pastors politicians pacifists-le_roy_f_smith-e_b_johns-1927-233pgs-rel-pol

Pastors, Politicians, Pacifists

By

LE ROY F. SMITHand

E. B . JOHNS

Copyrighted 1928 All Rights Reserved

SECOND EDITION

The Constructive Educational Publishing Co . (Not Inc .)

5,121 Ridgewood Court

CHICAGO

DECEMBER, 1927

PRICE, ONE DOLLAR

FOREWOC'HRIST'SAsTHEhourwas approaching for

His crucifixion, DOCTRINE Christ gaveutterance to His doctrinefor the separation of the state and church .This is recorded in three of the gospels . In Luke,Chapter 20, nineteenth to twenty-fifth verses,inclusive, it is set forth :

" 19. And the chief priests and the scribesthe same hour sought to lay hands onHim; and they feared the people ; for theyperceived that He had spoken this par-able against them .

"20. And they watched Him and sentforth spies, which should feign themselvesjust men, that they might take hold of Hiswords, that so they might deliver Him untothe power and authority of the governor .

"21 . And they asked Him, saying,Master, we know that thou sayest andteachest rightly, neither acceptest thou theperson of any, but teachest the way ofGod truly ;

"22. Is it lawful for us to give tributeunto Caesar, or no?"23. But He perceived their craftiness,

and said unto them, why tempt ye me?

D

"24. Shew me a penny. Whose imageand superscription hath it? They answeredand said, Caesar's .

"25. And He said unto them, render-therefore unto Caesar the things which beCaesar's, and unto God the things whichbe God's."

eX Great Statesman's ViewEdmund Burke, the great English statesman, in

describing the relations that should exist betweenthe state and church, said :

"No sound ought to be heard in the church butthe healing voice of Christian charity . The cause ofcivil liberty and civil government gains as little asthat of religion by this confusion of duties . Thosewho quit their proper character to assume what doesnot belong to them are, for the greater part, ignorantboth of the character they leave and of the char-acter they assume. Wholly unacquainted with theworld, in which they are so fond of meddling, andinexperienced in all its affairs, on which they pro-nounce with so much confidence, they have nothingof politics but the passions they excite . Surely thechurch is a place where one day's truce ought to beallowed to the dissensions and animosities of man-kind."

T'ublisherr' .Vote

Two helpful features, facilitating the use of thisvolume as a REFERENCE BOOK, have been included inthis edition .

First, the book carries a very complete TOPICAL,ORGANIZATIONAL, and PERSONNEL INDEX . This indexmay be used by the reader for the purpose of establishinga clear mental picture of the varied relationships andaffiliations of the members of this great organization,and also to enable him to comprehend the variety ofactivities in which the Federal Council interests itself .

Second, opposite the beginning of Chapter XVII, onPage 167, entitled, "The Family Tree," will be found achart graphically portraying the Organization, theCooperating Bodies, and the Spheres of Influence of theFederal Council.

INTRODUCTION

The charge will be made that this book is anattack upon religion . If this book be read withmerely ordinary carefulness, that charge will standwholly disproven .

The Man of Galilee was certainly not open to thecharge of being irreligious, yet his scathing criticismsof ecclesiastical leaders, constitute the high-watermark of righteous denunciation .The present general uprising against the extra-

religious activities of powerful leaders of ecclesiasticalorganizations and appurtenant societies, is an upris-ing not of men and women who despise religion, butof men and women who love religion and whoearnestly seek to perpetuate the correct interpre-tation of it, as the only hope for our civilization .

It is one thing for a man to love his home ; it isanother thing for him to patch the roof of his homewhen it leaks, to renovate his cellar when it becomesfoul, or even to remodel his domicile when necessary .

Indeed, the deeper a father's love for his home andits precious contents, the greater his solicitation tomake certain at all times that his sacred domicilebe clean and wholesome .

The authors of this book, in common with thou-sands of its readers, are unequivocal in their cham-pioning of religion . MORE THAN THAT, THE AUTHORS

Vlll

INTRODUCTION

ARE STEADFAST IN THEIR SUPPORT OF ORGANIZED

RELIGION-THAT IS, THE CHURCHES . The churchesare as necessary for the preservation and develop-ment of the religious mind of men, as the school isnecessary for the perpetuation of secular education .The citizen who neglects to support organized religionis not performing his whole moral citizenshipobligation .

But there appears today a divergence of view asto the proper function of the Church . A large, and,as we believe, a majority group in the United Stateshold to the opinion laid down by the deeply religiousmen who framed our government, that the influenceof religion is properly to be brought to bear upon theState by the righteous consciences of individualcitizens, translating each for himself his concepthof religious duty into his political acts . I N OTHERWORDS, THE CHURCH'S TRUE JOB IS TO MAKE THESTATE BETTER BY MAKING BETTER THE INDIVIDUALSWHO COMPOSE THE STATE .

But latterly we see a recrudescence of the old ideathat the function of the Church is not merely tomake good citizens who will then make a goodState, but that the Church should also, or even mostespecially, make citizens good by commandeeringthe functions of the State. Between the extremeexponents of these two cults there is found, of course,every gradation of thought . Some churchmen whoin principle agree that the Church's true functionis to save the souls of individual men, yet hold to thebelief that the Church should also engage in evangel-ization en masse, Christianization through politicalpower, provided, of course, as they stipulate, that

INTRODUCTION

ix

the brand of Christianity placed in power betheir brand .

The authors of this book are, in company withmany of their fellow churchmen, supporters of thetime-proven doctrine of this Republic and of themajority of the church groups in this Republic, thatthe mission of the Organized Church is to makecitizens righteous and through the righteousness ofthe citizens, and only through their righteousness,to operate toward accomplishing the righteousnessof the State .

If the Church has failed to "sell" the ideals ofmorality, Christianity, good will or integrity to theindividual, it is not possible, and in the UnitedStates it is not legal, for the Church to attempt to"deliver" these ideals to the citizenship en masseby means of ecclesiastical political power.

THE PUBLISHERS .

CONTENTSChapter

PageINTRODUCTION Vu

FOREWORD X111

I THE CHARGES 1II CARNEGIE SUBSIDIZES THE CHURCHES

SIII COOPERATING WITH THE KAISER . . 14IV COOPERATING WITH THE RADICALS . 24V CONSPIRING WITH THE RADICALS 36VI HELPFUL HINTS FOR SERMONS 48VII A HIGHLY FINANCED MOVEMENT 58VIII NOT A DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTION 69IX ITS POLITICAL PLATFORM . . . . 82

X AN APPEAL FROM LABOR LEADERS . 94XI THREATENS THE CHRISTIAN FAITH

104XII OPPOSITION TO THE AMERICAN LEGION

MEASURES 118

XIII THE FEDERAL COUNCIL'S DEPART-MENT OF STATE131

XIV WILL THE CHURCHES OR THE GOVERN-MENT ACT? 141

XV DR. CADMAN PLEADS GUILTY . . . . 150

XVI THE RADICAL "HOOKUP" OF THEFEDERAL COUNCIL164

XVII THE FAMILY TREE167

XVIII AN EXCHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE 172ACTIVITY PERSONNEL194CHART OF ORGANIZATIONAL "HOOK-UP"Opposite Page 167

INDEX 207

D ED ICA7I0,9C ~TO THE MEMORY OF OURCHRISTIAN MOTHERS, ATWHOSE KNEES WE LEARNEDOUR CONCEPTS OF CHRISTIAN

CITIZENSHIP ; AND

TO OUR CHRISTIAN FATHERS,WHOSE CHRISTIAN LOVEFOR MANKIND FILLED THEIRLIVES WITH HIGH SERVICEFOR THEIR CHURCH ANDTHEIR COUNTRY AND FORTHE FLAG WHICH FLOATS

OVER BOTH. e

CHAPTER I

THE CHARGES

N MAKING serious charges against such aI powerful ecclesiastical organization as theFederal Council of Churches of Christ in America,it is only fair to the readers that they be informed asto who makes them and as to the motives with whichthey are inspired . Based on the veneration whichevery decent man has for the things of religion andworship, there is always a disposition to view anycriticism of the clergy or of ecclesiastical organiza-tions as coming from some atheist, agnostic, or otherperson hostile to all worship or spiritual activity .It is believed that a short statement as to the identityof the authors will convince the fair-minded thatthey are not imbued with any intention of dis-crediting the churches .LeRoy F. Smith is a son and grandson of the

Methodist parsonage ; his father being ReverendE. L. Smith of the Northeast Ohio Methodist Epis-copal Conference and his grandfather, the lateReverend Dr. John Whitworth, of the same Con-ference . He was educated at the Methodist OhioWesleyan University . He is himself active in theMethodist Church and Sunday School work and hasbeen President of the large Men's Bible Class of the

2

PASTORS, POLITICIANS, PACIFISTS

First Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles,California, since 1923 .E. B. Johns is also of Methodist parentage, and is

educating his daughter in a Methodist training schoolfor religious workers. He is a graduate of TaylorUniversity and took a special course at DePauwUniversity-both Methodist institutions . He hasbeen a member of the Press Gallery of Washingtonfor over twenty years .It is not without grave provocation that these

sincere believers in religion and in the organizedchurch would even question the wisdom of a policypursued by such a pretentious organization, whichbears a religious name, as the Federal Council ofChurches of Christ in America . Indubitable andcumulative proofs of the secular political machina-tions of the Federal Council support the chargesthat :

1 . The Federal Council of Churches isattempting to take charge of affairs of the civilgovernment and is continually adding to itsprogram of the attempted management of affairswhich are distinctly non-religious and outsideof the mission of the Church . It is under-mining the teachings of Christ and the consti-tutional policy of the United States for theseparation of the State and the Church .

2. The group that controls the FederalCouncil of Churches is falsely claiming to repre-sent twenty million members of the ChristianChurches in national and international affairs .It is in no way a representative body as will be

THE CHARGES

3

shown. by its constitution and the manner ofselecting its controlling committees .

3 . The Federal Council of Churches is cooper-ating with and frequently working under thedirection of radical groups . The same radicalgroups are affiliated with the Third Interna-tionale, which is seeking to destroy all churchesand to stifle all religion .

4. From its inception the Federal Council hascombated every measure of adequate defensefor the nation . It carried on a campaign againstpreparedness, even when the country was beingdrawn into the World War . The Federal Coun-cil is regularly cooperating with organizationswhich refused to support the government whenit was in the great conflict .

5 . Among the leaders of the Federal Councilare men who are also active and influentialdirectors in many radical subversive organiza-tions. The left wing, or more radical element inthe Federal Council, is exerting an ever-increas-ing influence .

6. Every effort to strengthen the laws for theexclusion of undesirable immigrants from thiscountry has been opposed by the Federal Coun-cil. In this it has acted under the direction ofthe American Civil Liberties Union whichboasts of its radicalism .

7. The Federal Council, when the League ofNations covenant was pending before the Senate,insisted that the twenty million church memberswere demanding that the United States should

4


join the league . This will be substantiated byofficial reports of the Council .

8. The Federal Council, directed by a groupof high-priced international lawyers, succeededin convincing the Senate that the great body ofchurch members was demanding that the UnitedStates adhere to the World Court covenant . Inthis campaign Elihu Root and George W.Wickersham were prominent and assumed therole of church leaders .

9. The controlling group of the Federal Coun-cil favors the complete cancellation of the foreigndebt and is only waiting for an opportunemoment to mobilize the organization behindsuch a program .

10. The final objective of the controllinggroup of the Federal Council is a united or statechurch with power to deal with all political andeconomic questions even to the tariff . Thisstatement will be supported by official docu-ments of the Council .

11 . The entire program of the Federal Councilis contrary to the teachings of Christ and ispaganism under the guise of Christianity .

12. That the controlling group has at itscommand through the Federal Council and itsaffiliated and cooperating organizations anannual budget of about a million dollars .

CHAPTER II

CARNEGIE SUBSIDIZES THE CHURCHES

ALTHOUGH the Federal Council of Churcheswas organized in 1908, it did not assume to

direct affairs of the nation until 1914 . Even in 1913,its budget was only $35,000 . This might be pre-sumed to be a very generous budget for an organi-zation which according to its name and the purposeof its establishment, was only to advise the churcheson moral issues and promote friendly relationsbetween the different denominations. When theFederal Council was created, it was to engage in nonew activities but to form a sort of liaison betweenthe different churches. To this function there canbe no objection from any one who is interested in theprogress of Christianity .

It was in 1914 when Andrew Carnegie took overthe controlling group of the Federal Council by sub-sidizing what is known as the Church Peace Union .Mr . Carnegie, according to one of his biographers,had never evinced a friendliness to the clergy or thechurches. It is asserted that he refused donationsto denominational colleges, and is quoted as makingsarcastic remarks about some of the members of theclergy. His first gesture toward making donationsto the churches was the endowing of . the Church

6


Peace Union for $2,000,000. This is not a largeorganization of churches, as might be inferred fromits name, but consists of a self-perpetuating Board oftwenty-nine trustees. Practically all of the trusteesare in some way identified with the Federal Council .The Church Peace Union, or the Board of Trustees,has always exercised a dominating influence in theFederal Council . In one sense the Peace Union ismerely one of the activities of the Federal Council .The Carnegie endowment of the Peace Union gavethe controlling group in the Federal Council anannual income which has enabled it to run the budgetfor the Federal Council and its cooperating and asso-ciated organizations up into the millions. Amongthese organizations are the Church Peace Union,the World's Alliance for International Friendshipthrough the Churches, the Commission on Inter-national Friendship and Good Will, the NationalCouncil for the Prevention of War, and the AmericanCivil Liberties Union .

Part of the controlling group of the Federal Coun-cil will disavow the extreme left of their organizationwhich is disguised with the name of the AmericanCivil Liberties Union. They may also claim to haveno connection with the National Council for thePrevention of War which, in one of its Bulletins,boasted of being a friend of Soviet Russia . It isknown, however, that the controlling group of theFederal Council of Churches established the NationalCouncil for the Prevention of War, and that therehas been a close cooperation between the AmericanCivil Liberties Union and the Federal Council inimportant legislation pending before Congress .


7

As far as that is concerned, when attention wascalled to certain activities of the Peace Union, itwas asserted emphatically at the headquarters of theFederal Council that the Council had nothing to dowith the Church Peace Union . Despite this dis-avowal of the Peace Union at the headquarters ofthe Federal Council, only a few weeks previousDr. Frederick Lynch, secretary of the Church PeaceUnion, in testimony before the House Committeeon Military Affairs, declared as a member of theadministrative committee, he was drafting a resolu-tion on military training for the Federal Council .Just a moment previous to this statement, he hadasserted that the Federal Council had a constituencyof twenty million church members . The officials ofthese cooperating and associated organizations dis-avow each other with such abandon that their rela-tions can only be determined by observing theiractivities .The American Civil Liberties Union which is

awarded the honor of being the left of the FederalCouncil of Churches, has its left in the Third Inter-national. There is a world of evidence to prove thatthe left of the Civil Liberties Union is planted inRussia . Any attempt to follow all of the ramifi-cations of either the Civil Liberties Union or theFederal Council of Churches invariably producesmental dizziness . You soon find yourself goingaround in circles, meeting yourself at every turn .

The general picture is this : On the right aretwenty-eight Christian churches which contributeliberally to the support of the Federal Council, andhave little to do with framing its policy.

In the

8


center is the Church Peace Union with the $2,000,000subsidy, and on the left is the Civil Liberties Unionwith the Garland free-love communist fund . Thereis a conviction among those who have watched theFederal Council's activities that attached to theextreme left is a pot of Soviet gold . Withoutregard to whether this is true, it is known that theCivil Liberties Union always has a member of itscontrolling group in Russia conferring with theSoviet . At last reports, Wm . Z. Foster was theAmerican Civil Liberties representative in Russia .

The organization of the Church Peace Union wasnot attended by any great religious revival. Mr .Carnegie conducted the affair like a meeting of oneof his corporations in which he coolly proposed topurchase the churches' influence for the abolishmentof war . After war had been abolished, the iron-master authorized the trustees to expend the incomefrom the endowment for charity .But to quote from Mr. Carnegie's speech when

at his home on February 10, 1914, he established theChurch Peace Union :

"We all feel, I believe, that the killing of man byman in battle is barbaric, and negatives our claim tocivilization . This crime we wish to banish from theearth. Some progress has already been made in thisdirection, but recently men have shed more of theirfellow's blood than for years previously . We needto be aroused to our duty and banish war .

"Certain that the strongest appeal that can bemade is to members of the religious bodies, to youI hereby appeal, hoping that you will feel it to benot only your duty, but your pleasure, to undertake


9

the administration of two millions of dollars five percent bonds, the income to be so used as in your judg-ment will most successfully appeal to the peoplein the cause of peace through arbitration of inter-national disputes ; that as man in civilized lands iscompelled by law to submit personal disputes tocourts of law, so nations shall appeal to the court atthe Hague or to such tribunals as may be mutuallyagreed upon, and bow to the verdict rendered, thusinsuring the reign of national peace through inter-national law. When that day arrives, either throughsuch courts of law or through other channels, thistrust shall have fulfilled its mission .

"After the arbitration of international disputes isestablished and war abolished, as it certainly will besome day, and that sooner than expected, probablyby the Teutonic nations, Germany, Britain, and theUnited States, first deciding to act in unison, otherPowers joining later, the trustees will divert therevenue of this fund to relieve the deserving poorand afflicted in their distress, especially those whohave struggled long and earnestly against misfortuneand have not themselves altogether to blame fortheir poverty . Members of the various churcheswill naturally know sufferers well, and can there-fore the better judge . As a general rule, it is best tohelp those who help themselves, but there areunfortunates from whom this cannot be expected .

"After war is abolished by the leading nations thetrustees by a vote of two-thirds may decide that abetter use for the funds than those named in thepreceding paragraph have been found, and are freeaccording to their own judgment to devote the

1 0


income to the best advantage for the good of theirfellow men .

"Happy in the belief that the civilized world willnot, cannot, long tolerate the killing of man by manas a means of settling its international disputes, andthat civilized men will not, cannot, long enter a pro-fession which binds them to go forth and kill theirfellow men as ordered, although they will continueto defend their homes if attacked as a duty, whichalways involves the duty of never attacking thehomes of others ."

The Board of Trustees of the Church Peace Unionstarted the campaign for the abolishment of war onthe day that Mr . Carnegie turned over to them the$2,000,000 subsidy . High sounding resolutions werepassed in which a demand was made upon the rulersof the world that they abolish war . In the course ofthe resolution it was stated :

"The so-called civilized world maintains, chieflyin idle parade, usually all their lives, no less than6,244,600 men, armed and pledged to go forth andkill their fellow men as ordered should war arise .Most of these, however, never fire a hostile shot,war being the exception, long years of idleness therule . Even in war with men firing at battleshipstwelve miles distant, with troops under cover firingat troops a mile distant-war is no longer conduciveto the heroic."This is scarcely descriptive of the World War

which was then only a few months in the future .Confident that they could promptly carry Mr . Car-negie's objective for the abolishment of war andoverawe all of the nations of the world, two inter-

CARNEGIE SUBSIDIZES THE CHURCHES 1 1

national church conferences were promoted andfinanced by the Church Peace Union trustees . Onewas for Roman Catholic churches to be held in Liege,Belgium ; the other for the Protestants at Constance,Germany. In the official reports, published by theFederal Council, is recorded what happened at theconference. The report goes on to relate :

"One hundred and twenty delegates in all hadplanned attendance on the conference of Protestants .It so happened, however, that the delegates fromAmerica and England and a few each from theProtestant churches of Europe gathered in Con-stance, Germany, on the very day (August 1, 1914)that war was declared between Germany and Russia .The Roman Catholic Conference was to have beenheld at Liege on the very date upon which it wasattacked by the invading force . Needless to say,no delegates assembled for that conference.

"Over eighty delegates were in actual attendanceat the Conference at Constance, representing Amer-ica, England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Hol-land, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. One pastorfrom Bulgaria represented the Protestants of thatland . These delegates convened to consider theirduty and opportunity in the promotion of betterinternational relations. This was in truth the firstinternational conference of Christians ever held forthe promotion of world peace, but it was too late .The tragedy was on. The war lords were in controland Christians and the churches were powerless."

This part of the report is rather severe upon thewar leaders of England, France and later those of

1 2


the United States . It treats the former Kaiser rathersympathetically, going on to say :

"Emperor William, it should, however, be noted,had been so interested in the proposed Conferencethat, in spite of many absorbing duties, he sent hisown special representative to the Conference-Dr. Siegmund-Schultze-and this had much to dowith the success of the Conference . Through hisaid, although Germany was under martial law andnowhere could six persons gather for a meeting,special exception was made for this internationalconference of Christians . On August 2, three sessionswere held and steps were taken for the organizationof a World Alliance for Promoting InternationalFriendship Through the Churches .

"On Monday, August 3, the Conference took trainin a body on the last express out of Constance, slowlytravelled down the Rhine, and passed out of Ger-many only an hour before the entire passengerservice of the country was closed . Reaching London,we heard the jeers of the world hurled at Christianity,and especially at Christian pacifists . Christianity,we were told, was a failure, was bankrupt, becauseit had not prevented the war ; yet those Christianswho wished to do what they could to prevent allwars were derided, not only as impracticable folk,but as ignorant of history and of human nature ."It is submitted that the implied promise to Mr .

Carnegie when they accepted his millions that theywould abolish war and have something left over forcharity, does create the suspicion that this groupwas "not only impracticable folk, but ignorant ofhistory and human nature ."

CARNEGIE SUBSIDIZES THE CHURCHES 1 3

Their official reports show clearly that they didnot know what was taking place in the world at thattime. Everybody saw Europe drifting into the warbut they proceeded to call a peace conference whichmet on the day that the conflagration broke forth .Subsequent reports of their activities will showfurther that the American delegates "were onlyimpracticable folk" when it came to keeping thiscountry out of war . Instead of supporting a policyof armed neutrality which might have deterredGermany from committing outrages upon our neutralrights, they advocated a too-proud-to-fight policywhich could not but have created the impressionabroad that this nation would not defend itself.Neither before the war broke out in Europe nor

during the period that the United States kept outof it did the Federal Council leaders prove to be wisecounsellors . Their course only hastened the daywhen the United States was drawn into the conflict .

CHAPTER III

COOPERATING WITH THE KAISER

THERE is no documentary evidence that any ofthe leaders of the Federal Council of Churches

promised the Kaiser at the conference in Constance,Germany, which took place on August 1, 1914, thatthey would keep the United States out of war .According to the Council's official report it was dueto the former Emperor of Germany that the con-ference was a success . It was only by special decreeof the former Emperor that it was possible to holdthe meeting, as Germany was then at war withRussia and all popular meetings were prohibited .

It is easy to see how in the enthusiasm of theirgratefulness to the former Kaiser, some of thedelegates might have made rash promises to the warlord, which he may have taken too seriously . Thatthere may have been some foundation for this pre-sumption is given credence from the fact that theGerman correspondents at Washington early in thewar expressed the opinion that the churches wouldkeep the United States out of the war . That theycould not have done more to keep the United Statesout of the war if they had made a solemn promiseto the Kaiser is revealed by their official reports for1914215 and '16, and the early part of 1917 .


1 5

The delegates to the Constance Conference fromSwitzerland and other neutral countries went homeand supported their governments in the mobilizationof their military forces which kept them out of thewar. There was not a minute of the time in the waruntil the United States went into it that Switzerlandcould not have turned the tide of the war if shehad joined either the Allies or the Central Powers .The pressure from both sides to force Switzerlandinto the war was greater than that upon the UnitedStates, but she kept out of the war by armedneutrality .The American delegates to the Constance church

conference pursued an exactly opposite policy .Furthermore, President Wilson appeared to taketheir advice . His "too proud to fight" and otherpacifistic declarations were expressive of a greatflood of literature which was sent out from theFederal Council's headquarters . The result wasthat not only Germany but England paid no atten-tion to our rights as neutrals . Germany carried hersubmarine campaign so far that President Wilson'simplied promise in the campaign of 1916 to keep usout of war was in vain. The Federal Council groupcarried their campaign against preparedness almostup to the day that war was declared . The sinkingof the Lusitania, it will be observed, did not in anyway affect their campaign against the defenses ofthe nation . The reports of the Federal Council arerather boastful of the great flood of literature thatwas sent out to the churches which was designednot only to keep the nation out of war but to under-

1 6


mine its morale if it should be drawn into theconflict .

After the war was declared, there was a temporaryseparation between the right and left wings of theFederal Council group . The right was loyal through-out the war while the left kept partially within thelaw in opposition to the government . Now this doesnot apply universally to either the left or the right,for some of even the socialists supported the war .The clergy as a whole was loyal to the country, butthis could hardly be said of such active spirits asHarry F.Ward, of the Methodist Federation for SocialService. He was not sent to Leavenworth as weresome of his associates in the American Civil LibertiesUnion, but he makes no claim of supporting theGovernment in the great conflict .

In all of the Federal Council's reports and litera-ture there is not a single reference to America'srights as a neutral or as a nation . The entire $100,000of the Carnegie endowment for the Church PeaceUnion was expended according to their report of 1914on the Constance Conference, in peace meetings, andin drives against any gesture on the part of thecountry to prepare to defend itself . In a review ofthe work for 1914 it is stated : "The first year's workwas of necessity a year of beginning . Enterpriseswere started whose results can come out only later .As will have been gathered from reading the fore-going pages, the Church Peace Union works throughother agencies to which it makes grants ."The report states that "Five thousand seven

hundred dollars were expended on promoting wideobservance of Peace Sunday ." As these exercises


1 7

in the churches were at the call of President Wilsonfor Sunday, October 4, 1914, there appears noreason for such an expenditure on that day .The report continues : "Twenty thousand dollars

was sent to the British and German Peace Councilsbefore the war ; $13,700 was expended on the Con-ferences at Constance and London ; $10,000 wasgranted the Federal Council of Churches of Christfor its mission on peace and arbitration and theCommission on Relations with Japan ; $5,000 wasgiven the Federal Council's Commission on a hun-dred years peace ; $2,000 to the New York CityChurch Federation for organizing peace work amongthe New York Churches ; $1,000 to the FederalCommission for the preparation of a study on warand peace suited to the needs of the Sunday Schools ;and $13,400 was expended on publications and gen-eral publicity work ."The reference in the report quoted to granting

the Federal Council money for certain purposes isa mere form and in a sense humorous . The samegroup controls the Church Peace Union and theFederal Council . It amounts to passing the moneyfrom one hand to the other . A call for a meeting ofeither organization brings the same group together,and they can hold first a meeting of the FederalCouncil, and presto! the Peace Union is in session .

The Federal Council, or the Church Peace Unionstarted the year of 1915 by a message to the churches .As stated in the report, it was sent to 10,000 selectedpastors-the key men of the Protestant churches .In response to the popular demand that the WarDepartment make a report on the condition of our

1 8


Army, the General Staff had submitted recommenda-tions through the then Secretary of War Garrison .President Wilson, as the Council's reports show, hadaccepted its "too proud to fight" propaganda, andrefused to make public the reports of the GeneralStaff. There was a storm of protest from the dailypress. It was very insistent that the country shouldknow the truth about its defenses . It was to stemthis rising tide of public opinion that the FederalCouncil group made its address to the 10,000 selectedpastors. An impassioned appeal was made to pastorsto preach sermons that would calm what the Councilcalled "war talk ." On this subject the proclamationstated :

"Our own freedom from militarism has been dueto the protecting oceans rather than superior virtues .The present clamor for armament to resist a possibleattack is prompted, not by peril but by the disposi-tion to echo on our side of the sea the cries whichhave been heard in Europe for years, and is engender-ing the same suspicion that has wrecked the relationsof Germany and Great Britain . Are we to repeat thepolicy which is drenching the continent with blood-shed? This is the time to prepare, not for war,but for peace."

But the country insisted and the report of theGeneral Staff was made public . It provided for asmaller army than the Belgian force which theGerman Army had swept aside by a mere gesturein its drive at the heart of France . When enactedinto law by Congress in 1916, it became known asthe original National Defense Act . If it had beenput into effect before the United States was drawn


1 9

into the war, according to the plans of the GeneralStaff, it would have given the nation something like anadequate corps of officers and a nucleus that couldhave been expanded to the American ExpeditionaryForce without all of the attendant confusion andunnecessary expenditure and loss of life .

The National Defense Act provided for five annualincrements in the strength of the regular Army .The study in the General Staff in 1915 brought outplainly that to maintain the efficiency and standardof the regular Army, it would require five years tomake the expansion in the number of officers author-ized by the Act. The country was drawn into thewar in 1917 and an attempt was made to do in a fewmonths what should have taken five years . Theresult was that the regular Army as well as the restof the country was caught unprepared for theconflict .

But this did not deter the Federal Council groupfrom continuing its campaign against preparedness,even as the country was drifting rapidly toward theWorld conflict . It followed its message to thechurches by a questionnaire, the concluding para-graph of which declared that this is the time toprepare for peace and not for war .

The questionnaire reads :"Do you approve of the agitation for increasing

armament now being conducted by various organ-izations, or do you agree with President Wilson that`any agitation of America's unpreparedness for waris unfortunate just at this stage'? We should beglad to know your frank opinion on the wholequestion of the United States and armament. Should

20


we follow Europe or should we find some new wayto lead the nation?"While the answers were being compiled at the

Federal Council headquarters, a German submarinesank the Lusitania and the following was added tothe report :

"The answers to these letters were satisfactory andabstracts were given out to the daily press of the nationwhich furnished much encouragement for those dis-approving demands for excessive armaments ."The writer of the report was honest enough to

confess that : "These answers were sent in beforethe sinking of the Lusitania and might not be sounanimously opposed to any agitation for increasedarmament since then as they were before, for thatevent was the beginning of hysteria and fear whichhas seized so great a part of the nation ."

But there was no pause in the campaign to under-mine the morale of the nation as it was approachinga life and death crisis . The report goes on to state :

"Out of these answers 1,000 names were chosenwhich evinced the most interest in the peace move-ment, and were addressed follow up letters . Theywere asked to form peace-making committees in allof the churches and also in the various ministerialbodies . Literature was provided out of our pub-lication fund and every pastor was given DoctorGulick's excellent book, `The Fight for Peace,'writtenas a manual . Doctor Gulick also wrote a peace-maker's manual."

The activities of the Federal Council during thisyear extended to the colleges where the militaryauthorities were planning to secure most of the


2 1

emergency officers in the event of war . The reportstates "The Secretary (of the Federal Council) hasalso acted as a general adviser for the anti-militarygroup in the universities, which has taken a highmoral stand in their opposition to the attempt tolead America into the old war path which has ledEurope to destruction ." The Council's financialreport shows an expenditure of money in the collegesand schools. In these items are included $10,000 forreligious education, $1,000 for college anti-militarism,and another $1,000 for the Cornell Settlement School .In 1916 the Federal Council continued with

unabated zeal its campaign against preparedness andespecially against the passage of the NationalDefense Act. There is no detailed statement in thereports for 1916 as to how the $100,000 was expendedin these activities . It circulated through churchchannels a set of resolutions which set forth :

"Upon the hearts of the American people we shouldenroll the duty of national preparedness in mind andin spirit that we may more worthily meet the cruxof the situation by which we are now confronted .Military preparedness having proved to be inade-quate as a safeguard to world peace, we call upon meneverywhere to denounce the policy of armed peaceand to seek to follow a better way ."

In February the Federal Council started its peacepetition. Ten thousand post cards were mailed tothe clergy for their signatures. The petition began :

"We, the ministers of the churches of the UnitedStates, view with painful solicitude the organized anddetermined efforts to stampede the nation at thistime into increased and extravagant expenditures

22


for ships and guns, and desire to place upon recordour earnest objection to the committing of ournation to a policy of so-called preparedness, forwhich Europe is paying an awful price."

As an organization the Federal Council gave loyalsupport to the government after the war wasdeclared. Its bulletins show that it was more con-cerned with putting over prohibition as a warmeasure than getting American forces in the fronttrenches . It did pass one resolution asking thatconscientious objectors be given non-combatant ser-vice indicating that even during the war there wassympathy in the organization for the pacifists . Withthe signing of the Armistice the Federal Council ofChurches group began to suggest a League of Nations .There was some discussion of this by the inter-nationally minded group of the Federal Council evenbefore the war . It was because President Wilson'sutterance on the subject was the first to come froman official source that he is credited with originatingthe League of Nations idea .When President Wilson went to Versailles with

the plan for a League of Nations the controlling groupof the Federal Council attempted to mobilize all ofthe religious fervor of the country in the support ofthe proposition that the United States should jointhe League without regard to whether it wouldinvolve us in European affairs . On December 12,1918, the executive committee of the Federal Councilof Churches met in Atlantic City. A cablegram wassent to President Wilson in which he was assuredthat the churches would support him . The admin-istrative committee was instructed to conduct an


23

intensive campaign to rally all of the churches andreligious organizations in support of the League ofNations . An appeal was to be made to "theY.M.C .A., the Y.W.C.A., the Bible Classes, theWomen's Federated groups, and the Adult Studygroups." All of the financial resources of the FederalCouncil and the Church Peace Union were placedat the disposal of Doctor Sidney L . Gulick whobecame the real director of the League of Nationscampaign. According to the Federal Council'sadmitted expenses, the campaign for the League ofNations cost between $350,000 and $400,000 .In the great flood of literature and speeches in

support of the League of Nations there is not a wordor a suggestion that the interests of this countryshould be guarded. When the League of Nationstreaty was pending in the Senate every reservationproposed for the protection of this nation was indig-nantly opposed by the Federal Council of Churches .

A careful survey of all the official documents andstatements to the press of the Federal Council ofChurches on the League of Nations, Arms Confer-ence, World Court, and preparedness measures, doesnot reveal a single suggestion that the welfare orinterests of this nation should be considered . Suchsuggestions are denounced as sordid and selfish .

In every crisis or international controversy, thecontrolling group of the Federal Council can bedepended upon to cooperate with the enemy, orpossible enemy, whether it be Great Britain, France,Japan, the Kaiser, or the Russian Soviet . Its mottoappears to be-"My country, right or wrong, I amagainst it."

CHAPTER IV

COOPERATING WITH THE RADICALS

THE Federal Council of Churches of Christ inAmerica is a liberal organization, according to

the classification of Solon De Leon of the RandSchool of Social Science . In response to a questionfrom a correspondent this eminent authority onsocialism classed the Federal Council with the Amer-ican Civil Liberties Union and the Fellowship forReconciliation .

As the Rand School is the training school for redsand pinks, Mr. De Leon ought to know what he istalking about when he is giving the standing ofsocialistic and communistic societies . Of course,Mr. De Leon bases his opinion upon the activities ofthe controlling group of the Federal Council, and noton the twenty million church members which theCouncil claims to represent .

The liaison between the Federal Council and theAmerican Civil Liberties Union is through Harry F .Ward. Mr. Ward is chairman of the American CivilLiberties Union and also one of the most active inthe group which controls the Federal Council .Mr. Ward comes in to the Federal Council not as arepresentative of any church, but fromThe MethodistFederation for Social Service . This organization waF


2 5

not created by the Methodist Episcopal GeneralConference, but is a paper organization maintainedby Mr. Ward and his group of radicals and pinks .Still the Federal Council has listed among its pub-lications "Religious Democracy" and "The YearBook of the Church and Social Service," by HarryF. Ward. In the latter publication, he is given asassistant secretary of the Federal Council Commis-sion on the Church and Social Service . He is also amember of the Council of Church Secretaries.According to an official diagram of the FederalCouncil, the Secretarial Council has an importantfunction . All of the activities of the Federal Council,its executive and administrative committees, passthrough the Secretarial Council .

