The Foreign Press about the Change of Attitude of Soviet Power to Orthodoxy in 1943 (According to TASS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article analyzes a selection of materials of the foreign press, made by the Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union (TASS) in 1943 on the reaction to the change in the attitude of the Soviet government to the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). It is presented in one of the files of the state archive of the Russian Federation (SARF). In the collection mentioned, there are notes and articles of various editions of the countries of Europe, and also the States of North and South America, Africa, Australia. The claimed problems have not been seriously analyzed from the scientific point of view so far. The author notes that the negative and positive assessments of the transformation of the religious policy of the USSR were clearly divided into the two camps: the countries that supported the USSR in 1943 and the countries that had opposite views. The rhetoric of the press in the United States, Canada and England differed significantly from that one in Europe as a whole, and even more in Nazi Germany, Italy and Romania. The press of countries that were far away from the events, for example, the States of South America or Australia, reflected a neutral attitude to what was happening. Against this background, all actions of the Soviet authorities were assessed as superficial, temporary, and “fake”. According to the critics, they were forced. In reality, there was no question of freedom of religion in the USSR. In turn, the press of the allied countries relatively highly appreciated the changes in the policy of the Soviet state. It is obvious that the problems stated in the title of the article require further serious scientific analysis, which implies a large volume of work with foreign media of the time under consideration and with archival sources. Keywords: religion, Orthodoxy, freedom of religion, Patriarch, Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, mass media
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".