Politburo And The Church, Kremlin Archives

N. Petrovsky, S.G. Petrov

On confiscation of church valuables

Resolution of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) on organizing the confiscation of church valuables. From the minutes of the meeting of the Politburo No. 114, paragraph 6 of March 20, 1922

No. 23-18 ¹⁵

STRICTLY SECRET

The survey of members of the Politburo from 18.III.22 g .

6. - On the seizure of church valuables .

(Comrade Trotsky's proposal).

The draft directive proposed by Comrade Trotsky should be adopted with the following amendments:

To item 1 add a note:

In the most important provinces to establish the nearest time of withdrawal, in less important later, after information about the withdrawal in Petrograd and other central provinces. distributed throughout Russia.

To item 2: after Comrade Sapronov's departure, ¹ * Chairman ¹ * T. Beloborodov should be introduced to the commission as his deputy , who must be up to date no later than Wednesday 22. III. Appoint comrade Kalinin as chairman of the commission; representative of the Central Committee in the commission of comrade Yakovlev, obliging him to work correctly [;] deputy] Krasikov - Galkin. The composition of the bureau: Comrades Yakovlev, Sapronov (deputy -] Beloborodova), Unshlikht and Galkin.

In clause 17: the timeframes on the ground should be set under the control of the Central Commission and in such a way that the most important provinces go first. Send instructions to all provincial committees.

SECRETARY OF THE CC

- L. 16. Typewritten copy of a later extract on the letterhead of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) - RCP (b) of the 1930s.

- APRF, f. 3, op. ^{^[4]}, d.266, l. 12-13. Draft minutes of the Politburo meeting. Handwritten script on two sheets of lined paper. At the bottom left, there is an entry about the mailing: "Trotsky, Sapronov, Yakovlev, Unshlikht, Krasikov, Vinokurov, Beloborodov." For the list of those present, see No. 23-17.

- CA FSB, f. 1, op. 6, d.11, l. 31 — rev. Typewritten extract on the letterhead of the Central Committee of the RCP (b), made on March 20, 1922; signature - facsimile of V.M. Molotov. On l. 31 vol. round stamp: "RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY OF BOLSHEVIKS", in the center with the monogram "Central Committee". Above the text of the extract, the mailing address is printed: “Com. Trotsky, Sapronov, Yakovlev, Unshlikht . Krasikov, Vinokurov, Beloborodov ". On l. 31 below by the hand of I. S. Unshlikht litter: “2 copies. 21 / 3.22 Unshlikht ". Here is also the stamp of the Secretariat of the Presidium of the Cheka with the handwritten date "22 / III -1922" and the incoming number.

- RCKHIDNI, f. 5, op. 2, d.48, l. 18 — rev. Another copy of the extract of the same typewritten bookmark on the letterhead of the Central Committee of the RCP (b), made for V.I.Lenin. Signature, date and seal missing. There are no underlined names of addressees. On l. 18 stamp "Comrade Lenin's Archive" with handwritten date "26.III.22" and the entry number.

Notes and Comments:

