Elizabeth Kirkpatrick Dilling.

The red network; a who's who and handbook of radicalism for patriots online

. (page 4 of 59)
Online LibraryElizabeth Kirkpatrick DillingThe red network; a who's who and handbook of radicalism for patriots → online text (page 4 of 59)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

held together "by real estate." To this one might reply that Christ's faith
was started without any real estate in the first place and it can flourish and
acquire real estate any time that it burns with living power.

Modernist Protestant Churches, united under the influence of the radical
Federal Council of Churches, penetrated with communistic propaganda,
unsure of allegiance to Christian doctrines, are weak and divided foes, when
not actual allies, of the advancing menace of Bolshevism and Atheism now
assailing America from the schools and universities, the press, the pulpit, the
lecture platform, and radical politicians.

Three facts stand out:

1. Marxism is Atheism. Both Socialism and Communism are Marxism,
the only difference being that Socialism covers over its Atheism with a gar-
ment of "Christianity" when camouflage is expedient, while Communism
does not.

2. Cooperation with Marxism is cooperation with Atheism. Christ has
warned us against trying to serve two masters, saying "he who is not with Me
is against Me." Also, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:
for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what com-
munion hath light with darkness. . . . Wherefore come out from among them,
and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I
will receive you." (II Corinthians 7:14-17).

The "A. B. C. of Communism" has truly stated that it is impossible for
a man both to believe in God and to serve the Marxian cause. Even though
a Christian may believe that he is no less a Christian or that he in fact is
even a more "practical" Christian through accepting Marxism with a
mental reservation concerning its immorality and atheism, still the fact
remains that he is aiding those who have no such mental reservation but
whose fixed, immediate, and ultimate purpose is the destruction of Christian-
ity and its moral principles everywhere. The intermediary stage of true Social-
ism, which is called "Christian" Socialism, is a smeary mess of conflicting

"Christian" Socialism 29

Marxism and religious sentimentality which is referred to facetiously by real
Communists and Socialists as "the kindergarten of Red radicalism." Social-
ists agree that a consistent Socialist must lose his Christian faith. The pity
is that so many who have lost it continue to usurp pulpits.

3. "Christian Socialists" do cooperate actively with atheist Communists.
This whole book is an illustration of that fact. One may search in vain for
the prominent "Christian" Socialist who is not working with and for Atheist
Communists. As one becomes familiar with the names in the various Red
organizations, the truth becomes apparent that "Christian" Socialism and
Communism are branches of the same movement. Their members mingle on
the same committees; they are arrested in the same strikes and riots; they
share funds from the same sources; they unite in defending Satan's Base
Godless Soviet Russia.

My most vigorous opponents are "Christian" Socialists, even those who
are only sympathizers with the Red movement. My first experience was
with the Rector of the Episcopal Church which I formerly attended and in
spite of this I believe him to be a sincere, tho misguided, believer in Christ.
I was lecturing about Russia and I told him about the Soviet government's
dreadful blasphemous anti-Christian displays I had seen there, of their open
boast that they would accomplish from within the same thing in America,
and offered to come and show my Russian pictures to the Women's Guild,
gratis. Of course, I expected his sympathetic indignation and cooperation,
[nstead, to my surprise and bewilderment, he started talking about "Christian"
Socialism and about its being "quite different" from Communism; he stated
that he had once belonged to a small Socialist group at Oxford "just for the
benefit of the social order." Later, he asked if an anti-communist lecturer
who was to speak in the vicinity was "one of those terrible American Legion
men" and asked if I did not agree with him that Norman Thomas' Socialist
campaign platform was "pretty good." His instantaneous, almost automatic,
efforts to shield godless Communism and his refusal to allow me to warn of
its atheistic Christ-crucifying plans came as a shock to me at the time, but
I soon found it to be but a mild manifestation of "Christian" Socialism.

Try, I say, attacking Soviet Russia's godlessness, and see where your
"Christian" Socialist will stand. He will screen Sovietism and attack youl

As we observe how "Christian" Socialist Reinhold Niebuhr advocates
Marxian revolution and how he occupies the platform with atheist Communist
Party officials controlled by godless Moscow; as I have observed the con-
stant procession of Communist notices tacked on "Christian" Socialist Tittle's
Evanston M. E. Church bulletin board and read his printed sermons prais-
ing Communist revolutionaries as the ones God "spoke through"; as one
observes with what zeal Harry Ward, Bishop McConnell, and other "Chris-
tian" Socialists serve the A. C. L. U. legal defense of atheists and Communist
criminals, and how pleasantly McConnell serves the Socialist campaign while
Winifred Chappell serves the Communist campaign and signs a Manifesto
subscribing to Communist principles, and all of these unite in the Methodist
Federation for Social Service, headed by McConnell, in getting out the Bulle-
tin edited by Ward and Winifred Chappell after a thousand more obser-

30 The Red Network

vations like these the airy soap-bubble castle built upon arguments that
"Christian" Socialism has nothing to do with and is "quite different from
Communism" vanishes into thin air!

The Catholic Church, strangely, seems unaware that it has a few Red-
aiders in its midst, but in spite of these no such headway has been made by
radicals with Catholics as has been made with Protestants.

