Lecture IV

Dr. Paul Tudor Jones

The communists are great on infiltration. They worm their way into places of power and prestige. Like termites, they silently, secretly, bore into sound political and economic institutions, undermining the foundation until the structure falls from inner decay.

Communists frankly admit their willingness to lie, cheat, steal, and kill, in order to advance the cause of world communism. They have made remarkably successful use of duplicity in their infiltration programs. Hiding their communist affiliation or philosophy behind a false front until they have taken over the strategic posts of power, like Castro did in Cuba, they seek to infiltrate government, business, national defense, social organizations, and even religious bodies.

Any realistic discussion of communism must include a consideration of communist infiltration tactics. A discussion of Christianity and communism must face up to the question — how successful have the communists been in infiltrating churches and church organizations?

Often one hears nowadays that the Christian churches have been disastrously infiltrated by communism.

An American Mercury article in 1953, written by J. B. Matthews, began with the statement: “The largest single group supporting the communist apparatus in the United States today is composed of Protestant clergy.”

Mr. Fulton Lewis, Jr., in his radio broadcasts, has suggested, implied, or boldly asserted that some of the major Christian denominations have been infiltrated by the communists or are influenced by communist philosophy.

One edition of the Air Force Training manual implied that the National Council of Churches in America and its constituent bodies had been infiltrated by communism.

I heard a Mr. Bundy from Wheaton, Illinois speaking before the Memphis Rotary Club last year, charge that the NCCA was communistic, and that famous leaders of the major Protestant denominations, like Dr. Ralph Sockman in the Methodist Church, Bishop James Pike in the Episcopal Church, Dr. Eugene Carson Blake in the United Presbyterian Church, and Dr. Ben Lacy Rose in our denomination were either communists, or soft on communists, or communist dupes.

Many church members have become confused, alarmed, afraid, by these charges; and there has been widespread suspicion of both leaders and programs in our churches as a result.

Naturally, the questions are asked: What about these charges? How true or false are they? What is the nature and extent of the infiltration?

All responsible heads of the Protestant denominations in America have stoutly denied the charges that they have gone or are going communistic. The NCCA, which is a cooperative agency for the Protestant bodies of America, has issued the following statements about its organization and personnel:

“The council reaffirms its consistent position opposing the evils, the violences, and the violations of human rights by communist and other tyrannies . . . The National Council of Churches has never had a communist party member or sympathizer among its officers or staff, or its executives.”

The NCCA has issued denunciatory pronouncements on the occasion of every communist invasion, such as the Chinese communist invasion of Tibet, the Russian communist invasion in Hungary, etc.

In response to the NCCA objections and factual information, the Air Force Manual was withdrawn.

Dr. Marion Boggs, the esteemed pastor of Little Rock’s Second Presbyterian Church, while moderator of our General Assembly, invited those who were attacking the clergy and laity of our church by calling them communists to stand up in the proper church court, make their charges, present their evidence, and help get rid of these enemies. No one came forward to point the finger and substantiate their allegations.

From many a reputable source outside ecclesiastical circles, voices of defense have sounded and evidence has been marshaled to discredit the charges of heavy communist infiltration of our churches.

Mr. W. C. Sullivan, an official with the F. B. I., in addressing a church meeting in Cincinnati, Ohio, on March 2, 1961, said: “It is a patent falsehood — this idea that the Protestant denominations have been subjected to alarming infiltration by communists.” Mr. Sullivan went on to say that though Christianity is the antithesis of atheistic communism, nevertheless, the communists have tried to infiltrate and influence the churches and their leaders, but with small success. Mr. Sullivan further stated: “America’s religious institutions are one of our most formidable bulwarks in the crusade against communism . . . There can be no question as to the loyalty of the overwhelming majority of the clergy to the nation and the fact that they have been among the most consistent and vigorous opponents of communism.”

Then why these charges? The denials are sweeping. The characters of the men making the statements are among the noblest of our time. People are prone to say: “Well, where there is so much smoke, there is bound to be some fire.”

The explanation of this phenomena, I believe, is to be found in looking closely at these three separate realities:

First, there is the surface affinity of Christianity and Communism. We have been noting carefully in our studies, the vast differences between Communism and Christianity, and these are vast and striking. But there are some surface affinities. Many Christian leaders such as William Temple, the Late Archbishop of Canterbury, and Jacques Maritain, the great Roman Catholic philosopher, have observed that communism is a “Christian heresy.” And John Coleman Bennet says that communism flourishes best in soil that has been cultivated by Christianity.

Christianity has across the centuries concerned itself with human freedom, personal rights, economic well being. Communism, in its classic form, professes similar interests, but in its practical manifestations, has proven to be horribly cynical about all human rights, while its propaganda has continued to profess allegiance to many aims that are part and parcel of the pronouncements of the Hebrew prophets and the Sermon on the Mount.