Yet it is doubtful whether there is a more uncom-promising advocate or defender for all that is radicaland subversive in America than Doctor Ward . Thelate Samuel Gompers, former President of the Amer-ican Federation of Labor, referred to him as "a pinkcleric ." "He was the idol of the I.W.W. leadersand did all he could to shield the communists whowere arrested in the Bridgeman (Mich .) raid. Hisorganization, then known as the Civil LibertiesBureau, during the World War, gave aid and comfortto conscientious objectors and draft dodgers. Sincethe war, it has conducted a campaign to secure therelease of those who were sent to Leavenworth fortreasonable activities during the war ." It is thisorganization that originated the term "politicalprisoners" for those who were convicted of com-mitting crimes against the government when it wasin the great conflict .

26


Yet for the information of the twenty millionchurch members which the Federal Council claimsto represent, it should be stated that since the warin every appearance before Congress the FederalCouncil of Church representatives have cooperatedwith, or been under the direction of, the CivilLiberties Union . This combination was particularlyactive during the long session of Congress in 1925-26 .From the official reports of the hearings before Con-gressional Committees, it would appear that it wasonly necessary for the American Civil Liberties Unionto push the button and the Federal Council wouldsnap to the front . This is evident from a review onthe hearings on the Capper Bill introduced at therequest of the American Legion to prevent profiteer-ing during the war, the bill for the deportation ofalien criminals, the Walsh bill prohibiting the detailof regular Army officers to certain schools and col-leges, and the items appropriating allowances formilitary training in the Army Appropriation Bill .In the hearings it was frequently brought out bycross questions that the Federal Council's repre-sentatives had given very little thought to the billsbefore the Committee, and they frequently dis-played total ignorance of the points at issue . Theywere usually prompted by the Civil Liberty Union'sattorneys and it was evident that the churches werebeing used as a respectable front for the radicals'fight against preparedness and the exclusion ofcriminal aliens .

In the hearings before the House Committee onImmigration and Naturalization, it is of record thatthe Federal Council was working under the direction


27

of the American Civil Liberties Union . Repre-sentative Albert Johnson, of Washington, who hasbeen a stalwart advocate of effective legislation tonot only exclude undesirable aliens, but to deportalien criminals, as Chairman of the Committee,opened the hearings by announcing :

"This meeting was called at the request of theofficers of the American Civil Liberties Union. Thelist of persons attending this hearing, as given to me,is as follows : From the Federal Council of theChurches of Christ in America, New York City :Rev. Samuel McCrea Cavert, general secretary ;Rev. Sidney L . Gulick, secretary Commission onInternational Justice and Good Will ; Rev. AlfredW. Anthony, chairman, Committee on FriendlyRelations between Jews and Christians. From theSocial Service Commission, Episcopal Diocese ofNew York : Rev. Charles K. Gilbert, executivesecretary .

"From the American Civil Liberties Union : AllenS. Olmsted and Francis Fisher Kane, of Philadelphia ;Arthur Garfield Hays and Walter Pollak, of NewYork City; Elizabeth Gilmer, Eli Frank, Jr ., Mrs .W. W. Ford, and Mercer G. Johnston, of Baltimore .

"From the Delaware League of Woman Voters :Miss Edith Spruance, chairman of Legislative Com-mittee, Wilmington, Del .

"From the League for American Citizenship, NewYork City : Mr. N. Phillips, chairman ."From the National Council of Jewish Women :

Mrs. M. Lansburgh, Legislative Committee, Wash-ington, D.C."

2 8

PASTORS, 'POLITICIANS, PACIFISTS

Allen S. Olmsted, 2nd, an attorney for the Ameri-can Civil Liberties Union, had charge of the wit-nesses, and indicated the order in which they wereto appear . To obtain a picture of the character ofthe man under whose direction the Federal Council'switnesses were operating, let his testimony, as itappears in the report of the hearings, be quoted :

Representative Holaday : "Just take that question :an alien who has been guilty of rioting, and who hasbeen convicted in the courts and sentenced to a yearin the penitentiary . Do you feel that there is anyloss to America, to the future of our country, indeporting that man?"Mr. Olmsted : "Yes, I do."Chairman Johnson : "You mean aliens?"Mr. Olmsted : "Yes, aliens ."Chairman Johnson : "You think that an alien has

a perfect right to come here and get into a laborstrike, preach communism all he wants to, and toadvocate the overthrow of the government?"Mr. Olmsted : "Yes."Representative Box : "There is no distinction

between citizen and alien . You believe that even ifan alien has come in violation of law and from thevery inception of his connection with the countryhis connection was formed with lawlessness-?"Mr. Olmsted : "Yes, I think I would even go that

far, although I might reduce that."Chairman Johnson : "Let us carry the idea out

farther . We have a strike in Passaic . That is astrike made up pretty much of aliens, is it not?"Mr. Olmsted : "Yes, sir."


29

Chairman Johnson : "I think you will ascertainthat perhaps one-half is alien population . I believethat the strike leaders there say they are commun-ists-that is a communist strike . The probabilitiesare that they are preaching anti-religion, anti-government, the third International, and other thingsof that kind. These speeches are being reported intheir papers . Now, if that leads to rioting andmurder, you think the leaders, if aliens, should notbe deported? * * * He has perhaps sneaked in herewithout following any rules for getting in, andimmediately he is taking part not only in the strike,but in doing his part toward overthrow of thegovernment . What are you going to do with thealien? You cannot deport the citizen ."Mr. Olmsted : "No."Representative Holaday: "Do I understand you

to say that an alien has the right to preach the over-throw of the government and anarchy?"Mr. Olmsted : "Yes."Even the publicity for the hearing was conducted

by the American Civil Liberties Union . It was by alady who gave her name as Miss Isabelle Kendig,although she is married and has children . Shebelongs, it was explained, to a group "of forwardlooking" women who do not believe in assumingtheir husbands' or legal names when they are married .In an advance press notice from the American CivilLiberties Union, which appeared in a number ofpapers, the following account of the hearing wasgiven :

30


"ADVANCE PRESS REPORT."American Civil Liberties Union,

Isabelle Kendig, Washington Representative,806 Seventeenth Street, Main 172 .

(For immediate release)Registration of aliens and extension of the present deportation

law were severely scored by representatives of national welfareand labor organizations at a hearing before the House Immi-gration Committee today.

Allen Olmsted, attorney of Philadelphia, acted as chairmanof the delegation and introduced the speakers .

Francis Fisher Kane, of Philadelphia, former United Statesdistrict attorney was the principal spokesman for the AmericanCivil Liberties Union, one of the organizations represented .

Representatives of the American Federation of Labor and theBrotherhood of Locomotive Engineers also spoke at the hearingand registered the protests of organized labor to any extensionof the present deportation law and to the whole principle ofalien registration .

Other speakers were the Rev. W. L. Darby, of Washington,representing the Federal Council of Churches ; Father W. T.Montivan, of the National Catholic Welfare Council ; Mrs. MarkLansburgh, of Washington, secretary of the Legislative Com-mittee of the National Council of Jewish Women ; NathanielPhillips, New York, of the League for American Citizenship ;Miss Edith Spruance, Wilmington, legislative chairman of theDelaware League of Women Voters ; and Miss Elizabeth Gilman,Rev. Mercer Johnston, and Eli Frank, representing the Balti-more branch of the American Civil Liberties Union .

A letter condemning the proposed legislation from the Rev .Charles K. Gilbert, of the social service commission of theEpiscopal diocese of New York, was also read into the record .

Others who protested against the legislation were GilsonGardner, of Washington ; Rev. Samuel .McCrea Cavert, generalsecretary, Federal Council of Churches ; Rev. Sidney L. Gulick,Secretary, Commission of International Justice and Good Will,and Rev. Alfred W. Anthony, chairman, Committee On FriendlyRelations Between Jews and Christians, both of the FederalCouncil, and Arthur Garfield Hays and Walter Pollak, New Yorkattorneys for the Civil Liberties Union ."


3 1

This is a remarkable account in that it consists ofa description of things that did not occur at the hear-ing. The representative of the labor organizationsfailed to appear at the hearings . For differentreasons quite a number of the other witnesses werenot present and Rev . W . L. Darby was the onlyrepresentative of the Federal Council of Churches .Rev. Charles K. Gilbert, in a letter to the AmericanCivil Liberties Union, quoted Mr . George W. Wicker-sham, chairman of a committee of the FederalCouncil, as stating that the bills in his judgment"reflect the survival of war psychology and they aretotally at variance with the theory of Americaninstitutions ."Mr. Olmsted, after reading the letter, declared,

"I may say also that Mr. Wickersham voices thegeneral objection that we of the Civil Liberties Unionhave to the bill."

Upon the shoulders of Doctor Darby was laid theburden of presenting the views of the Federal Councilof Churches .

Doctor Darby, in response to questions, read thelist of churches affiliated with the Council . Hesaid : "The entire Protestant membership is about35,000,000. We have in excess of 20,000,000 repre-sented in the Council ."

Doctor Darby read a lengthy resolution adoptedby the administrative committee and followed witha statement in support of the resolution . In thecourse of his statement he said : "There should be notaint of a `star chamber' in connection with deporta-tion proceedings . This provision of the proposedlaw is reminiscent of the universally condemned

32


practice of the czarist government of Russia banish-ing to Siberia objectionable individuals by secretbureaucratic procedure . I desire to raise the questionwhether it is not unreasonable and extreme to pro-vide that an alien shall be deported if `convicted ofany offense for which he is sentenced to imprison-ment for a term of one year or more .' The immigra-tion act of 1907 provides for deportation in case of`a crime involving moral turpitude .' The new pro-posalposal might easily result in the deportation of analien for a relatively slight offense ."

Chairman Johnson, joined by the other membersof the Committee, pressed Doctor Darby for thegrounds upon which he based his protest againststar-chamber proceedings in deportation of aliens .

Representative Box said : "You stated in your pre-liminary reference, as I understand it, that youwanted such restrictions adopted that would preventthe railroading out of the country of people legallyentitled to stay here . I wanted to know of any casesin which that has been done ."Doctor Darby : "I cannot speak for the New York

office because I do not have the facts, but it is mypresumption that they must know of some cases ofthat kind, or if they do not, there is evidence therethat because of what seems to them to be a defectin the statement of this law, that would be the case ."Continuing, Doctor Darby said : "The person

accused should be guaranteed by law the right ofcompetent counsel ."

Chairman Johnson : "You understand that alldeportations now under the law the deportee has theright and benefit of counsel?"


33

Doctor Darby : "I did not know that ."In three or four other cases where the adminis-

trative council protested against the bills pendingbefore the Congress, the members of the Committeecalmly informed Doctor Darby that this was alreadyin the law.

The storm really broke out when RepresentativeHoladay asked : "Now, can you suggest any felonyfor which a man is sent to the penitentiary for a yearor more that you think would be a hardship, or thatyou consider a slight offense?"Doctor Darby : "The thought in my mind is that

an alien might commit an offense because of the factthat he is an alien and not familiar with the countryor the laws of the country that might appear to himnot to be something which is contrary to law, becausehe had not known about it very much."

Representative Holaday : "Can you suggest anoffense of this kind?"

Chairman Johnson : "Take a liquor violation first .What do you think about that?"Doctor Darby : "I think that the law regarding

liquor violations ought to be quite clear ."Chairman Johnson : "An alien who inadvertently

gets into the bootlegging game is sent up for one year .What is his status to be as regards deportation?"Doctor Darby: "That answer would be purely my

own and not as representative of the FederalCouncil."Chairman Johnson : "Well, I would like to have the

Federal Council's views, but you can speak foryourself."

34


Doctor Darby : "I would say in connection withthat matter that the law appears to be sufficientlywell-known and if deportation is the wise course, Isee no objection to it ."

Chairman Johnson : "All right, take the next case .What else do you think of, and when you get tospeaking for all the churches, let me know . Yourlast statement was for yourself . Now, we assumeyou are going to speak for the churches."

Doctor Darby: "Mr. Chairman. The action whichis here asked and which I am endeavoring to bringbefore you came before the committee in New Yorkwhen I was not there, and I am not as well informedon these points as the gentleman who expected to behere except for illness."Chairman Johnson : "Very well, you are here as a

representative of the Federal Council of Churches ofChrist in America, and you are reading a paper inwhich you are told of the objection to the deporta-tion of people convicted and imprisoned for a termof one or more years, and you are speaking for thechurches."Representative Holaday : "What offense would you

suggest should not be included in that?"Doctor Darby : "Mr. Chairman, I am not suffi-

ciently acquainted with the law to be able to answerthat question."Representative Free : "This came under my notice .

It seems in a certain country it is customary for aman who wants a girl who does not want to marryhim, to go out and kidnap the girl and then rape her,and then say, `You had better marry me because youhave been ruined anyway .' The parents of the boy


3 5

and his relatives, the women, entered into the schemeto help the man carry it out . They were aliens . Theywere arrested and tried and they were sent to thepenitentiary for rape . Do you think that being acustom in that country whence they came, that thatwas a crime for which they should not be deported?"Doctor Darby : "I think they should be in that

case .Representative Free : "Well, they were following a

custom of the country from which they came ."Doctor Darby : "I cannot be responsible for these

particular items ."Representative Free : "Do you believe, or does that

organization believe, that the person who is threetimes given a sentence of six months in jail, has com-mitted no crime, and is a good citizen and shouldremain here?"

Doctor Darby: "There might be cases, where aman because of the circumstances involved, wouldnot be a criminal in the sense in which we use thatword; you know that might be the case ."

Representative Free : "You think he is a goodcitizen?"Doctor Darby: "I do not know ; that would depend

upon the individual case involved . There would bea question against it certainly ."

And in this manner is the controlling group of theFederal Council of Churches, under the direction ofthe American Civil Liberties Union, assuming tovoice the sentiment of 20,000,000 church members .

CHAPTER V

CONSPIRING WITH THE RADICALS

WHILE William Z. Foster was witnessing inRussia a review of the largest conscripted

army of the world, his comrades of the AmericanCivil Liberties Union were organizing and financinga movement to abolish even voluntary militarytraining of your men in America. The term "com-rade" is used in the communistic and socialistic sense .The subversives have profaned this endearing greet-ing of comrade which was originally used by theveterans of the Civil War .

We pause to remark that in reading the great massof literature that the subversives of every type havebeen producing, not a word of protest against themaintenance by Soviet Russia of a larger army thanthe German Imperial Army is found . Russia hasnot only compulsory training but compulsory servicein time of peace . This does not appear to theFederal Council of Churches and its chief ally, theAmerican Civil Liberties Union, as a menace to thepeace of the world . A skeleton regular army, amonth's voluntary training in the summer camps,and a Navy below the treaty ratio in America, tothe internationally minded, is militarism and a threatto the peace of the world . They are proceeding on


3 7

the assumption that the only way to preserve peaceis to disarm the United States . Every gesture on thepart of Congress or the authorities at Washingtonto carry out the provisions of the National DefenseAct, or to maintain the Navy at the strength author-ized by the Washington Arms Conference, is met byviolent protest from the Federal Council of Churches,and its affiliated advisory and cooperative pink andred organizations . Up to a year ago the FederalCouncil confined itself principally to opposition to anyincrease in the regular army . Radicals or liberals,as they sometimes call themselves, have always beenopposed to the maintenance of an Army and Navy .Some have gone as far as the abolishment of theArmy and Navy altogether and others have favoreda national police policy for the regular establishment .There are several groups that have been violentlyopposed to the National Guard and not too friendlyto even the maintenance of a police force . Whilesubversives have been unfriendly even to the police,they have been ever ready to call on the police forprotection when threatened by a crowd which hasobjected to their preaching against the governmentand society.Recently the subversives have directed their

attacks against military training in schools and col-leges and summer camps . Particularly are theyopposed to military training in schools and colleges .Three or four years ago the extreme left of theradicals began to organize for a drive against militarytraining which finally resulted in the introduction ofthe Walsh Bill, the ultimate objective of which is todo away with all military training, despite the fact

3 8


that it is carrying the colors of opposition to com-pulsory military training in the schools and colleges .This attitude on the part of all radicals is due to theresults that were being obtained under the NationalDefense Act in training of the younger men in thecamps and schools . It was observed by the sub-versives that the military courses in the schools andcolleges consist as much of patriotic instruction asmilitary training . Students who take military train-ing either in the camps or colleges are being taughtrespect for the flag and love of country . These areprinciples to which subversive organizations object .When they talk of militarism in the colleges they donot refer to the military art as studied in the regularArmy and Navy service schools, but to the doctrineof patriotism and respect for American institutions .This they recognize as opposed to internationalmindedness .

The first witness that the Civil Liberties Unionintroduced before the House Committee on MilitaryAffairs in support of the Walsh Bill insisted that thetraining provided for is of no military value . He wasKenneth Walser, who said :

"These boys study the subject and have militarytraining for three hours a week. I say that the col-lege boy or high school boy who studies close orderdrills for three hours a week during his college courseknows next to nothing about military training, knowspractically no more when he gets through than if hehad not studied close order drill at all ; that is, froma military standpoint."

He declared that he entertained the highest respectfor regular officers and expressed the opinion that


3 9

they would agree with him in this view . While themilitary authorities will admit that they cannotmake a professional soldier with the limited trainingreceived in the schools and colleges, much of theunnecessary loss of blood and treasure would havebeen avoided in the World War if the country hadhad the same reserve corps and national guard thatit has at present .

But if the students in high schools and colleges arereceiving such meager military instruction as isdescribed by Mr. Walser, how can the opponents ofthe system maintain that it is creating militarism inour educational institutions? With a few hours aweek training, while the boys are devoting all therest of the time to other studies, how can they beindoctrinated with militarism?

A careful analysis of all of the arguments emanat-ing from these sources shows clearly that it is notagainst military training but against patriotic instruc-tion that the drive is being made . The word mili-tarism is used to disguise their purpose. A numberof witnesses declared that the training created exag-gerated nationalism and destroyed internationalmindedness .

It is not surprising that this should be their lineof attack when it is known that the movement toabolish all military training originated with the con-trolling group of the American Civil Liberties Union,was financed by the Garland free-love socialist fund,and is supported by the left wing of the FederalCouncil of Churches of Christ in America. This isan assurance of its subversive character .

40


It was in September of 1925, at a "students"conference at Swarthmore College that the plans ofthe subversives for a drive against military trainingbecame known. At this conference, Dr. John NevinSayre, in a report to the Fellowship of Reconciliation,announced that a pamphlet by Winthrop D . Lane,a recognized socialist, had been written and that itwas to be financed by the American fund for publicservice, better known as the Garland Fund . This isthe fund that was turned over to the controllinggroup of the American Civil Liberties Union, ofwhich Doctor Sayre is a member . The donor of thefund is Charles Garland, the socialist of free-lovefarm fame. He served a term in jail for his allegedrelations with a young woman on his farm . The fundwas originally about $900,000 but it was so investedthat it is reported to have increased to over a million .Doctor Sayre in testifying before the Military Com-mittee of the House admitted on June 15, 1926, thata little over $5,400 had been received from theGarland Fund for the circulation of the Lane pam-phlet. He expected to secure more before thecampaign was over .

In a letter signed by Roger N . Baldwin, uponAmerican Civil Liberties Union stationery, it isstated that the four incorporators of the GarlandFund are Norman T. Thomas, Lewis Gannet, RobertMorss Lovett, and Roger N. Baldwin . These incor-porators have elected to serve with them as theexecutive committee, Prof. Harry F. Ward, JamesWelden Johnson, Rabbi Judah Magness, ScottNearing, William Z. Foster, and Miss Mary E .McDowell .


4 1

Upton Sinclair, in a circular letter, in 1925, statedthat "the American Fund for Public Service hadvoted to finance the publication of a series of stand-ard works of literature and education in the serviceof the movement for workers' emancipation . Theseries to contain 200 titles, to be put on the marketat the lowest possible price . It will be known assuch titles as `The Workers' Classics' and `TheRadical Classics .' I have been asked to become theeditor of a series; an advisory editorial board oftwenty or thirty persons will be appointed . Theclass is of the socialist, communist, anarchist, single-tax, cooperative, and other wings to be represented ."According to the circular the committee of the Gar-land Fund had voted $100,000 for this work .This statement by Upton Sinclair in connection

with the personnel of its trustees is a sufficient guar-antee that the Garland Fund was to be used for sub-versive purposes . At the "students conference" atSwarthmore it was agreed that the Fellowship ofReconciliation and the Fellowship of Youth for Peacewere to conduct the campaign, using the Lane pam-phlet as its text book . A bulletin from the Fellow-ship of Youth for Peace states :

"A systematic campaign focused against compul-sory military training will be launched this monthby a special joint committee of which Dr . NevinSayre is chairman and Ray Wilson is secretary . Themajor burden of the follow-up work will fall uponour fellowship. The committee is preparing for anextensive campaign against militarism in the educa-tional institutions of the United States .

42


"Abolition of compulsory military training in col-leges ; abolition of all drills in the high schools ;investigation of teachings in summer C. M. T . C's . ;exposure of military propaganda ; and disassociationof military drill from general educational institu-tions-these are the objectives of the campaign .Among the institutions where the issue of theR.O.T.C. has come to a head this fall are MissouriState, Minnesota and Ohio Universities .

"The fellowship is united with the Council ofChristian Association and other student organiza-tions in calling a World Court Students' Conferencein the greater Boston District-for December 4, 5,and 6 at which representatives of all college groupswill work out a campus peace program . This willbe followed in March by a Greater Boston Youthconference composed of delegates from religious,industrial, and student groups ."

Evidently the methods of this radical organizationwere too crude, and Dr . John Nevin Sayre broughtanother one into existence. It was a self-appointed"Committee on Militarism in Education" of whichhe is chairman . It was then that the Federal Councilof Churches came openly into the movement. TheLane pamphlet was given to the public by Arthur W .Hungerford, publicity director of the Federal Councilof Churches. Then Dr. Samuel M. Cavert, one ofthe general secretaries of the Federal Council ofChurches, on March 10, 1926, completely establishedthe contact between the ecclesiastic organizationwith the Lane pamphlet and the Garland free-lovesocialistic fund. He did it by joining with DoctorSayre in an appeal for the distribution of the pam-


43

phlet . In this manifesto, which was published in aradical paper, Doctor Cavert and Doctor Sayrecondensed all of the arguments of the Lane pamphlet .A quotation from the appeal will give the generalcharacter of the Lane pamphlet and the doctrine towhich the controlling group of the Federal Councilwere attempting to commit twenty million churchmembers. In referring to military training the jointletter said :

"Its actual value for the purposes of nationaldefense is very low. It is even lower for the meansof promoting public physical health and ideals ofright citizenship . But as the means of keeping alivethe military view of life its value is high . The mili-tary view of life is opposed to freedom of speech andconscience, and to faith, reason and good will as thefoundation of security ."Many of our finest young students who come

closest in contact with military training see thisclearly. The Evanston Inter-denominational studentconference in a resolution widely printed declaredfor the abolition of military training in high schoolsand denominational and in all other colleges includingland-grant institutions .

"Do our churches mean business? Will they backup their own young people and their own repre-sentatives? One concrete opportunity to answer thisquestion with an emphatic `yes' is furnished by theexistence of the Committee on Militarism in Educa-tion which issued the widely circulated pamphlet byWinthrop D. Lane .

"The committee seeks help . This can be given bypeople in two ways, first by sending names and

4 4


addresses to the Committee on Militarism in Edu-cation ; and second, by sending a contribution, how-ever small, to the emergency fund of $5,000 whichmust be raised to carry on the fight against a processof militarization, which unless stopped will destroyall hope of making America a leader in establishingworld peace."

If there is any doubt as to the original intentionsof the group which controls the Federal Council toform a solid front with the American Civil LibertiesUnion and the Garland Fund, it will be only neces-sary to call attention to the fact that about a monthlater Dr. S. Parkes Cadman, who broadcasts himselfas President of the Federal Council of Churches,came out in an attack upon the reserve officers train-ing corps, at a meeting in the Brooklyn Y .M.C.A .He used all of the data and arguments of the Lanepamphlet and declared that the Reserve Officers'Training Corps was "encouraging belief in violenceas the final resort in international differences ."It is the practice of Doctor Cadman at these

lectures to announce that he is willing to answerquestions from the audience, but when two reserveofficers who were in attendance attempted to asksome questions they were ejected from the hall bya policeman who was called by some of the officialsof the Y.M.C.A. Thus did Doctor Cadman "encour-age" the "belief" in the use of "violence" not"as a final resort" but as the first resort . Whilepreaching against the use of force he used it .

This was all preparatory for the hearings on theWalsh Bill before the Committee on Military Affairsof the House of Representatives, by which the radi-


45

cals propose to break the backbone of the NationalDefense Act. Just a word on the Walsh Bill willmake it clear that its advocates are misrepresentingit, and shows the hypocrisy of the entire movement .It is being represented as a bill to prohibit com-pulsory military training in schools and colleges .Neither the War Department nor the Federal Gov-ernment has any authority to determine whethermilitary training in schools and colleges shall beelective or compulsory. The Federal Government'sauthority on schools extends only to the Militaryand Naval Academies, which would not be affectedby this bill. In a word the bill prohibits the WarDepartment from detailing regular Army officers toschools where the school authorities make militarytraining compulsory or part of the curriculum. Theadvocates of the bill by indirection are reallyattempting to extend the authority of the FederalGovernment and the War Department over bothprivate and public schools .

But to return to the hearings before the HouseCommittee on Military Affairs on the Walsh Bill .Doctor Frederick Lynch, secretary of the ChurchPeace Union, and member of the administrativecommittee of the Federal Council of Churches,appeared in support of the Walsh Bill . He declaredthat he was a member of the committee that waspreparing a resolution expressing the views of theFederal Council of Churches with its constituencyof twenty million church members . He gave theCommittee the impression that the Federal Councilof Churches would endorse the Walsh Bill and called

46


attention to the address of Doctor Cadman, Presi-dent of the organization .Doctor Lynch's testimony was not of a very

definite character . The members of the MilitaryCommittee could not pin him down to a positivestatement that he was personally opposed to militarytraining . He insisted that he was in favor of theNational Defense Act and he was for the use of forcein the defense of the country. It was apparent tothe Committee that Doctor Lynch appeared tocreate the impression that the churches were sup-porting the chief witnesses who were W. S. Long-Seth, of the American Civil Liberties Union, who saidhe did not think the Revolutionary War or the CivilWar were justifiable ; and Prof. William Bradley Otis,of the New York City College, who said : "I wouldrather have my son go to Leavenworth than to takecompulsory military training in colleges ."

But the country became aroused by the radicaldrive to destroy military training in colleges andsummer camps . The controlling group of the FederalCouncil became cautious . They shifted their posi-tion slightly, as it became apparent that some ofthem thought they had gone too far in support ofthe Walsh Bill and the Lane pamphlet .

The Lane pamphlet or the Walsh Bill was not dis-avowed by the Federal Council nor did it support itas Doctor Lynch assured the Committee it would .

To give the appearance that they were simplystudying the subject a pamphlet was issued by theFederal Council or rather the Commission on Inter-national Justice and Good Will . In it a great pre-tense was made to present the facts and both sides


4 7

of the question. A labored attempt was made tocreate the impression that the peace of the worlddepended upon whether the American boys in schoolsand colleges and in summer camps took a shortperiod of military training . Two pages and a halfof the pamphlet are devoted to arguments in supportof military training and almost six pages to pacifismand anti-preparedness . The pamphlet concludes byeight questions, the suggested answers of which areall arguments against military training .

But that the controlling group of the FederalCouncil of Churches are secretly supporting the Lanepamphlet and those associated with the Garlandfree-love socialist group was revealed by a call atthe headquarters of the Council at New York . Arequest for the Federal Council's military trainingpamphlet was met with the polite request for twenty-five cents, but the Lane pamphlet was quietlyslipped into the caller's hand without additional cost .

It was a little incident but it fully demonstratedwhere the interests of the controlling group of theFederal Council lie. The Lane pamphlet, it shouldbe borne in mind, is expressive of the policy of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union with its representa-tive, William Z. Foster, in Russia attending grandreviews of the red army which is based on compul-sory service and has a strength greater than theGerman Imperial Army when the Kaiser was a realwar lord.

CHAPTER VI

HELPFUL HINTS FOR SERMONS"HELPFUL hints to the pastor for sermons"comprise a large part of the literature which is

poured out of the headquarters of the Federal Coun-cil of Churches of Christ in America . They are sentout from the Council's headquarters at New Yorkin every conceivable form from large volumes tosmall bulletins .

Any drive at Washington for legislation, or forinternational treaties is preceded with a barrage of"helpful hints for sermons .'' Often it is in the formof an appeal to the pastors to preach sermons sothat the sentiment of the churches can be mobilizedin support of some program which has been adoptedby the controlling group of the administrative com-mittee . Matters are taken up which have nevereven been discussed at the quadrennial meeting ofthe Federal Council or even the executive com-mittee. The League of Nations and the World Courtwere included in the Federal Council's program butmilitary training never was, but a drive was madeagainst it all the same . Annually, the controllinggroup of the administrative committee becomesactive just before Armistice Day. It has been patentever since the war that the controlling group of the

HELPFUL HINTS FOR SERMONS

49

administrative committee is determined to directthe manner in which Armistice Day is celebrated .Suggestion is made in their literature to the pastorsthat the World War veterans should be invited tothe Armistice observance in the churches, but it isapparent that the leaders of the Federal Council donot intend to allow the American Legion to assumethe control of Armistice Day celebrations if they canavoid it .

But these "helpful hints to pastors" is a year-around program. No doubt you have been pro-foundly surprised that your pastor in his sermondeveloped a sudden interest in international andsecular affairs . To your surprise he turned asidefrom his usual line of thought on the reliance uponChrist for the salvation of mankind and called uponthe authorities at Washington instead of Divinehelp. Of course, your pastor was not conscious ofany loss in the faith of Christ . Perhaps he was hardpressed with the many social and welfare demandsof his parish . He was groping about in his mind fora topic for his next Sunday's sermon, when heopened his mail and found a complete outline for one .It may have been prepared by George W . Wicker-sham, the international lawyer, or Dr. Sidney L .Gulick, of Japan, but it bore the pretentious seal ofthe Federal Council of Churches of Christ in Amer-ica. Your pastor has no time to check up on it todetermine whether it squared with the facts ofhistory . He has been too busy with his pastoralduties to give much thought to international orsecular affairs and accepted the Federal Council asan authority on such matters . He proceeded to

SO


prepare his sermon on lines laid down by the Wicker-sham-Gulick group in the Federal Council ofChurches .

Again he may take his topic and argument fromhis church paper. Even then he does not escapefrom the insidious influence of the controlling groupof the Federal Council . Part of the Federal Councilorganization is the Editorial Council of the ReligiousPress, through which to an alarming extent inter-nationalism and pacifism is being spread .For example : The International Sunday School

lesson for November 7, 1926, was "The Fall ofJericho," as related in Joshua, sixth chapter. Now,the New York Advocate, the official organ of ourchurch, embarrassed by the necessity of handlingthis story, since it is a canonical Scripture, in itscommentary spends much time and agility in endeav-oring to prove that this episode was purely a non-military episode . The commentator says, "Jerichowas not taken by a soldier, nor in a military way ."Then he says, still embarrassed but still agile, "Theway the walls fell is not what I am interested in, butwhy they fell." "Read," the commentator says,"Read Genesis and Deuteronomy and you will findout why the city fell . You will also learn that theJews were warned that if they should repeat thecity's sins they too would follow in the downfall .God would have no more difficulty in taking the landfrom the Jew than - he had in taking it from theAmorites. God is a moralist, not a nationalist ." Andagain, in the following paragraph he says : "The storyclearly sets forth that the city was not taken by the


5 1

soldier . The walls were not blown down bydynamite!"

This was some time before dynamite was thoughtof, but this was a mere detail to our commentator .

Finally, in his "Questions for Discussion" thecommentator, hoping to lead his readers as safely asmay be around the embarrassing difficulty, asks thisquestion first : "Which is the most important, thefact or the way of telling?" Still apologizing, youobserve, for the Bible's crude, naive way of tellingus about this whole Jericho business . And for hisfinal kick at the brutal American Citizen in theuniform of his country, he asks the question : "Shouldthe soldier be a model for men?"Now, I beg of you, stand back a few feet and

look at something interesting . You will have toadmit that the man who can build a Philippic againstmilitary employment, upon the groundwork of thestory of the Fall of Jericho, is no mean expert inexigesis. In slang phrase, "We've got to hand it tohim ." But wait a minute . He stayed well awayfrom one verse. Let us quote that verse, "So theLord was with Joshua ." Josh . 6 :27 .

Let us look at the Jericho story a moment, andsee whether the Lord was as hostile toward the ideaof an armed man in uniform as our commentator is .Of course, the commentator does a bit of apologyfor the Lord when he ventures to say, "God is notmixed up with war because He likes war but becauseHe loves man ." But just how much was Godmixed up in this Canaanitish War?First, God gave Joshua his commission as Com-

mander-in-Chief. "Now after the death of Moses,

52


the Lord spoke unto Joshua saying, `Moses is dead .Now therefore arise, go over Jordan, thou and allthis people, unto the land which I do give to them .There shall not any man be able to stand before thee .Be strong and courageous ."'

Second, God gave Joshua, his military general,specific instructions from time to time, as to themanner in which he was to approach and take thehostile cities .The commentator says, "When Joshua crossed the

Jordan, he put the priests first ; when he invested thecity, he put the soldiers before the priests ; that washis arrangement, not the Lord's ."Now, the Bible says, "See I have given unto thy

hand Jericho, and the King thereof, and the mightymen of valor (enemy shock troops) . And ye shallcompass the city with all ye men of war (infantry,cavalry, artillery and anti-aircraft) and go round thecity once. Thus shall ye do six days . And sevenpriests shall bear before the ark, seven trumpets ofram's horns ; and the seventh day ye shall compassthe city seven times (i .e . with the soldiers) and thepriests shall blow with the trumpets . And when thewall shall fall flat, the people shall ascend up, everyman straight before him ." (In other words, all wereto execute the command "Left face, for-ward,charge! ") And the armed men went before the prieststhat blew the trumpets, and the gathering hostsfollowed in the rear of the priests . The sacred ark inthe center of the column, as our flags are carriedtoday .

Now, this plan must have been satisfactory to theLord ; for after Joshua had followed this plan accord-

-HELPFUL HINTS FOR SERMONS

53

ing to his orders for a week, the Lord cooperated bycausing the walls to fall . The Lord furnished theheavy preliminary artillery of heaven, but He specif-ically gave the rather bloody job of mopping up tothe infantry under General Joshua . And as youhave read, they made a rather thorough job of it .And do not assume that the Lord overlooked any

little details which General Joshua might have putin on his own motion . No, no. For example, theorders were specific that all the spoils of war shouldaccrue to the Lord's treasury ; and when one of theIsraelites, Achan by name, hid out some of thecaptured gold for his own use, the anger of the Lordwas kindled, and He caused the soldiers of Al tokill 36 Israelites in the next battle, and to chase themall day; and the curse of Achan's deed was removedonly when they had taken him and all his familyout and put them to death .Then God told General Joshua to fear no longer,

but to go out and do to the City of Al what he(i.e . Joshua) had done to Jericho . And Joshua took30,000 proved and trained soldiers out in a nightattack and by a stratagem led the infantry of Aiinto ambush ; and at the Lord's command the Jewishinfantry took the city and set it on fire and hangedthe King, and destroyed all the people .Throughout all this whole Biblical story of the

conquest of Canaan, there runs the intimate accountof the operation of the hand of God through themilitary cooperation of Joshua, the Chief of Staffwhom God not only appointed but as well directedthroughout all his battles . In his eagerness to saya word against the modest defense policy of his

5 4


country, a country which stands today with the mostnon-militaristic record among all the great states ofearth, the Advocate commentator has the temerityto blame God's Field Marshal for doing the thingsGod directed him to do . That subterfuge is but onestep removed from an accusation against God him-self; for Joshua, from the only records . we have, wasmeticulous in following the details of God'scommands .

