Three Things You Should Not Believe about Ministry in the Former Soviet Union

by John Johnson

One of the greatest challenges for today’s mission is the former Soviet Union, also known as the Commonwealth of Independent States (C.I.S.). After 70 years of religious restriction, the open promotion of the gospel has been allowed again.

One of the greatest challenges for today’s mission is the former Soviet Union, also known as the Commonwealth of Independent States (C.I.S.). After 70 years of religious restriction, the open promotion of the gospel has been allowed again.

Walter Sawatsky believes that “the political transformations of 1989-91 did not suddenly give a captive church its freedom. These freedoms were being claimed gradually, if at an uneven pace, across Eastern Europe.”1 Sawatsky points to revised legislation on religion in 1975 as a change which allowed religious leaders to begin squeezing concessions from the state. By 1989, it became possible to ship large quantities of religious literature into the Soviet Union without a permit.

The response of evangelicals to the change was swift. By 1990 mission efforts had become an avalanche. Church offices in Moscow which had been struggling to survive with a few typewriters became equipped with computers and fax machines in about one year.

The opportunities which these changes have created are unique. The population of the C.I.S. is informed, aware, and educated. Classical music and art have long been valued and play a significant role in society. Many of those who convert can soon serve as leaders of the faith, both in their own countries and around the world.

One of the difficulties facing those who seek involvement in the new mission is that of understanding the extent and nature of the opportunity. Thirty-two percent of the Russian population is believed to be nonreligious.² Fifty-five percent claim Orthodoxy as a religion, but Don Fairbairn believes that up to two-thirds of those who claim Orthodoxy as a religion may not be active within it.³ One-half of 1 percent are evangelical.⁴

The following assumptions are often made about ministry in the former Soviet Union. Although they may appear legitimate, they should not be accepted as fact.

1. The gospel has been received without qualification. Many of those who hear the gospel in the C.I.S. are ready to receive it. Many others are asking questions about its validity.

In a book entitled Soviet Education Nigel Grant contends that education in the former Soviet Union was a political tool for the construction of communist society.⁵ Soviet educational authorities openly declared the aims of their system. They believed that education must meet society’s needs. Since they believed their society should be communistic, they felt that education should be political as well.

The indoctrination which this encouraged was widespread and thorough. Says Grant, “Directly and indirectly the communist viewpoint is put across at every stage of schooling and reinforced by the other media of communication outside the school, such as the theater, films, radio, television, and the press.”⁶

Socialistic education included moral training. The ideal Soviet educator believed that morality was socially defined and perceived it to include love for the Soviet motherland, pride in revolutionary traditions, and adherence to the precepts of the Communist Party. Moral education was a joint enterprise in which the school, youth organizations, parental associations, and other groups participated. No metaphysical standard of morality was assumed; it was believed that basic values can be derived from the social needs of man.

As a result of such training, a generation of Soviet youth were brought up in schools which presented atheism as the only point of view. Museums of atheism reinforced this instruction and served to debunk religious thinking. Many of those who were brought up in this system have never had their thinking challenged.

Ray and Cindy Le Clair believe that “For a large percentage of the population, atheism is not the result of a careful consideration of the claims of Christ, but a passive assimilation of Soviet propaganda. Yet for some, atheism is still an aggressively held belief.”⁷ Patrick Johnstone estimates that 32 percentofthe Russian population is nonreligious.8 Such individuals may listen to the gospel with interest, but they will also question its validity.

2. Western approaches to evangelism can be imported to the C.I.S. without modification. Many of the approaches being used to teach the Bible in the C.I.S. have been imported from the United States and Western Europe. In his comments about mission agencies which have begun their work since perestroika, Walter Sawatsky remarked that “Some are more subtle and sophisticated than others, but the common assumption is that there is an evangelism program, package, or doctrinal framework which is right, which the Soviet partner must now follow.”⁹ Although Sawatsky’s remarks cannot be applied to all newcomers, relatively few have been able to acquire the knowledge they need to tailor their approach to the local scene.

In a recent survey of theological education initiatives in the C.I.S., Jack Graves discovered that nearly every Protestant program in existence is relying on expatriate teachers for a majority of the administrative leadership and instruction.¹⁰ Large programs were discovered without a resident core of instructors or administrators. Less than 10 percent of those who were involved had ability in local languages.

One reason that foreign approaches are accepted is that everything else from the West is in demand. This openness to outside influence embraces pornography with the same gusto that it does religion. In an atmosphere such as this, information about Christianity is welcome, whether its presentation is culturally relevant or not.

How long will this euphoria last? No one really knows. But if the impact of the gospel is to last into the future, culturally appropriate teaching must be considered. If the good news is identified with the West, a change in political climate may mean its rejection.

