Billy James Hargis. The Facts about Communism and Our Churches. Christian Crusade, 1962. See here to purchase the book.
Billy James Hargis was a conservative anti-Communist preacher, in the
vein of such organizations as the John Birch Society. This book is
about the Communist infiltration, manipulation, and use of churches.
Julian Williams provided Hargis with the research and documentation.
Here are some thoughts and observations:
A. The Communist stance towards religion is examined in this book.
Hargis provides quotes from the Communist pillars, such as Lenin, as
well as from American Communist leaders. Essentially, the Communist
stance, as Hargis portrays it, is that the Communists are disdainful
towards religion, but they are willing to tolerate it if it serves their
aims. They realize that the proletariat will not relinquish its
religious beliefs easily, so the Communists will work with religion
provided that it promotes and advances their economic and political
worldview. This is evident in Communist countries, where some churches
act as propagandists for the state.
B. Hargis documents that Communists have infiltrated American
churches, but he backs away from saying that most of the pastors and
Christians who adhere to left-wing political views are Communists. He
even backs off from claiming that the National Council of Churches and
the World Council of Churches are Communist, even though, of course, he
acknowledges that there are overtly Communist pastors in the World
Council of Churches. What Hargis argues is that a number of pastors have
been influenced by Communists and unknowingly duped into advancing
their agenda. This agenda includes support for Fidel Castro, the
admission of Red China into the UN, disarmament, allowing Communist
foreigners into the United States through lax immigration laws, a
one-world government, opposition to HUAC, and opposition to free
enterprise. According to Hargis, mainline Protestant churches and
publications have endorsed such positions, which have been promulgated
in explicitly Communist publications. Hargis also criticizes mainline
Protestantism for denying supernaturalism, such as the virgin birth, and
he seems to maintain that this overlaps with Communist
anti-supernaturalism.
C. Hargis also responds to critics of his position. When the Air
Force suppressed an educational manual within its ranks that exposed
Communist influence in churches, that does not mean that the Air Force
was denying the manual’s message; the Secretary denied this was the
case. The same goes for J. Edgar Hoover and William Sullivan of the FBI,
when they criticize dividing people against each other, for they
themselves express concern about the Communist usage of churches to
advance the Communist agenda.
D. Hargis contends that the National Council of Churches threatens
freedom of speech. Radio stations are increasingly deciding to limit
their Protestant airtime to churches that are part of the NCC. The NCC
also seeks to influence what churches are constructed and where, which
could prioritize NCC-affiliated churches and marginalize conservative
ones. This analysis is likely dated, due to the decline of mainline
Protestantism and the current abundance of evangelical churches. Plus,
Christian radio is predominantly right-wing.
E. Hargis touches on the question of whether churches should even be
involved in politics. On the one hand, he seems to be sympathetic
towards a “no” answer. Numerous Christians and pastors have disliked the
NCC because it has taken political stances. Hargis refers to a
Presbyterian leader who quotes the Westminster Confession’s
discouragement of synods and councils from “intermeddl[ing] with civil
affairs which concern the Commonwealth[.]” Norman Vincent Peale laments
that mainline churches give people the stone of social action rather
than the bread of spirituality. On the other hand, Hargis maintains that
churches should stand against Communism, which has persecuted
Christians throughout the world. All this is noteworthy because Hargis
has sometimes labeled himself one of the earliest voices of the
religious right. My impression (which is subject to correction) is that
his political agenda was not as comprehensive as that of the religious
right of the 1980’s, perhaps because society during the 1960’s was still
largely conservative in culture.
F. The tone of this book is (A.) the Communists believe A, (B.)
American Christian leaders also believe A, so (C.) the American
Christian leaders are wrong because they agree with the Communists. But
Hargis sometimes offers a rationale for his political positions.
Communism is brutal and authoritarian. Disarmament is wrong because
military strength on the part of the U.S. is what guarantees the peace,
plus the Communists break disarmament agreements. The Bible supports
private property because it has “Thou shalt not steal.” The early
Christians’ sharing of their possessions in Acts 4 was temporary and was
eventually abandoned as unfeasible, plus it was voluntary rather than
coerced. The Bible supports private charity rather than state welfare. I
differ from that last point because I think that the Pentateuch
promotes a just society which keeps the poor from falling through the
cracks, not just individuals helping others whenever they feel like it.
G. Hargis sometimes provides details about the liberal Christians’
rationale for their positions: social reform can undermine Communism by
redressing the poverty that Communists exploit, Romans 13 would require
Christians to submit to a world government (that is a new one for me—-a
conservative rationale for a liberal position!). The book may have been
stronger had it done so more.