The commentator fences again, and says, "It maybe difficult to associate God with the sacking of theCity of Jericho . History is gory, but the white Godis mixed up with it all."

May we not paraphrase the commentator thus,without violence to logic : "It may be difficult for usto associate God with the recapture of the city ofLouvain . History is gory, but the white God ismixed up with it all . He is mixed up with the thou-sands of brave, trained, armed police officers whomake the commentator's city a somewhat safe placeto live in . He is mixed up with the 100,000 Cana-dians who with their breasts staunched the horror ofLille . He is mixed up with the ragged Cubansoldiers who hid in the swamps until America camewith her soldiers, also mixed up with God, andhelped them to make possible those happy Metho-dist schools and hospitals and churches in Cubatoday."

And the commentator closes his distorted exposi-tion by asking the question, "Should the soldier bea model for men?"

But why this insult to every man who wore theuniform from Lexington to the Meuse-Argonne? It


55

cannot be justified even in the Biblical account ofthe Fall of Jericho .

The soldiers were only defending the faith of theirforefathers as directed by God through his Chief ofStaff. Theirs was only to obey the command ofJoshua who communicated to them the will of theLord of Hosts . It was the priests who were trumpet-ing for the war upon the Canaanites .

And no great soldier has trumpeted for war in thiscountry. Even in the colonial days it was not Wash-ington who trumpeted for the French and IndianWar. It was what happened in London and Pariswhich had brought on the French and Indian War .

There are no records of Washington having madea "Give me liberty or give me death" speech in thetrumpeting that preceded the Revolutionary War.He was not a guest at the Boston Tea Party . Thereis no record of his participating in any of the agita-tion which brought on the War of Independence .With his wealth Washington should naturally havebeen a Tory, but when his country called he wasready to defend it . For this he is to be held up toscorn according to the commentator .How much did the heroes of the War of 1812,

Captain Hull and Commodore Perry, have to dowith that conflict? It is doubtful whether they knewwhat it was all about . They simply responded tothe call of the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy . Itwas Congress and the State Department whichdecided the country should not submit to the Britishaggressions on the high seas .Neither did General Scott nor General Taylor

trumpet for the Mexican War. Here again were two

56


soldiers who had very little or no knowledge of whythey were sent against Mexico .

In the Civil War, what did Grant and Lee have todo with bringing on that great conflict? Lee was inthe regular Army and Grant, a former regular officer,was in a tannery. It is not of record that they par-ticipated in the pre-war agitation which brought onthe great conflagration . In thundering tone, thepulpit of the North trumpeted against slavery ; thestatesmen stirred the country with the discussion ofStates rights. If the country had waited for Lee,Grant, or any of the other great soldiers of the Civi IWar to start it there would never have been a con-flict between the North and the South .

Will some prating pacifist tell us what Pershinghad to do with putting this country into the WorldWar? He and most of the leaders of the AmericanExpeditionary Force were on the Mexican bordertrying to keep peace there when they were called toWashington and sent overseas. The war over,Pershing retired. There was a dispute between Chileand Peru which threatened war, and the Presidentcalled on General Pershing to act as 'a peacemaker .He responded with the same spirit of loyalty as hedid when he was ordered to command the AmericanExpeditionary Force in the World War .

A soldier does not bring on war . He does nottrumpet for war . He only defends the country whenit is in war with the hope of early peace .

Assuming that they have a grade school knowl-edge of history it cannot be because they thinksoldiers promote war that the pacifists are makinga drive against every man who is now wearing or has


S7

worn the uniform . They are simply striving to placethe country in a defenseless condition . They areeven invading the sacred portals of the church tobring this about .

" Helpful hints to pastors for their sermons" is notan unimportant part of this pacifist campaign againstthe security of the Nation .

CHAPTER VII

A HIGHLY FINANCED MOVEMENT

IF ANY of the twenty-eight denominations or oftwenty million church members should at any

time object to the political activities of the FederalCouncil of Churches of Christ in America, theyshould be advised of the financial strength of theorganization . The Federal Council is a corporationunder the laws of the State of New York, which has atits command a budget running up into the millions .

In the controlling group are men who are skilledin handling large affairs and conducting propagandaupon an international scale . Among them areGeorge W. Wickersham, one of the highest paidlawyers of this country with international connec-tions in London and Japan . He has at various timesbeen attorney for Mitsui & Company, the largestfinancial and banking institution in Japan, and isreported to represent some large English bankinginterests .

But perhaps the most versatile and skilled manip-ulator is Dr . Sidney L. Gulick, who can preach apowerful sermon on Sunday, and spend the other sixdays as an international lobbyist . In a brief, filedwith the State Department, Mr. V. S. McClatchy,of California, said :


5 9

"The moving spirit in this enterprise, the pro-moter and manager, who bears the the modest titleof secretary, is Dr . Sidney L . Gulick, who describeshimself on the title pages of some of his writings as`Professor in Doshisha University, and lecturer ofthe Imperial University of Kyoto, Japan .'"Dr. Gulick was born of missionary parents in the

Far East and reared with adopted oriental children .He was educated in America and returned to Japanas a missionary about thirty years ago and has madehis home there since. He is an able man, speaksJapanese, and has written books on the Japanese .

"In 1913 he left Japan on a furlough and has beenin America since at work in promoting his `neworiental policy ."'

In the earlier reports of the Federal Council hewas introduced as Doctor Gulick, of Japan. Onereport says, "We are fortunate in having with ustoday Doctor Gulick of Japan ." It has been a ques-tion in Congress for years as to whether his chiefsource of income is from the Federal Council ofChurches. He admits that he formerly drew a salaryfrom the Japanese educational institution, but insiststhat he turned it in to the Methodist Board of Mis-sions. It is doubtful in the minds of those who knowwhat fees Mr. Wickersham demands for his serviceas to whether he is on the payroll of the FederalCouncil of Churches. Reference is made to Mr .Wickersham and Dr. Gulick in this manner to pointout that the official report of the Federal Councilmay not tell the whole story of its finances . Thereare others connected with the organization who maybe serving interests outside of the Council .

60


The expenditures of the Federal Council ofChurches of Christ in . America, according to thereport of the treasurer, for the year ending December31, 1925, were : $330,767 .36, but this is only a smallpart of the budget which is at the disposal of thecontrolling group of the Federal Council. The trea-surer's report sets forth that two "separate funds forspecial causes" were raised and cared for by thetreasurer. They were Committee on Religious Workin the Canal Zone, $46,787 .23, and Central Bureaufor Relief of Evangelical Churches of Europe,$98,233 .33, or a total of $145,020 .56, which bringsthe regular expenditures of the Federal Councilproper up to $475,787.00, or almost half a million .Then there is the Church Peace Union, which orig-inally had an annual income of $100,000 from theCarnegie Endowment, but which is reported to havebeen increased to $150,000 . This is controlled bythe same group that dominates the Federal Counciland brings the total up to $625,787 .00. In fairnessthe sum of $11,100 should be deducted from thisamount as the Church Peace Union is credited withmaking this contribution to the Federal Council'sbudget, to be expended by the International Justiceand Good Will Commission, and for the Commissionon the Council of Churches .

It is realized that there will be violent protestsfrom certain officials of the Federal Council when itis stated that contributions from the Garland FreeLove Socialist Fund should be added to the budgetof the controlling group of the Federal Council ofChurches. A careful scanning of the testimony ofDr. John Nevin Sayre, of the American Civil Liber-


6 1

ties Union, in the hearing before the Committee onMilitary Affairs of the House of Representatives willreveal that he admitted that about forty-five thou-sand dollars for the campaign against military train-ing in schools and colleges had come from the GarlandFund. He furthermore said that he expected a largercontribution from that source . As has been pointedout in previous chapters, the controlling group of theFederal Council of Churches cooperated with Dr .Sayre and his self-appointed committee in the cam-paign against military training, and of course, in theexpenditures in the Garland Free Love SocialistFund. Active in this campaign with Dr . Sayre wereRev. S. Parkes Cadman, president of the council ;Rev. Samuel McCrea Cavert, general secretary ;Dr. Sidney L. Gulick, and Arthur W . Hungerford,director of publicity for the Federal Council ofChurches .

Another organization that is cooperating with theFederal Council group and appears to be under itsdirection is the National Council for the Limitationof Armaments which is quite as radical as theAmerican Civil Liberties Union, and has a budgetwhich is estimated at from fifty to seventy-fivethousand dollars .

In addition to the national organization with itslarge expenditures, there are Federal Councils ofChurches in forty cities which, according to theannual report of the general secretary, maintainheadquarters and salaried officers . A very conserva-tive estimate of these expenditures would be a halfmillion dollars . Ten thousand dollars a year is asmall budget with which to pay a secretary, stenog-

62


raphers, clerks, and the rent of the headquarters ofa city federal council of churches .

In justice to these local organizations, it can besaid that not all of them are working under thedirection of the controlling group of the FederalCouncil. Many of them are absolutely independentand are devoting their energies to the original pur-pose for which the Federal Council was created . Asomewhat extended investigation of their activitiesdeveloped that the officers of some of them throwmost of the literature which is sent from nationalheadquarters in the waste basket . They are notconcerned with the League of Nations, the WorldCourt, the foreign debt and other political issueswhich are consuming most of the time and funds ofthe national organization .This independent attitude of part of the city

federal councils has been giving the controlling groupat the national headquarters considerable concern .To overcome this a general field secretary has beenappointed who no doubt is expected to line up thelocal organizations more closely behind the nationaland international political program of the generalheadquarters. The controlling group is reaching outto get its hands upon the local organizations anddirect the expenditures of their funds .On March 1, 1926, according to an announcement

made in New York and printed in all the daily papers,Sir Henry Lunn, who has amassed a fortune of mil-lions from his English tourist agency, placed at thedisposal of the controlling group of the FederalCouncil an endowment that probably exceeds theCarnegie donation. These funds are being handled


63

without any blare of trumpets and there is no men-tion of these in Federal Council's reports .

"Sir Henry came to America," says the announce-ment, "under the auspices of the World's Alliancefor the International Friendship through theChurches." This is an organization which wasformed at the conference at Constance, Germany,which was called by the Federal Council of Churchesand the Church Peace Union. It has been inactiveuntil recently when it gave out a statement pro-testing against appropriations for three light cruiserswhich were authorized by the Act of 1924 . Thestatement given out by the World's Alliance for theInternational Friendship through the Churches wasalso signed by Dr . Sidney L. Gulick, George W .Wickersham, and a number of others who are prom-inent in the Federal Council of Churches .

In his statement, Sir Henry declared that heintended to turn over all of the fortune aside fromthat which was required for his own living expendi-tures, to a board of trustees of an incorporatedsociety. Evidently, this will be another endowmentlike the Carnegie to which the internationalists inthe churches can go for funds to promote theirprogram. Sir Henry Lunn is a member of the Leagueof Nations Union and, of course, is anxious to drawthe United States into that organization .An effort was made to obtain the list of "the

contributions from individuals" which the annualreport of the treasurer states produced $164,107 .35,for the year of 1925 . An appeal had recently beensent out for additional funds in which the FederalCouncil styled itself the "spokesman and servant of

64


the Protestant churches," adding, "with largeresponsibilities-responsibilities fraught withmomentous consequences to the church, community,the nation and the world ."

"A campaign to create public opinion for theentrance of the United States into the PermanentCourt of International justice has been pursued withsuch vigor that it is generally agreed that the churchesare the greatest single factor in bringing this about .* * * The greatest hope for America doing its full partin securing world peace lies in the hundred thousandlocal churches and more than twenty million churchmembers that comprise the direct constituency ofthe Federal Council."

This was an appeal for an addition of $150,000 tothe Federal Council's budget and appeared to bedirected at large financial interests who are inter-ested in involving the United States in the WorldCourt and League of Nations to increase the valuesof their investments in Europe .

To determine whether this was a correct conclu-tion a letter was written to Dr. Cadman asking forthe privilege of looking over the list of the contrib-utors to the Federal Council . The letter was referredby Dr. Cadman to Rev . Charles S . MacFarland, oneof the general secretaries, and in the course of hisreply he said :

"This information is fully given in the printedannual reports, and in addition any reputable personis privileged to examine the Treasurer's books andthe auditors' reports any time . All sources areprinted in full except individual contributors, of whomthere are about twenty thousand."


65

This appeared to be an assurance that consentwould be given for a careful examination of theFederal Council's books .Dr. MacFarland was not at the New York head-

quarters when a call was made in accordance withthis promise. Dr. Cavert, the other general secre-tary, assured the callers that the Council had nothingto conceal and that the books of the treasurer wouldbe open to them .

In glancing over the large card index containinga list of the contributors it was found that the largercontributors were credited with a number of dona-tions and that it would be quite a task to get anydefinite idea as to just what was the chief source andcharacter of the Council's income. Arrangement wasmade with the chief clerk by which the clerks in theoffice were to copy a list of the larger contributorsafter office hours and they were to be paid by thecallers . With this understanding, it was arrangedthat a call would be made on the following day atwhich time this information would be furnished .

On the following day the chief clerk stated thatshe had instructions not to give out the information .For three days the callers were referred from oneofficial of the Federal Council to another withoutmaking any progress. Various excuses were givenfor not giving a list of the larger contributors .

To make the refusal a matter of record the follow-ing letter was addressed to Dr . McFarland :

"I would appreciate it very much if you wouldfurnish me with a list of the individual contributorsto the support of the Federal Council of Churches ofChrist in America. I would like to get the specific

66


information as to every source of income the Councilhas had. Any necessary expenses in making copiesof this data for me, I will, of course, gladly pay .

"I am enclosing herewith a self-addressed envelopeand may I express the hope that I will hear from youin regard to this matter at your earliest convenience ."

The reply to this letter came from Frank H . Mann,president of the Union Mortgage Company, 60Broadway, New York, N . Y., who said :

"As Treasurer of the Federal Council of Churchesof Christ in America, there has been referred to meyour letter of July 14th, asking us to furnish you alist of the individual contributors to the support ofthe Federal Council of Churches . No officer of theorganization, so far as I know, would have anyauthority to furnish such a list as you require. Avery full report of the Council's financial transactionsis printed in its Annual Reports, and I am sure thatthe Board of Finance would be very glad to permitthe Treasurer to supplement this information . Itwould seem to me doubtful that they would authorizethe treasurer or any other officer to furnish a com-plete list of the names of the individuals who have sub-scribed during the past year! or during the past years ."

In another effort to secure some definite informa-tion as to the finances of the Federal Council thefollowing was written to Mr. Mann :

"Am I to interpret this letter as a positive refusalon the part of the Federal Council of Churches ofChrist in America to furnish me a list of the individ-ual contributors to the support of the Federal Councilof Churches?

"You state in your letter : `No officer of the


67

organization, so far as I know, would have anyauthority to furnish such a list as you require .' Doyou know of any provision in your constitution andby-laws which prohibits any officer of the FederalCouncil of Churches from furnishing such a list, ordo you know of any resolution of the Council itself,the executive committee, or the administrative com-mittee, which prohibits the furnishing of such a list?If so, I will appreciate it if you will give me referenceto the constitution or to such resolution, and whensuch resolution was passed . Do you know of anygood reason why a list of the contributors to theFederal Council of Churches of Christ in America,together with the amounts of their contributions,should not be open to the public?

"It would seem to me that any public organizationsuch as the Council is supposed to be, that neitherthe Treasurer, the Secretary, nor any other dulyqualified administrative officer of the Council wouldhave to have specific authority to grant such a list .In fact, I am rather astonished that the list is notat all times open to public inspection ."

Still hedging, with a determination not to go onrecord as saying "no" to requests for this informa-tion, Mr. Mann replied as follows :

"If there is specific information about the activ-ities of the Federal Council of Churches or about theirreceipt and expenditure of moneys, I shall be veryglad to present to the proper committee or com-mittees any request from you which may be made inwriting for specific information .

"The books of accounts were audited by certifiedpublic accountants of national reputation . A very

6 8


complete report of its financial operations is pub-lished and widely circulated . The, Council hasnothing to conceal in connection with its financialprogram, and as I said before, I shall be glad topresent to the proper committees any request youmay make in writing for specific information aboutthe Council's work ."

In glancing over the list of contributors before thedoor was closed against an examination of thetreasurer's books, it was noted that the names ofPaul Warburg, John D. Rockefeller, The Phelps-Stokes Foundation, Elihu Root, the Altman Foun-dation, Robert Fulton Cutting, Peter Grimm, andMrs. Jas. Leigh Laidlaw appeared .

But why this secrecy as to who is contributing tothe support of the Federal Council of Churches?This is not characteristic of churches . Churches arein the habit of refusing contributions from a doubtfulsource. Men who contribute to religious organiza-tions take pride in it . In raising money to build achurch or pay a church debt the names of the con-tributors are broadcasted to the public. There ismore secrecy about the origin of the fund for thesupport of the Federal Council of Churches thanthose of political parties of today .

There is a law which compels candidates of polit-ical parties to report the names of contributors andthe amounts they contribute . As the Federal Coun-cil of Churches is now engaged in political activity,its controlling group should be required to make thesame reports that candidates and political partiesdo . There should not be even the "appearance ofevil" in dealing with affairs of the churches .

CHAPTER VIII

NOT A DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTION

ACHURCH makes no pretensions of being ademocratic institution. Neither in its local

government or general government does a majorityof the members rule. Pastors and priests are notelected by a popular vote . Neither are the bishopsnor any of the higher officials of the church. Perhapsthe Methodist-Episcopal and the Catholic Churchesare the furthest from the government of a majorityof the laymen or members . Yet these two denomi-nations are the strongest and are gaining strengthevery year . There is no general demand on the partof the layman to govern the churches or even toshape their religious doctrines .A man or a woman gives no thought to the political

views of the pastor or priest when he joins thechurch. Those of us who do not inherit our religionare attracted to a church by its doctrines or thepreaching of some pastor . More attention is paidto the robes of a preacher than his utterances uponthe League of Nations, the World Court, prepared-ness or even the tariff. The appearance of a Method-ist minister Sunday morning in his pulpit with therobes of a Catholic priest would be fraught withserious consequences . Just what the bishop would

70


do in such a case is not known as there is none ofrecord .What would happen if a Catholic priest appeared

at his altar in a business suit or even a frock coatwe do not feel competent even to suggest. It is forthe reader to use his imagination in drawing a pictureof the developments if a Methodist pastor and aCatholic priest should exchange their robes in themanner indicated .

But if your pastor launches into an impassionedappeal for this nation to enter the League of Nations,the World Court, without any safeguarding reserva-tion, the incident passes with slight or no commentfrom the congregation. He may advocate in thename of peace the cancellation of the foreign debtor oppose any form of preparedness without anyserious dissension in the congregation .

As the brothers and sisters pass out or on theirway home you will frequently hear such remarksas this : "Our pastor is an earnest soul. How hewould like to take the whole world up in his armsand remake it so there would be no more sin orsorrow. Of course he does not understand what allof this League of Nations and World Court means ."

Even the women of the church take the pastorseriously on political affairs . They expect him toadvocate anything that has the appearance of pro-moting peace and rarely demand of him that he makean investigation of any of these great subjects .

At the same time the pastor's sermon may receivea scarehead in the local paper depending upon theenterprise of the publicity agent of the church orthe popularity of the pastor . His utterances out-


7 1

side of the church are frequently taken as an expres-sion of the sentiment of the congregation on greatnational and international questions .

This lack of any effort on the part of the clergy toobtain the views of the congregation on great politicalissues is characteristic of the Federal Council ofChurches . The Federal Council of Churches ofChrist in America consists of representatives oftwenty-eight denominations. They are : NorthernBaptist Convention, National Baptist Convention,Free Baptist Churches, Christian Church, Churchesof God in N. A. (General Eldership), CongregationalChurches, Disciples of Christ, Evangelical Church,Evangelical Synod of N. A., Friends, MethodistEpiscopal Church, Methodist Episcopal Church,South, African M . E . Church, African M. E . ZionChurch, Colored M . E. Church in America, Method-ist Protestant Church, Moravian Church, Presby-terian Church in the U.S.A ., Presbyterian Church inthe U. S. (South), Primitive Methodist Church,National Council of the Protestant Episcopal Church,Reformed Church in America, Reformed Church inthe U. S., Reformed Episcopal Church, Seventh DayBaptist Churches, United Brethren Church, UnitedPresbyterian Church and the United LutheranChurch, consultive body .The Federal Council which meets once in four

years consists of about four hundred members offi-cially designated by the denominations. Eachdenomination is entitled to four members and onemember for every fifty thousand communicants ormajor fraction thereof.

72


This is the description given in the official reportsof the Federal Council. There is no record of anyof the members of the Council receiving instructionsfrom the different churches . The heads of the differ-ent denominations are authorized to represent theirchurches and designate their members for the FederalCouncil. There is no record of any denominationholding an election to select its representative in theFederal Council.

The official accounts of the meeting of the FederalCouncil indicate that the large body of four hundredclergymen with a small sprinkling of laymen havelittle to do with shaping the policy of the Council .A "business committee" is appointed which is veryappropriately named, for it conducts all of the busi-ness of the quadrennial meeting . A splendid pro-gram of sermons, music, and devotional exercises isoccasionally interrupted by voting to approve reso-lutions reported by the " business committee ." Thereis no indication of a majority or minority report andthe whole affair proceeds like the well-oiled machineof a political convention .

Then the Council adjourns for four years andturns over the business of speaking for twenty mil-lion church members to an executive committee .Even this executive committee meets only once ayear and the character of its proceedings is verymuch like that of the Federal Council itself with itsfour hundred members .

It is in the administrative committee that thecontrolling group of the General Council directs theaffairs of the great organization. It is here wheregroup control is made possible, through provisions


7 3

of the by-laws of the organization . Section 2 ofArticle VI sets forth the key position occupied by theadministrative committee in the following language :

"The commissions and standing committees shallbe subject to the administrative committee and shallreport to it and through it to the executive com-mittee and Council ."

The control of the administrative committee isvested in a small group, and in fact, in the President'shands through the manner prescribed for its selection .

In Article IV the manner of selecting the admin-istrative committee is provided " (a) of one delegateof each of the bodies composed in the Council,nominated by the proper authorities of the bodiesrepresented." This gives the twenty-eight denom-inations composing the Federal Council twenty-eightmembers of this important committee . The articlestarts out as if the administrative committee is tobe at least representative of the clergy of the twenty-eight denominations, but there are three other kindsof members with which the denominations have nodirect connection .

Under paragraph (b) of the Article, it is provided :"Of one representative of each agency of organizedChristianity which by action of the executive com-mittee may become enrolled in affiliation, coopera-tion or consultive relations with the Council . Underthis provision, according to the report of the Councilfor 1920-1924, there are fifteen delegates and alter-nates on the administrative committee . Some ofthese affiliated and cooperating bodies consist onlyof a small committee-for instance, the Committee

74


on Cooperation in Latin-America, and the Councilfor Home Missions .

It is paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section whichplaces the entire control of the administrative com-mittee in the hands of the President and his group ofadvisers . Paragraph (c) provides that "chairmen ofcommissions shall be members of the administrativecommittee." Under another article the President isauthorized to appoint these chairmen and the mem-bers of the commission . Paragraph (d) provides forfifteen members of the administrative committee atlarge which are also appointed by the President .These two provisions give the President the majorityof the members of the administrative committee . Toleave no doubt in the matter the executive andadministrative staff, twelve in number, are membersof the administrative committee. There are, ofcourse, those appointed personally by the President,some of whom are in the controlling group. Promi-nent among these are Rev. Charles S. MacFarland,general secretary ; Rev. Samuel McCrea Cavert,general secretary; and Rev. Sidney L. Gulick, secre-tary, Commission on International Justice and GoodWill .

With this organization it is apparent that DoctorCadman and his group of George W . Wickersham andDoctor Gulick have very little trouble in directinga campaign or propaganda for or against anything .The control is made more secure by incorporatingthe Federal Council of Churches .

For instance, in the campaign for the World Courta "committee of direction," whatever that is, wascreated by the Commission on International justice


75

and Good Will of which Mr . Wickersham is nowchairman, and Doctor Gulick secretary . Quotationsfrom the report of this commission made by DoctorGulick will give a picture of how the controlling groupof the Federal Council works .

"During the spring (1923), it became clear thatthe Senate would not be likely to accept the proposalunless the entire nation was clearly and stronglybehind it. President Harding's sudden death earlyin August and the advent of President Coolidgemade still more problematical favorable action bythe Senate .

"Because of this situation the committee of direc-tion of this commission decided that a nation-widecampaign of education on the subject was impera-tively needed . Literature was prepared and issuedin August proposing the observance of ArmisticeDay (November 11) as World Court Sunday, andthe week preceding as World Court Week . Theseproposals were approved by the administrative com-mittee early in September. A sixteen-page, two-colored pamphlet entitled "The Churches of Amer-ica" was prepared with great care, suggestions beingreceived from such outstanding experts as Hon .George W. Wickersham, Hon . Elihu Root, andMr. Charles T . Howland and others.

"The proposals to observe World Court Weekwere enthusiastically taken up by the state and civicfederations and Councils of Churches, local branchesof the Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C .A ., the ChristianEndeavor and also several secular organizationswhich had already gone on record in support ofAmerican membership in the World Court of Justice,

76


such as the National League of Women Voters, theGeneral Federation of Women's Clubs and the groupof societies and movements represented by theNational Council for the Prevention of War ."The Commission's World Court pamphlet was

sent to some seventy thousand pastors, but thedemand for it was so large that the successive edi-tions brought the total published up' to 131,350 .In conference with the National League of WomenVoters, a five-minute sermon, to be read by a womanon World Court Sunday, was prepared and issuedto the extent of 100,000 copies . A flyer for dis-tribution in pews, entitled `An Imperative Questionfor All Citizens,' was issued to the extent of 200,000 ."After describing the intensive campaign in the

way of inducing members of the organization to floodthe Senate with resolutions, petitions and lettersthat were prepared by the commission and its largecorps of employees, the report continues :

"On November 21, a delegation of representativechurch leaders waited upon President Coolidge andSecretary Hughes, expressing what was believed tobe the mind of the churches in regard to Americanmembership in the World Court of Justice .

"The delegation included, as representatives ofthe Federal Council, Dr . John W. Moore, Chairmanof the Administrative Committee, and Drs . MacFar-land, Watson and Gulick ; as representing particularchurch bodies, Bishops Freeman and Mann, of theProtestant Episcopal Church, Bishop McDowell, ofthe Methodist Episcopal Church, Dr . Radcliffe, ofthe Presbyterian Church, Dr. Abernathy, of theBaptist Churches North, Dr . Morgan of the Con-


77

gregational, and Dr. Wilfley, of the Disciples ofChrist churches . Hon. George W. Wickersham spokeas representing Christian laymen connected with thechurches."This somewhat extended quotation from the report

is made to give a picture of how the wheels go aroundon the inside of the Council . By this systematicdrive the impression was created at Washington that20,000,000 church members had risen en masse anddemanded that the Senate ratify the protocol forthe World Court without reservation .

But there was a rude awakening for some of themost prominent senators when they went home tomeet their constituents. A majority of the WorldCourt senators who came up for reelection weredefeated either at the primaries or the election . Anumber of senators, when they had gotten in touchwith the sentiment of their state, announced thatthey would introduce resolutions providing for therescinding by the Senate of its approval of the WorldCourt protocol . President Coolidge, who had urgedthe ratification of the World Court treaty in hisprevious message, did not mention it in his lastmessage. In his Kansas City speech he declaredthat the United States would not consider any propo-sition for the modification of its reservations and thiswas virtually a withdrawal of the support of theadministration for the World Court as it was organ-ized under the League of Nations .The campaign of the controlling group of the

Federal Council for the World Court was a plainmisrepresentation of the sentiment of the churchmembers of the country . If 20,000,000 church

7 8


members, or a majority of them, had been for theWorld Court, their votes and influence would haveswept the primaries and the elections. The officialsof the Federal Council would have known that therewas no sentiment among the great body of churchmembers if they had taken any steps to ascertain it .They were not concerned with the sentiment of theiralleged constituency but merely to put through theratification by the Senate as part of their interna-tional program .Another striking instance of how the controlling

group of the Federal Council is assuming to speakfor 20,000,000 church members without the leastshadow of authority is the publication of the reporton prohibition . This was the most extensive reportthat has ever been issued by the Federal Council .It came out under the seal of the Federal Counciland was handled by its publicity director. Through-out the country the impression was created that theFederal Council of Churches had made a thoroughinvestigation of the operations of the Volstead Actand had reached the conclusion that it was a failure .The report was greeted with great enthusiasm by thewet forces .

But it developed that this report like most of itsstatements, was given out without any action on thepart of the executive committee. It created suchwidespread indignation in church circles that a con-ference was held atWashington which was attended byDr. Clarence True Wilson, of the Methodist Temper-ance and Public Moral Board ; Bishop James Cannon,Jr., Chairman of the Committee on Temperance andSocial Service of the M. E. Church South ; Rev .


79

Thomas E. Lewis, President 'of the General Con-ference Methodist-Protestant Church ; Bishop Wil-liam F. McDowell, Methodist Episcopal Church ; andBishop William Bell, United Brethren Church . Atthe conclusion of the conference they gave out asigned statement which was a startling exposure ofthe proceedings in the Federal Council . In course ofthe statement it is set forth :"This report was prepared by Rev. F. Ernest

Johnson, Secretary of the Research Department ofthe Federal Council of Churches of Christ in Amer-ica, and rushed into print with practically no con-sultation with the Church Temperance Board oragencies, or without submission even to the Admin-istrative Committee of the Federal Council forreview or suggestions . Such publication, if made,as it should have been, in the name and on theauthority of F. Ernest Johnson would not have beenobjectionable and the report if so made wouldprobably have secured slight publicity and comment .

"But its publication as supposedly representingthe attitude and conclusions of the Federal Councilof Churches obtained naturally, and necessarily,tremendous publicity, both for the writer of thereport and for the report itself. And whatever mayhave been the purpose underlying the Johnson reportthe most striking and important result of the reportias been the life injected by it into the enemies of)rohibition . Practically every wet leader and everytdvocate of modification of the Eighteenth Amend-nent takes this Johnson report (not Federal Councileport) as a spring board, heralding it throughouthe world as an evidence of the changed attitude of

80


the American churches towards prohibition . Indeed,so widespread and so positive and emphatic has beenand still is this interpretation of the meaning of theJohnson report that the Administrative Committeeof the Federal Council was obliged on October 21,1925, to make a sweeping statement denying thatthe Federal Council had changed its position onprohibition (which statement, although official, asthe Johnson statement was not, received compara-tively little publicity) . And furthermore, on Febru-ary 12, 1926, five months after the publication ofthe Johnson report, the President of the FederalCouncil has given out an official statement pro-testing that the attributation to the Federal Councilof the interpretation of the Johnson report was awell-nigh unpardonable misrepresentation, indeed,an inexcusable betrayal by a member of the con-stituent bodies of the Federal Council, fasteningupon them responsibility for a report the preparationand publication of which they had never authorizedthe substance of which they did not know until iiwas published, and with the conclusions of whiclthey did not agree then nor do they agree today .'

The manner of handling the prohibition report inot an exception but is only typical of the policy othe different groups in the Council of committing20,000,000 church members on questions of the highest importance . The World Court campaign as habeen pointed out was conducted by "a committeof direction ." Even the administrative committeknew little of what was taking place and the eventthat followed in the country demonstrated that tl20,000,000 laymen knew nothing and had no syn


8 1

pathy with it. Still on every occasion when officialsof the Federal Council appear at Washington eitherbefore President or Congress they claim to represent20,000,000 church members .

CHAPTER IX

ITS POLITICAL PLATFORM

TN PREVIOUS chapters frequent mention has1 been made of the group control of the FederalCouncil of Churches of Christ in America and itscooperating and allied organizations . From its con-stitution and by-laws it is shown how absolute is thecontrol of President S . Parkes Cadman and his groupof advisers . Dr. Cadman's utterances thereforebecome of supreme importance in looking into thefuture of the Federal Council .

A careful survey of his sermons and official state-ments force two outstanding conclusions. They are :One : That the Federal Council is to be launched

into national and international politics, dealing withquestions which have hitherto been outside of thesphere of activity of Protestant churches .Two : That the Federal Council, or rather the Cad-

man group, is seeking a united or state church .Some of the most eminent church leaders have

become alarmed at this tendency in the policy of thecouncil . In their private conversations they referto the Federal Council as a movement to establishDr. Cadman as the "Protestant Pope of America ."

We have in our possession a letter from an eminentdivine in New York written in answer to one asking


83

for his views on the Federal Council as he has beenin a position to observe its operation . In the courseof this letter he says :

"The Federal Council is simply an attempt tomake the League of Nations an ecclesiastical as wellas a political tyranny, revive the Holy RomanEmpire and prepare the way for the anti-Christ asthe world's last great Caesar-previous to the comingof the true Caesar, King of Kings, and Lord ofLords."

But let Dr. Cadman speak for the Federal Councilas he is amply qualified to do through his absolutedomination of the organization . He does this in anarticle appearing in the Federal Council's bulletinof May-June, 1926. Under the title of "PresentTrends in American Churches," Dr . Cadman writes :

"Prophecy is always risky, but one who surveyspresent tendencies in American religious life canhardly doubt that there are important trends now atwork which are bound to make themselves felt power-fully in years to come . Without presuming to surveythese tendencies in any completeness, one can readilypoint out three .

"In the first place, the American churches aregoing to grapple courageously with great social andinternational questions. The day is past when anyrealm of our economic, industrial, social, political orinternational life will be regarded as outside thesphere of responsibility of the churches . All overthe country, prophetic voices are declaring from thepulpit and in ecclesiastical assemblies that theorganized group life of society is to be no less subjectto the rule of Christ than the life of the individual .

8 4


"When, however, the churches attempt to maketheir influence felt in moulding public opinion ongreat public issues, they discover that if they areto do anything effective, they must act far moreunitedly than has hitherto been the case . Therealization of this fact has led to a second notabletrend in American religious life, namely the progressof cooperation among the churches. Few things aremore noteworthy in the history of American Chris-tianity during the last two decades .

"The rising tide of interest on the part of thechurches in world peace is perhaps the most notableevidence of the way in which the religious forcesare moving unitedly forward in the face of newresponsibilities. It is the judgment of close observersof the political situation that no single factor hascounted for more in the final decision of the UnitedStates Government to enter the World Court thanthe persistent and united activity of the churchesin behalf of this step. There is a new consciousnessabroad that Protestantism has too easily surrenderedto the State in the decision as to great questionswhich, while in one sense political, are at bottomprofoundly moral. The divided state of Protes-tantism has been especially responsible for its havingso nearly abdicated this field in the past . Theknitting up of our isolated forces into somethinglike a unified whole will mean much in regaining amoral autonomy for the churches in all ranges ofhuman activity."

In the language of a clergyman, Dr . Cadman out-lines a platform for clerical political party . Evi-dently he thinks that this country is ready for the


8 5

creation of a new third party by himself and the groupthat controls the Federal Council . Nothing in therealm of secular affairs and politics is excluded inhis program . Under his plan the Federal Councilwould not only take charge of the nation's foreignrelations and write treaties, but the administrativecouncil of his organization would prepare tax, tariff,river and harbor, good roads and public buildingbills . It is presumed that eventually the stateFederal Councils would plunge into state politicsand the city Federal Councils would go into wardpolitics .Dr. Cadman is rather impatient that the churches

have not taken more part in politics than they havein the past . He declares : "There is a new conscious-ness abroad that Protestantism has too easily sur-rendered to the state in the decision as to greatquestions which, while in one sense political, are atbottom moral. The divided state of Protestantismhas been especially responsible for its having sonearly abdicated this field in the past ."Dr. Cadman is by no means visionary. He is not

indulging in the discussion of abstract principles .As he has demonstrated in handling the affairs ofthe Federal Council, he is what is known as a prac-tical politician . Sometimes referred to as a machinepolitician .

