more ruthlessly destroyed root and branch, than the Orthodox Church.  No,   
the obvious explanation of the sad story of religion in Russia during the   
past twenty years is to be found in the militant atheism whichh has been   
    an essential characteristic of Bolshevic Communism.     
 
                                                            
 
 
The second proposition sets forth the present day stock-in-trade Soviet   
proffession of freedom of worship which is well calculated to deceive the   
simple American mind that reads into such a statement its own forthright   
concept of the words employed.  The proposition is true only on the   
assumption that in Bolshevik ideology religion is essentiallly political.    
There is good fround for this assumption in the minds of those who, like   
the Bolsheviks, are materialistic and atheistic communists and hold that   
"religion is the opiate of the people".  But there is also good ground for   
suspecting the sincerity of Russian spokesmen who use phrases that mean   
one thing to them nd quite another to the people they are talking to.  For   
them the proviso that "Churches are not political" is never verified , and   
ting of freedom of worship under this proviso is simply mean
 
                                                            
 
 
It is worth noting, too, that "freedom of worship" is not today a good   
phrase with which to express the most fundamental of the four freedoms--   
freedom of religion.  I have brought out this thought in a few paragraphes   
just written (Enc. B)  for one of our Detroit papers, to be published on   
Dec. 7th as part of a brief symposium on the "Four Freedoms".  Freedom of   
worship without freedom of relgious teachingmerely condems religion to a   
 slow death--with the extinction of the present generation. 
 
                                                            
 
 
Freedom of woship, even in its most restricted sense, does not actually   
exist in Russia today.  Fresh, firsthand evidence of this is available in   
two documents which I am sending you herewith enclosed.  A few days ago I   
forwarded copies of them to  Mnsignor Ready with the reuest that he get   
them into the hands of the President and Mr. Welles.  One (Enc. C) is a   
letter which Archbishop Stritch of Chicago has recently received from   
Bishop Gawlina, Bishop of the Polish Armed Forces, who was in Russia   
during the past sumer in connection with his offical duties.  The other is   
    a copy of a memorandum which the Ploish Embassy in      
 
                            Iran