were informed that this decree, in addition to the telegram (for Ivanovo-Voznesensk - telegrams) of March 19, 1922 (No. 23-15) “is communicated for immediate and unswerving execution ". Further, in the first paragraph, the words "like the Moscow commission of Sapronov-Unshlikht" were omitted (the local authorities should not have known about the existence of such a commission). The list of members of the provincial CICC at the end of this paragraph has been expanded to include the persons listed in paragraph three. Thus, as an independent paragraph 3 was canceled, merging into the text of the first paragraph. Point number two has completely disappeared: it was considered inappropriate to report its content to the localities. The fourth item received the second number. Instead of the affirmative “are” in the first sentence of the now second paragraph, the prescriptive “create” appeared. Items five, six, seven, and twelve have been merged into one at number three. Points eight, nine and ten are number four. Items eleven and thirteen are at number five. Moreover, after the text of paragraph eleven, it was added: “The confiscation of valuables shall be carried out primarily in city churches, starting with the richest. To the peasant churches, poor parishes should be treated with caution and thoroughly clarified the situation. " Clause six of the directive to the localities was rewritten: “In those provinces and counties where, according to general conditions and according to completely * unprepared * work, the confiscation of valuables can be carried out or is already being carried out without the risk of excesses, etc. the responsibility of the provincial committees. In the same provinces, where the preparatory work was insufficient, where the provincial committees, assessing the situation, will come to the conclusion that there are dangers of excesses, postpone the seizure until the party congress, where representatives of this province, together with the central commission for seizure, will set the required time. To continue preparatory, agitation and organizational work in all provinces with all energy. " In part - this is a revised seventeenth paragraph of the text of the directive of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (b), the PB decree of March 16 (No. 23-10) was also taken into account. Under clause seven of the directive, the text of clause fourteen of the Politburo directive is included. Clauses fifteen and sixteen concerning the seizure of church valuables in Moscow and Petrograd are absent in the directive to the localities. But a new text was added to paragraph eight: “The Central Committee once again emphasizes the absolute secrecy of all preparatory organizational work. To inform the Central Commission on a regular basis about the progress of work, terms, measures taken ”. But a new text was added to paragraph eight: “The Central Committee once again emphasizes the absolute secrecy of all preparatory organizational work. To inform the Central Commission on a regular basis about the progress of work, terms, measures taken ”. But a new text was added to paragraph eight: “The Central Committee once again emphasizes the absolute secrecy of all preparatory organizational work. To inform the Central Commission on a regular basis about the progress of work, terms, measures taken ”.

Unfortunately, neither in the thematic files of the archives of the Politburo, nor in the files of the archives of the draft minutes of the meetings of the Politburo were found materials reflecting the process of processing the directive adopted by the Politburo into a directive of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) in the field. Although, undoubtedly, a number of new clauses included in the directive after the revision prescribe to the local authorities a more restrained, and even “sparing” regime for the campaign of confiscation of church values. In particular, the text added to the new paragraph five on the removal of primarily from the city's wealthy churches. Apparently, this significant amendment was made under the influence of the decision of the Commission "for the registration and concentration of values" (Minutes No. 8, p. 4), the head of which was L. D. Trotsky (see P-51 and comm. 48 to the Appendix ). However, L.D. Trotsky (under the influence of V.I.Lenin's letter of March 19, 1922, No. (No. 23-16)?) Changed his point of view to the exact opposite. Only VM Molotov tried to defend a less radical regime for the removal of valuables from poor peasant churches (see No. 23-16, 23-22, 23-23). LD Trotsky sharply resisted at the same time, receiving support from the Politburo (see No. 23-24). The question arises: were the members of the Politburo informed about the revision of the text of the directive of the Politburo approved by them when Molotov sent cipher telegrams of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) to the localities? (Moreover, the cipher telegram with the corrected text was sent to Yekaterinburg on March 23, 1922, and adopted on March 24, 1922, that is, after the Politburo adopted a resolution recognizing Molotov's position on the seizure of church valuables as unacceptable (No. 23-24).) This assumption requires additional research.

All the texts of the points of the Politburo directive to the places cited in this commentary are given according to the published cipher telegram that arrived in Ivanovo-Voznesensk. They have minor discrepancies, practically not affecting the semantic content, with the published text of the cipher telegram that came to Yekaterinburg.

See: History of Russia. 1917-1940. Reader. Ekaterinburg, 1993.S. 226228; Also. Chelyabinsk, 1994.S. 226-228; Badelin V.I.Gold of the

Church. Historical sketches and modernity. Ivanovo, 1993.S. 133135; The chosen vessel: Collection of documents on the history of the Russian Orthodox Church. 1888-1932. SPb., 1994.S. 308-310.