In outlining his plans for the invasion of practicalpolitics, Dr. Cadman in the same bulletin, says :

"The growing recognition of the usefulness of theFederal Council means that the American churchesare definitely committed to a policy of cooperation .Whether this will, in time, lead to a united church,

86


such as has already come into being in Canada, onecan hardly prophesy, but there can be no doubt thatthe present interdenominational activities are bring-ing about a new spirit of unity anda greater con-sciousness of the power which a United Churchcan have."

In this Dr. Cadman shows that he realizes that aclerical-political party and a state church go hand inhand. In order to force through his program hemust have the machinery and there must bea union of the organization of all the ProtestantChurches. This, of course, he realizes is a ratherslow process and must be brought about gradually .However, Dr. Cadman is not waiting for this

union of state and church to draw the churches intopolitics . In everything that has been written onthis subject the activities of the Federal Council havebeen shown in League of Nations, World CourtAffairs, and Immigration legislation . He is nowattempting to gradually draw the Federal Councilinto a campaign for a complete cancellation of theforeign debt. A step in this direction was made bythe appointment of George W . Wickersham, apropagandist for the cancellation of foreign debts,as chairman of the Federal Council's Commission onInternational Justice and Good Will . Dr. Gulick,the secretary of this Commission, is also of theopinion that the foreign debt should be cancelledin the interests of peace .

Recently in a syndicated article Dr . Cadman, asPresident of the Federal Council of Churches, madehis views known on the subject . He asked himselfthe following question :


87

"Should we insist upon the payment of the wardebts as arranged or provide for some method oftheir cancellation?" He then answered this questionby saying :

"I may be a financial heretic rushing in whereangels fear to tread . Yet I confess to the convictionthat if Lord Balfour's proposal of August 1, 1923, towipe clean the slate of international obligations andstart afresh had been accepted, the world of tradeand politics would have been infinitely better off ."In my judgment, the United States should not

insist upon payment of the war debts due her forthe following reasons :

"(1) The debtor nations' obligations to us are farmore than offset by our moral obligations to them .For two years they held the lines with terrible lossesof men and material in a war which subsequentevents made as much our war as theirs .

"(2) We can well afford by cancellation whatwould be a splendid manifestation of justice andmagnanimity, and retain for our Republic the esteemand honor which greeted her noble and disinterestedpolicy of intervention to end the World War .

"(3) The recurrent payment of debtor nationswill be regarded by their succeeding generations astribute exacted from them by their ally for helping`to make the world safe for democracy.'

" (4) It is highly improbable that any of our formerallies except Great Britain and perhaps one or twosmall states can maintain their respective paymentsin the face of their huge indebtedness and depre-ciated currencies .

8 8


" (5) It would give them hope and courage for thefuture, and accelerate the return of that generalprosperity in which the United States wouldparticipate .

"Secretary Mellon wisely observes that the pros-perity of Europe is more valuable to America thanall the debts .

"Meanwhile, it is slowly filtering into the nationalconsciousness that to be debt collector of the humanrace is not an enviable position ."How gracefully Dr . Cadman glides into politics

by this statement . For a century Great Britain hasbeen a debt collector and in not entirely out of thisclass now. You never heard a loyal Britisher suggestthat Great Britain was not "in an enviable position ."I doubt if you will find in all of Dr . Cadman's writ-ings such a suggestion as he was born in England .A frank statement of Dr. Cadman's reasons for thecomplete cancellation of the debts would be thatit is the bid to buy the good will of Europe by thecancellation of debts that are honestly due theUnited States . In other words, Dr . Cadman wouldhave the United States pay tribute to Europe inorder to maintain peace .

But without entering into a complete discussionof the merits of his proposals, Dr . Cadman's state-ment indicates that cancellation is on the programof the controlling group of the Federal Council .Dr. Cadman, George W . Wickersham, and Dr .Gulick are only waiting an opportunity to conducta campaign like they did for the League of Nationsand World Court for debt cancellation . The sameappeal will eventually be made for debt cancellation


8 9

that was made for the League of Nations and theWorld Court .

That this has been decided upon is made plainin The Handbook of the Churches, the latest publi-cation of the Federal Council . It appears in thedescription of the authority and activities of theCommission on International Justice and Good Will,of which George W . Wickersham is chairman . ThisCommission in the yearbook is described as "theofficial agency of the churches of the Federal Councilfor carrying on common activities in the subject ofWorld Justice and Peace." In the concluding para-graph it is stated that the Commission in its litera-ture has "dealt with the subject matter consideredat the Washington conference for the limitation ofarmaments, with the World Court issue, with therelation of America and Mexico, with famine condi-tions in Russia, Germany, Austria, China, with earth-quake sufferers in Japan, with problems of Asiaticsin America, with the relations of America and Japan,and with the problem of China and the West, withthe general questions of war and peace, and withmany similar questions, such as traffic in narcoticdrugs, European debts to the United States, immi-gration legislation, etc ."

But that the program is even more far reachingthan this is indicated by a statement to the pressgiven out through the publicity director .

It is in the form of a questionnaire that was sentout by the Commission on International Justice andGood Will of the Federal Council of Churches . Themost adroit arguments and deceptive propagandaare often made through asking questions . With a

90


great show of sincerity they are asked so as to coverthe most sinister purpose . Those who propose thequestions assume the attitude of disinterested seekersof truth . They avoid placing themselves on recordfor those things which they are really advocating .Observe with what expertness the author of these

questions approaches his objective ."How would you answer these questions of

national and international policy from the Christianpoint of view?" is asked . It is then explained thatthese questions are sent to "thousands of congre-gations for study and individual answer duringArmistice week ."

In the first five questions there is a great pretenseat getting at the fundamental problems of the world .They are :

1 . "What constitutes a nation? Define its char-acteristics .

2. "Does a nation possess absolute, unlimitedsovereignty? If not, what limits its sovereignty?

3. "Is a nation, as such, under moral law? If so,list and define its moral duties .

4. "Does a nation possess any inherent andinalienable rights? Name and define them .

5. "Can a nation so ignore its duties or violateits obligations as to forfeit its rights? Illustratefrom history."

The sixth question is aimed at the Monroe Doc-trine and the immigration question. It is :

6. "Should or should not the United States agreeto submit for peaceful settlement every internationaldispute not capable of solution by diplomacy? If


9 1

not,why? How about disputes involving the MonroeDoctrine? Immigration?"

If any one seeking to discuss the Monroe Doctrineor Immigration from a new point of view should sendan inquiry to the Federal Council of Churches hewill be furnished with plenty of material to supportthe theory that the Monroe Doctrine should be sub-mitted to the League of Nations or the World Court .Immigration is also an international question accord-ing to at least part of the controlling group of theFederal Council of Churches . That is why thisquestion is asked . The internationalists of theCouncil are constantly seeking an opportunity togive a new interpretation to the Monroe Doctrine .

The seventh and eighth questions are of an abstractcharacter relating to the new definition of "aggres-sive war" and the right of neutrals to sell munitionsand make loans, to belligerents . In the ninth ques-tion the right of the United States to control itsnatural resources is questioned . This question reads :

9. "Has a nation absolute right to the mineral orfood resources within its territory? Can it do withthem whatever it wishes regardless of the needs ofothers? Coal? Iron? Oil? Wheat? Rubber?"

The tenth question is a bold attempt to draw thechurches into a discussion of the tariff. It is doubtfulwhether any extreme free trader would have beenwilling to classify the tariff question as a moral issue .This is done by asking :

10. "Has a nation the right to regulate its tariffregardless of the disasters its rates may inflict onother peoples? Why?"

92


If the Federal Council of Churches has its way thediscussion of the tariff will be taken up in SundaySchool. But the greatest effort is made in the ques-tionnaire to drag the discussion of the immigrationquestion into Sunday School . This is really done torevive the discussion of the Japanese and Chineseexclusion act which is regarded in Congress as settledonce for all . Any discussion of the question now onlyraises false hopes in Japan and keeps alive the resent-ment that was really stirred up by propagandists inthis country led by Dr. Gulick of the Federal Coun-cil, in an attempt to break down our immigration lawwhich not only excludes Orientals but limits immi-gration from other countries . This is done by sixquestions approaching the subject from every angle .They are :

11 . "Has a nation absolute right to regulate immi-gration into its territory? Why?

12. "Have suffering and poverty-stricken Euro-peans the right to come to the United States? Ineither case, why?

13 . "Have Asiatics the same inherent right ofimmigration that Europeans have? Why?

14 . "Is the question of immigration strictly`domestic'? If not, on what principles are domesticand foreign interests to be reconciled?

1S . "Has a country with large areas of unoccupiedterritory the right to exclude immigrants from over-populated countries? If so, on what principles?If not, why?

16 . "Has an over-populated country the right totake territory by force from a nation with sparsepopulation-e .g., European seizure of North and


93

South America three and four centuries ago? WouldChinese and Japanese have the right to seize the Unit-ed States if they had the might? In either case, why?"

No doubt these questions and especially the lastone have been sent to Dr. Gulick's friends in Japan .They are splendid suggestions for the Jingoist inJapan . It shows a splendid spirit on the part ofDr. Gulick. While he is in this country opposingall forms of preparedness and measures for nationaldefense, he is suggesting that the Chinese andJapanese have the right to seize the United States"if they had the might." But, in explaining thebackground of the "national study conference ofchurches" called by the Federal Council, Dr. Gulickstrikes at the very heart of the nation. He asks :"What do the churches of America as a whole

think about war and about peace? Are they orare they not essentially `pacifists'? Were anotherwar to come would they do again what they did in1917 and 1918?"Doubtless the Department of justice would

appreciate it if Dr . Gulick would answer this ques-tion himself. Upon his answer to this question woulddepend whether he would be interned "were war tocome again." The type that attempted to concealtheir disloyalty under the robes of the clergy in thelast war will not be dealt with so leniently in thenext war. The men who respond to the call of thecountry can be depended upon to attend to this .

To raise this question Dr . Gulick outrages thegreat body of loyal and patriotic church people, andreveals the disloyal intent of himself and a numberof his associates in the Federal Council .

CHAPTER X

AN APPEAL FROM LABOR LEADERS

THE most humiliating development in the activ-ities of the Federal Council and its cooperating

organizations, to those who have always looked tothe churches for the highest standards of citizenshipand Americanism, are the protests which come fromlabor leaders . The Soviet world revolution haspassed the preaching stage in labor unions . There isoften actual combat between the leaders who areloyal to American institutions and those who haveembraced communism or socialism as prescribed byMoscow .Naturally, labor leaders who are waging war

against sovietism in the union view with astonish-ment the sympathy and support that the subversivemovement receives from church leaders . This is thelast source from which they expected encouragementto communism which has destroyed all churches inRussia .

As a consequence, from the labor leaders comesan appeal that the communists and Russian sovietsympathizers be driven from the churches as theyare endeavoring to drive them out of the labortemples . This movement to combat the subversivemovement in labor unions was started by the late


95

Samuel Gompers, now recognized as one of the mostpowerful and patriotic leaders in the labor movement .One of his last acts was to sound a warning to thechurches in which he pointed out the alarmingprogress that the subversives were making in religiouscircles . He insisted that some of the foremost leadersin the subversive movement were occupying pulpits .Among those whom he regarded as most dangerouswere Rev. Harry F. Ward of the Methodist Church,and Rabbi Judah L. Magnus . Mr. Gompers inreferring to these distinguished divines said :"Harry F. Ward, titular head of the American

Civil Liberties Union and an active participant invarious parlor pink organizations over a period ofseveral years; the most ardent pro-Bolshevik clericin this country . Dr. Ward has been prominent insuch pacifist and radical organizations as the Fellow-ship of Reconciliation, Emergency Peace Conference,People's Council, and the Liberty Defense Union . Heis the author of a number of pro-Bolshevik articles .

"Rabbi Magnus, well known as a revolutionarypacifist and equally well known for his oppositionto the policies of Americaa during the World War, andat present a directing genius in several propagandaorganizations of the pacifist and parlor pink variety ;and one of the principal organizers of the People'sCouncil. In addition, Rabbi Magnus was one of themoving spirits in the Emergency Peace Federation,a member of the American Conference of RussianFreedom, and a moving spirit in many other pro-Bolshevik and pacifist activities."

President Green, who succeeded Mr . Gompers asthe head of the American Federation of Labor, and

96


Vice President Woll took up the fight where he leftit against communism in labor organization and likeMr. Gompers are making an appeal to the churchleaders for support . In a recent speech before theNew York Chamber of Commerce against the recog-nition of the Russian Soviet Government Mr. Wolldescribed the conflict in the labor union and directedthe attention again to evidences of the efforts thatare being made to swing the churches to communism .

"The battle with the Communists in the labormovement," said Mr. Woll, "can be fought out onlywithin the unions themselves . I am proud to tellyou that it is being waged with vigor and withsuccess .

"During the last ten days you have doubtlessnoticed the press accounts of the war declared uponthe needle trade unions in New York by the Com-munist wing of those organizations . It has calleda mass meeting to be held on January 2 by the LeftWing members of the trade union organizations inthis city, to plan an attack upon all bona fide unions .On the other hand, the anti-Communist wing ofthirty-five craft organizations in New York, repre-senting an overwhelming majority of the members,has called a meeting for the latter part of this monthto combat Communism and Communists whereverfound in the trade union movement . This situationis well described in the following extract from adeclaration issued by the International Ladies' Gar-ment Workers' Union :

" `Taking advantage of industrial depression, theCommunists were successful in gaining control insome organizations . Two organizations in particular


97

that they have taken over are the furriers and cloak-makers of New York City. They immediately threwthem into long and bloody strikes, starving theworkers of these industries, ruining the industries,and finally making settlement that completelybetrayed the membership of those unions . By theuse of their press, they glorified their failures . Bythe use of terrorist methods, they are attempting tostifle the opposition of the enraged members . Workerseverywhere have now had ample opportunity tostudy their methods and ability . The time has comewhen the preservation of the trade unions demandsthe expulsion of these elements from offices andcontrol .'

"Let me quote also the following from an addressentitled, `The Communist Plague in Our Unions,' byMr. Morrow Sigman, President of that organization :

• `According to the financial report of the Workers'Party, this party had, in 1924, 15,233 members . Theorganizational expenses of this party alone amountedin 1923, according to the financial report of itssecretary, to $140,000, of which sum only about$40,000 was covered by membership dues . Thereport does not mention where the remaining $100,000came from.

• 'This, however, is not all. The Communist Partyof America publishes fourteen daily papers, eightweeklies and several monthly magazines . Not oneof these publications pays for itself, and, with theexception of one or two, these Communistic period-icals have neither readers nor advertisers. TheItalian Federation of the Workers' Party, which has319 members, issues its own daily paper . The Hun-

98


garian Federation numbers 359 members and pub-lishes a daily paper . The Polish Federation has 245members and also publishes a daily newspaper. TheEnglish central organ of the Communists, whichcarries no advertisements whatever and has only aninsignificant number of readers, comes out daily insix pages and issues a special supplement on Sunday .Notwithstanding the fact that most Communistpapers have no income whatever, they are coming outregularly, and some of them have even purchasedbuildings and are equipped with linotype andprinting plants .' "Continuing, Mr. Woll said, "The Communist

forces waging this war are financed and directed fromMoscow. Think of it! Moscow fighting its battle onthe sidewalks of New York ."Mr. Woll went on to describe how the Communists

were attempting to capture or destroy the UnitedMine Workers' organization by preventing the reelec-tion of John L . Lewis as President .

"This is the fight in which Albert Coyle, reditor ofthe official organ of the International Brotherhoodof Locomotive Engineers," said Mr . Woll, "hasplayed such a sinister part. At the recent conventionof the A. F. of L. in Detroit, he was exposed as havingplotted to start a rival paper to support the Com-munist forces in the Union whose candidate againstLewis was one Brophy . Coyle had written a letterto Powers Hapgood, a nephew of Norman Hapgood,giving definite instructions for launching and con-ducting such a paper and stating that he would getfrom his rich friends the $30,000 necessary to putover the venture ."


99

Mr. Woll, after declaring that this contest wastaking place not only in all the large unions, thensaid that the Communists were reaching out afterunorganized labor. In pointing out how insidiousthe subversive movement is being conducted in thechurches, Mr. Woll said :

"At its 1924 national convention, attended bymore than 800 delegates, one of the largest churchdenominations in point of membership adopted unan-imously the following Karl Marxian declaration onprivate property which was incorporated into thefundamental law of that church :

" `Wealth accruing to the holders through monop-oly values or special privileges, or through largeopportunities for costless saving, is not earned, andwealth created by society should be devoted to thedevelopment of all the people in ways to be deter-mined by the people themselves .'

"These high-sounding phrases, if they mean any-thing at all, imply affirmation of a doctrine which,if it is to obtain in the United States, will wipe outnot only the billions invested by the life insurancecompanies, but the billions owned by all the otherpeople of the country . If that doctrine obtains,gone are all the great endowments for the benefit ofhumanity! Gone are all our legacies to our childrenand our children's children! Gone is the whole insti-tution of private property, individual initiative andspirit of personal adventure! If we are to wipe outall capitalism with its wage system, rents, interestand profits, what is to become of the investments ofall the colleges, churches, missions, private hospitals,libraries and great foundations? What of the mil-

1 00


lions of savings bank depositors whose earnings like-wise go to corporation securities, to say nothing ofthe hundreds of millions of dollars invested by thewage earners of the country in shares of industrialcorporations, or of the millions making up the greatbody called the public, whose investments enter thebillion-dollar field?

"It is also pertinent to observe that, when these`unearned' billions are to be `devoted to the develop-ment of all the people in ways to be determined bythe people themselves,' it means that Congress, theonly body that can represent `all the people them-selves,' is to spend this money . What a `porkbarrel' orgy there will be!"

Of course, not over eight out of the eight hundreddelegates at the convention realized what was beingimposed upon this great church . It only demon-strates how dangerous it is for a body of clergymento deal with economic questions which, according toold-fashioned religion and the spirit of our institu-tions, is outside of the jurisdiction of any church .The resolutions adopted by too many general con-ferences and general organizations of ecclesiasticalbodies in recent years bear a strong resemblance tothe platforms of political parties . It is time thatthe laymen take an interest in these affairs and maketheir views known to their pastors if economic ques-tions are to be dwelt with by ecclesiastical organ-izations .

Continuing his discussion of the subversive move-ment in the churches, Mr . Woll said :"While giving such emphasis to one particular

Church, it is not to be assumed that it is the only


1 0 1

offender . Unfortunately, the social and industrialdepartments of nearly all other churches are open tomuch criticism though perhaps not to such a largedegree. Nearly all tend toward the `Left Wing .'

"It is not on social and industrial problems alonethat they follow extreme lines. They are likewiseinclined toward the `Left' on the question of peaceand war. Either as individual churches or throughthe Federal Council of Churches, nearly all havegone on record as being opposed to àll wars, defen-sive as well as offensive .' Of course, we are allagainst war with its frightful horrors but the lineshould clearly be drawn between offensive and defen-sive wars . Favorite declarations of Church andpeace movements are that Àll wars are futile' andÀll wars are suicidal,' as if either term could beapplied to our Revolutionary War or the War of theRebellion or the war to free Cuba, which, by the way,was an offensive war demanded by the people . Todeclare that the World War was `futile' or `suicidal'is to assume an air of mental and moral superioritywhich existing facts neither warrant nor justify .Suppose we had not entered the war and Englandand France had been defeated! Our refusal to enterwould have been indeed a folly and an act of nationalsuicide .

"In this connection, let me bring to your attentiona book, `The Abolition of War,' written by Messrs .Sherwood Eddy and Kirby Page, two of the leadersof the recent so-called impartial commission to Russiadiscussed in my letter to President Coolidge .

"The following paragraph in that book is of specialinterest :

1 02


" `In the last war a few score of genuine conscien-tious objectors went to prison for their faith . It isonly fair to tell the government frankly in advancethat in the next war, not a few score, but manythousands will gladly go to prison or to death ratherthan take any destructive part in what they believewith the Federal Council of Churches "is the world'schief collective sin." '

"A fitting companion-piece to that volume isanother by Mr. Kirby Page entitled 'War-ItsCauses, Consequences and Cure,' copies of whichwere sent to 115,000 clergymen of the country andin which we find the following pledge :

"`Let the Churches of America say to their owngovernment and to the peoples of the earth : "Wefeel so certain that war is now un-Christian, futile andsuicidal that we renounce completely the whole warsystem . We will never again sanction or participatein any war. We will not allow our pulpits and class-rooms to be used as recruiting stations . We willnot again give our financial or moral support to anywar . We will seek security and justice in otherways .Mr. Woll continues by placing the question up to

the members of the Protestant Churches who aresupporting the Federal Council, by saying :

"May I ask if it is not time for all loyal citizenswithin the churches to assert themselves more fullyto the end that the promotion of religious ideals shallnot be carried on to the loss and detriment ofloyalty and patriotism to our democratic institutions?Of course, the Communists encourage and welcomedisintegration of the morals of so-called `capitalist'


1 03

nations and, therefore, they welcome to their foldthe `Left' leaders in the churches ."Mr. Woll drives the point home to every Protes-

tant, or as far as that is concerned, every church-member, when he says :

"Suppose labor leaders had so far forgotten theirduties and responsibilities as to give expression tothe utterances herein quoted! Are we not justifiedin believing that the whole American public wouldhave risen in righteous wrath?"

What these labor leaders are saying deserves theprayerful consideration of at least a part of the20,000,000 church members which the Federal Coun-cil claims to represent . How long will the greatbody of loyal and patriotic laymen permit thisactive and radical minority to preach against ourinstitutions? Is it going on to a point where theloyalty of the Protestant church is to be questioned?

CHAPTER XI

THREATENS THE CHRISTIAN FAITH

THE Imperial German Army was taken as athreat against the sovereignty of the nations

of Europe . By some it was regarded as a threatagainst all liberal or republican forms of government,including that of the United States . Taking theextreme pre-war view it did not mean more than thereturn to those forms of government in which thedivine right of kings was recognized . There were nodirect declarations from the officials of the GermanEmpire upon which these statements can be based,but it was the general attitude of the Kaiser whichcreated world-wide suspicion among the more liberalgovernments .

Soviet militarism (and it is that if one existed inGermany before the war), is a threat against theChristian faith, all churches and all religion . Eventhe German Empire before the war, at home orabroad, never attempted to interfere with a man'sreligious belief. In Germany the church was a sacredinstitution . While at war, as the report of the FederalCouncil of Churches quoted in a previous chaptershowed, the Kaiser gave protection to the churchesby permitting the conference called by the FederalCouncil at Constance to meet while the country was


105

under martial law. This conference of the repre-sentatives of the Protestant churches would not betolerated today in Russia in time of peace .

The Soviet dictatorship is a Godless government .The Communist party which is the Russian Govern-ment, or Soviet, will eventually banish all churchesfrom Russia . As far as it has been able to obtaincontrol of the Southern Government at Canton theCommunist party has driven the missionaries andchurches out of that country . If it is successful in itsworld revolution the churches will be driven out ofevery country in the world. The destruction of allchurches is one of the chief objectives of communism .Religion cannot exist in a communistic country .

These statements are not based on inferences, aswere the charges against Imperial Germany, but areon the direct and unequivocal statements of thedisciples of communism .Karl Marx, the great apostle of communism,

declared that "religion is the opium of the people ."His followers who established the Russian Sovietdictatorship hold to the same opinion . In an officialpublication "The A. B. C. of Communism," byN. Bucharin and E . Z. Preobraschensky, the relationsbetween communism and religion are clearly stated .In the course of a chapter on the subject the fol-lowing is quoted : "Religion and communism areincompatible. A communist who rejects the com-mandments of religion and acts in accordance withthe decisions of the party ceases to be one of thefaithful."

It will be observed that these authorities recognizethe principle set forth in the Bible that a man cannot

106


serve two masters. He cannot serve both God andcommunism.

But to quote further from this definition of com-munism : "On the other hand one who, while callinghimself a communist, continues to cling to a religiousfaith, one who in the name of religious command-ment, infringes on the prescription of the party,ceases thereby to be a communist."

And these principles are being put into effect, aswill be testified to by Sherwood Eddy, who, afterreturning from a trip to Russia at the head of a self-appointed commission, writes the following for theZion Herald :"The communist party is frankly materialistic,

atheistic and anti-religious in its policies ."Again this advocate of the recognition of the Soviet

dictatorship says :"The philosophy of the communist party is based

upon force, and their avowed policy is world revolu-tion., This party has a membership in fifty-twocountries and its plan of revolution is a frank chal-lenge to our whole social order ."Now what stands back of these declarations? Are

they mere statements of an abstract theory or isthere a real force which at the proper time willattempt to extend communism into every countryand destroy Christianity?

They are supported by the Red Army of Russia,according to frequent declarations of communistpropaganda. The military authorities of not onlythe United States but of all European governmentsrate the strength of the Red Army higher than thatof the Imperial German Army before the war . No


107

country even approaches Russia in the strength ofits land forces .

Not desiring to be open to the charge of conductinga propaganda for the War Department or thenational defense societies, we quote William Z . Fosterof the American Civil Liberties Union, of whichHarry Ward, the author of the social creed of theFederal Council of Churches, is the chairman. Com-rade Foster has recently returned to the UnitedStates after an extended trip as a guest of the SovietGovernment, and has written a very informativepamphlet entitled "The Russian Revolution ." Hisfirst declaration is "The Russian Revolution is oneof the very greatest events in all human history,"and in Chapter III he declares :

"One of the great achievements of the RussianRevolution was the creation of the Red Army . Thisfamous organization is the protector of the revolu-tion, which it has successfully shielded from anarmed and hostile capitalistic world. When at itsmaximum during the most critical period of thecivil wars, the Red Army numbered 5,300,000members, and was the strongest military organi-zation in the world ."

In another chapter attention was called to how,under the direction of Mr. Foster's organization,the American Civil Liberties Union, the FederalCouncil of Churches conducted a campaign againstmilitary training in this country . He is one of thetrustees of the Garland Free-Love Socialistic fundwhich financed the Lane pamphlet and the cam-paign of publicity against military training . In thiscampaign there was perfect cooperation on the part

1 08


of Dr. S. Parkes Cadman, President of the FederalCouncil of Churches . Dr. Cadman and the otherleaders of the Federal Council of Churches drew ahorrifying picture of the effects of a short period ofmilitary training in the schools and colleges on thepeace of the world .

As this campaign is still in progress let Mr . Foster,one of the leaders of the movement to abolish allmilitary training in the United States, give you apicture of real compulsory military service, as itexists in Russia :

"Another problem related to the question of com-pulsory military service," writes Mr . Foster, "is thatbecause of their bitter experiences under Czarism,the Russian people, especially the revolutionaryelement, had gained a deep hatred of conscription,hence, when they founded the old Red Guard, theybased it upon the system of voluntary enlistment .But this did not work out well . The mass of thepeople were war-weary and the burden of the strugglefell upon the best and most militant elements of thecity workers. Russia was slaughtering her most pre-cious mechanics (a loss which her industries are stillsuffering severely), while the slacker elements eitherstayed aloof from the Army altogether ; or, havingjoined it, would soon desert, with good clothes ontheir backs and rifles in their hands ."Under such conditions the building of a real

fighting force was out of the question . The Russianleaders did not hesitate before the obvious remedy ;they established universal compulsory military ser-vice. For this they were criticized by the Utopiantheorists who see revolution through the rosy spec-


109

tacles of a celestial idealism. But the shallowness ofsuch criticism is evident to everyone who has hadactual contact with the masses in action and knowstheir limitations. Even in the trade union move-ment, the principle of compulsion must be appliedin many ways. What, for instance, would become ofthat movement if it depended upon a volunteersystem of dues? It would degenerate into chaos in ahurry. Labor unions the world over have found itnecessary to adopt strongest regulations, the prac-tical effect of which is to virtually compel theignorant and indifferent workers to fight intelligentlyand vigorously in their own behalf. And so it was inRussia ; the leaders had to introduce the discipline ofcompulsory military service in order to make thebackward masses defend the conquest of the revolu-tion. They are not at all sentimental about the thing ;they know very well that there is a world of differencebetween conscription to protect your master's inter-est and conscription to protect your own . They haveno apologies to offer ."

In an effort to create the impression that the RedArmy is different from any other military force,Mr. Foster says :

"The Red Army is just as different from otherarmies as the Soviet Government is different fromcapitalistic government. It is pervaded throughoutwith a democratic spirit totally unknown to othermilitary organizations . Between the officers and thesoldiers a feeling of brotherhood prevails ; they dressjust alike and call each other `comrade .' The RedArmy is a people's army in the true sense of theword."

1 1 0


But turning over about five pages in his pamphlet,the following remarkable declaration which is moreimperialistic and boastful than any that ever camefrom the Kaiser, is found :

"In the Red Army communist sentiment is strong,well placed and highly organized . All the officers areeither outspoken communists or, where they arenon-party men, they have given ample evidence oftheir unwavering loyalty to the revolution . All ofthe new officers, graduates from the Soviet militaryschool, are party members-no other may take thecourse of instruction . Likewise, all of the com-missars (inspectors general) are devoted commun-ists. It is the important function of these officials,one of whom is attached to every military sub-division, to look after the political education of thesoldiers ; they check up upon the commanding officersand see to it that the Red Army is kept faithful tothe revolution . And so far they have accomplishedtheir task wonderfully well . Every military unit hasits yatchayka, composed of officers and men, all onan equal footing . At its maximum strength the RedArmy numbered 5,300,000 men, five-sixths of thempeasants, yet this mass was like so much putty inthe hands of the thin sprinkling of planful, deter-mined and thoroughly organized communists . Theyhad no trouble at all in welding it as a powerfuldefensive weapon for the revolution ."

This is a splendid description of a military castebased on communism. What a sensation would becreated in capitalistic United States if some memberof Congress would even introduce a bill providingthat young men of only one political faith or religion


1 1 1

could be admitted to West Point, or commissionedin the Army or Navy. In the United States, officersof the Army come from every political party, everychurch, and every walk of life . In Russia they comefrom only the party in power. Any party who wouldattempt to dictate the political sentiments of theArmy could not carry a precinct in a presidentialelection in capitalistic United States .

Compulsory service is not confined to the RedArmy. It permeates the communistic industrial sys-tem of Russia, according to Mr . Foster, of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union . In course of adescription of the system, he says :

"One of the greatest forces giving life and powerto the communistic party's elaborate organizationis the marvelous discipline of the membership. Thisis of a strictness absolutely unknown among otherclasses of revolutionists . `Party Discipline' is a termto conjure with in Russia . When the party is con-sidering a measure of importance the members dis-cuss it pro and con with the utmost freedom . Butonce a decision is arrived at all discussion ceasesimmediately, the opposition subsides, differences ofopinion are forgotten or laid aside and concentratedaction is the order of the day .

"An important phase of this discipline is the draft,or `mobilization' as it is called, to which membersare subject . Not even the highest officials are exempt .Constantly the paper contains long lists of the namesof members sent to all parts of the country to per-form every sort of task . Only recently the PetrogradCommunist party mobilized 300 of its members,serving in high government offices, and sent them

1 1 2


into the factories for three months, so that theycould refresh their proletarian spirit . Indeed, in manyother respects besides its draft, the Russian Com-munist party has the characteristics of a militaryorganization. Its members have the right to beararms and most of them do . They drill regularly onceor twice a week in their yatchaykas . During thecritical periods of the civil wars the entire party isunder arms ."

If it did not appear under his name the followingwould be taken as an utterance of a Hohenzollernin describing the imperial army of Germany beforethe World War :"The Red Army," Mr . Foster goes on to say, "is

an organized crusade for the revolution . It defeatsits foes not only by force but also by education . Somilitant and contagious is its proletarian spirit thatits leaders can peacefully boast that European troopscannot be used successfully against it . Once it getsits propaganda machine in operation, the morale ofthe opposing army begins to fall . The working classprisoners that are captured are fed, entertained andtaken about the country to see the proletarian insti-tution of the new social order . Then they are returnedto their own lines to spread the good news . Greatquantities of literature are published and distributedto the enemy troops, pointing out how they aredupes of capitalism and why they have no interestin carrying on the war. Soon the effect is produced ;the worker-soldiers lose all taste for the war andeither the army begins to disintegrate or its leadersnegotiate peace . Even American soldiers were not


1 1 3

immune to Red Army propaganda, as their revoltproved .

"All told, the Red Army is a remarkable institution .It is the strong right arm of the Russian revolution ."

That this Red Army system was being extendedinto China became evident with the success of theCantonese Army in its initial victorious sweep tothe north. While the great powers were negotiatingwith the different governments of China with regardto the foreign concession the Russian Communistparty was pouring propaganda into the warring areas .A strong Chinese Communist party was organizedquietly throughout China and it appeared to be onthe eve of controlling the southern government. Aspecial Chinese number of the official organ of theexecutive committee of theCommunist Internationaleof December, 1926, in its leading editorial shows theclose relations between the Chinese Communistparty and the parent organization in Russia . It goeson to state :"The victory of the Canton Army, its advance

to the north up to the Yangtze River, its occupationof the central industrial districts of China, the attrac-tion of the peasants into the revolutionary move-ment, the growing acuteness of the class strugglesin the rural districts in China, the approaching con-flict between the Canton Army and the principalforces of the internal and imperialistic counter-revolution in China, i.e ., with the Mukden militaristgroup, all indicate that the revolution in China hasentered a new phase in which the struggle forhegemony between the proletariat and the bour-geoisie will determine the further direction of the

1 1 4


revolution . The outcome of this struggle will deter-mine whether China develops along non-capitalistlines, along lines of conflict with world imperialismin alliance with the Soviet Republic, and the worldproletariat toward the ultimate aims of socialism,or whether a semi-emancipated China, concluding acompromise with the imperialist powers, will pro-ceed along the lines of capitalist development ."When this was written Michael Borodin-com-

munist, bolshevist, atheist, apostle of the Sovietphilosophy and Soviet methods, was the chief adviserof the Canton Government . He had really succeededto the leadership of Doctor Sun Yat Sen, and was thedictator of the southern government . He went toChina originally as an envoy of the Russian SovietGovernment, having been called away from hisschool teaching in Hull House, Chicago, by Lenin,to come to Moscow for instructions in his new com-mission as agitator extraordinary in China . HullHouse, it will be recalled, is the great Chicagoeducational and socialist center, founded and con-ducted by Jane Addams, who is so staunchlydefended by the Federal Council. At this writingthere are indications that the conservative leadersof the southern government are attempting to throwoff the domination of the Russian Communist party .

This, however, does not obscure the fact that theCommunist party of Russia is attempting to takeadvantage of the disturbed condition of China tofasten a Soviet dictatorship upon China. This isindicated by the sudden enmity toward Christianmissionaries which developed during the advance ofthe Cantonese Army to the north .


1 1 5

This special Chinese number of the CommunistInternationale is devoted largely to instructionsissued to the Russian Soviet envoys in China . Greatemphasis is placed upon the importance of develop-ing another Red Army in China by Comrade Stalinin his speech to the Chinese Commission of the exec-utive committee of the Communist Internationale .In course of his remarks on this subject, he says :"First of all, the Communists of China must

intensify their political work in the army to theutmost and try to convert the army into a real andexemplary bearer of the ideas of the Chinese revolu-tion. This is specially necessary for the reason thatall kinds of generals, having nothing in commonwith the Kuomintang (the Nationalist Party inChina), are joining the Canton troops. These generalsjoined the Canton troops as the force which iscrushing the enemies of the people, but in doing sothey introduce elements of disintegration into thearmy .

