Religion and the USSR

[Dimentio]

I wonder why it was so important to systematically destroy churches and reeducate priests during the 20;s? I mean, the orthodox church was actually revitalised by that treatment, and it created an opposition refueled by a dissident class of priests during the entire existence of the USSR.

It would actually have been less confusing if the Soviet Union changed the leadership of the church and promoted the theory that Jesus would have liked communism. That is actually partially what the social democratic bishops in the Swedish church have done.

[Red October]

i think they probably destroyed all the churches because they did not want any other authority in the soviet union. back in feudal times the government had alot of power, but the church could wield power over the government. you have a good point about turning jesus into a more communist figure though. the problem is that some parts of the bible enforce that we should obey the government's authority and some parts say government authority is bad. maybe the leadership of the soviet union did not want to work with such a contradictory religion?

[Dimentio]

Due to the later actions of the Soviet Union in domestic politics, I am rather sure that the Soviet government was not so inclined toward making the people question the governmental auhority.

Moreover, Peter I [1682-1721] actually crushed the church as an independent authority already under the 1690;s. The Russian orthodox church have since then until 1917 been a tool for the czarist power. It fell like a house of cards around 1917, but then it reemerged due to Soviet persecution in the 1920;s.

[( R )evolution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2006 08:57 pm
Due to the later actions of the Soviet Union in domestic politics, I am rather sure that the Soviet government was not so inclined toward making the people question the governmental auhority.

Moreover, Peter I [1682-1721] actually crushed the church as an independent authority already under the 1690;s. The Russian orthodox church have since then until 1917 been a tool for the czarist power. It fell like a house of cards around 1917, but then it reemerged due to Soviet persecution in the 1920;s.
I think he was talking about back in feudal europe (western europe) The reason we never saw really big empires in western europe during the middle ages is because the church did not want large empires to possible threaten there power. The Holy Roman empire never became a huge empire because the church restricted them. I think it was Gregory I (correct me if worng) you stopped the appoitment of church officals by goverement people. And the papacy would gather up allies to stop growing states. The church was a domintant power in the middle-ages.

[( R )evolution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2006 03:14 pm
I wonder why it was so important to systematically destroy churches and reeducate priests during the 20;s? I mean, the orthodox church was actually revitalised by that treatment, and it created an opposition refueled by a dissident class of priests during the entire existence of the USSR.

It would actually have been less confusing if the Soviet Union changed the leadership of the church and promoted the theory that Jesus would have liked communism. That is actually partially what the social democratic bishops in the Swedish church have done.
But what is wrong with this is that Russia isnt and never really was a land of one religion there is different religions in Russia and if they were to promote one religion that would be kind of oppressing other religious groups. But besides that religion is just wrong, lol so why promote it?

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by ( R )evolution+December 18, 2006 03:21 am--> (( R )evolution @ December 18, 2006 03:21 am)
[email protected] 17, 2006 03:14 pm
I wonder why it was so important to systematically destroy churches and reeducate priests during the 20;s? I mean, the orthodox church was actually revitalised by that treatment, and it created an opposition refueled by a dissident class of priests during the entire existence of the USSR.

It would actually have been less confusing if the Soviet Union changed the leadership of the church and promoted the theory that Jesus would have liked communism. That is actually partially what the social democratic bishops in the Swedish church have done.
But what is wrong with this is that Russia isnt and never really was a land of one religion there is different religions in Russia and if they were to promote one religion that would be kind of oppressing other religious groups. But besides that religion is just wrong, lol so why promote it? [/b]
Who have said that they only could adhere to one religion? It is possible to be neutral towards all religions, or to be positive towards them. As long as the priesthood - or the higher priesthood - would be subjugated by the regime, then the likeness for rebellion would have decreased.

Moreover, the Soviet Union did not lie in western Europe. The church prior to 1917 had a strong support from the peasants, but it was a political carcass.

[Vargha Poralli]

IMO this is the most stupidest thing did by Stalin and his regime. Whatever the purpose the ending didn't justify the means. Instead of demolishing churches and reeducating the preists they should have just left them alone with all ways of collecting the funds closed . Eventually religion would have faded from the minds of the masses in the course of time. Their action just solidified the resolute of religion and when the bureaucracy's failure happened people started using the dope again.

And Stalin did use church for his purpose. During the early stages of WW2 when all other means have failed to keep up the morale of the troops and people he temporarily allowed church to operate,priests blessed the guns of the soldiers etc.

[Dimentio]

Yes I agree. Completely crazy, and so typically despotic regimes.