Much of the contemporary diatribe against the NCCA and denominational leaders is based on thinking like this statement from the St. Mark’s Vestry committee in Shreveport, Louisiana, as it reported its study of the NCCA: “The Vestry Committee knows of no instance where any responsible person has accused the NCCA of being communist, a communist front, or of having any of its executive or administrative posts manned by a communist . . . But, there is room for discussion of the extent to which activities or pronouncements of the NCCA, or of high officials within it, may have paralleled propaganda of the communists.” (p. 10-11)

Then the report goes on to show that both the NCCA and the communists have been either for or against the same things — such as:

1. Seating Red China in the United Nations
2. Opposing the tactics of the House Un-American Activities committee.
3. Suspension of atomic testing, etc.

Therefore, there is some sort of tie-up between communism and the NCCA.

This sort of reasoning is very much like saying: Most preachers are bootleggers because both preachers and bootleggers are in favor of prohibition and against local option. Two block votes you can count on being tied together in any local option contest are the preachers and the bootleggers. The fact that they may be against the same thing, though perhaps for different reasons, doesn’t count.

There is a surface affinity between Christianity and classic communism, between Christian goals for society and communist propaganda, and this gives people a wrong impression about a relationship that does not and cannot exist.

Another reality we must grasp in order to understand the phenomena of wild communist charges being hurled without foundation against Christian bodies and leaders is — the amazing varieties of religious conviction and expression that exist in the Christian church and even within the same communions and congregations.

The religious convictions and expressions of some people remain individualistic and meditative while others are also concerned with social righteousness. They may be members of the same household, brothers in the same family, reading the same Bible, hearing the same preaching, yet one will say that the business of religion is to tell a man how to save his own soul, to direct his prayer life and his personal morals, while the other will insist that is only a part of the business of Christianity and this other part is to bring to bear all possible good influences to transform the social and business life to conform to the ideal of the Kingdom of God.

Some people are separatists while others are ecumenical in spirit. One man’s religion makes him want to go out and bring the whole world in to share his joy. Another’s only joy in religion is to be found in the superior feeling it gives him over his less righteous brothers. Even the race of the spirit is to the latter, a competitive thing. He can’t be happy unless he is outstripping someone else. Consequently, he is of the disposition always to be searching out the qualities in the other fellow’s religion, which render that one less excellent than himself. If there were not this matter of communist taint or fellow-traveler disposition, he would latch on to something else to find fault with his brother about. He is just constitutionally unfitted for an enlarging brotherhood. He belongs to the brand of righteous remnant that is getting more and more righteous and more and more of a remnant all the time.

Finally, there is this reality we must see in order to understand this phenomena of wild communist charges hurled at decent, respectable, sincere Christians: and this one is psychological. There are multitudes of people, and I suppose that there always will be some of them, who are so insecure within themselves that they have to be at it, continuously attacking someone else as an enemy of their country to prove to themselves that they are super-patriots. They are insecure. They want status. They find the communist issue an easy way to get it. Of course, their build-up of self-esteem comes at a very dear price to the peace and security of our nation and some of our noblest institutions.

Well, what are we going to do about the charges and counter-charges we hear about who is communist and who is not?

A Methodist minister, who came as a refugee to Memphis from Cuba and stayed for a while in the home of his sister, Mrs. Warren Webb, one of the faithful members of this congregation, has given us all some good advice. He says (I quote from a letter he wrote to the Commercial Appeal): “It will not do to label as communist everyone who disagrees with us. Of course, we disagree with many persons, but that doesn’t mean that we are always right and they are wrong — that they are communists and we are not. The confidence in the leadership of the nation — political, religious, economic, social, must be maintained. Of course there are communists, but these cases must be isolated and considered on their own merit, and we should not make generalizations that will weaken the confidence of the people. That is what the communists want most.”

Dr. Andy Eddington, President of our Presbyterian Schreiner Institute in Texas, had a friend who was very worried about the presence of communism in the U. S. He and his friend live in the little town of Kerrville. He was always saying that they should be on the job fighting communism. Andy asked him: “Where are the communists?” His friend didn’t know. So Andy called up the state offices of the F. B. I. He asked if there were any communists in Kerrville. “No,” came the reply. “Will you tell me if ever any communists come to Kerrville?” “Yes,” came the reply. One day the phone rang. A voice said there was a communist at such and such motel on the edge of Kerrville. Andy called up his friend. “Come on,” he said, “there is a communist in town. The F. B. I. just called me and told me where we could get him.” “Oh,” said his friend, “I didn’t mean I wanted to fight communism like that.”

There are specifics in this worldwide war against communism, where we can and should be engaged up to the hilt. There is something for Christianity and against communism we can and ought to be doing. We will talk about that next Thursday.