"Chinese revolutionists, including the Chinesecommunists, must seriously take up and study mili-tary affairs . They must not regard military affairsas of second-rate importance, because in China this isone of the most important factors of the revolution ."

In considering creation of this great military forceit should be borne in mind that it is directed againstall religion . It is a war upon the Christian faith andit will be conducted by an army which according toMr. Foster, is the strongest in the world. As amatter of self-defense if the Federal Council ofChurches represents twenty million (20,000,000)Protestants it could be justified in assuming the

1 16


leadership in combating the red menace of the Chris-tian faith and organized religion . It would appearthat the Council should give support to adequatedefense for this nation which is sheltering Chris-tianity .This issue comes to the Federal Council on the

question as to whether Godless Soviet Russia shouldbe recognized by the United States . The RussianSoviet Government has been refused recognition bythe State Department under three administrations .Great pressure has been brought to bear by certainfinancial interests and radical groups to force theState Department to admit the Godless Sovietdictatorship into the family of nations . When askedas to the attitude of the Federal Council on thisquestion Reverend James Myers, industrial andfield secretary of the Federal Council of Churches,said :

"The Federal Council has never taken up the ques-tion, and so it is not of record. Personally I am infavor of the recognition of Soviet Russia. Christiansmust recognize that internationalism is above nation-alism ; the brotherhood of man must be recognizedif a man is a Christian ."Compare this with utterances that have come

from official Soviet Russia . Lunatcharsky, Com-missar of Public Instruction under the SovietGovernment, speaking at Moscow, said :

"Why ought we believe in God? We hate Chris-tianity and Christians ; even the best of them mustbe regarded as our enemies . They preach love of one'sneighbor and pity, which is contrary to our prin-ciples. Christian love is a hindrance to the develop-


1 1 7

ment of the revolution . Down with love of ourneighbor; what we want is hate . We must know howto hate, for only so we can conquer the universe ."

The only gesture that the Federal Council or anyof its cooperating and coordinating organizationshas made is a participation on the part of some ofits members in trips to Russia . Dr. Harry F. Ward,author of the Federal Council's social creed, hasbeen there a number of times gathering materialfor the defense of communism. The most notableexpedition was the self-appointed commission ofSherwood Eddy . Among those in Sherwood Eddy'scommission were Dr. Charles C. Morrison, editorof the Christian Century ; Kirby Page, member ofFederal Council's Commission on InternationalJustice and Good Will ; and Dr. William H . Scarlett,Dean of Christ Cathedral, St . Louis. Upon returningto New York from Russia, Mr . Page, claiming to bespeaking for the commission, gave a very glowingaccount of the success of communism in Russia,although his subsequent writings did not supporthis declarations .

But there should be no doubt as to the attitude ofthe Federal Council of Churches toward the worldrevolution of Soviet Russia . Here is where it couldspeak truthfully for twenty million church men andwomen if the facts of the Red Revolution were sub-mitted to them . Here is an international questionwhich should be within the scope of the FederalCouncil's activities. Here is an opportunity to defendthe Christian faith in international affairs .

CHAPTER XII

OPPOSITION TO THEAMERICAN LEGION MEASURES

"EVER again will capital and labor profiteerat home while we are fighting in defense of the

country," was on the lips of every member of theAmerican Expeditionary Force when they returnedfrom France. Of course, all of the impressions as toprofiteering which the veterans entertained whenthey returned to civil life were not based upon facts .There were exaggerated reports as to really whathappened in some quarters while the veterans wereabroad, while some of the real evils were concealed .At the same time the war prices and profits as a wholecannot be defended and the veterans were justifiedin most of their complaints .

There is no doubt that some well considered legis-lation should be passed to meet the economic con-ditions that have always developed in this countryin war time. It is a subject which was taken up atthe first meeting of the American Legion, and hasbeen discussed with great earnestness at every sub-sequent meeting. This discussion finally resulted inthe appointment of a special committee by ColonelHanford MacNider in 1921 when he was NationalCommander of the American Legion . The committee

OPPOSITION TO THE AMERICAN LEGION MEASURES 1 1 9

was instructed to devise a bill which would place inthe hands of the President immediately upon thedeclaration of war the authority that it was foundnecessary to confer upon him towards the close ofthe World War.

Colonel John Thomas Taylor, Vice-Chairman ofthe National Legislative Committee of the Amer-ican Legion at the opening of a hearing before theSenate Committee on Military Affairs, in stating thepurpose of the American Legion's bill, which isknown as the Capper-Johnson Bill, said :

"The object of the legislation is two-fold : first,to promote peace ; that is the primary object ; andnext, to see that there shall be, in the event of anotheremergency, no slackers and no profiteers-that everyman and woman in the country shall do their shareeither in the actual military forces or in the industrialforces, to see to it that this nation of ours is a unitednation in the event of another military necessity ."

The Capper-Johnson Bill was made the subjectof an extended study at the War College through aterm of four years . Major General Hanson E . Ely,who was then Commandant of the War College, wasa member of the American Legion special committeeand through him the representatives of the veteranshad access to all of the War College records andwent into the subject with great care. At the hearingbefore the Senate Committee Secretary of War Davis,Assistant Secretary of War MacNider, SenatorArthur Capper of Kansas, Major General HansonEly, Major General John H. Lejeune, Commandantof the Marine Corps, Robert S. Brookings of St .Louis, Chairman of the Price Fixing Committee

1 20


during the war, Bernard M. Baruch, Mrs . LucyFenn, Daughters of the American Revolution, andMrs. H. B. Wurdeman, appeared among other wit-nesses in the support of legislation of this character .All agreed that something like the Capper-JohnsonBill should be passed although amendments weresuggested, not only by the witnesses but by some ofthe members of the Committee . A representative ofthe American Federation of Labor was not fullycommitted to the bill and submitted a letter fromPresident Green of the organization suggesting thata conference between the representative of the Feder-ation and the American Legion be held to work outan agreement on the provisions of the bill .

In opposition to the bill there appeared repre-sentatives of the American Civil Liberties Union, theFellowship of Reconciliation, and the NationalCouncil for the Prevention of War . All of theseorganizations are in control of radical-pacifists, andagain the Federal Council of Churches of Christ inAmerica was a cooperating body .

"Miss Isabelle Kendig, representing the Ameri-can Civil Liberties Union, appears to have mobilizedthe opposition to the bill . This is not the lady's legalname, as stated in another chapter, for she is marriedaccording to her admission before the House Com-mittee on Immigration . She belongs to one of theschools of socialism under which women do notchange their names when they are united in mar-riage. Dr. John A . Ryan was one of the chief wit-nesses appearing as a member of the ExecutiveBoard of the National Council for the Prevention ofWar. Assuming that Dr . Ryan who is a professor at

OPPOSITION TO THE AMERICAN LEGION MEASURES 1 21

Georgetown University, helps shape the policy ofthe National Council for the Prevention of War,and thus was a spokesman for that organization, itmay be well to look into the character of thisorganization .

The Washington Post of January 23, 1925, states :"Frederick J. Libby, super-pacifist, executive

secretary of the National Council for the Preventionof War, yesterday was denied the right to speak inthe public schools of the District of Columbia. Thiswas done by the action of the Board of Educationin adopting a report presented at yesterday's meet-ing of the special committee to investigate Libby ."

The report said in part, as follows :"With the desire to be correct in our conclusions

we have sought and have carefully studied and con-sidered the masses of records submitted to us, bear-ing upon the activities of said Libby ; and have beencontrolled by the broad scope and purposes under-lying the patriotic organization of which we aremembers .

"The perusal of the documentary evidence wehave had in hand gives an astounding revelation ofthe extent and character of the propaganda workthroughout the country, originating with the class ofrevolutionary organizations now operating in thiscountry, whose object and purpose is to undermineand, if possible, to .destroy the prosperity nowenjoyed by all who live within our borders and whorespect our Constitution and laws .

"Through their secret agents and representatives,acting under their orders and instructions, they havebecome active in their pernicious work ; and through

1 22


organizations pretending to aid the masses, they seekto create discontent, to arouse ill feeling by mis-representing facts, and so to mislead the misinformedand ignorant classes among our fellow citizens ."From the evidence submitted to us we have

become convinced that Frederick J . Libby is one ofthe recognized leaders in the movement originatedwith the avowed enemies of this country ."

Another active member of the National Councilfor the Prevention of War is Sara Bard Field ofCalifornia. In February, 1922, according to the LuskReport, she made a declaration of her principles ina letter in which she stated :

"I am a radical. I believe war rests upon ourpresent economic falsity. I believe that the com-petitive system means commercial and industrialwar, inevitably leading to bloody war . Until we haveestablished cooperation in making and in distributingthe world's production, which includes most of thenecessities and luxuries used by man, we shall haveintensive activities on the part of nation againstnation to gain trade centers and spheres of influence,until finally the activity is carried to the militarystruggle. I have no confidence in anything short ofrevolution, peaceful by all means if possible, bloodyif necessary, in every land resulting in the establish-ment of the communistic idea in some form to doaway with war ."Women should stop at nothing but the full

abolishment of war. They give life at the greatestcost. And this life can only be preserved by thegreatest wisdom, which is to see on what foundationwar rests ; pull the support from under it and go

OPPOSITION TO THE AMERICAN LEGION MEASURES 123

about the building of the new world as Russia ispainfully trying to do ."It was not so much what Samuel M. Cavert,

General Secretary of the Federal Council ofChurches, said at the hearings as the fact that hisappearance with the radicals and pacifists createdthe impression that the churches of the country areopposed to the Capper-Johnson Bill or any legis-lation of this character . In the press notice handedout to the correspondents prominence was given tothe fact that Mr. Cavert appeared. The impressionwas conveyed that the churches are supporting theposition taken by the radical and the pacifist organ-izations. Neither Mr. Cavert nor any of the witnessesof the American Civil Liberties group discussed thepending bill intelligently or made any constructivesuggestions as to how it could be amended to meetthe situation that develops at the opening of war .Continually the members of the committee werecompelled to inform the opposition witnesses as tothe provisions of the bill and ask them to discussthem instead of a fancied or assumed measure .Mr. Cavert opened his testimony by stating :"I am one of the general secretaries of the Federal

Council of Churches, which as I have no doubt youknow, is a federation of twenty-eight Protestantchurches, and I am particularly happy to follow ourgood friend, Father Ryan, and perhaps reinforce atleast one or two points which he has suggested .

Father Ryan, as has been stated, was a memberof the Executive Board of the National Council forthe Prevention of War . Mr. Cavert evidently wantedto create the impression that the Protestant churches

1 24


were united in the support of this radical organiza-tion's opposition of the bill .Mr. Cavert stated that the attitude of the Federal

Council of Churches on the pending legislation wasexpressed in two sentences from a resolution adoptedby its Administrative Committee. These sentencesread as follows :

"We believe that any program of war-time con-scription should be put into force only by act ofCongress with reference to a specific emergency ."We record strong convictions that whenever

human life is subject to conscription, materialresources should be conscripted with equal clearnessand vigor."Although from the press notices it would be

inferred that the Federal Council of Churches wasopposed to the Capper-Johnson Bill, Mr . Cavertproceeded to confuse the minds of the members ofthe committee by stating :

"You will note, Mr. Chairman, that these resolu-tions make no mention of the Capper-Johnson Bill .They are not directed at this or any other measurenow before Congress .

"It is not the ordinary practice of the FederalCouncil of Churches to indorse or oppose specificmeasures as such. These resolutions, however, laydown certain principles in the light of which it hasseemed to the administrative committee of theFederal Council of Churches that to oppose a mea-sure, which proposes as this measure does, to putinto effect a far-reaching program of conscription,is necessary.


"I am not here this afternoon to argue againstconscription as such-not at all. The resolution-letme read it again .

"We believe that any program of war time con-scription should be put into force only by act ofCongress with reference to a specific emergency ."Chairman Wadsworth interrupted Mr . Cavert's

recital of the facts that Abraham Lincoln was opposedto the Mexican War, by asking him if he was at thehearing on the previous day when the bill was readso that he might be advised as to the character ofthe bill. Mr. Cavert expressed regrets that he wasnot. For his information Chairman Wadsworth said :

"I took occasion during the hearings to read intothe records the language of the bill which passed theSenate in 1920, amending the National Defense Act,which introduced the subject of organizing selectivedraft in the event of another war . The amendmentread about like this : `When Congress shall declareand the President shall proclaim a major nationalemergency, then'-and following that the automatictaking effect of the selective draft act."This explanation ought to have satisfied Mr .

Cavert that the legislation pending was in accordancewith the resolution passed by the AdministrativeCommittee of the Federal Council of Churches pro-vided that the war time conscription should be putin force by an act of Congress, but it did not . Thisrepresentative of twenty-eight Protestant churchescontinued to ramble along aimlessly protestingagainst the bill in an indefinite way . He could notkeep off the Mexican War .

1 26


"May I illustrate my point," continued Mr .Cavert. "Let us suppose, which is undoubtedly in therealm of the highly hypothetical, that as the resultof some of the present ill feeling with Mexico, eitherover economic conditions or alleged religious perse-cutions, that war should be declared, it would beentirely in the competence of one man to say thatall of our manhood should be conscripted for thatwar, a war which in your judgment, I am sure, aswell as in mine, would be highly wrong and more orless unjustified. A matter that affects so directly themoral conviction and consciences of men as con-scription in time of war ought not to be put intoeffect automatically or semi-automatically, but reallyought to have brought to bear upon it enlightenedpublic discretion ."

"If we waited for general public discretion undercircumstances which you mentioned;" interjectedSenator Reed, "the Mexicans would already be occu-pying a good many cities in Texas, might they not?"

"Why, it is theoretically possible," admitted Mr.Cavert and turned his attention to the other sen-tences of the Federal Council of Churches resolu-tions. He insisted that the Capper-Johnson Billwould not conscript wealth as provided in theCouncil's resolutions . In the course of his testimonyon this point, Mr. Cavert said : "My objection tothe bill, Mr. Chairman, is that it does not useequally precise language with regard to capital thatit uses in regard to human life . It says draft withregard to human life. Everybody knows what thatmeans. The President has no option there. Draftmeans a definite thing, but control means that he


may get $5 .00 or it may mean that he will get$95.00."

"Let me make an observation," said ChairmanWadsworth. "Perhaps you can enlighten me . Thusfar in your illustration you have taken merely acorporation. Would you carry out your illustrationlogically and apply it, we will say to the farmer whoowns land, who gets his living from it, and he is theonly person who does-he and his family ."Mr. Cavert said : "I do not know whether I can

carry that out or not .""My curiosity was aroused," insisted Chairman

Wadsworth, "by your use of the phrase 'conscrip-tion of wealth,' and I wondered with what kind ofwealth you were going to be satisfied ."Mr. Cavert: "There is just one thing which would

satisfy me, and that is the thing that is in the reso-lution-how you may work it out in detail I do notknow-to deal with the material resources with justas much fairness and just as much regard as you dealwith human life ."Chairman Wadsworth : "That is an eloquent reso-

lution, I admit, but we are trying to anticipate justhow that can be done with respect to all kinds ofwealth, and you had rather impressive views aboutit and I did not know but what you had workedthat out ."Mr. Cavert : "Yes, my views are quite emphatic .

I know it means something very drastic. You takeJohn Smith, the foreman of the Bethlehem Company,and you require him to lay down everything he hasand everything he is if necessary for the sake ofwinning the war for the country . Now I say let us

1 28


take Mr. Charles M. Schwab and require him to laydown everything he has got for the sake of winningthe war for the same country. I do not say that thatis a practical thing, but I say that morally one thingstands on an equal footing with the other ."

Senator Fletcher : "Are you satisfied to use theword draft in place of control with reference toindustry?"Mr. Cavert : "I would except for the fact that as

the Chairman has pointed out we do not know whatdraft means when you apply it to wealth ."

Senator Reed : "Perhaps it is only fair to suggestthat Mr. Schwab did incur great personal danger inthe course of the World War. He came pretty nearto being drowned by a German submarine so it ishardly fair to pick him out as an illustration of aprofiteer who took no risk."Senator McMaster: "Mr. Chairman, did he sug-

gest the language that he would put in this bill?"Chairman Wadsworth : "Not yet."Senator McMaster : "I would like to get a clear

idea of this . For instance, in conscripting wealth youwould go, for one thing, through the community andget hold of all the savings certificates and all of thatkind of thing ; how far would you go in conscriptingwealth if you put it in the bill?"Mr. Cavert : "I would not put it in a bill . I would

not adopt a bill at all ."Senator McMaster : "Just a moment ago you

stated that if the conscription of wealth was in thebill you would be advocating it ."Mr. Cavern "I said I might be advocating it . I

only say that because some of my friends in the


American Legion have termed this a peace-timemeasure. I do not think it is ever possible to putwealth on quite the same basis as human life, butI think if you are going to have a bill of this sortthen you ought to make every possible effort to seethat capital is treated in the same regard as youtreat a man ."Senator Reed : "When you draft a man you take

his person for the service of the government. Youcannot do that with capital ."Mr. Cavert : "I am afraid you are right ."Senator Reed : "When you tax capital, you take

part or all of it for the use of the government . Aren'tyou just quibbling with words?"Mr. Cavert's testimony throughout showed clearly

that either he was quibbling or had no knowledge ofthe bill pending before the Committee . At the sametime there was a purpose not only in his appearancebut his testimony. It was to defeat this bill, as it hadthe appearance of a preparedness measure . Whilepleading that his heart was going out after the menwho would be called for service in the event of war,he did not make any proposal by which capital couldbe placed upon the same basis or war profiteeringcould be prohibited . Pacifists of his type frequentlyinsist that it is the moneyed interests which promotewar, but at the same time they refuse to cooperatewith those who won the World War in attemptingto take the profit out of war .This is the only conclusion that can be reached

in reading Dr . Cavert's testimony when he wasassuming to speak for 20,000,000 Protestant churchmen and women. This also applies to the Adminis-

1 30

PASTORS POLITICIANS PACIFISTS

trative Committee of the Federal Council of Churcheswhich passed a resolution giving Mr . Cavert author-ity and instructions to appear before the SenateCommittee on Military Affairs in opposition to abill which was prepared by the American Legionafter years of study of the economic problems of war .

CHAPTER XIII

THE FEDERAL COUNCIL'SDEPARTMENT OF STATE

THE Federal Council's intent to rule the Nation'sforeign affairs is no less firm and no less frankly

admitted than is its purpose to dominate the homegovernment .In the 1927 "Handbook of the Churches," the

official publication of the Federal Council, Dr . Cad-man, the Federal Council's President, in his forewordon page 7, says : "The American Churches are goingto grapple courageously with great social and Inter-national questions ." "The day is past when anyrealm of our economic, industrial, social, political orInternational life will be regarded as outside thesphere of responsibility of the churches .

"There is a new consciousness abroad that Prot-estantism has too easily surrendered to the State ."

In these quoted words of the President of theFederal Council, which are his most recent utter-ances on the subject, we find the bald truth of thecharges we are making against this ecclesiasticalhierarchy.Until within recent years, the church leaders in

America endeavored, as did the Master, to make theworld righteous by instilling righteousness into the

132


hearts of the individual citizens of the world. But,the Federal Council's impatience, coupled with thelatter-day acquisition of political power, by thishierarchy, has led it to discard the Nazarene's planof individual salvation, and to substitute masspolitical influence.

The tools they once accused the Catholic Churchof trying to employ, the Protestant hierarchy is nowutilizing with a consummate skill, which suggestsa long and careful study of the art they once con-demned.

In the Federal Council's action in its attempt tocontrol the United States Government in its rela-tions to Nicaragua and other Central AmericanStates, it is operating true to form . Also, it is operat-ing in concert with the same radical elements whichhave long since learned to rely comfortably upon theFederal Council's hearty support .

The "center" organization at present engaged inpropaganda against the United States and in favorof the Socialist-Communist scheme to sovietizeMexico and all Central American States, is a newlyspawned organization known as the "Non-Inter-vention Citizens Committee ."

Through the members of this Committee the workis carried out to more than one hundred organiza-tions, some of them openly Socialistic and Com-munistic, while others (following the usual strategy)are legitimate enough, but appear to be in the handsof clever adepts . This Citizens' Committee is inter-esting to look at . Let us look at it .

In the list comprising the "center" 13 are foreignborn . Of these, 8 were born in Russia . They are

THE FEDERAL COUNCILS DEPARTMENT OF STATE 1 33

Schlossberg, Hillquit, Danish, Vladeck, Zuckerman,Schneiderman, Budish and Cohn. Muste was bornin the Netherlands ; Claessens, in Switzerland ;Lieberman in Lithuania ; Wise in Hungary andBeckerman in England .

Nineteen are openly affiliated with the Socialistparty, and practically all of the others have beenengaged in some form of activity to advance theSocialist scheme . The 19 are : Schlossberg, Hillquit,Vladeck, Beckerman, Cohn, Muste, Budish, Zucker-man, Danish, Claessens, Lieberman and Schneider-man-all born outside the United States, and Thomas,Budenz, Holmes, Wood, Beardsley, Dunn and Ship-lacoff. The birthplace of Shiplacoff is not known .Dunn affiliates more actively with the Communiststhan with the Socialists.Seven are affiliated with the Rand School. They

are : Schlossberg, Danish, Lieberman, Hillquit-born outside the United States-and Thomas, Holmesand Beardsley.

Nine are connected with the League for IndustrialDemocracy (formerly the Intercollegiate SocialistSociety) . They are Hillquit, Danish, Vladeck andMuste, born outside the United States-and Dunn,Holmes, Ernst, Thomas and Sayre. The birthplaceof Ernst is not known .

Ten are connected with the American Civil Liber-ties Union . They are Vladeck, Muste, Schneiderman,Wise, all born outside the United States, and Dunn,Holmes, Wood, Thomas, Sayre and Villiard .

Seven are affiliated with the Fellowship of Recon-ciliation. They are Muste and Wise, born outside the

1 3 4


United States, and Holmes, Thomas, Wood, Sayreand Villard .

Eight are connected with the radical SocialistMagazine known as "The Labor Age," formerly the"Socialist Review ." They are Danish, Vladeck,Muste, Schneiderman, Budenz, Cohn, Budish, allborn outside the United States, and Holmes .

Six are found connected with the Pioneer Youths,a part of what is commonly called the Youth Move-ment in the United States . They are Schlossberg,Danish, Vladeck, Muste, Lieberman and Cohn, allborn outside the United States .

Three members of the "Center" are on the boardof the Garland Fund, which supplies financial aid toradical movements and propaganda . They are Dunn,Ernst and Thomas .

This by no means completes the list of interesting"hook-ups" of the Non-Intervention Citizens' Leaguewith radical propaganda organizations and withorganizations offering fertile fields for sowing prop-aganda .

This Non-Intervention Committee, through its"Center" personnel is connected with forty (40)different organizations, thirteen (13) of which func-tioned before the war and while we were in the war,three (3) educational movements and nine (9) pub-lications .

In order to keep the record straight and that thereader may understand the nature, character, andpurpose of these organizations, educational institu-tions and publications, they are listed herewith .

The thirteen (13) organizations functioning duringthe war or immediately preceding or thereafter, are :

THE FEDERAL COUNCIL'S DEPARTMENT OF STATE 135

The Liberty Defense ; The People's Council ; FirstAmerican Conference for Terms of Peace ; EmergencyPeace Federation ; League to Limit Armament ; CivilLiberties Bureau ; Neutral Conference Committee ;Collegiate Anti-Military League; Union for Demo-cratic Control ; National Trade Union Committeefor Russia; American Relief for Russian Children ;People's Freedom Union ; American Union AgainstMilitarism .The twenty-seven (27) organizations functioning

since the war, most of which are today carrying onsome form of anti-American and un-American propa-ganda are : The Amalgamated Clothing Workers ;The Pioneer Youth ; the Russian Industrial Corpora-tion; the Socialist Party of America ; the Cloth Hat,Cap and Millinery Workers Union ; the Conferencefor Progressive Political Action ; the League forIndustrial Democracy; the International Ladies'Garment Workers Union ; the Workingmen's Circle ;the Civic Club of New York City ; the AmericanCivil Liberties Union ; the Fellowship of Reconcili-ation ; the Teachers' Union of New York ; the TextileWorkers' Union ; the Knit Goods Workers' Union ;the Woman's Trade Union League ; the Open ForumSpeakers' Council ; the American-Russian Recon-struction Farms ; the Russian American IndustrialCorporation; the Garland Fund ; the Committee ofAcademic Freedom ; the Committee on Militarism ;the People's Legislative Service ; the Association forthe Advancement of the Colored People ; the ForeignPolicy Association ; the Church League for IndustrialDemocracy ; the Fellowship of Youth for Peace .

Where does the Federal Council of Churches come in?

1 3 6


The Federal Council of Churches is found to besinging a loud and important melody in this verymixed choir. The Non-Intervention "Citizens" Com-mittee is divided into six groups . Under the desig-nation "Clergy" we find the following Federal Coun-cil general staff officers : Rev. Dr . S. Parkes Cadman,President of the Federal Council of Churches ;Samuel M. Cavert, General Secretary, FederalCouncil of Churches, and lined up in their distin-gu ; shed platoon are, among others, Dr . Samuel GuyInman, Rev. Ralph W. Sockman, Rev. Karl Reiland,Rev. 0. Russell Bowie, Rev. John Haynes Holmes,Rev. John H. Lathrop, Rev. John W. Langdale,Rev. S. M. Shoemaker, Jr., Rev. Henry EmersonCobb, Rev. A. Lane Miller, Rev. T. Guthrie Speers,Rev. Finis S. Idleman, Rev. W. T. Crocker, Rev.Minot Simons, Rev . Halford E . Luccock, and Rev .Isaac Landman .President Cadman told the world how this whole

Central American matter was to be handled by thesovereign government of the United States, underthe direction of the Federal Council on January 15,1927, in the New York Herald Tribune. He admittedthat he did not know all the facts upon which tobase a correct opinion, but he assured his readersthat the Federal Council was giving the issues con-sideration, and that the Administrative Committeeof the Council (corresponding to the College ofCardinals, but with much more power) would shortlymake a full statement by which the yeomanry ofAmerica would be able to govern its mental processes .

But like the Prescient Field Marshal that he is,Dr. Cadman snaps his fingers at such carefully com-

THE FEDERAL COUNCIL'S DEPARTMENT OF STATE 137

piled information as the Nation's Department ofState, with its manifold avenues of information isin possession of, and says, in effect, "Pooh, pooh,for facts!" Quoting verbatim his published pro-nouncement, he said, in the paper and on the datecited above, "No matter what thefacts may bethere is no occasion for resorting to other than peace-ful means of settlement ." Truly, this great hier-archy of Churches in America, thus definitely andpronouncedly hooked up with this fine assortmentof outstanding patriotic "Citizens" and organiza-tions, is most helpful in its attempted gratuitouschauffeuring of the foreign policy of the Republic, ina crisis when every counsel of wisdom would indicatethe need for cautious, thoroughly well-advised state-ments, or none at all .

Prominent among the list of church leaders yokedup with the Non-Intervention "Citizens" Com-mittee, is the Rev . Samuel Guy Inman. The Non-Intervention Committee held a "School for Speakers"in New York City on February 23rd and 24th, 1927 ;and Dr. Inman was on the faculty . Dr. Inman madethe statement that when the United States was atwar, he was in Mexico, serving as the head of thePeople's Institute, and that some 500 or 600 of thosewhom he graduated were now in strategic positions inthe present Mexican government. The People'sInstitute was, and is, an organization designed toteach the theories of Socialism and Communism,properly sugar-coated .When his country is at war, Dr . Inman is in a

foreign country, teaching under a thin disguise theprinciples calculated to aid and comfort the enemy .

1 3 8

PASTORS POLITICIANS, PACIFISTS

And when his country is endeavoring to steer acautious course and avoid any necessity for otherthan a peaceful arbitrament, the Reverend Doctoris found to be home, engaged with a motley crew inrocking the boat . It is very probable that if suchcitizens as Schlossberg, Vladeck, Beckerman, Cohn,Muste, Budish, Zuckerman, Danish, Claessens,Lieberman, Schneiderman, Budenz, and Shiplacoffwere to attend divine services in a body, they wouldnot be unlikely to select their colleague as theirchaplain .Dr. Sidney L. Gulick is one of the outstanding

members of the cabinet of the Federal Council ofChurches. Dr. Gulick preceded Dr . Inman on theprogram of the Non-Intervention Committee's Schoolfor Speakers in February . Dr. Gulick represents theWest Coast of the Pacific in the Federal Council'sCollege of foreign Ambassadors Extraordinary. Theactivities of Dr. Gulick and the other members ofthe Federal Council's general staff in relation to thecrisis in China, are viewed with exceeding joy bythe Communist Third Internationale . They areplaying the game exactly as the Third Internationaledirected that it be played.The Communists have avowed their desire and

plan to play one faction against another in China,for the purpose, not of effecting Chinese liberty orChinese progress, but for the open purpose of settingup a Soviet Government there.

Part of their thesis for the Second Congress of theCommunist Internationale reads as follows :

" Foreign domination has obstructed the free devel-opment of the social forces, and, therefore, its over-

THE FEDERAL COUNCIL'S DEPARTMENT OF STATE 1 39

throw is the first step toward a revolution in thecolonies. So, to help overthrow the foreign rule inthe colonies is not to endorse the Nationalist aspira-tions of the natives, but to open the way to thesmothered proletariat there." The "smothered pro-letariat," as used here, of course, means the actualand potential Soviet forces. Lenin goes on to say,somewhat naively, that "For the overthrow offoreign capitalism, which is the first step towardrevolution, the cooperation of the bourgeois Nation-alist revolutionary elements is useful." In otherwords, the first step toward making China Com-munistic and Soviet, is to incite her natives, frommistaken patriotic motives to throw out all foreigncapital; and then the wedge of communism may beentered.

Now, the Third Internationale, acting upon thiswell-defined program, set about to accomplish theirpurpose. In the "Communist International," theofficial organ of the Executive Committee of theThird Internationale, in the issue of February 28,1927, we read :

"In order to mobilize all the `reserves' of the Inter-nationale Revolutionary Movement, it is necessaryto carry out, with the speed commensurate with theexceptional importance of the matter, the unitedfront under the slogan, `Hands off China,' while atthe same time, the Communists' parties must actindependently and employ all forms of mass revolu-tionary struggle."Now shortly after this directive went forth from

Moscow, the Federal Council of Churches of Christ

1 40


in America, whether innocently or not, stepped intothe parade with both feet, and voted excellent"Hands off China" resolutions, exactly as Moscowdesired. Nor was the Communist group ungratefulto the Federal Council for this helpful action ; forthe" Daily Worker," the official organ of the Workers(Communist) Party of America, in its issue of March28, 1927, says : "China's National awakening, whichhas been marked by the leadership of students andworking-class agitators, has no terrors for the FederalCouncil of Churches of Christ in America . Thatalliance of 22,000,000 Protestant church members,which often is heard in defense of civil liberties andthe right of collective bargaining, has issued a letterof congratulation to the Nationalist Movement inChina. Coming at the moment of the Fall of Shanghai,it can be interpreted only as a pledge of cooperation ."

Is it a coincidence? Is the friendly, appreciativeattitude of the Third Internationale toward theaction of the General Council in Mexican, Nica-raguan and Chinese affairs an accident?Wherever we find strong movements operating to

embarrass the delicate activities and negotiations ofour Government, the Federal Council is found alignedwith these movements . When we find a program ofinsidious, adroit intrigue skillfully played by com-munism to further its long, patient ends, we notethat communism gratefully counts the Federal Coun-cil of Churches of Christ in America as one of itsdependable "reserves." Does the war college of theFederal Council, the Administrative Committee,indeed speak for 20,000,000 American Protestantcitizens?

CHAPTER XIV

WILL THE CHURCHES OR THEGOVERNMENT ACT?

THERE is nothing that a member of Congressfears more than the disfavor of church mem-

bers. Especially do those who are not acquaintedwith the workings of the Protestant churches viewwith alarm any protest that comes from an organi-zation which claims to represent them . The mannerin which the church leaders mobilized the sentimentof the country behind prohibition has profoundlyimpressed every man in public life .

But the wide scope of the activities of the con-trolling group of the Federal Council and its alliedorganizations has raised the question as to its author-ity to speak for 20,000,000 church members, amongthe more thoughtful members of Congress . Some ofthem are active in church affairs and they have beenmaking quiet and discreet inquiries in church circlesand they have found very little knowledge amonglaymen and even among pastors of the politicalactivities of the Federal Council in national andinternational affairs . The great majority of pastorsand laymen have come in contact only with localFederal Councils which in the main have confinedtheir efforts to coordinating the efforts of the different

1 42


denominations in strictly religious affairs . The greatbody of earnest Christian men and women who haveconfined their efforts to "Brighten up the cornerwhere you are," have not been advised of the ambi-tious program of the super-Federal Council innational and international affairs .

But too many members of Congress have simplyaccepted the claims of the super-Federal Councilgroup at their face value . Not until RepresentativeArthur M. Free of California introduced a resolutionin the closing days of the sixty-ninth Congress wasthe authority of the controlling group of the FederalCouncil and allied organizations to speak for20,000,000 church members in all things political,questioned .Previous to this there had been much quiet dis-

cussion in the cloak-rooms by members of Congressof the dangerous tendencies of a group of the clergyto participate in politics . They would declare, inprivate conversation, not for publication, of course,that this course on the part of certain clergicalleaders is contrary to the American doctrine for theseparation of the state and church. Some of themwould go so far as to point out that it might developa clerical and anti-clerical party or group as existsin Europe. It remained for Mr. Free to courageouslydirect the attention of Congress and the countryto this dangerous tendency.Mr. Free's resolution was introduced as the result

of the publication of the charges contained in thefirst chapter of this book . That a searching investi-gation of the activities of the Federal Council shouldbe made for the information of the members of

WILL THE CHURCHES OR THE GOVERNMENT ACT? 1 43

Congress as well as all Protestant churchmen wasmade plain by the character of the speech insertedin the Congressional Record after the adjournmentof Congress by Representative John E . Rankin ofMississippi . Mr. Rankin in his impassionate outburstagainst Mr . Free and his resolution showed clearlythat he has read very little of the great mass ofliterature that had been circulated by the FederalCouncil and is not acquainted with its activities forthe past ten years . He has not even read carefullythe hearings before Congressional Committees atwhich the officials of the Federal Council appeared,much further than their frequent declaration thatthey were speaking for 20,000,000 Protestant churchmembers.

In replying to the charge that the Federal Councilhad been falsely claiming to speak for 20,000,000church men and women, Mr. Rankin declares :

"The truth of the matter is that it (FederalCouncil) represents more than 20,000,000 of the God-fearing, liberty-loving, patriotic, moral, intelligent,Christian men, women and children of the UnitedStates."

If this is true neither Mr . Rankin nor the con-trolling group of the Federal Council should objectto the inquiry which Mr . Free proposes in his reso-lution. Mr. Rankin would render a great service toCongress if he can establish the claim that anyorganization possesses the authority for speaking tothe Executive and Legislative branches of the Gov-ernment for not only all Protestant Christians, butbabies in the cradle . It is reallydue Congress as wellas church people that the exact character of the

1 44


authority of the Federal Council be establishedbeyond peradventure of a doubt .

From some of the communications that Mr . Freehas received from church leaders since the intro-duction of the resolution, astonishment is expressedthat any organization should assume to voice thesentiments of Protestants on political questions .Others indicate that they have already started aninvestigation of the activities of the Federal Counciland declare that they will bring it to the attentionof the next general conference or assembly of theirdenomination. Mr. Free has been almost uniformlycommended for his efforts to clear up the situation,first through the churches, and then in Congress ifthe status of the Federal Council is not made clearby clerical organizations .Mr. Free took this action with an earnest desire

to ascertain whether such authority as is claimed byMr. Rankin has been conferred upon the FederalCouncil. No member of Congress entertains a higherregard for the sacred character of the Church thanMr. Free. Not only in the introduction of his reso-lution but in all his public career he has supportedall measures which he thought were for the upbuild-ing of public morals . He has been unswerving in hissupport of prohibition .

