Churches in Great Britain and Red Army Day

The establishment of closer ties between the Soviet Union and Great Britain in the course of World War II facilitated a return to the traditional prerevolutionary friendship between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Church of England. Its early stage embraced not only the English translation of The Truth about Religion in Russia and the exchange of church delegations but also an international celebration of Red Army Day (February 23). The latter was directly influenced by the Soviet victory at Stalingrad in the beginning of 1943. On this occasion, Stalin received a special gift fTom King George VI: a sword with an inscription declaring the respect of the British people to “the people with steel hearts—the citizens of Stalingrad.”121 The Soviet embassy in London informed its government in detail about the pro-Russian demonstrations that took place in Great Britain on the occasion of the Stalingrad victory. The Church of England and the other religious organizations in the United Kingdom were also expected to express their support for the Red Army. According to the Kremlin, such behavior was in harmony with the British Foreign Office’s desire to maintain the feeling among the Soviets of the equality of all the Allies.122

On January 14, 1943, the Ministry of Information sent a letter to Archbishop William Temple announcing the idea that Red Army Day should be observed in Great Britain on Sunday, February 21. The aim was “to demonstrate on a national scale” the admiration and gratitude of the British people to Russia.123 The author of the letter, Rev. Hugh Martin from the Religions Division, asked the Archbishop of Canterbury whether he would find the involvement of the Church of England in such a celebration possible. Reverend Martin explained the complexity of the case:

On the one hand, you might very naturally feel reluctant to suggest any more subjects for special prayer; you might also feel that the occasion was not a very suitable one. On the other hand, the Christian people of this country are not behind others in their friendship for the people in Russia and it is, as you know, of no little importance on many grounds that we should try to convince the Russians of this facT.124

He recalled that some of the hardships experienced by Christians in the Soviet Union were provoked by the suspicious attitude of its government not only to the local churches but also to those abroad. Reverend Martin also pointed out that his proposal that special prayers for the Russian people be offered in churches on February 21 was supported by the International Fellowship Department of the British Council. Finally, he informed the ArchbishoP of Canterbury that similar letters had also been sent to the moderators of the Federal Council and of the Church of Scotland.125

The Church of Scotland supported the proposal of the Religions Division. Still, its leadership took into consideration that the project of celebrating Red Army DaY was arranged by the government, while the proposal of Reverend Martin was “a kind of appendix” foreseeing a possibility that “the leaders of the Churches might issue an appeal for prayer on the same day.”126 IT proposed that a common letter signed by him, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the moderator of the Free Church Federal Council be issued. This letter should invite prayers for the Russian people in the same way in which these religious leaders had already done for Poland several weeks earlier.

John Whale, the moderator of the Free Church Federal Council, also agreed with Martin’s proposal, “albeit with some misgiving and reluctance.”127 He recognized that in general his church adherents were grateful for the heroism of the Russian people. At the same time, Moderator Whale declared that all of them were against everything that seemed “to equate the Christian Gospel with politicaL interest or local patriotism.” Neither were they able to accept “the thought that the worship of Him, Who is one sense above history, should be exploited in the interest of propaganda.”128 He ended his letter by sharing his feeling about cynicism in international politics and mentioned that a more frequent celebration of days of special prayer would diminish their popularity among the British people.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, noted that the Anglican bishops “were rather opposed” to the suggested initiative, but like the moderators of the other two churches he finally accepted it. His decision stemmed fTom his belief that “a refusal would do harm.”129 Therefore, Temple prepared a draft and sent it to his colleagues asking for their comments. It read:

At the time, when we are watching with grateful admiration the achievements of the Russian Army, it is natural and right that people in this country should rend some means of paying their tribute to such brave Allies. In association with that tribute Christians will wish to pray for the people and Church of Russia. We suggest accordingly that on Sunday, February 21st, as we pray for our nation and its allies, special intercession should be offered for Russia, for its whole people, for its armies, and for all who suffer in resistance to the aggressioN.130

Moderator Whale had no major criticism of the draft. He appreciated the coupling of people and church in Temple’s general statement but thought that it was necessary to specify that it was the Christian Church. He regarded the phrase “for its whole people” as “an indirect way of praying for Russian Christians and others who have been persecuted.”131

The draft was sent also to the Cardinal of the Catholic Church in Great Britain. In his letter to the Catholic prelate, William Temple emphasized that he was not an advocate oF “a direct association of the Church with the Red Army under that name.”132 Despite his hesitation, however, he supported this project because he thought that British Christians had to offer a helping hand to their Russian fellows. On January 28, the cardinal responded that he did not feel able to sign the proposed draft for a special day of prayer for Russia. He justified his refusal with the post-1917 initiative of the Roman Pope, according to which the Catholic Church read special prayers for Russia after every masS.133 Thus, in the end, the prayer for Red Army Day was supported in a modified way, as a prayer for Russian Christians, by the churches of England and of Scotland as well as by the Free Church.

Several days after the day of prayer, the Archbishop of Canterbury summed up the resonance of this prayer. He shared his own doubts and those of Rev. Hugh Martin about Red Army Day. Archbishop Temple emphasized that the call for prayer haD been very carefully designed to avoid the suggestion that February 21 “was to be a Day of Prayer for Russia.”134 ACcording to him, the call’s aim was that “among the prayers for our own country and its allies, special intercession should that day be offered for Russia.” It seems, however, that the public reaction was not what was expected. The Archbishop of Canterbury admitted that it was impossible to control the newspapers, and after their protests and critics one had to follow suit. In this way, Western Christianity remained quite reserved toward the Soviet Union and its religious policy. From this perspective, it was the election of Metropolitan Sergii (Starogordskii) as Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus’ that had to persuade the societies in the allied states that the change was real.