hope to deflect young people from religion so that in time churches will simply die out. This scheme fits Communist ideology very well.
Some Encouraging Factors
One can take courage from at least two facts, however, that the Communists seem to ignore. Being irreligious, Marxists do not know the essence of Christianity. They do not realize that Christianity is not merely the result of education or indoctrination. Therefore, Christianity does not depend ultimately on priests or ministers—a fact which is not always clear to Christians either.
Dr. A. T. Robertson once said—not without a touch of humor—that God’s kingdom will prevail in the hearts of men despite the preachers. Communists approach Christianity within the presuppositions of their own irreligion. Since Communists evaluate Christian conviction as mere indoctrination, they believe that by controlling the indoctrinators they will be able to exterminate religion!
Another fact unrealized by Communists is the difference between external oganized Christianity and internal spiritual belief of Christians as individuals. Communists actually believe that Christianity will be vanquished with the destruction of church buildings or organizations. Nothing, of course, is further from the truth. Were they to raze every church building; to close every theological school; to suppress the publication of Christian literature; were they to banish Christians to the far reaches of the earth and allocate only one real Christian per square mile, Marx would nonetheless lose the battle to spiritual forces behind the Iron Curtain.
By manipulating ecclesiastical organizations Communists believe they have Christianity under control.
Herein lies a grave warning and an important lesson. Modern Christians seem to major in organization. Denominational papers feature so-called “since I came” articles that extol the visible results of the minister’s work. Money, buildings, statistics! Only the Lord knows how strong the Church really is. Yes, Communists can and do use the organized church for their purposes; but they are totally helpless before the spiritual power of Christian believers.
The greatest mission field today is right within the local church. Organization may be the enemy’s tool of death-dealing operation, but through the indwelling Christ millions of transformed Christians will live forever to the glory of their Saviour and Lord.
BELA UDVARNOKI
Murfreesboro, North Carolina