The resolution which he introduced and the state-ment which he gave out at the time indicates clearlythat Mr. Free has no intentions of bringing anindictment against the organized churches or their20,000,000 members. A careful reading of both willprove this to any fair-minded man or woman . There

WILL THE CHURCHES OR THE GOVERNMENT ACT? 145

is nothing in them but solicitude for the welfare ofthe churches .

The following is the text of the resolution :"WHEREAS, There has appeared in a magazine most serious

charges against the Federal Council of Churches of Christ inAmerica, and"WHEREAS, It is set forth in these charges that representatives

of the Council are falsely claiming to speak for 20,000,000 churchmembers in supporting or opposing important legislation pendingbefore Congress, and"WHEREAS, It is charged that the Federal Council and its

affiliated and cooperating organizations have an annual budgetof about a million dollars, and"WHEREAS, Representatives of the Council are appearing

frequently before Committees of the Congress, and"WHEREAS, It is of vital interest to the House of Represen-

tatives and the Committees thereof to be advised regardingthe influences and connections of organizations and represen-tatives of such organizations seeking to influence legislation,"THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Committee on the

Judiciary be directed to g ve the officials of the Federal Councilof Churches of Christ in America an opportunity to submitan answer to the charges made in said magazine, and that thepublishers and editors of the magazine, and the authors of thecharges, be invited to submit evidence in support of the chargesmade by said magazine, which charges are as follows-

" 1 . That the Federal Council of Churches is attempting totake charge of affairs of the civil governinent and is continuallyadding to its program of the attempted management of affairswhich are distinctly non-religious and outside of the missions ofthe church as most members see it . The writers believe it isundermining the teachings of Christ and the constitutionalpolicy of the United States for the separation of the State andthe Church.

"2. That the group that controls the Federal Council ofChurches is falsely claiming to represent twenty million membersof the Christian Churches in national and international affairs .That it is in no way a representative body as will be shown by

146


its constitution and the manner of selecting its controllingcommittees .

"3. That the Federal Council of Churches is cooperatingwith and frequently working under the direction of radicalgroups. The same radical groups are affiliated with the ThirdInternationale, which is seeking to destroy all churches and tostifle all religion ."4. That from its inception the Federal Council has combated

every measure of adequate defense for the nation . It carriedon a campaign against preparedness, even when the country wasbeing drawn into the World War. The Federal Council isregularly cooperating with organizations which refused to sup-port the government when it was in the great conflict ."5. That among the leaders of the Federal Council are men

who are also active and influential directors in- many radical sub-versive organizations . The left wing or more radical element inthe Federal Council, is exerting an ever increasing influence ."6. That every effort to strengthen the laws for the exclusion

of undesirable immigrants from this country has been opposedby the Federal Council . In this it has acted under the directionof the American Civil Liberties Union which boasts of itsradicalism ."7. That the Federal Council, when the League of Nations

covenant was pending before the Senate, insisted that thetwenty million church members were demanding that the UnitedStates should join the league. This will be substantiated byofficial reports of the Council ."8. That the Federal Council, directed by a group of high-

priced international lawyers, succeeded in convincing the Senatethat the great body of church members was demanding thatthe United States adhere to the World Court covenant . In thiscampaign Elihu Root and George W. Wickersham were prom-inent and assumed the role of church leaders ."9. That the controlling group of the Federal Council favors

the complete cancellation of the foreign debt and is only waitingfor an opportune moment to mobilize the organization behindsuch a program."10. That the final objective of the controlling group of the

Federal Council is a united or state church with power to deal

WILL THE CHURCHES OR THE GOVERNMENT ACT? 1 47

with all political and economic questions even to the tariff .This statement will be supported by official documents of theCouncil ."ll. The entire program of the Federal Council is contrary

to the teachings of Christ and is paganism under the guise ofChristianity according to the multitude of devout churchmembers ."12. That the controlling group has at its command through

the Federal Council and its affiliated and cooperating organi-zations an annual budget of about a million dollars ."BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Committee on the

Judiciary be directed to report to the House whether or notthis is a subject for further investigation and recommendationsto the House."Mr. Free's resolution, it will be observed, is more

of the character of an inquiry than a demand for asweeping investigation by Congress of the FederalCouncil. It is simply a request that the Committeeon Judiciary take under consideration any evidencethat may be submitted in support of the charges andany answer that the Federal Council may choose tomake. In stating his purpose in introducing theresolution, Mr. Free declared :

"I realize that there is but little possibility ofsecuring any action on my resolution relative to thecharges brought in a magazine against the FederalCouncil of the Churches of Christ in America at thissession of Congress, but I do feel that by the intro-duction of the resolution I may bring about a studyof the matter by the churches of the country priorto the opening of the next session of Congress ."From time to time the members of Congress

have received communications on all sorts of legis-lative matters from the Federal Council of theChurches of Christ in America, which organization

1 4 8


consistently claims to represent in excess of twentymillion church people in the United States .

"Some of the representations made by this Coun-cil do not seem to me to be in harmony with repre-sentations made to me by various church organiza-tions throughout the United States . This was par-ticularly impressed upon me when a communicationwas presented by the American Civil Liberties Unionto the Committee on Immigration and Naturaliza-tion, of which I am a member, asking for a hearingon behalf of that organization, and other organiza-tions, including the Federal Council of the Churchesof Christ in America on the so-called DeportationBill H. R. 3774 .

"I had understood that the churches generallyfavored that bill and was utterly surprised to findthat a representative of the Federal Council of theChurches of Christ in America appeared in opposi-tion to certain provisions in the bill at that hearing,and particularly opposed the provisions which pro-vided that an alien sentenced to imprisonment fora term of one year or more in a penitentiary shouldbe deported and objected to the provisions providingfor deportation in case the cumulative sentences ofan alien amounted to as much as eighteen months .

"These activities on the part of the Federal Coun-cil have been, to say the least, confusing to membersof Congress, a majority of whom themselves aremembers of some church .

"The Federal Council officials should not onlyanswer the charges set forth in the articles in themagazine referred to in my resolution, but make cleartheir relations with the great body of church members .

WILL THE CHURCHES OR THE GOVERNMENT ACT? 149

"I would prefer to have this situation cleared upwithin the churches so that the members of Congresswill be advised whether it is the intention of churchmembers to permit the Federal Council to go intonational and international politics as spokesman forthem on matters not of a religious or moral char-acter. Otherwise I will press my resolution for pas-sage in the next session of Congress ."The vital issues raised here cannot be brushed

aside, as attempted by Mr. Rankin, with a sweepingdeclaration that the charges are directed against theChristian faith . Objections to the ambitious schemesof the group which is attempting to use the Protes-tant churches to advance their political plans can-not be taken as an attack upon religion or theorganized church.

It is for the 20,000,000 members so often referredto by the Federal Council to decide whether thechurches are to be drawn into politics . Is politics tobe preached from the pulpit? Are we, contrary tothe teachings of Christ, the Constitution and thespirit of American Institutions, to have in effecta union of the state and church?Only an awakening of the great body of earnest

Christian men and women will avert this catas-trophe to the Church and State .

CHAPTER XV

DR. CADMAN PLEADS GUILTY

T

HAT the clergymen and laymen of everyProtestant denomination have taken the charges

made in the first chapter of this book as a seriousindictment of the Federal Council of Churches ofChrist in America is clearly shown in the letterswhich are being received by Representative ArthurM. Free, of California, who introduced the resolutionfor their investigation by Congress . The activitiesand tendencies of the controlling group of the FederalCouncil have not gone unnoticed by many earnestand sincere Christians. Before Mr. Free's resolutioncalled the attention of the country to this subjecta great many church leaders had become thoroughlyalarmed at the political activities of the FederalCouncil .

There is a tendency in many of the letters toaccept the suggestion of Mr. Free that the investi-gation should be conducted by the churches. Thisit is generally admitted would be a wiser course asit would keep the affairs of the churches out ofCongress. However, many of the letters are ratherinsistent that Mr. Free press his resolution for pas-sage at the next session and that .the affairs of theFederal Council be thoroughly aired .

DR . CADMAN PLEADS GUILTY

1 5 1

Some of the churches have already taken steps tolet the Federal Council know that it has no authorityto speak for them in large affairs . The leadership inthis movement has been taken by the UnitedLutheran Church in America . That denominationappointed an official board of visitors with instruc-tions to make a thorough investigation of the policyand methods of the Federal Council .

This action was taken in 1924 and the officialvisitors did not report until October of 1926 . Withwhat great care this work was done by the officialvisitors is indicated by the declaration . in the firstparagraph of the document which states that thevisitors "have delayed a formal report to the exec-utive board of the United Lutheran Church in orderto give particular study to the official record ofproceedings rather than to merely recite the storywith incidental impressions of the occasion ."

And this thorough research into the activities ofthe Federal Council sustains all of the essentialcharges set forth in the first chapter of this book .It goes further and predicts that the Federal Council"must collapse from within or it must be recognizedas a super church body ."

The report goes on to say :"The elaborate organization of the federation,

with commissions for almost every conceivable phaseof human interest and activity, religious, educational,social, industrial and political ; local, national andinternational, presents an overwhelming task foranalytical study and evaluation .

"Without an extended statement of grounds forthem, we modestly present such conclusions as we

1 5 2


have reached in such study as we have been ab1'e tomake, for whatever consideration you may judgethem to be worth.

"1 . That the Federal Council, in its organizationand activities, is more formally than actually repre-sentative of the constituency for which it speaksand acts . Notwithstanding the official relationshipof the various church bodies to the Council, and theprovisions made for review of its activities, we areconvinced that few of the people in the constituentbodies and only a small per cent of the leaders evenare well enough acquainted with, or are definitelyenough interested in the activities of the Council,to make these bodies consciously responsible for thespirit of action of the Council or to direct, in anylarge way, its course of action .

"2 . That the Federal Council is the consistentexpression of reformed Protestantism of the mostdistinctive type, calvinistic to be specific, with atti-tude, principles and activities determined accordingto that type modified by other contacts only in sofar as policy requires . Accordingly, the activities ofthe Council, in social, civic and political spheres,are not always in harmony with the spirit of thegospel, or consistent with the principles of separationbetween the church and the state . It appears to usthat in relation to society at large, and in relationto government, it goes far in attempting in the nameof Protestantism what it condemns in Romanism .However, in accord with its calvinistic views andspirit along certain lines, and in many specificinstances, the Federal Council has been an efficientagency in promoting legitimate cooperation among


1 53

groups of churches, in bringing about a better under-standing, in the cultivation of a better public senti-ment and in modifying governmental policies wherethe rights of the church were involved."3. That much of the `survey' work of the Federal

Council is too superficially made to furnish reliabledata for general conclusions, and that in manyinstances, determining views are too unsound to beaccepted as a sound basis for theories, policies andprograms ."4. That the Federal Council seems to be largely

committed to the legalistic conception of God andof human life, and is not responsive to that which isdistinctively evangelical. But by this we do notwish to say that there are not outstanding individ-uals in the Federal Council who are evangelical inspirit and in words, but they do not give characterto the Council as a whole ."S. That the Federal Council, through the multi-

plication of commissions, iss projecting its activitiesto such a degree that only one of two things canresult in no distant future :

(1) It must collapse from within, or(2) It must be recognized as a super-church

body ."6. That the Federal Council shows strong ten-

dencies, if not clear purpose, to foster and promotecertain things which involve unfaithfulness and com-promise in full testimony to the truth . These twothings we name : (1) Unionism, and (2) the com-munity church .

"7. That there is some evidence of a dispositionto shift responsibility for some courses of some

1 54 ,


council departments and commissions, when suchdepartments or commissions draw criticism uponthemselves ."The Presbyterian Church has not gone as far as

the Lutheran, but has taken steps to curb theactivities of the Federal Council by giving it noticethat "all pronouncements on great moral questionswhich affect this church be submitted to the generalassembly for approval ."

Walter I. Clarke, manager publicity department,Presbyterian General Assembly, in a letter to Mr .Free, calls attention to this. Mr. Clarke says :

"I quote from the official minutes of the GeneralAssembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U .S.A .meeting in Baltimore, June 2, 1926 :

" `The standing committee on bills and overturespresents a report which was adopted as follows :

" `Overture 6-That the Presbyterian Church inthe U.S.A. deplores the recent unauthorized pro-nouncement of the Federal Council of Churches uponthe prohibition question ; and requests that in thefuture all pronouncements upon great moral ques-tions which affect this church be submitted to thegeneral assembly for approval .'

"I will be pleased to have you keep me postedconcerning the results of your action ."Reverend James M . Gray, President Moody Bible

Institute, Chicago, in his letter to Mr. Free, indicatesthat he has been giving serious thought to the policyof the Federal Council, and has reached the con-clusion that it is not in harmony with the distinc-tively American doctrine of the separation of thestate and church . He says :


1 5 5

"I am interested in the newspaper reports of yourresolution proposing an inquiry into the politicalactivities of the Federal Council of Churches . Manyearnest and sincere Christians will likewise be inter-ested and for their sake as well as my own I wouldlike to receive a copy of your resolution . I am sendingyou a copy of the Moody Bible Institute monthly ofFebruary, containing an editorial `Church and State'which is along the line on which you are thinking ."

Another indication of objections not only to thepolicy of the Federal Council but to the characterof its controlling group comes from Rev . I . CochraneHunt, Minister of the First Presbyterian Church, ofMemphis, Mo. He represents the southern branchof the Presbyterian Church .

In the course of his letter, Reverend Hunt says :"The church of which I am minister-southern

Presbyterian-is a member of the Federal Counciland our representatives have spent much valuabletime and effort vainly protesting against many ofthe things of which you complain . I do not objectto Congressional action by which undue activity ofany church as indicated in your resolution, may bedefinitely restrained . But I believe that the mostlasting effect could be obtained by the constituentchurches themselves, through their supreme judica-tories, in laying down policies of the Federal Counciland definitely limiting its rights and power to speakfor the constituent churches outside of the realmof spiritual life-incidentally, removing from leader-ship professional propagandists of any cause ."From Rev. C . J. Fisher, pastor of the Congre-

gational Church of Kewanee, Illinois, comes an

1 56

PASTORS, POLITICIANS, PACIFISTS .

emphatic declaration that the Federal Council doesnot represent his church, and refers to its efforts as"un-American propaganda ." He says :

"I am in hearty sympathy with your resolution .The Federal Council does not represent the Congre-gational Church of Kewanee, Illinois, or any of itsmembers. We have never delegated to the aboveorganization any right, power, or authority to speakfor us on any subject whatsoever . I am not in sym-pathy nor are any of my members, . with the remark-able activities of the Council along certain lines .It is high time that some one should investigate thisself-appointed group, and put a limit to their unoffi-cial, unrepresentative and often un-American propa-ganda."

"Bordering on sedition" is the classification thatRev. Frederick Getty, pastor of the M . E. Church,Oak Grove, Missouri, gave to the Federal Councilliterature. His views are given in few words butthey have no uncertain ring . In the course of hisletter, Reverend Getty says :

"I want to send a word of commendation for yourresolution . I have been disturbed again and again bycommunications received from the Federal Council .While they claim to represent the churches, let mesay positively that they do not speak for all thechurches nor for all the preachers. My judgment isthat many of their utterances border upon sedition ."Rev. John P. Martin, pastor of the Community

M. E. Church, Goshen, Ohio, in the course of hisletter to Mr. Free described how the radicals usedwhat used to be known as mob tactics in puttingthrough pacifist resolutions . He says :


1 5 7

"Here is an illustrative incident . At the StatePastors' Conference in Columbus, last January,resolutions were passed demanding the outlawry ofwar and criticizing the foreign policy of the UnitedStates. About a thousand pastors were in attendance,but the resolutions were drafted by minor groups andwere not brought before the conference until justbefore adjournment, when about 200 were present .The resolution did not represent one-third of thepastors and very few of them had brought them tothe attention of their congregations . The Protestantchurch members are not pacifists. I hope Congresswill be able to get the facts about the FederalCouncil."

These are quotations from a few of the great floodof letters which Mr. Free received from pastors beforehe left Washington . The resolution was introducedonly four days before Congress adjourned and yethe had received several hundred letters before heleft for his home in California. It will be noted thatmost of them come from the smaller cities where itis contended that pacifism has gained a strongerfoothold .

About as many letters came from prominent lay-men as were received from clergymen . There areindications of an awakening in this quarter to thedangerous tendency of the Federal Council's policy.William J . Vanyon, an attorney of St . Joseph, Mich .,protests vigorously against the assumption of author-ity on the part of the Federal Council . He declared :"More power to you! I wondered why Congress

has not investigated this organization, professing tospeak for 20,000,000 church people, when in fact it

1 58


does not speak for anyone except its officers . Asone who has contributed nearly $9,000 to the build-ing of a new Congregational Church here, and whosebrothers put up another $4,000, I desire to say thatthe Federal Council has never represented us . Idoubt that there are more than six members of ourcongregation consisting of more than 200 families,who know anything about the Council or its officers,except when our minister in the past mentionedsomething he wanted to put over ."From Denver, Colo., over the signature of Duncan

Bond, comes a cheering paragraph to Mr . Free .He says :

"Your resolution is commendable and timely . Ihave made contributions to churches from time totime, but am decidedly of the opinion that churchand state should be kept separate, along the linesupon which our forefathers conceived our form ofgovernment as to liberty and religious freedom ."Harry A. Jung, a prominent business man of

Chicago, Illinois, objects to the efforts of the FederalCouncil to take over the duties of the regularlyelected members of Congress. He goes straight tothe point, writing :"I am not an unbeliever, an atheist or agnostic .

My quarrel with the Federal Council is wholly thatof a patriotic citizen, who has felt that this body isendeavoring to influence the judgment of the electedrepresentatives of the people ; and since they aremostly hair-splitting theologians, their religiousfervor makes them dangerous to our common wealwhen they get far afield from the things that shouldconcern them most ."


1 59

Harold J. Howe, of Chicago, an attorney and aMethodist, who has given his service as an instructorat the military training camps, declares emphaticallythat the Federal Council does not represent the rankand file of the churches. Writing to Mr . Free, he says .

"As a member of the Protestant Church, and asa citizen, I congratulate you . Your action is fullyjustified, for the Council does not represent theopinion of the rank and file of the church members,even the Methodist Church of which I am a member .I am a graduate of the University of Illinois, wheremilitary training is compulsory and the student bodyis proud of its R .O .T.C . unit whose graduates gavesuch a good account of themselves during the war .I have been an instructor at the C .M.T.C. campsat Camp Custer. The charges made by these self-appointed representatives of the churches arechildish."

Doctor Corliss D . Coon, of Manson, Iowa, declaresthat the claim of the Federal Council that it repre-sents 20,000,000 church members is laughable . Inthe course of his letter he says :"I extend my sincere hope that your efforts will

be successful. The Federal Council claims to repre-sent 20,000,000 people . This is laughable . I belongto the Methodist Church, which is affiliated, andI know many like myself are not in accord with theactivities of the Council. I know of members whodo not even know what the organization is or whatit stands for. There are plenty of red-blooded Amer-icans among . the membership of the churches whoare being grossly misrepresented by this organization .

1 60


The patriotic organizations of the country promptlyrallied to the support of the Free resolution and areinsisting that it shall be passed. Among them are theveteran organizations and the Daughters of theAmerican Revolution . They have not yet had timeto act in a national capacity when this was written,but some of the branches have been heard from byMr. Free .The first to respond was Margaret N. McCluer,

National President of the American War Mothers .She telegraphed Mr . Free that :

"We heartily commend and endorse your resolu-tion for the investigation of the Federal Council ofChurches. Congratulate you on your patriotic ser-vice and trust the resolution may be adopted . Theirkind of propaganda is pernicious and should bestopped."

Realizing the danger of the spotlight on theiractivities the controlling group of the Federal Councilproceeded cautiously with a campaign to smotherany discussion of their policy or methods . At thiswriting no answer has come from the Federal Councilof Churches to the charges in the Free Resolution orthe statements that were made in a magazine whichpublished a portion of this book. The efforts of thecontrolling group up to this time were confined to anattempt to stop the publication of the articles in themagazine, and a statement by Dr . S. Parkes Cadman,President of the Federal Council, that this discussionis an interference with the freedom of the pulpit .

Quite unexpectedly one of the authors of this bookwas called into a conference at which two repre-sentatives of the Federal Council were vehemently


1 6 1

denouncing the authors and declaring that there wasno truth in the charges brought against the FederalCouncil. When the author was ushered into the roomwith the declaration by the editor, "Here is one ofthe men who wrote these articles," the representativeof the Federal Council drew himself up and turningto the editor, said, "You understand me, I came hereto talk to you as the editor of this magazine . I willhave nothing to say to this man," giving his indexfinger a scornful slant as he pointed to the unex-pected author.In response to an inquiry as to what it was all

about the editor answered, "They declare that youmade no effort to obtain information from theofficials of the Federal Council, and that you wroteentirely from sources unfriendly to the Council ."

To this the reply was made that a letter waswritten to Doctor Cadman asking for informationrelative to the purposes, policy and character of theFederal Council. The letter was referred to DoctorMacFarland, one of the general secretaries of theFederal Council, who answered it . The letter did notgive the authors all the information that they desired,and one of them visited the New York headquartersof the Federal Council . He spent three days dis-cussing the affairs of the Council with anyone con-nected with it who was willing to talk . It wasexplained that he was not able to get in touch withDoctor MacFarland who was reported as being outwhenever he called .

At this point the editor said, "Why, this is DoctorMacFarland ."

1 62


The author declared with considerable enthusiasm,"Why, Doctor MacFarland, I am pleased to meetyou at last."

This advance was met with the same declarationby Doctor MacFarland, "I will have nothing to sayto this man ."Turning to the editor, the author said, "What

other objections have they to our articles?"The editor responded, "They say that you have

absolutely misrepresented them in relation to pre-paredness ."

Turning to Doctor MacFarland, the author defiedhim to place his finger on one measure of prepared-ness for the Army, Navy or Reserves, aside fromadditional chaplains for the Army and Navy, thatthe representatives of the Federal Council in theirnumerous hearings before Congressional Committees,had supported .

Drawing his robes majestically about him, DoctorMacFarland swept from the room, declaring that hewould not say a word "to that man ."Dr. S. Parkes Cadman, President of the Federal

Council, attempts to parry the blow that is aimed atthe Council, by a more adroit movement . In hiscolumn syndicated in the daily press under the head-ing of "Doctor Cadman's Counsel," he asks himselfunder date of Detroit, Michigan, the followingquestion

"What have you to say about the attempts tointerfere with the freedom of th'e Christian pulpitwhich have recently been commented upon in thepress?"


1 63

Before giving part of Doctor Cadman's answer tohis own question, we are constrained to note thesimilarity between his method of thought and thatof the American Civil Liberties Union . The Ameri-can Civil Liberties Union, under the disguise of con-tending for the freedom of speech and the press, isconducting a campaign for Communism, Socialism,Soviet Russia, and all subversive propaganda . Itinsists that an alien has the right to come to thiscountry and advocate the overthrow of the govern-ment. Any restraint that should be placed upon analien's activity in this line in the way of deportationis limiting free speech .

In his answer Doctor Cadman, after indulging insome wandering remarks relative to the freedom ofthe pastor's vocation, calls attention to the recentdeclarations of clericals on the "supremacy of Christas the Lord of human life, whose laws reign in everydepartment of man's activity for common welfare ."In his concluding paragraph he says :

"Read the Encyclicals of the Vatican and theofficial declarations of the great Protestant Com-munes of Great Britain and America upon peace,war and industrial problems. They may convinceyou that a new era has dawned for Christian preach-ing of which neither its would-be corrupters nor itsprejudiced censors are fully aware ."

In this Doctor Cadman pleads guilty to the under-lying charges printed in these pages . He has broughtwith him to this country from England the olddoctrine of the State Church. It is this which droveour forefathers to the new world in search of religiousliberty through the separation of the state and church .

CHAPTER XVI

THE RADICAL "HOOK-UP" OF THEFEDERAL COUNCIL

N 0 RADICAL society liveth to itself. The out-standing phenomenon in the radical move-

ment in America, as elsewhere, is the widespreadinter=locking of membership .

The radical, liberal, socialistically inclined, inter-nationalistic, airy, utopian "forward-looker," countsthat day lost in which he fails to join a new societyor else to found one .Take the Rev. John Haynes Holmes for an

example. This eminent divine is the organizer andpastor of the Community Church, formerly the"Church of the Messiah," in New York.

He is, or has been affiliated with the followingseditious organizations : Industrial Workers of theWorld (I .W.W.), American Civil Liberties Union,Intercollegiate Socialist Society, Amos Council AppealCommittee, Intercollegiate Liberal League, Com-munity Forum, American Association for LaborLegislation, Civil Liberties Bureau, American Com-mittee of Relief for Russian Children, Committeeof 48, International Committee for Political Pris-oners, League for Industrial Democracy, League ofNeighbors, Peoples Legislative Service, Labor

THE RADICAL"HOOK-UP" OF THE FEDERAL COUNCIL 165

Defense Council, Peoples Council of America, Fel-lowship of Reconciliation .

Some "joiner ."The favored scheme is to breed radicalism in

specially designed societies, and then to transplantit by adroit infiltration into existing, innocent, andoften highly proper and useful organizations .

This scheme is worked in two ways . One plan isto send tried and true radicals from the subversivesocieties into the non-subversive ones .

The other plan is to induce the more radicalmembers of the non-subversive organizations toaffiliate with the subversive societies .

In most instances, both schemes are employedsimultaneously ; and in all instances, the desiredresults are obtained .

These desired results are, the "pinking" of thestaid organization with the doctrine of the radicalone ; the championing of the radical movements andactivities by the reputable societies ; and the break-down of Patriotism, the great bete noir of the radical .

The Federal Council of Churches displays a typi-cal, close, Siamese-twin "hook-up" of the sort justdescribed ; and the large following of the FederalCouncil renders this "hook-up," from the view-point of the revolutionary element, most desirable ;and from the standpoint of national safety andintegrity, highly dangerous .

Here, as always, these Federal Council leaders,thus radically "bed-fellowed," speak ever for youand for me and for each and every one of the twentymillion American Protestants whose churches have

1 66


blindly handed over to the Federal Council theirseveral political proxies .

Herewith is a partial list of the links which bindthe Federal Council with the thoroughly organizedforces of radicalism, class hatred, and revolution .Were this list complete, it would go down into nearlyevery village and hamlet, where local privates ofradicalism exert their constant and cumulativepenny's worth of influence upon the Christian cit-izenry. At the top, of course, the "hook-up" is moresinister; that' is only good strategy.

UNOFFICIAL BUTCO-OPERATING SOCIETIESWorld's Alliance for International

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

77 Members

28-1 from each Denomination .1S-Members at Large.15-1 from each Commission or

Standing Committee .12-1 from each Affiliated Body .S-Officers of the Administrative

Committee.2-Former Presidents .

UNOFFICIAL BUTCO-OPERATING SOCIETIESAmerican Civil Liberties Union.League of Nations Non-Partisan

Association.

ivorthern Baptist Convention.National Baptist Convention .Free Baptist Churches .Christian Church.Churches of God in North America .Congregational Churches .Disciples of Christ .Evangelical Church.Evangelical Synod of North America .Friends .Methodist Episcopal Church .Methodist Episcopal (South) .African M . E . Church.African M . E . Zion Church.Colored M. E. Church in America .Methodist Protestant Church.Moravian Church.Presbyterian Church in U . S. A.Presbyterian Church in U . S . (South) .Primitive Methodist Church .National Council of the Protestant Episcopal

Church .Reformed Church in America .Reformed Church in the United States .Reformed Episcopal Church .Seventh Day Baptist Churches .United Brethren Church .United Presbyterian Church .United Lutheran Church .

by the Presidentof the FederalCouncil .

..v.W aUL 11 V 1:. ISUUItSHome Mission Council.Council of Women for Home Missions.Federation of Women's Boards of Foreign Mis-

sions.International Council of Religions Education .Council of Church Boards ofEducation .American Bible Society.National Board of Y.W .C .A.National Board of Y.M.C.A .Committee of Reference and Counsel of the

Foreign Conference of North America .Committee on Co-operation in Latin America .Students Volunteer Movement for Foreign

Missions.Association of Executive Secretaries of Councils

of Churches.

COMMISSIONS ANDSTANDING COMMITTEES

OF THE FEDERAL COUNCILCommission on Evangelism and Life Service .Commission on Christian Education .Commission on Church and Social Service .Commission on Church and Race Relations .Commission on International Justice and Good

Will .Committee on Good Will between the Jews and- Christians .Department ofResearch and Education .Commission on Relations of Religious Bodies inEurope.

Permanent Washington .Committee.General Committee on Army and Navy Chap_

lams.Committee on Relations with the Eastern

Churches .Committee on Merry and Relief.Board of Finance.Committee on Financial and Fiduciary Matters .Editorial Council of the Religious Press .

CHAPTER XVII

THE FAMILY TREE

ROM previous chapters as well as from the sub-joined chart it is apparent that the control of the

Federal Council is vested in the Administrative Com-mittee, a majority of which is selected by the Presi-dent and his group of associates . It is a self perpet-uating corporation of New York . All of the churchescould withdraw their support and the controllinggroup could continue to use the name of FederalCouncil of the Churches of Christ in America andportentously claim to speak for twenty millionProtestant church members . This condition wasbrought about by the incorporation of the FederalCouncil under the laws of New York State .

The forty-nine to twenty-eight ratio in the mem-bers as shown by the chart does not fully indicatethe preponderance of the influence of Dr . S. ParkesCadman and his group in the Administrative Com-mittee. Most of the twenty-eight representatives ofthe denomination are busy with the affairs of theirchurches of a religious character. They are not as arule professional propagandists and cannot find tirr eto run to New York every month to attend meetingsof the Administrative Committee. In actual attend-ance the members who are appointed by the President

1 6 8


or come through the side door to the AdministrativeCommittee are in control by about three to one .Aside from this the commission and department

act independently although in their announcementsthey claim to represent the entire membership ofthe churches affiliated with the Federal Council .Notable instances of this are the Commission ofInternational Justice and Good Will and the ResearchDepartment. This is brought out plainly in thereport from the Research Department on prohibi-tion and the activities of the Commission on Inter-national Justice and Good Will in the League ofNations, World Court, and Immigration campaign.

The date on the composition of the AdministrativeCommittee is chiefly from the latest issue of theHandbook of the Churches, which was formerlyknown as the Church Yearbook . This is an officialpublication of the Federal Council, which apparentlyclassifies the League of Nations and World Court asreligious organizations for it contains a completestatement of these international organizations . Ascanning of the Handbook of the Churches revealsa list of over a hundred societies, organizations, andactivities which make no pretension of being religiousor in any way connected with the churches . Some ofthem are controlled by anti-church and anti-religiousleaders .

For instance, under the head of "Representativenon-denominational religious publications" the"World Tomorrow" is listed. The "World To-morrow," according to the testimony of Dr . JohnNevin Sayre, who was then its editor, was sup-ported by the Garland "Free love" socialist fund .

THE FAMILY TREE

1 69

This is one of the "hook-ups" of the American CivilLiberties Union with the Federal Council as thetrustees of the Garland Fund are directors of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union . Rev. Harry F .Ward, Chairman of the American Civil LibertiesUnion, as has been previously pointed out, is theauthor of the social creed of the Federal Council .The American Civil Liberties Union has a contactwith the Communist party of Russia largely throughWilliam Z. Foster, one of the directors of the organ-ization and a candidate to succeed the late CharlesE. Ruthenberg as the American Representative of theThird Internationale. Comrade Ruthenberg, it willbe recalled, was honored by the Third Internationaleby having his ashes placed in Moscow alongside ofLenin and other world revolutionists .

Still, according to the classification of the FederalCouncil, the "World Tomorrow," which advocatescommunism and socialism is a representative religiouspublication . The logical conclusion of this classi-fication is that communism and socialism arereligion .

In this the Federal Council authorities take issuewith the highest authorities on communism . In aprevious chapter it has been brought out that com-munism is a crusade against religion, but this doesnot seem to disturb the authors of the Federal Coun-cil's Handbook of the Churches, including Dr .Cadman .There are no pretensions in the chart to give a

picture of all of the interlocking relations betweenthe Federal Council of Churches and the differentbodies which are supporting its activities. The

170


National League of Women Voters, recognizedradical organization, is not mentioned . Still, accord-ing to its report sent out from National Head-quarters it is actively supporting the Federal Council .In one of these reports it is set forth :

"Miss Morgan, Chairman of this department,reports that leagues in twenty-three states took partin the Law-not-War demonstrations in July andthat many classes and round tables are being con-ducted at which plans for international peace arediscussed. She urges all local leagues to work withthe Federal Council of Churches in its program forWorld Court Week, November 4-11 ; to circulatepetitions addressed to the President ; to see that the`League sermon,' a brief statement for women, isread in the churches, and to sell peace stamps forthe two-fold purpose of calling attention to the causeof peace and of raising funds for the leagues whichsell them . The `sermon' and stamps may be securedfrom Miss Ruth Morgan, 1010 Grand Central Ter-minal Building, New York City."

Under the head of unofficial cooperating societiesis given those organizations which are connectedwith the Federal Council and the AdministrativeCommittee to interlocking directorships .An attempt is made to conceal the relations

between the American Civil Liberties Union and theNational Council for the Prevention of War, butthese organizations are cooperating with the Admin-istrative Committee as closely as any of the otherorganizations . The connecting link between theAdministrative Committee and the National Councilfor the Prevention of War is the World's Alliance for

THE FAMILY TREE

1 7 1

International Friendship Through the Churches andthe American Civil Liberties Union operates largelythrough the Commission on Church and SocialService. The Commission on Church and SocialService is one of the standing organizations of theFederal Council, the present Chairman of which isBishop McConnell, who had been shoulder toshoulder with Rev. Harry F. Ward, Chairman of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union in radical activitiesfor years .

The World's Alliance for International FriendshipThrough the Churches and the Church Peace Unionhave interlocking directors . A majority of thetwenty-eight trustees of the Church Peace Union aremembers of the Administrative Committee and theAdministrative Committee controls the World'sAlliance for International Friendship Through theChurches. A similar relation exists between theother organizations of the unofficial cooperatingsocieties .

CHAPTER XVIII

AN EXCHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE

DURING their investigation of the activities ofthe Federal Council, the authors received from

many sources, including the clergy, interesting data ;however, space prevents the presentation of all ofthis material, although it was deemed expedient toinclude at least "an exchange of correspondence"between a prominent citizen and several of theofficials of the Federal Council .

HARRY CURRAN WILBURSuite 808

166 W. Jackson Blvd .Chicago, Ill .

March 29, 1927 .Mr. Sidney L. Gulick, Secretary,Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America,612 United Charities Building,105 E. 22nd Street, New York City .My dear Sir :

I have just seen a newspaper clipping purporting to have beensent out of Washington, D . C., to the effect that the FederalCouncil of Churches of Christ in America "has issued a letterof congratulation to the nationalist movement in China."

The dispatch further states that "the Federal Council ofChurches, in effect, begs the Chinese revolutionary masses toremember that it was through the teachings in the missionschools that the story of Western nations' struggles for liberty

AN EXCHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE 173

has come to the Chinese inspiring them to win emancipationfor themselves."

I would be very much interested in receiving a copy of thepurported statement, if the report is correct, because of thebearing it well may have on developments in the Far East .