3. Soviet evangelicals should be left to evangelize on their own. Soviet evangelicals are truly remarkable; their survival through years of persecution is a monument to the grace of God. But the persecution which produced their character can also be blamed for their problems.

Persecution forced evangelicals to emphasize preservation, separating themselves from society. Because of this, the significance of doing evangelism was often lost. Although freedom of worship has been regained, some segments of the church have yet to make mission a priority again.

In Soviet society, social class is clearly defined. The largest segment of society is the workers class; this includes factory workers, service personnel, and technicians. According to Ray and Cindy Le Clair, “The Soviet tendency is to emphasize the distance between classes. Unlike the American tendency for individuals of different classes to establish an atmosphere of social equality, Soviets not only distinguish between social strata, but also make fine distinctions between the strata.”¹¹

In some countries, individuals from different classes attend the same church and seem happy to do so. In the former Soviet Union, individuals from the “higher” classes wish to be distinguished as different from the rest and restrict their relationships to them. According to Laura Lemco, “A common person is given little consideration by those in authority, from the lowest level to the top.”¹²

Johnstone believes the middle class and the educated pose a special challenge for evangelicals who are “predominantly poor and less educated because of past restrictions on known believers.”13 In contrast, individuals from the West are accorded higher status, whether they deserve it or not. As a result, they often find a more favorable reception with the professional community than do working class Christians.

Another area in which the West can contribute to evangelicals is through the training of leaders. For years, governmental restrictions on religion inhibited the training of candidates for ministry. According to Johnstone “virtually no pastors in evangelical churches have any training at all.”14

Evangelicals in the C.I.S. want the encouragement of the West. If their autonomy is assured, and their doctrine respected, their cooperation can be obtained.

WHAT WE CAN DO TO HELP
1. Invest with care in the former Soviet Union. The evangelistic effort which is being focused on the C.I.S. has hardly stemmed the tide of spiritual need. The population of Kiev alone equals that of Papua New Guinea (three million), but with far fewer churches. Ukraine (of which Kiev is the capital) has three times the evangelicals as other areas of the C.I.S.

Some of the more significant ways to help are often overlooked. Jack Graves discovered that quality textbooks for theological training are rare.l5,16 David Scoates with the Churches United in Global Mission is providing support for Russian farmers. Creative possibilities abound.

2. Those who minister in the C.I.S. should attempt to obtain the training they need to do so. Short-term trips to the C.I.S. have absorbed millions of mission dollars. (See following article.—Eds.) Some of those who have benefited from such exposure will return on a long-term basis. Before they go back, we should encourage them to develop the skills they will need for a long-term contribution.

Experienced missionaries from other parts of the world are often sent to the C.I.S. in order to meet the demands of the mission there. While cross-cultural experience in any part of the world is an asset, it does not necessarily qualify one to minister in a new and different setting. Mission agencies should recognize the need for training and provide their personnel with the support they will need to get it.

3. Mission leaders could meet on a regular basis regarding their efforts in this region. Such times of sharing could combat territorial thinking, possessiveness, and other strategies which Satan may use to hinder the mission.

Endnotes
1. Walter Sawatsky, Soviet Evangelicals and the Western Missions. (Unpublished paper, used with permission, 1991), p. 2.
2. Patrick Johnstone, Operation World. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993), p. 467. Although Johnstone does not profess to be a professional source of demographic information, I rely on him for lack of better statistical information on religion in this part of the world.
3. Don Fairbairn, Partakers of the Divine Nature, An Introduction to Eastern Orthodox Thought. (Unpublished paper prepared for the staff of New Life Soviet Union, Campus Crusade for Christ) pp. 2, 3.
4. Johnstone, op. cit., p. 467.
5. Nigel Grant, Soviet Education , 1968, p. 23.
6.Ibid.
7. Ray and Cindy Le Clair, Handbook for Christian Travelers to the USSR. (Wheaton, Ill.: Slavic Gospel Association, 1992), p. 31.
8. Johnstone, op. cit.
9. Sawatsky, op. cit., p.6.
10. Jack Graves, Biblical and Theological Initiatives in the Former Soviet Union and East-Central Europe. (Greenwood, Ind.: Overseas Council for Theological Education and Missions, Inc.,1993), p. 2.
11. Ray and Cindy Le Clair, op. cit., p. 21.
12. Laura Lemco, Starting a Christian Student Group in Gorlovka, Ukraine. (Unpublished paper submitted to the Biola University School of Intercultural Studies in January of 1993. Used with permission.)
13. Johnstone, op. cit., p. 553.
14. Johnstone, op. cit., p. 552.
15. Graves, op. cit., p. 2.
16. The David C. Cook Foundation, Elgin, Ill., is compiling a list of evangelical literature available in the languages of the region, with information on copyright holders and publishers.

—–

Copyright © 1994 Evangelism and Missions Information Service (EMIS). All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from EMIS.

Comments are closed.