Thanking you for furnishing me a copy if it is available, I amYours very truly,

HCW:B

HARRY CURRAN WILBUR

FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHESOF CHRIST IN AMERICA612 United Charities Building105 East 22d Street, New York .

April 4, 1927 .Mr. Harry Curran Wilbur,166 West Jackson Boulevard,Chicago, Illinois .My dear Mr. Wilbur :Your letter of March 29 has come to my desk . In reply I am

enclosing a copy of the action taken by the AdministrativeCommittee with regard to the situation in China . This I judgeis what you desire to see. I also enclose our program for 1927,from which you may see what our constructive policies are .

If you have any other questions with regard to the activitiesof the Federal Council or this Commission please let me knowfor it is important that those who are interested in our activitiesshould know fully with regard to them .

Very sincerely yours,(signed) SIDNEY L. GULICK,

Secretary .(ENCLOSURE)

"4. That Mr. Cavert continue to serve as editor, and theSecretarial Council appoint a Committee of Three, of which heshall be a member, to consider questions which may arise con-cerning the character of the material to be included in theBulletin .

"S. That the Committee on Policy continue to study furtherthe larger questions of future policy with reference to the FederalCouncil Bulletin, and, as the successive issues of the Bulletin

174


appear, give counsel to the editor as to any points at which theexisting policy can be improved ."6. That in case questions concerning the contents of the

publication arise on which the Secretarial Council's Committeeof Three feels the need of counsel in advance, the Chairman ofthe Administrative Committee shall be looked to for suchcounsel."Dr. Gulick read cables from Dr . Franklin and from 147

missionaries in Nanking in regard to the urgent need for nego-tiating new treaties with China and avoiding the use of militaryforce, and reported that a special conference on China had beenheld, at which a committee had been appointed to draft astatement for submission to the Administrative Committee .This had been done by mail, and on the basis of the repliesreceived a second statement had been drafted . Both were readand after various changes had been made in the second state-ment, it wasVOTED : That the following statement on China be adopted :

"The Administrative Committee of the Federal Council ofthe Churches of Christ in America desires, at this time of anxietyand turmoil in China, once more to call attention to the moment-ous character of the situation that has been developing in thatland, and to urge that the United States, in keeping with herhistoric policy, make justice and friendship paramount in allher dealings with China ."We desire to express profound sympathy with the Chinese

people in their struggle for an independent and sovereigngovernment and in their . demands that `unequal treaties,'`tariff domination,' `extra-territoriality' and `concessions' shallbe equitably ended. (Underscoring Mine-Harry Curran Wilbur .)

"We believe that the United States should seek to help Chinain every practicable way to meet her terrific economic, indus-trial, intellectual, social, moral and religious problems .

"We heartily support the expressed purpose of our Govern-ment to undertake the negotiation of new treaties with Chinabased on principles of equality and reciprocity .

"We believe that an attitude of true friendliness towardChina must include thorough respect for the Chinese peopleand a desire to help China to a position of genuine freedom and


equality in the family of nations, with attendant responsibil-ities, and with the full recognition of reciprocal religious liberty.

"This Committee earnestly hopes that our nation will aspromptly as possible approach China, to the end that practicalprograms may be worked out together through peaceful methodsby which to secure these and other needed changes in therelations of our two nations ."


166 W. Jackson Blvd .Chicago, Illinois .

April 7, 1927 .Rev. Dr. Sidney L. Gulick,Secretary, Federal Council of Churches,612 United Charities Building,105 East 22d Street, New York, N . Y .My dear Dr. Gulick :Thank you for your courtesy and promptness in sending me,

as per my request for information in my letter of March 29,an official copy of the minutes showing the action taken by theAdministrative Committee of the Federal Council of theChurches of Christ in America with regard to the situationin China .

I regret exceedingly to find that the official action checks incompletely with the features of the program of the CommunistInternational to utilize and to shape the situation in Chinaso that it will advance the plan of the Communist Internationalto precipitate world revolution .

I wrote you about the matter in the first place because informa-tion had come to me from a distinct and uncamouflaged Com-munist source to the effect that the Federal Council of Churchesof Christ in America was helping advance the Communistprogram, whether or not the leaders of that movement realizedthat they were doing so . I was shown reports of certain pur-ported facts and was told how they were being utilized in Chinaand in this country with a view to creating sentiment thatwould tend to weaken the support that should be given theGovernment of the United States in this crisis that may involve

176


civilization itself . Although this particular informant had nevermisled me in the past as to what was actually going on, I doubtedif he could be correct in this instance and, therefore, I suspendedjudgment until I had written to you . Your report and theminutes covering the statement as to what was "VOTED"confirms absolutely as to how it was being utilized is beyondcontroversy .

Working on the theory that you do not have the actual factsas to what has been planned for a long time, worked out fromthe direct thesis presented by Lenin himself to the SecondCongress of the Communist International sitting in Moscow,nor definite data on what is actually happening at the presenttime and, therefore, lack evidence as to how closely the actiontaken by the Administrative Committee of the Federal Councilof the Churches of Christ in America checks with the Leninthesis, I submit some of the most striking facts herewith .The second paragraph under the heading of "VOTED," on

page 5 of the copy of the minutes that you sent me reads asfollows :"We desire to express profound sympathy with the Chinese

people in their struggle for an independent and sovereigngovernment and in their demands that `unequal treaties,'`tariff domination,' 'extra-territoriality' and `concessions' shallbe equitably ended ."

The theory of Lenin, when he was forced to abandon hisplan to move his proposed world revolution out of Russiawestward, was to turn east in an endeavor to stir up the so-calledcolonial and "oppressed peoples." The accepted course ofaction, as you know if you have studied Communist tactics,is to move through what the Communists call the "partialdemands," using them for the double purpose of getting closerto the masses and likewise to mislead those who would notcatch a glimpse of what was following directly behind theseso-called "partial demands ." The general thought, so far asthis second purpose is concerned, is to mislead through appealsto humanitarianism, etc ., in order to give momentum to thereal movement and to weaken the hands of governmentalauthorities who knew exactly what was going on and wereseeking to thwart it .


Let me now submit the following quotations from Lenin'sthesis drafted for the Second Congress of the CommunistInternational

"Foreign domination has obstructed the free developmentof the social forces and, therefore, its overthrow is the firststep towards a revolution in the colonies . So to help overthrowthe foreign rule in the colonies is not to endorse the nationalistaspirations of the native bourgeoisie but to open the way to thesmothered proletariat there."

I note your declaration of "profound sympathy with theChinese people" and I wish to point out that Lenin himselfshowed that this was exactly the way to "open the way to thesmothered proletariat."

Let me now quote the following from the same thesis of Leninwho is, as I think you will admit, a competent authority onCommunist plans and programs :

"For the overthrow of foreign capitalism, which is the firststep toward revolution in the colonies, the cooperation of thebourgeois nationalist revolutionary elements is useful . . . .The real strength of the liberation movements in the coloniesis no longer confined to the narrow circle of bourgeois nation-alists. In most of the colonies there already exist organizedrevolutionary parties which strive to be in close connection withthe working masses ."

With especial reference to the last sentence in the quotationjust concluded I call your attention to the fact that the PlenarySession of the Central Executive Committee of the Kuo-mintang, concluded in Hankow on April 4, showed the forces ofthe left in complete control and laid down six major proposi-tions, among the chief of which was the re-establishment of theMilitary Council with civilian members sitting thereon, the sub-ordination of the military arm to the political arm and thecentralization of finance in the hands of the finance ministry ."Expression of views on foreign policy by any party memberor official without the authorization of the Central ExecutiveCommittee" was expressly prohibited. A public statement byGeneral Chiang Kai-Shek, announcing adherence to thesefindings was sent throughout China, according to a cable toCommunist headquarters in this country, following his some-

178


what extended conference with Wang Ching-Wei, Left Wingchief and not a military man .

It might be of interest to note in this connection, though itdoes not bear directly on the point I have just been discussing,that one member of the re-established Military Council isreported in the cable to Communist headquarters from theforeign department of the so-called Nationalist Governmentof China to be General Feng, the so-called "Christian General ."It is also somewhat interesting to note, for such bearing asit may have on the oft-made statement that the leaders of thismovement are not Communistic, that the children of bothGeneral Chiang Kai-Shek and General Feng Yu-Hsiang, arestudying in Moscow and spoke at the Moscow celebration of thefall of Shanghai. This illustrates the degree of truth in thestatement that Moscow has lost its contact with the militaryleaders in China .

I now quote again from the Lenin thesis heretofore referred to :. The Communist parties of the different imperialistic

countries must work in conjunction with these proletarian partiesof the colonies and through them, give all moral and materialsupport to the revolutionary movement in general . . . . Theproletarian parties must carry on vigorous and systematicpropaganda of the Soviet idea, and organize the peasant andworkers Soviets as soon as possible ."

In view of what I have just written as to the completedominance of the movement by the radical faction at the recentPlenary Session of the Kuomintang Central Executive Com-mittee in Hankow it seems to me that it becomes fairly evidenthow thoroughly the program laid down by Lenin several yearsago has been carried out.

That action such as that reported in your minutes, quotedearlier in this letter from the copy that you sent me, is con-sidered by the Communists as direct aid to their program canbe easily proven. They are busily engaged on every hand, as Ican prove from documents in my possession, in organizing"Hands Off China" committees, conferences against inter-vention in Nicaragua and Mexico, which I note that the FederalCouncil of the Churches of Christ in America has also approved,and similar groups. That those who engage in those movements


at this time of crisis are actual allies-or perhaps I should say"reserves"-of the Communist forces, can be easily established .I now quote from a magazine known as the Communist Inter-national, official organ of the Executive Committee of theCommunist International, which in its issue of February 28,1927, you will note that it antedates the action of the FederalCouncil of Churches as shown in the copy of the minutes thatyou sent me-says :

"In order to mobilize all the reserves of the internationalrevolutionary movement it is necessary to carry out, with thespeed commensurate with the exceptional importance of thematter, the united front under the slogan of `Hands Off China,'while at the same time the Communists' parties must actindependently and employ all forms of mass revolutionarystruggle ."

There is the official quotation from the ranking Communistworld authority and it shows very clearly that those whosponsor such movements as "Hands Off China" are lookedupon by the Communist leaders in Moscow as their "reserves ."

It is not at all necessary to accept my judgment as to whetheror not the action of the Federal Council of Churches, as reportedin the minutes of which you sent me a copy, is considered directsupport of the Communist movement. The official organ of theWorkers (Communist) Party of America is The Daily Workerprinted now in New York City and with its editorial rooms at33 First Street, if you do not have the address .

In its issue of March 28, 1927, in an undated dispatch pur-porting to have been sent out from Washington, D . C ., it says,as the opening sentence :

"China's national awakening, which has been marked by theleadership of students and working class agitators againstforeign imperialism and domestic exploitation of Chinese labor,has no terrors for the Federal Council of Churches of Christin America . That alliance of 22,000,000 Protestant churchmembers, which often is heard in defense of civil liberties andthe right of collective industrial bargaining in the United States,has issued a letter of congratulation to the nationalist move-ment in China ."

180


I presume that haste in preparing the dispatch led the Com-munist organ to substitute the word "congratulation" for thewords "profound sympathy" as expressed in the minutes of theaction taken by the Administrative Committee of the FederalCouncil of Churches, as per copy which you sent me, or perhaps,in the last analysis these are really synonyms. The succeedingsentence in the dispatch I have just quoted, beginning on page 1of the Daily Worker of March 28, and concluding on page 3,reads :

" Coming at the moment of the fall of Shanghai to the national-ist forces, it can be interpreted only as a pledge of cooperationbetween Protestant mission supporters in the United Statesand the anti-imperialist government at Hankow ."

You, of course, understand that "the anti-imperialist govern-ment at Hankow" is the Central Executive Committee of theKuomintang, which controls the actions, and as pointed out,even interviews, of either the military leaders or so-calledcivilian officials such as Eugene Chen. The next sentences inthe article from which I have just been quoting are of particularinterest, it seems to me . Those sentences read :

"This appeal to the Chinese nationalists, through the Chris-tian Church in China, is due to the fact that Chinese graduatesof mission schools have almost unanimously joined in the revolu-tion and have been most active in denouncing the hypocrisyof Christian nations in their dealings with China . The FederalCouncil of Churches, in effect, begs the Chinese revolutionarymasses to remember that it was through the teachings in themission schools that the story of Western nations' struggles forliberty has come to the Chinese, inspiring them to win eman-cipation for themselves . It begs the Chinese to give the mis-sionaries a chance to show that they can serve them in the futureregardless of their having thrown in their lot with anti-imperialism ."

I have now quoted the complete article and so cannot becharged with unfairness. I am frank to say that in rereading it,after receipt of the copy of the minutes which you sent me,I am not clear as to whether the last two sentences refer to someother action taken by the Federal Council of the Churches ofChrist in America in this country or whether it refers to action


taken by representatives and organizations representing inChina the constituent bodies named on your letterhead, orperhaps representatives in China of the Federal Council ofChurches itself. I note, however, that in the paragraph fromthe minutes, copy of which you sent me, immediately pre-ceding the announcement of what was "VOTED" it says :"Dr. Gulick read cables from Dr. Franklin and from 147

missionaries in Nanking in regard to the urgent need for nego-tiating new treaties with China and avoiding the use of militaryforce . . . ."

It may be that the Communist dispatch refers to action takenby this group or some of the Chinese who were taught by them .You have the complete records while I, not having them, cannotfully interpret these propositions .

It occurs to me, in passing, that it might be of interest tothe 22,000,000 Protestant church members to know that theCommunists headed the dispatch from which I have quotedwith a two column headline reading :

"CHINESE GRADUATES OF MISSION SCHOOLSFIRST TO EXPOSE MISSIONARY HYPOCRISY ."

This letter is already very lengthy and yet I have touchedonly the high spots . If occasion warrants I can submit furtherdata in support of the position I have taken, gleaned fromauthoritative Communist sources in the course of some fifteenyears' study of the radical movement here and abroad . I shallnot go into that, however, but shall simply point out onceagain the disarmament propaganda, the use of the phrase"avoiding the use of military force" and how this action onthe Chinese situation, as a matter tending to hamper theactivities of my country in protecting its nationals in Chinaand itself against the spread of world revolution from the Eastas planned by Lenin, squares with the generally reported actionof the Federal Council of Churches in bringing pressure to bearon the Senate of the United States when my country's nego-tiations with Mexico were at an apparently critical stage .

Is it coincidence?Is the assertion that there is no Communist activity in Mexico

of the same value as to true statement of facts as the assertionthat the Communists do not control the nationalist movement

182


in China with which you express "profound sympathy" asshown by the copy of the minutes that you sent me?Is the fact that at the time the Communist organs are

filled with the cry of withdrawing our ships and marines fromChina and from the Caribbean the Federal Council of Churchesreiterates its stand about disarmament and not using force amere coincidence?

Did you have the facts that I have submitted in this letter,or facts similar to them, prior to the action taken as set forthin the minutes of which you sent me a copy?

If you did have them were you consciously acting as "reserves"for the Communist forces?

If you did not have them-especially as they are mattersabout which all students of the movement were informed-bywhat authority do you claim to advise 22,000,000 Protestantmembers on the course of action?

If you did not have these facts, known as I have said to allstudents of the radical movement, would you recommend thatloyal American citizens should follow the leadership of theFederal Council of Churches or the leadership of the officialsof the United States of America who are in touch with what isgoing on throughout the world?

If your organization has better facilities for getting informationas to just what is going on than has Secretary Kellogg andPresident Coolidge, why did you not have these facts whichhave been printed and publicly circulated?

If you did have these facts why do your recommendationsparallel exactly what the Communist International wishes?

You closed your very kind letter of April 4 by stating that ifI had "any other questions with regard to the activities of theFederal Council" I should let you know . I do not think of anymore just now .In order that there may be absolutely no misunderstanding

about the matter I want to say that this letter is not confidentialin any sense of the word . You are at full liberty to show it toanyone you please and to use it in any way you see fit and Iwish to further assure you that I shall advise certain peoplethat I think ought to know about it that I have now laid thesefacts before you so that whatever the future course of action


of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Council ofChurches may be it is at least of record that you have thisinformation .

In order that my own position may be clear, I may state thatI am of Protestant ancestry and that both of my grandfathers,one great uncle and one uncle, were ministers-Methodist andPresbyterian . They believed in their country, were willing tofight for it and did fight for it, with the exception of one grand-father who was physically disqualified and one uncle who wasonly about five or six years old at the time of the War betweenthe States . They saw nothing incompatible between their faithand defending the country that sheltered their faith and them .

I do not believe in theocracies. I stand without qualificationon Article I of the first ten original Amendments to the Con-stitution of the United States that begins :

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment ofreligion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."I interpret this as meaning that Church and State in the

United States of America shall be forever separated, with noexceptions noted as to denominations .

I do not object in any sense of the word to ministers of thegospel participating in political matters. On the contrary Ibelieve that they should do so, but when they do they shouldparticipate on the same basis as other individual citizens, askingno special favors because of the calling they have adopted norclaiming to speak with any special authority by reason of thefact that they are ministers of the gospel .

The attempt to influence the actions of Congress and publicofficials through bringing pressure to bear as organized churchesis something else again and to that I am uncompromisinglyopposed. That is merely a new theocracy, not even as frank asthe old theocracies, for this new theocracy stands in the back-ground and brings pressure to bear instead of shouldering thefull responsibility for its course .Under the Constitution of the United States foreign affairs

are in the hands of the President of the United States, his officialadvisors, and in certain specific circumstances, "by and with theadvice and consent of the Senate." It is not in the hands of anychurch or any combination of churches. I shall oppose as best

184


I can any effort to lodge it there, directly or indirectly, and Iam rather firmly of the opinion that it is about time that thefacts in the matter were taken to the people of the UnitedStates. I shall do my part to get them there.

Wherever and whenever the foreign policy of the UnitedStates of America is involved I shall stand by the duly con-stituted authorities of my country, without qualification, andwithout any reservation whatsoever. Those who know me bestwill agree, I am confident, that I am broadly tolerant, but whenthe life and the welfare of America are concerned I stand bymy country without qualification and I know no other basison which to classify others in their attitude toward Americathan that ancient formula :

"He who is not for me is against me and he who gatherethnot with me scattereth abroad ."Again thanking you for your prompt and courteous reply to

my inquiry of March 29, and trusting that the matter sub-mitted herewith will be of sufficient interest and value to repayyou for the time taken in reading this letter, I am

Very sincerely yours,(signed) HARRY CURRAN WILBUR .

HCW:B

FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHESOF CHRIST IN AMERICA612 United Charities Building,105 East 22d Street, New York

April 22, 1927 .Mr. Harry Curran Wilbur,166 West Jackson Boulevard,Chicago, Illinois .My dear Mr. Wilbur :

Your letter of April 7 was duly received. Pressure of dutieshas delayed this reply .

I deeply appreciate your kindness in writing so fully . All ofyour questions, however, are answered by the fact that theAdministrative Committee of the Federal Council took itsaction, and takes all its actions, without any reference what-ever to the policy or program of any other body or person,


whether in the United States or any other country, exceptingthe church bodies .

Yours very truly,(signed) SIDNEY L. GULICK,

Secretary .(Signed in Dr. Gulick's absence from the city .)


166 W. Jackson Blvd .Chicago, Illinois

April 25, 1927 .Rev. Dr. Sidney L. Gulick,Secretary, Federal Council of Churches,612 United Charities Building,105 East 22d Street, New York, N. Y .My dear Dr. Gulick :Your letter of April 22 acknowledging my letter of April 7

has just been received, and I thank you for it .Let me respectfully point out that the mere fact that the

Administrative Committee of the Federal Council of Churches"takes all its actions, without any reference whatever to thepolicy or program of any other body or person, whether in theUnited States or any other country, excepting the churchbodies," most certainly does not answer the questions on page 9of my letter of April 7 .

It does, however, make the attitude of the AdministrativeCommittee of the Federal Council unmistakably clear . Youmake it very plain that the Administrative Committee of theFederal Council likewise "takes all its action without anyreference whatever to the policy or program" of the UnitedStates of America .

Furthermore, inasmuch as the documented facts in my letterof April 7 stand unchallenged by you, you make it equally clearthat the Administrative Committee of the Federal Council isapparently totally unconcerned because its action aids, abets,and forwards the program of the avowed enemies of the UnitedStates .

186

PASTORS, POLITICIANS PACIFISTS

Thank you for making the record so beautifully clear that"he who runs may read," and let the record show, furthermore,that this classification of the Federal Council of Churches withthe enemies of my country is yours, not mine .

This letter, like my first one, is in no sense confidential . Icare only to add that I shall do my best, so far as my meagerresources permit, to make widely known my letter of April 7to you, your reply of April 22, and this letter, that there maybe as little as possible of misunderstanding of the unchallengedfacts .

Regretting exceedingly that a body of such potential influencefor good as yours might become lined up as endorsing theprogram of the enemies of my country instead of supporting mycountry's policies, I am

Yours very truly,(signed) HARRY CURRAN WILBUR .

HCW:B

FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHESOF CHRIST IN AMERICA612 United Charities Building,105 East 22d Street, New York .

May 6, 1927 .Mr. Harry Curran Wilbur,166 West Jackson Boulevard,Chicago, Illinois .My dear Mr. Wilbur :

Your letter of April 25 1 assure you entirely misinterprets thepolicies, programs and relations of the Federal Council, as hasbeen made clear by public statements and editorials, of whichI enclose copies .

If you will read the Porter resolution adopted by Congressyou will see that the action of the Administrative Committeeof the Federal Council is in complete agreement with the policiesof the Government therein advocated .

If, therefore, the Federal Council is open to the charges youmake concerning "aid given to the enemies of the United States,"then Congress and President Coolidge are open to the samecharges .


I feel that you entirely misunderstand and misrepresent mycountry's spirit and policies of goodwill to China and its people .

Yours truly,(signed) SIDNEY L . GULICK,

Secretary .


166 W. Jackson Blvd .Chicago, Illinois

May 9, 1927 .Rev. Dr. Sidney L. Gulick, Secretary,Federal Council of Churches of Christ,612 United Charities Building,105 E. 22d Street, New York .My dear Dr. Gulick :

Your letter of May 6, with enclosures, is just at hand and Ihave read both the letter and the enclosures that came withit carefully before adding them to my files for the record andfor future reference .

I am frank to say that I cannot see that my letter of April 25"misinterprets the policies, programs and relations of theFederal Council," as it merely quotes your statement in yourletter of April 22 that the Federal Council "takes all its actionswithout any reference whatever to the policy or program of anyother body or person, whether in the United States or any othercountry, excepting the church bodies ."

If the Federal Council takes its actions "without referencewhatever to the policy or program of any other body or person,whether in the United States or any other country, exceptingthe church bodies," that certainly states most emphaticallythat the action is taken without regard to the policy or programof President Coolidge or Secretary of State Kellogg, who arecertainly persons and who are certainly not "church bodies,"and likewise without reference to the program of Congresswhich certainly is a body within the United States though not achurch body .

Your injection of the reference to the Porter resolution isentirely extraneous . It is extraneous in the first place because

188


your letter of April 22 specifically states that the Federal Counciltakes all its actions "without any reference whatever to thepolicy or program of any other body or person ."

It is extraneous in the second place because the Constitutionof the United States, Article II, Section 2, Sub-section 2, veststhe foreign policy of the United States of America in the Presi-dent, acting by and through the Secretary of State and otherproperly designated officials and with treaties that may benegotiated by him to be approved by the Senate. The Porterresolution therefore is merely an expression of the opinion of themajority of Congress and your letter states that the FederalCouncil acts without reference to the policy or program of anyother body except church bodies .

Your reference to the Porter resolution is extraneous on thethird ground that it does not answer the questions I submittedin my original letter of April 7, the gist of which may bere-summarized as follows :

1 . Did you know of the Lenin thesis presented to the secondcongress of the Communist International, from which I quotedin my letter of April 7, prior to the action taken by the Admin-istrative Committee of the Federal Council of Churches as perthe copy of the minutes that you sent me with your letter ofApril 4?

2. If you did know of this action is it a mere coincidence thatthe action of the Federal Council of Churches checks completelywith the program of the Communist International in China aslaid down by Lenin and as followed without a break?

3. If you did not know these facts, which are common knowl-edge to students of the movement, by what authority do youclaim to advise the 22,000,000 members of the Protestantchurches that you claim as constituent members of the FederalCouncil on the course of action that should be pursued?

I am doing what I can to get the complete record of ourcorrespondence before as many people as possible and amperfectly willing to let the record speak for itself .

In order to make certain that you have the fact and becauseI feel that it is germane to the subject we have been discussingbecause it shows that the Communist International is undeviat-ingly following the Lenin program I wish to call your attention

s


to the fact that last week the so-called Hankow government,Communist controlled, and from which Chiang Kai-Shek hasapparently split away, cabled Communist headquarters in theUnited States to push the "Hands Off China" program . Youwill find the cable printed in the Daily Worker, official Com-munist organ, issue of May 5, 1927, page 3 .

Let it be of record that you now have the fact .Sincerely,

(signed) HARRY CURRAN WILBUR .HCW:B

SOME NOTES ON CERTAIN ACTIONS OF THEFEDERAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

The Federal Council of Churches continues to make up itsrecord .

To each of those to whom this bulletin goes I have sent here-tofore copies of the entire correspondence between myself andRev. Dr. Sidney L. Gulick, one of the Secretaries of the FederalCouncil of Churches .At the time of dictating this bulletin, as shown by the date

below, there has been no reply to my letter of May 9, 1927, toRev. Dr. Sidney L . Gulick, copy of which you have .

One of my friends advises me that Federal Council Bulletinfor May, 1927, Vol. X, No. 5, under the Department "TheOpen Forum," on page 31 of the bulletin says :

"THE MOSCOW MYTH AGAIN!"That action such as that reported in your minutes (expressing

sympathy with the aspirations of the Chinese people) is con-sidered by the Communists as direct aid to their program canbe easily proven. That those who engage in those movementsat this time of crisis are actual allies-or perhaps I should say, reserves'-of the Communist forces, can be easily established .

HARRY CURRAN WILBUR."Chicago, Ill .The quotation-except that subheading-is from my letter

of April 7, 1927, copy of which you have and which was a letterof more than eleven typewritten pages . By reference to thatletter you will note not only how much of the complete argu-ment is omitted but how much it omits even from the paragraph

190


from which it purports to quote . Let the record stand as anilluminating example of the spirit of fairness actuating thematter put out in printed form by the Federal Council ofChurches .

Let me also point out that the quoted word "reserves" istaken from the reference made by the official organ of theExecutive Committee of the Communist International, as ispointed out distinctly in the paragraph of my letter of April 7from which the Federal Council Bulletin quotes in part, butcarefully omits the illuminative documentation .Let that subhead, "The Moscow Myth Again,"-which is

injected by the Federal Council and is not from my letter-make its own iecord as to the attitude of the Federal Councilof Churches toward the Soviet group striking at civilizedgovernments everywhere and particularly at Great Britain andthe United States. It is very illuminating as to the attitude ofthe Federal Council of Churches and its idea of what is a mythrather than a menacing reality .

So far as I have been able to ascertain, the quotation fromthe Federal Council of Churches Bulletin, is the only statementthat has been made to date on this matter and there has beenno direct communication with me nor was I sent a copy of thebulletin since my letter of May 9 was written to Dr . Gulick.I have sent out many copies of the correspondence but, thoughI have no printing press nor publicity budget at my disposal,in each and every case I have sent copies of Dr . Gulick's lettersto me in their entirety and copies of my letters to him in theirentirety. I had no reason for withholding a part of the corre-spondence.

In order that all the facts, so far as they are at my command,may be before all concerned, 1 am sending a copy of this bulletinby registered mail to Dr . Gulick at the New York office of theFederal Council of Churches .

HARRY CURRAN WILBUR .Dated June 2, 1927 .


THE FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THECHURCHES OF CHRIST IN AMERICA

Office of the General Secretary

Washington Office105 E. 22d Street, New York .

937 Woodward Bldg.New York City, June 7, 1927 .

Mr. Harry Curran Wilbur,166 West Jackson Boulevard,Chicago, Illinois.Dear Sir:

Your communication of May 9th, together with your previouscorrespondence with Dr . Gulick, have been referred to me asthey deal with matters of general policy .Permit me to say that Dr. Gulick has, in my judgment, already

answered your letters with adequate completeness and I see noreason for continuing to take your time in the matter.

With appreciation of your interest,Sincerely yours,

(signed) CHARLES S. MACFARLAND .Rev. Charles S . Macfarland,

CSM-H

General Secretary .


166 W. Jackson Blvd.Chicago, Illinois

June 15, 1927 .Rev. Dr. Charles S . Macfarland,General Secretary Federal Council of Churches,105 East 22d Street, New York .My dear Dr . Macfarland :

Upon my return from a trip that took me out of the city fora week I find on my desk your letter of June 7 acknowledgingreceipt of typewritten bulletin issued by me on June 2 and senton that date by registered mail to Rev . Dr. Sidney L. Gulick.

To complete the record I may say that on June 6 Miss Bishopacknowledged receipt of the bulletin I had sent to Dr. Gulickand advised me that as he had left the city to be gone for several

192


months she was "referring the memorandum to one of the otherSecretaries of the Federal Council ."

Thank you for writing me about the matter and for makingthe record complete .

The record now shows that you, as General Secretary of theFederal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, havegone over the entire correspondence between Dr . Gulick andmyself; that the letters were referred to you because "they dealwith matters of general policy" ; and that in your judgmentDr. Gulick has "already answered" my letters "with adequatecompleteness" and that you see no reason for continuing totake my time in the matter . Your letter is essentially blanketapproval of the position taken by Dr . Gulick in his corre-spondence with me and a reiteration of the attitude of theFederal Council in the matter concerning which I first wrote toDr. Gulick, this reiteration coming after you had definite informa-tion that the course taken practically paralleled the course laiddown by Lenin for his disciples to follow in China and the FarEast. Your adherence to a policy that, whatever it may havebeen intended to do, actually lends aid and comfort to theenemies of my country and to the unscrupulous group withwhich Great Britain was eventually compelled to sever tradeand diplomatic relations after infinite and almost unparalleledpatience, is, of course, a matter resting solely with you and theFederal Council . You have made up the record and I shall, ofcourse, act upon your suggestion and not write you furtherabout the matter, but I do want to point out here, in order thatthe record may be wholly clear, that I submitted the facts,documented, in my letter of April 7, 1927, to Dr . Gulick .

As this letter, as per your unmistakable suggestion in yourletter of June 7, is to close the correspondence, I wish to addthat I am forced to disagree with your statement that Dr .Gulick has answered my letters "with adequate completeness,"and to point out that the three questions on page 2 of my letterof May 9, which are reiterations of questions beginning onpage 9 of my letter of April 7, are not answered at all . I amsending copies of this letter and of your letter to all those towhom I have sent copies of the earlier correspondence, in


accordance with my plan of giving those with whom I take thematter up at all a complete record rather than a partial one .

Again thanking you for your letter of June 7, which officiallyapproves the record made up, I am,

Sincerely yours,HARRY CURRAN WILBUR .-

HCW:B

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

Federal Councilof Churches of

Radical or LiberalChrist in America

Name

Affiliations and Activities

Member

Atkinson, Rev.

General Secretary, WorldHenry A . Alliance for International

Friendship Through theChurches .

This organization is activein its endeavor to discountpatriotism .

President of the Cadman, Dr . S .

While he has publicly statedFederal Council

Parkes

that "when war cures a maladyof Churches of

worse than itself, it is alwaysChrist in America. justifiable," and while he admits

that in the present state ofworld affairs, it is necessary forAmerica to continue to providemeans for protection, yet he isa constant antagonist of theNation's defense Act, whichprovides for a modicum oftraining of her citizens toafford that protection .

He is insistent in his pro-nouncements that the Church'sduty is to enter the politicaldomain of the State.

It is upon the reiteratedstatements of Dr. Cadman, asmuch as upon any one singleevidence, that the authors havepreferred the charges found inChapter I of the present work .

He is one of the staff officersof the radical "Non-Interven-tion Citizens (?) Committee,whose membership, as shownin Chapter XI II, is found to beintimately connected with mostof the Socialistic and Commun-istic groups at work in theUnited States today.


Christ in America

Member of theProtestant Epis-copal Commissionon ChristianUnity and Depart-ment of ChristianSocial Service ;this is the Epis-copal body affil-iated in the Fed-eral Council .Chairman of

the Federal Coun-cil Committee onRelations withEastern Churches .

General Secre- Cavert, Rev .tary of the Fed-

Samueleral Council .

McCreaMember of the

AdministrativeCommittee ;Secretary of theEditorial Councilof the ReligiousPress ; Secretaryof the Committeeon the War andthe ReligiousOutlook .

Commission on Devine, Rev .the Church and

Edward L.Social Service in1921 . Commis-sion on Interna-tional Justice andGood Will .

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

Radical or LiberalName

~Iffiliations and Activities

Brent, Bishop

An ardent champion andCharles H . speaker for assorted radical

ideas and movements . Said in1916, in apologizing for Bol-shevism, that "it has someadmirable features." Memberof editorial staff of the Church-man, a liberal religious weekly .His privatesecretaryisreportedby the press as secretary of theBuffalo Branch of the Amer-ican Civil Liberties Union,which ultra-radical organiza-tion is the consistent championof all subversive and revolu-tionary groups and individuals .

195

Contributor to "The WorldTomorrow," ultra-liberalpacifist publication, and theChristian Century," pro-

Russian, revolutionary relig-ious weekly.

A signer of the misleadingLane Pamphlet against mili-tary training, which pamphletwas backed financially by theGarland Free Love Fund, anddistributed enthusiastically bythe New York office of theFederal Council.Close friend of Harry F.

Ward, q . v.

Co-Author with Rev . JohnA. Ryan and John A. Lapp ofthe Pamphlet, "The DenverTramway Strike of 1920 ."

196



Christ in America

Name

Secretary of the Gulick, Rev .Federal Council .

Sidney L.Note : Gulick,Cavert and Mac-farland comprisethe triumvirateof the Great Gen-eral Staff of theFederal Council .These three areresponsible formany of the ex-cathedra pro-nouncements ofthe inner cham-ber, or adminis-trative committee .

Radical or LiberalAffiliations and Activities

Born in the Orient. Twentyyears in Japan . Came to thiscountry as Professor for theImperial University of Japanand Doshisha University .Makes frequent visits to Japanwhere he has a summer home .Thoroughly exposed for hisun-American pro-Jap aneseattitude in Montaville Flowers'book "The Japanese Conquestof American Opinion." (Geo .H. Doran Co., N. Y.) Con-tributor to the "Christian Cen-tury ." Connected with the pub-lication, "Christian Work ."Member of the World

Alliance for InternationalFriendship Through theChurches .Member of the Alva W .

Taylor gratuitous ambassado-rial delegation to diagnose Mex-ico, July, 1926 .

Secretary, National Com-mittee on Constructive Immi-gration Legislation .

Speaker for the ForeignPolicy Association .Member of the Farmer-

Labor Party of New Yorkin 1921 .In 1924, attended the

National Convention of theLeague for Industrial Democ-racy (alias the IntercollegiateSocialist Society.)

Active Pacifist and opponentof National Defense as appliedto the land of his presentresidence .


Christ in America

Name

Former Vice- Hatch, Rev .Chairman Com-

Harold A .mittee for theChurch and SocialService .

Member.

Hardin, Rev .Martin

Washington, D.C. Darby, Rev.representative of

W. 1 . .the FederalCouncil .

Executive Secre- Johnson, Rev .tary Department

F. Ernestof Research andEducation of theFederal Council .

Associate Sec-

Landis,retary, Depart-

Benson Y .ment of Researchand Education ofthe FederalCouncil .

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

197

Radical or Liberalflffiliations and Activities

Subscriber to the AmericanCivil Liberties Union accordingto the Lusk Report. Memberof the Fellowship of Reconcili-ation for term expiring in 1926 .

Represented the FederalCouncil in the Louis Lochnermeetings of November 8, 1915,and following, held in Chicagoto aid German aggression .

Appeared in 1926 under thedirection of the American CivilLiberties Union, as a Repre-sentative of the Federal Coun-cil of Churches before theHouse Committee on Immi-gration in opposition to thedeportation of alien criminals .

On editorial council of "TheWorld Tomorrow"; Co-authorwith Kirby Page and others ofthe pamphlet "The Wage Ques-tion"; author of the pamphlet"Social Gospel and PersonalReligion," espousing the Social-ist plan of production for useand not for profit. Author ofthe Federal Council Pronounce-ment on Prohibition which wasdiscredited by the Councilafter it was published .

Disseminates socialistic prop-aganda for the Federal Coun-cil to the churches through aweekly Information Service .

Spreader of the SocialisticGospel referred to under F .Ernest Johnson .Author of the pamphlet,

"Social Aspects of Farmers'Cooperative Marketing ."(Communal theory .)

198



Christ in America

Name

Chairman of the Leach, HenryCommittee on

GoddardMexico, of theCommission onInternationalJustice and GoodWill of the Fed-eral Council .

Chairman of theCommission onthe Church andSocial Service .Was Chairman ofthe Commissionon the SteelStrike of 1919.(Report on whichwas discreditedas unwarrantedlybiased.)A prominent andinfluential leaderin the FederalCouncil .

Member of the Lynch, Rev .Hierarchy, the

FrederickAdministrativeCommittee of theFederal Council .


Editor of the "Forum," ultraliberal monthly publication,and member of the advisorycommittee of the radical"Churchman ."

McConnell,

Member of the AmericanBishop

Civil Liberties Union ; of theFrancis J . Foreign Policy Association ; of

the World Alliance for Inter-national Friendship Throughthe Churches. Outstandingleadera he Socialistic Evans-ton (Ill.) Conference of theMethodist Federation for SocialService of June, 1926 . Thisconference's main subject ofdiscussion was "Production forUse and Not for Profit ." Thisconference drew much praiseand commendation from theSocialist, Communist, andRadical press.Was one of the endorsers of

the Lane attack on MilitaryTraining which was financedby the Free Love GarlandRadical Socialist Fund.Cooperator with and

defender of the Rev. Harry F.Ward, q.v .

Secretary of the ChurchPeace Union; Educational Sec-retary of the World Alliancefor International FriendshipThrough the Churches, anaffiliated organization with theultra-pacifist National Councilfor the Prevention of War .


Christ in America

Member of theBoard of Trus-tees .Chairman of theWashington, D.C.office.Former Chair-man, GeneralCommittee onllrmy and NatyChaplains .

General Secre-tary, RecordingSecretary, andTrustee of theFederal Council .Member of var-ious commissionsand committeesof the FederalCouncil .Has been alludedto by certain ofhis fellow clergy-men as the"Senior Prot-estant Cardinal,and a logicalcandidate forPapal honors, incase of a vacancy."

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

199

Radical or LiberalName


McDowell,

Member of the WorldBishop Wm . F. Alliance for International

Friendship Through theChurches, an affiliated organ-ization with the ultra-pacifistNational Council for the Pre-vention of War.This excellent churchman is

quite sincere and well-disposed,but his trusting nature makeshim the easy agent of the moresubtle and radical men asso-ciated with him in the FederalCouncil .With the advice of Rev .

Macfarland and others, hiscommittee passes upon Protes-tant applicants for commissionas Chaplains in the U .S. Army,U. S. Navy, and the U . S .Reserves.

Macfarland,

Trustee, Church PeaceRev .

Union. Member, ExecutiveCharles S . Committee of the World

Alliance for InternationalFriendship Through theChurches, an affiliated organi-zation with the ultra-pacifistNational Council for the Pre-vention of War .Visits the Citizens Military

Training Camps each year,reporting on the messes, moralsand methods therein .

Takes a great interest in theselection of Reserve Chaplains ;the denominations havesupinely turned over to theFederal Council the functionof certifying their clergymenfor commissions in the Chap-lains Reserve Corps, U. S .Army .

200



Christ in America

Former Presidentof the FederalCouncil .Trustee; MemberExecutive Com-mittee ; and offi-cial member rep-resenting theNorthern BaptistConvention .Chairman of theWestern (Chi-cago) office of theFederal Council.

Industrial and Myers, Rev.Field Secretary

Jamesof the FederalCouncil Com-mission on theChurch and SocialService .

Radical or LiberalName Affiliations and Activities

Mathews, Dean

Pacifist, opposed to patrioticShailer

hymns. Trustee of the ChurchPeace Union.

One of the organizers of theWorld Alliance of the Churchesfor the Promotion of Inter-national Justice and Good Will,now known as the WorldAlliance for InternationalFriendship Through theChurches, an affiliated organi-zation with the ultra-pacifistNational Council for the Pre-vention of War .

Admitted that he is a mem-ber of the American Civil Lib-erties Union . Staunch self-admitted friend of ElizabethGurley Flynn (I .W.W.), CarloTresca (anarchist) and RogerN. Baldwin, director of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union .

Representative

Niebuhr, Rev .

Radical Pacifist . Contribut-on the Federal

Reinhold

in g Editor to "The WorldCouncil of the

Tomorrow," "The ChristianEvangelical

Century," the "Survey," andChurch .

the "New Republic," all ofChairman of the

which are radical publicationsIndustrial Com-

which are defenders or cham-mission of the

pions of Soviet Dictatorship.Detroit Council

Honorary Secretary of theof Churches. Fellowship for a Christian

Social Order, whose creed is theSocialist creed of productionfor use and not for profit. Heis an advocate of pooling sal-aries of the clergy to escape theeconomic pressure of donors .He is closely associated withKirby Page and SherwoodEddy. Prominent in the 1926Radical Student Conference atMilwaukee .


Christ in America

Name

Member of the Page, KirbyCommission onInternationalJustice and GoodWill .Committee Workfor the Depart-ment of Researchand Education in1922 .

Committee Work Taylor, Prof.for the Depart-

Alva W .ment of Researchand Education .Formerly mem-ber of the Com-mission on theChurch and SocialService . Repre-sents the Dis-ciples of Christ asan official mem-ber of the FederalCouncil .

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

201


Formulator of the "SlackersOath." Absolute Pacifist . Co-author with Alva W. Taylor,F. Ernest Johnson, and others,of the pamphlet "The Wa ;eQuestion." Editor of "TieWorld Tomorrow." Co-authorwith Sherwood Eddy of "TheAbolition of War." One of thefounders of the Fellowship ofReconciliation . Staunchly pro-Soviet. Member of the Exec-utive Committee of the Fellow-ship for a Christian (?) SocialOrder (Socialistic) .

Editorial writer for "TheChristian Century." Memberof the Commission on Inquiryon the steel strike of 1919,report of which was discreditedas unwarrantedly biased .Headed self-appointed ambas-sadorial delegation to Mexicoin 1926 . This mission to Mex-ico was a plain unwarrantedinterference with our StateDepartment's foreign relationswith Mexico. This mission wasfrankly apologetic for Com-munist influence in Mexico .Author of "The Church andIndustrial Reconstruction ."

Associate Secre- Van Kirk, Rev. Member of the Worldtary of the Com- Walter W . Alliance for Internationalmission on Inter- Friendship Through thenational justice Churches, an affiliated organi-and Good Will of zatian with the ultra-pacifistthe Federal National Council for the Pre-Council .

vention of War. Ardent inter-nationalist "cultivating theinternational mind among theleaders of tomorrow" (YouthMovement). Contributor to"TheChurchman,"ultra-liberalreligious (?) journal .

202

PASTORS POLITICIANS, PACIFISTS


Christ in America

Name

Member of the Ward, Rev .Council of Church Harry F .Secretaries .Methodist Epis-copal represen-tative on theCommission onthe Church andSocial Service, asSecretary of theMethodist (?)Federation forSocial Service .Note :-ThisMethodist (?)Federation forSocial Servicewas the subjectof some consider-able discussion inthe MethodistGeneral Confer-ence in 1924. Onaccount of its un-official character,and on accountof its free-lanceactivities, manydelegates desiredto deprive it theprivilege of longerusing the word"Methodist"but Ward was

finally permittedto use the name,but without un-qualified Metho-dist sanction ofall his activities.


Chairman and prominentruling spirit of the ultra-radical,revolutionary, and I.W.W.-defending American Civil Lib-erties Union.

The joint Legislative Com-mittee Investigating SeditiousActivities of the State of NewYork, defines the AmericanCivil Liberties Union thus :"American Civil LibertiesUnion, in the last analysis, isa supporter of all subversivemovements, and its propa-ganda is detrimental to theinterests of the State. Itattempts not only to protectcrime but to encourage attacksupon our institutions in everyform ."During the War, Dr . Ward

was very active in several pro-German and Pacifist organiza-tions, such as the People'sCouncil of America, "Modeledafter the Council of Workmenand Soldiers in Russia," theprogram of which was "a draw-ing together of all the radicalforces of workingmen, suggest-ing mass action" ; EmergencyPeace Federation organized byseveral well-known radicalsand pro-Germans, "to keepAmerica from war and itsattendant consequences" ; Fel-lowship of Reconciliation,American Union against Mili-tarism, First American Con-ference for Democracy, andTerms of Peace. All theseorganizations carried on sub-versive and disloyal propa-ganda during the war.

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

203


Radical or LiberalChrist in zimerica

Name

/Iffiliations and Activities

Dr. Ward in 1920, presidedover an I.W.W. meeting heldat the (Socialistic) Rand Schoolof Social Science in New York,at which money was raised forthe defense of the I .W.W.murderers of the four membersof the American Legion atCentralia, Washington .He has claimed from the

lecture platform that the Rus-sian bolshevist leaders are notunderstood i n this country, andthat those who condemn themare not fair nor just. He hasattacked the United StatesGovernment for its policy ofdeporting radical aliens .

Defends the I.W.W. from theplatform .He says in his book "The

New Social Order," that thesystem under which our gov-ernment is living is doomed togo, and whether or not the neworder comes peaceably orthrough violence depends uponthe so-called middle and prop-erty class . This class, accord-ing to Ward, must bow to theinevitable and allow the so-called proletariat of the worldto establish the new socialorder for which Ward is work-ing, or a violent revolution willresult .

Ward is an ardent exponentof the doctrine of syndicalism .The meaning of syndicalismis : "The ownership and opera-tion of each industry by theworkers in that industry-thepolitical state to be abolished ."Ward, in his book above

cited, on page 373, says : "The

204




Name


principles of democracydemand direct control of eacheconomic function by all thosedirectly engaged in it, butcoordinating control of all thefunctions by all the people ."America has few franker

champions of syndicalism,socialism or communism thanRev. Ward. He makes a prac-tice, and has long made a prac-tice, of interpolating his radicalideas into all groups andorganizations wherein his polit-ical adroitness gains himinfluence. As Professor ofSocial Science in Boston Uni-versity School of Theology, hedelivered many radical lectureswhich he later published underthe title "The Labor Move-ment."

He left Boston UniversitySchool of Theology and wentto the Chair of Christian Ethicsin the Union Theological Semi-nary in New York ; but hisstrategic post in the Bostonschool is now held by his warmpersonal friend and under-study, the Rev. G. BromleyOxnam, late of the Church ofAll Nations in Los Angeles,noted for its radical activitiesand influence .

When the Methodist Feder-ation for Social Service, Ward'ssurface organization, held itsnotorious conference at GarrettBiblical Institute in Evanston,Illinois, in 1926, it was decidedthat there should be no pub-licity in the discussions in thismeeting, and the Chicago Dailyjournal publicly stated that

ACTIVITY PERSONNEL

2.05



Name


its reporters were informedthat there would be no pub-licity. Despite this fact, three-quarters of a column of pub-licity giving purported sum-maries of some of the state-ments appeared in the DailyWorker, the official Commun-ist organ . Ward was in touchwith certain Communist allieswhile he was in Chicago.

Chairman of the Wickersham, Has long been engaged inCommission on George W . conducting a campaign for theInternational League of Nations, the WorldJustice and Good Court, and the Cancellation ofWill . Foreign Debts . Active in manyChairman, Na- organizations having these endstional Committee

in view .on American-

Attorney for the MitsuiJapanese Rela-

interests in Japan .tions of the Fed-

In the hearings before theeral Council . House Committee on Immigra-

tion, held in 1926, the attorneyfor the American Civil Liber-ties Union, presented as a partof its argument against theHoliday Bill for the Deporta-tion of Criminal Aliens, a com-munication from Mr. Wicker-sham vigorously opposing thisproposed legislation .

Chairman of the Committeefor Treaty Ratification, withSidney Gulick as his secretary .

206




Name

I iliations and Activities

Editor, Christian

Luccock, Rev .

Signer of the Lane PamphletAdvocate, the

Halford

attacking Military Training,leading rweekly

which was financed by thepublication of

American Civil Liberties UnionMethodism,N .Y .

by means of the Free LoveSocialistic Garland Fund .

Permits frequent pacifisticand "new social order" articlesto appear in his paper. Alsopermits unwarranted commen-taries on the Sunday Schoollessons to be printed in theAdvocate.

High, Rev .

One of the acknowledgedStanley leaders of the Youth Move-

ment, and the author of the"Revolt of Youth," a so-calledtext book of the movement.

Zinoviev said, "The YouthMovement is the best sectionof the Third Internationale,and that is as it should be,because they are the heraldsof the future ."On page 214 of his book,

Rev. High says : `"The GermanYouth Movement is a sponta-neousuprisingagainst thesuper-imposed restrictions of the home,the church, and the school ."

"Go to Leavenworth ratherthan fight" is the pronounce-ment of Stanley High ; and heis a co-worker with Brent DowAllinson, who served a term asa draft obstructor .Signer and backer of the

Lane Pamphlet antagonizingMilitary Training .

INDEX

SECTION I-TOPICALPage

Abolition of the Army 37,42"Abolition of War, The," by Kirby Page and Sherwood Eddy 101,201Administrative Committee Rules Supreme184,185,4daocate, Christian (Methodist) 50,206Aiding Soviet Plans 137,138Alien Criminals, Deportation of . . . . 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35,197, 205American Legion Bill 119American Legion Peace Plan Opposed by Federal Council . . . . 118Anti-Christ 83Armistice Day 48, 49, 75Arms Conference 23Army, The 18, 26, 37,199Army Chaplains, How Appointed 199Army Officers 26,199Atheism in Russia 116Austria 89

Bank Savings jeopardized 100Bloody Revolution Promised by National Council for Preventionof War Leader 122

Boston Tea Party 55Boston University School of Theology 204Bridgman, Michigan, Raid, The 2S

Cancellation of Foreign Debts 205Canton Government, The 114,115Capitalism Assailed by the Churches 99Carnegie Endowment 6Central American Relations, Federal Council Activity in . . 132,136Centralia, Washington; Murder of Legionnaires203Chaplains, Army, Navy and Reserve-How Appointed199Chicago Daily journal 204

208

INDEXPage

Chile 56China 89China, The Red Army System in 113China, The Revolution in . . . . . . 113, 172, 173, 174, 192"Chinese Graduates of Mission Schools First to Expose MissionaryHypocrisy" (Daily Worker headline) 181

Christian Idvocate (Methodist) 206Christian Century, The 117,195,196, 200, 201Christian Endeavor 75"Church and Industrial Reconstruction" 201Church of the Messiah, New York 164Churchman, The 195,198, 201Citizens Military Training Camps Inspected by the Federal Coun-

cil of Churches 199Civil War, The 46Clerical Political Party 84Coal . . . 91Committee on Military Affairs, House of Representatives . . . 44,61Communism in Trade Unions . . . 96,99Communist Internationale, Chinese Edition . . . . . 115Communist Paper Endorses the Federal Council of Churches . . 179Communist Papers 182,190Communist Party . . 97, 137, 140, 163,169, 176,178,179, 188,190, 204Community Church, New York 164Compulsion in Trade Unionism 109Compulsory Military Service in Russia 111Congregational Church, Kewanee, Illinois 155Congressional Hearings 26, 44, 61Congressional Resolution on Federal Council145Constance Conference, The 16,17Constitution of the United States 183,188Criminals, Alien, Deportation of . . . . 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35,197,197,205

Daily Worker, The (Communist)140,179,180,189, 205Defensive Wars Opposed 101Denver, Colorado 158DePauw University 2Deportation Bill, H. R . 3774 148Devine, Rev. Edward I 195Disloyalty, Suggestions Toward 93"Doctor Cadman's Counsel" 162Doshisha University, Japan 59,196Draft, The, in Soviet Russia III

SECTION I-TOPICAL

209Page

Encyclicals of the Vatican 163England . . . 163Evangelical Church 200Evanston Interdenominational Socialistic Student Con-

ference 43,198,204Expenditures, Federal Council of Churches

5, 6, 8, 10,16,17, 21, 23, 60, 62, 63

"Facts Are Not Important," Dr . Cadman 137Fall of Shanghai, The 140Farmer-Labor Party 196Federal Council, Form of Organization of . . 72, 73, 130, 136, 140, 170Federal Council Member Churches 71Federal Council Membership 31Federal Council Opposition to Capper-Johnson American Legion

Peace Bill 124Food Resources of the Nation 91Foreign Policy of the United States 184Forum, The

198Free Resolution in Congress 145,150

Garland Free Love Fund8, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47, 60, 107, 134, 135, 168,195, 198,206

Garrett Biblical Institute 204General Staff, The 18Germany 89Goshen, Ohio 156Gospel of Hate, Russian 117Government of the United States 175Great Britain 190Greater Boston Youth Conference 42

Handbook of the Churches89,131, 168, 169"Hands Off China" 139Hankow 177, 178,189Hate, Russian Gospel of 117Holy Roman Empire, The 83"Hook-up," The Radical 164, et seq .Hull House, Chicago 114

Immigration 86, 89, 92,168, 205Imperial University of Japan 59,196International Program of the Federal Council131Iron 91

210 INDEX

Page

Japan 49,58,S9,89,196"Japanese Conquest of American Opinion" 196Johnson Report on Prohibition 79Joshua S1,52

Kaiser, The 12,14,47,10SKewanee, Illinois 156Kuomintang, The 115, 177,178

Labor Leaders 95Labor Unions' Conflict with Soviet Influence96Lane Pamphlet Against Military Training 42, 46, 47, 107,195, 198, 206"Law Not War" 170League of Nations3, 22, 23, 48, 70, 77, 86,168, 205Leavenworth 16, 25, 206Limitation of Armaments 89Louis Lochner Meetings 197Loyalty of the Protestant Church Questioned103Lusitania, The 20Lutheran Church Withdrawal from Federal Council151Lutheran Prophecy of Federal Council Collapse151

Manson, Iowa 159Marx, Karl, His Declaration Adopted by the Churches99Marx, Karl, His Pronouncement Against Religion105Methodist Episcopal Church 156Methodist Episcopal General Conference25,202Mexican-American Relations89, 178, 181, 198, 201Mexican War, The 125Military Caste in Russia, The 110Milwaukee Radical Student Conference of 1926200Mineral Resources of the Nation 91Minnesota State University 42Missouri State University 42Mitsui Interests in Japan 58,205Monroe Doctrine Assailed 90,91Moody Bible Institute 154Moscow 114,139,140, 169,176, 178, 190

National Defense Act 18,19,21,4S,194National Guard, Opposition to 37Nationalist Movement in China 140Nation's Sovereignty Questioned 90Navy Chaplains, How Appointed 199New Republic, The 200

SECTION I-TOPICAL

211Page

"New Social Order, The" 203New York Advocate (Methodist) 50,206New York Herald Tribune, The 136Nicaragua 178

Oak Grove, Missouri 156Oath, Slackers 201Ohio University 42Ohio Wesleyan University 1Oil 91Organization of the Federal Council 130

Party Discipline in Russia 111Passaic (N. J .) Strike 28Pastors' Conference (State), Columbus, Ohio157Peru S6Presbyterian Church's Action Toward the Federal Council . . . 154Presbyterian Church (South), Memphis, Mo155Private Property Rights Assailed by the Churches99Prohibition, Federal Council Action On 78,197Propaganda Plan, The 165Protestantism Not to Surrender to the State 84Public Building Bills, Federal Council Interest in85

Radical "Hook-up," The 164, et seq.Radical Opposition to Army and National Defense37Rand School of Social Science 2S,133,203Red Army, Comparative Strength of106,107,110Red Army, The Purpose of 112Religion and Communism 105,106Rents Assailed by the Churches 99Reserve Chaplains, How Appointed 199Revolution (Bloody) Promised by National Council for Prevention

of War Leader 122Revolutionary War, The 46Rivers and Harbors, Federal Council Interest in85Rubber 91Russia 7, 36, 89, 106, 107Russia, Recognition of by the U . S 116Russian Gospel of Hate 117'Russian Revolution, The 107Russia's Compulsory Military Service 108

212 INDEXPage

School for SpealWrs 137Senate, The United States 75Separation of State and Church 163,183Shanghai 178Slackers Oath, The, Distributed by Kirby Page102,201Socialist Party and Socialism133, 135, 137, 163, 200Social Creed of the Federal Council 117Southern Presbyterian Church 155Soviet Militarism 104Soviet Russia7, 36, 107, 108, 109, 163, 175, 176, 177, 178, 190State Department, The 116State Pastors' Conference, Columbus, Ohio157Student Conference, Milwaukee, 1926 200Survey, The 200Swarthmore College 40,41Syndicalism 203

Tariff Bills, Federal Council Activity for85,91Tax Bills, Federal Council Activity for 85Taylor University 2Third Internationale . . 7,139, 146, 169, 176,177, 182, 188, 206Third Internationale, Happiness of 137Threat to Refuse Service in War 102

Union Mortgage Co ., 60 Broadway, New York City66Union Theological Seminary 204United Church, A, Suggested 86United Lutheran Church 151United States Senate, Federal Council Pressure Upon181Vatican, Encyclicals of 163Volstead Act, The 78

Walsh Bill, The 38, 44, 45, 46War Debts, Cancellation of 87War Department, The 45Washington Post, The 121

Withdrawal of United Lutheran Church from the Federal Council 151World Court, The23, 48, 70, 75, 77, 80, 86, 89, 146, 168, 170World Tomorrow, The 168,195,197, 200, 201World War Veterans 49Young Men's Christian Association23,44,7SYoung Women's Christian Association23,7SYouth Movement 134,135,201,206

INDEX

SECTION II-ORGANIZATIONSPage

Administrative Committee of the Federal Council

130, 140, 167, 171,173,174,175,176,180,183,184,188,195,196

Altman Foundation 68Amalgamated Clothing Workers 135American Association for Labor Legislation164American Civil Liberties Union 3, 6,16, 26, 29, 30, 36, 38, 47, 60, 61, 95,

Civil Liberties Bureau (Now American Civil Liberties Union,q .v .) 25,124Cloth Hat, Cap and Millinery Workers' Union135Collegiate Anti-Military League 135Zommission on Church and Social Service . . . . 171,195,197,202

107, 111, 120, 123, 133, 135, 146, 148,163, 164, 169, 170, 171, 195, 197, 198,

200, 202, 205, 206American Conference of Russian Freedom . .

. .

.

.95American Federation of Labor . 25, 30, 120American Fund for Public Service . . . . .

. .

.

. . . . . 41,134American Legion . .

. . . . . .

. .

.

. . . . 118,203American Relief for Russian Children . . .

. .

.

. . . .

135,164American-Russian Reconstruction Farms . .

. .

.

.135American Union Against Militarism . . . .

. .

.

. . . . 135,202American War Mothers .

. .

.

.160Amos Council Appeal Committee . . . . .

. .

.

.164Army and Navy Chaplains Committee . . .

. .

.

.199Association for the Advancement of Colored People . 135

Baptist (Northern) Convention .

. .

.

.200Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers . . .

. .

.

. . . . . 30,98

Central Bureau for Relief of Evangelical Churches in Europe . .

60Church League for Industrial Democracy . . . . .

135Church Peace Union6, 11, 45, 60, 63, 171, 198, 199, 200Civic Club of New York City . .

.

.135

214 INDEXPage

Commission on International Friendship (Justice) andGood Will . . . 6, 46, 60, 74, 86, 89,117, 168, 195, 201,205

Commission on Relations with Japan 17,205Committee of Academic Freedom 135Committee of Direction 74,75Committee of 48 164Committee on Cooperation in Latin America . . . . . 74Committee on Friendly Relations Between Jews and Christians . 30Committee on Militarism in Education42, 44, 135Committee on Relations with Eastern Churches195Committee on Religious Work in the Canal Zone60Committee on the War and Religious Outlook195Community Forum 164Conference for Progressive Political Action 135Congress of Church Peace Union 11Cornel Settlement School 20Councill of Workmen and Soldiers in Russia202

Daughters of the American Revolution 120,160Delaware League of Women Voters 27,30Department of Research and Education of the Federal

Council 79,168,197, 201

Editorial Council of the Religious Press 50Emergency Peace Conference 95, 135, 202

Federal Commission for the Preparation of a Study in War andPeace .

.

.

.

.

15Fellowship for a Christian Social Order .

. . . . 200,208Fellowship of Reconciliation . . . . 41, 95,120,133,135, 165, 197, 201Fellowship of Youth for Peace . . . . 41,137First American Conference for Terms of Peace . . . . 132Foreign Policy Association . 135, 196, 195

General Federation of Women's Clubs . . . . .

76

Hungarian Federation of the Workers Party . . . . .

97

I. W. W. (Industrial Workers of the World) 25, 164, 202, 203Intercollegiate Liberal League . . .

164Intercollegiate Socialist Society . 133, 164, 196International Committee for Political Prisoners . . . 164International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union . . . . . . . 96,135Italian Federation of the Workers Party . . . . .

97

Japanese-American Relations Committee of the Federal Council . 205

SECTION II-ORGANIZATIONS

215Page

Knit Goods Workers' Union 135

Labor Defense Council 164,165League for American Citizenship 27,30League for Industrial Democracy133, 135,164, 196League of Nations Union 63League of Neighbors 164League to Limit Armaments 135Liberty Defense Union 95,135Locomotive Engineers, Brotherhood of 98

Methodist Board of Missions 59Methodist Board of Temperance and Public Morals78Methodist Federation for Social Service 16,202

National Catholic Welfare Council 30National Committee on Constructive Immigration Legislation . . 196National Council for the Limitation of Armaments61National Council for the Prevention of War . 6, 120, 121, 122, 123, 170,

198, 199, 200, 201National Council of Jewish Women 27,30National League of Women Voters 76,170National Trade Union Committee for Russia135Neutral Conference Committee 135Non-Intervention Citizens Committee . . . . 132, 134, 137, 138, 194

Open Forum Speakers Council 135

People's Council 95, 135, 165People's Freedom Union 135People's Institute of Mexico 137People's Legislative Service 135,164Phelps-Stokes Foundation 68Pioneer Youth 134,13SPolish Federation of the Workers Party 97Protestant Episcopal Commission on Christian Unity and Depart-

ment of Social Service 19S

Research Department of the Federal Council79, 168,197Russian-American Industrial Corporation 135

Teachers' Union of New York 135Textile Workers' Union 13S

Union for Democratic Control 135United Mine Workers of America 97

216 INDEX

PageWomen's Federated Groups 23,76Workers (Communist) Party of America, The96,140Workingmen's Circle, The 135World Alliance for International

Friendship Through the Churches 6, 12, 63, 171, 194, 196, 198, 199,201World Alliance of the Churches for the Promotion of International

Justice and Good Will 200World Court Students' Conference 42

INDEX

SECTION 111-PERSONNELPage

Abernathy, Rev . Dr 76Addams, Jane 114Allinson, Brent Dow 206Anthony, Rev . Alfred W 27,30Atkinson, Rev . Henry A 194

Baldwin, Roger N 40,200Baruch, Bernard M 120Beardsley, Samuel A 133Beckerman, Abraham 133Bell, Bishop William 79Bond, Duncan 158Borodin, Michael (Michael Berg) 114Bowie, Rev. 0 . Russell 136Brent, Bishop Charles H 195Brookings, Robert S 119Bucharin, N 105Budish, J . M 133Burke, Edmund xiv

Cadman, Dr. S . Parkes . . . 44, 46, 61, 64, 74, 82, 85, 86, 108,131,136,150,160, 161,162, 167,169, 194

Caesar xivCannon, Bishop James 78Capper, Senator Arthur 119,120Carnegie, Andrew S,8,60Cavert, Rev. Samuel McCrea 27, 30, 42, 61, 65, 74, 123, 136, 173, 195, 196Chiang Kai-Shek, General 177,189Christ xiiiClaessens, August 133Clarke, Walter I 154Cobb, Rev. Henry Emerson 136

218

INDEXPage

Cohn, Fannia M 133Coolidge, President Calvin 77, 182, 187Coon, Dr . Corliss D ., Manson, Iowa 159Coyle, Albert 97Crocker, Rev . W. T 136Cutting, Robert Fulton 68

Danish Max D 133Darby, Rev. W. L . . . . . . . . . 30,31,32,33,34,3S,197Davis, Secretary of War Dwight E 119De Leon, Solon 24Dunn, Robt . W 134

Eddy, Sherwood 101, 106,117, 200, 201Ely, Major General Hanson E 119Emperor, William 12,14Ernst, Morris L 133

Feng Yu-Hsiang, General 178Fenn, Mrs. Lucy 120Field, Sara Bard 1'22Fisher, Rev . J . C 155Fletcher, Senator Duncan U 128Flynn, Elizabeth Gurley (I . W. W .) 200Ford, Mrs. W. W 27Foster, William Z8, 36, 40, 47, 107, 108, 111, 112,169Frank, Eli, Jr 27,30Free, Representative Arthur M34, 35, 142, 150Freeman, Bishop 76

Gannet, Lewis 40Gardner, Gilson 30Garland, Charles 40, 47,168Garrison, Secretary of War L . M 18Getty, Rev. Frederick 156Gilbert, Rev . Chas . K 27, 30, 31Gilmer, Elizabeth 27,30Gompers, Samuel 25,95Grant, General Ulysses S 56Gray, Rev. James M 154Green, Wm. F., President, A .F . of L95,120Grimm, PeterGulick, Dr. Sidney L . . 20,27 , 30,49, S0,58,61,63,74,76,86,93,138,

172, 173,181,184, 185,189,190, 196, 205

SECTION III-PERSONNEL

219Page

Haas (Original Patronymic-See Hayes) 27,30Habgut (Original Patronymic-See Hapgood)98Hapgood, Norman (see Habgut) 98Hapgood, Powers (see Habgut) 98Hardin, Rev . Martin 197Hatch, Rev . Harold A 197Hayes, Arthur Garfield (see Haas) 27,30High, Rev. Stanley 206Hillowitz, Misca (see Hillquit) 133Hillquit, Morris 133Holaday, Representative Wm . P 28, 33, 34Holmes, Rev. John Haynes 136,16SHowe, Harold J., Chicago, III 159Howland, Charles T 75Hull, Captain 55Hungerford, Arthur W 42,61Hunt, Rev . I . Cochrane 155

Idleman, Rev . Finis E 136,137Inman, Dr. Samuel Guy 136

Johnson, Representative Albert 27, 32, 33, 34Johnson, Rev. F. Ernest 79,197, 201Johnson, James Weldon 40Johnston, Mercer G 27,30Jung, Harry A ., Chicago, III 158

Kane, Francis Fisher 27,30Kellogg, Secretary of State Frank B 182,187Kendig, Miss Isabelle 29 120

Laidlaw, Mrs . James Leigh 68Landis, Benson Y 197Land nan, Rev . Isaac 136Lane, Winthrop D 43Langdale, Rev. John W 136Lansburgh, Mrs. M 27,30Lapp, John A 195Lathrop, Rev. John H 136Leach, Henry Goddard 198Lee, General Robert E. .

. 56Lejeune, Major General John H 119Lenin, Nicholai 114,169, 176,177, 181,188,192Lewis, John L ., Pres. United Mine Workers of America97

220

Lewis, Rev. Thomas E . . .Libby, Frederick J . . .Lieberman, Joshua . . . .Lincoln, Abraham . . . .Longseth, W . SLovett, Robert Morss . .Luccock, Rev . Halford E . .Lunatcharsky, Anatole .Lunn, Sir Henry

Nearing, ScottNiebuhr, Rev . Reinhold .

Olmstead, Allen SOtis, Prof. Wm . BradleyOxnam, Rev . G. Bromley .

Page, KirbyPerry, Commodore . . . .Pershing, General John J . .Preobraschensky, E . Z . .

INDEX

Page 79 121,122 133 125

46 40 136,206 116 62,63

MacFarland, Rev . Charles S . . . 64, 67, 74, 76, 161, 162,191, 196,199MacNider, Colonel Hanford 118Magness, Rabbi Judah 40,95Mann, Bishop 76Mann, Frank H 66Martin, Rev . John P 156Marx, Karl 99,105Mathews, Dean Shailer 200McClatchy, V . S 58McCluer, Margaret N ., American War Mothers160McConnell, Bishop Francis J 171,198McDonald, Miss Mary E 40McDowell, Bishop Wm . J 76,79McMaster, Senator 128Miller, Rev. A . Lane 136Montivan, Father W . T 30Moore, Dr. John W 76Morgan, Rev. Dr 76Morgan, Miss Ruth 170Morrison, Dr . Charles C 117Muste, A . J 133Myers, Rev . James 116,200

40 200

27,30 46 2)4

101,117,197,200,2015556

105

SECTION III-PERSONNEL

221Page

Radcliffe, Rev. Dr 76Rankin, Representative John M 143Reed, Senator James 126Reiland, Rev . Carl 136Rockefeller, John D 68Root, Elihu 4, 68, 75, 146Ruthenberg, Charles E 169Ryan, Dr. John A 120,123,19S

Sayre, Dr. John Nevin40, 41, 42, 60,133, 134,168Scarlett, Dr. William H 117Schlossberg, Joseph 133Schneiderman, Rose 133Scott, General 55Shoemaker, Rev. S. M ., Jr 136Siegmund-Schultze, Dr 12Sigman, Morrow 97Simons, Rev . Minot 136Sinclair, Upton 41Sockman, Rev. Dr. Ralph W 136Speers, Rev . T. Guthrie 136Spruance, Miss Edith 27,30Stalin, Josef 115Sun Yat Sen 114

Taylor, Alva W 196,201Taylor, Colonel John Thomas 119Taylor, General Zachary 55Thomas, Norman 40,134Tresca, Carlo (Anarchist) 200

Van Kirk, Rev . Walter W 201Vanyon, William J ., St . Joseph, Mich 157Villard, Oswald Garrison 134Vladeck, B . C 133

Wadsworth, Senator JamesWalser, Kenneth . . .Wang, Ching-WeiWarburg, Paul .Ward, Rev. Harry F. .

Watson, DrWhitworth, Rev. Dr . JohnWickersham, George W .

125 138 178 68

16,24,2S, 40, 95, 107, 117,169,171, 195,198,202,203,204,205 76 1. 4, 31, 49, 50, 58, 63, 74, 77, 86, 146, 205

222 INDEXPage

Wilbur, Harry Curran 172,193Wilfley, Rev . Dr 77Wilson, Rev . Dr . Clarence True 78Wilson, Ray 41Wilson, President Woodrow 15Wise, Rabbi Stephen A 133Woll, Matthew, Vice-President A . F . of L96Wurdeman, Mrs . H . B 120

Zinoviev, Gregore 206Zuckerman, M 133

pastors politicians pacifists-le_roy_f_smith-e_b_johns-1927-233pgs-rel-pol

Education

influence of religion

religious men

support of organized

religious mind of men

reference book

great organization

animosities of man

proper character