Gerard B. Donnelly, S. J., wrote, in "America," a Catholic publication
(1932), a statement which should be framed and put on every church door
in this land. He held that a vote for Norman Thomas for President would
be in direct violation of Catholic doctrine and said: "No Catholic can
accept the Marxian philosophy or the denial of the right of property. Social-
ism cannot Christianize itself merely by soft-pedaling or even by dropping
entirely its dogmas on class warfare and property rights. Rome's ban against
Socialism is not withdrawn. . . . The Socialist Party proposes recognition of the
Soviet Union. Now the Soviets are publicly and explicitly hostile to God.
To vote for their recognition, or, what is tantamount, to vote for a party
which advocates their recognition, is once more formal cooperation with evil
and obviously something no Catholic can do."


The Socialist method of attaining power has been the inspiration for the
adjective which Communists popularly bestow upon their Socialist brothers.
They call the Socialists "yellow" and the Second International the "yellow"
International. This Socialist method, says Hearnshaw, is "the method of
sapping rather than assault; of craft rather than force; of subtelty rather
than violence. 'Permeation' has been their watchword. . . . Above all they have
tried to bemuse the public mind into the belief that 'socialism' and 'collec-
tivism' are synonymous terms; and that all they are aiming at is a harmless
and beneficent extension of state and municipal enterprise."

Even Friedrich Engels, collaborator of Karl Marx, writing to his friend
Sorge in America (who collected Florence Kelley's letters from Engels and
placed them in the New York Public Library) in commenting on the camou-
flage, subterfuge and indirection of Fabian Socialists said: "Their tactics
are to fight the liberals not as decided opponents, but to drive them on to
socialistic consequences; therefore to trick them, to permeate liberalism with
socialism, and not to oppose socialistic candidates to liberal ones, but to
palm them off, to thrust them on, under some pretext. ... All is rotten." (So-
cialist Review, vol. 1, p. 31).

Even more rotten is the attempt of mis-named "Christian" Socialists to
deceive Christians into believing that Marxism is like Christianity. The Daily
Northwestern of Dec. 13, 1932, under the heading "Niebuhr Claims Marxian
Theory Like Christian," reviews Niebuhr's book, "Moral Man and Immoral
Society," which has been praised by both the Communist and Socialist Red
press for its correct Marxian position in setting forth the necessity for bloody
class hate and revolution. It quotes him as saying: "The religio-political
dreams of the Marxians have an immediate significance which the religio-
ethical dreams of the Christians lack." Yes, indeed! The religio-political
dreams of the Marxians include the destruction of Christianity and of the
very moral principles Christ held dear. Whenever and wherever Marxians

"Christian" Socialism 31

attain power, as in Mexico, Russia, or Spain, Christian churches are "signifi-
cantly" and immediately closed or destroyed and Christians persecuted.

Reinhold Niebuhr is one of America's outstanding "Christian" Socialists.
In company with Harry Ward and others of the same kind who adorn plat-
forms at Communist meetings, he teaches at Union Theological Seminary,
where the L. I. D. conference on "Guiding the Revolution" was held and
from whence Arnold Johnston went forth to Kentucky last year as repre-
sentative of the A. C. L. U., to be arrested for criminal syndicalism. Niebuhr
was honored with a place on the platform as speaker for the Communist-
controlled U. S. Congress Against War, held in N. Y. City, Sept. 29, 1933,
in company with Earl Browder, General Secretary of the Communist Party,
and Henri Barbusse, French Communist, guest of honor (Daily Worker).

The Phila. Record of October 14, 1933 reported: "Reinhold Niebuhr,
Union Theological Seminary Professor, last night advocated the use of force
to bring about a new social order. . . . His open leaning toward revolution was
expressed at the opening of a three-day joint regional conference of the
Women's International League for Peace and Freedom and the Fellowship
of Reconciliation at Swarthmore College" (A "Pacifist" conference).

Karl Marx, the idol of Reinhold Niebuhr, denies the existence of God
or Supreme Spirit in any form. He teaches: the desirability and inescapable
necessity of class hatred, class revolution, envy and covetousness; the abol-
ition of the family unit and of marriage; the communizing of women; state
ownership of children; that matter and force constitute all of creation; that
only materialistic circumstance guides destiny, character, and history; that
man's spirit is as material as a chemical effervescence or an electric spark
which flickers out or rots with the body; that "Religion is the opium of the
people"; that with the vanishing of property rights, religion and morality
will vanish, along with other "bourgeois sentimentalities"; that a govern-
mental proletarian dictatorship must be set up by violence; and that any
theory that the two classes can get together is only a dodge on the part of
the bourgeoisie who wish to avoid having their throats cut in a bloody
proletarian revolution.

Jesus Christ teaches: that God is the Father of all life; that the family
unit and marriage are indissoluble; that parents should love their children
and children honor their parents; that Christians should exercise love and
charity toward their neighbors; that no political kingdom of worldly power
should be sought by Christians, as such, but rather personal kindness and
a mastery over self.

Any government will be good if it is composed of good persons and no
government can be good that is built by persons of Godless and immoral
principles. Goodness is a day to day personal achievement, a contest with
evil which constantly breaks down, and must be taken up again.

Anyone who says that the theories of Marx and Christ are alike is either
a hopeless idiot or a wilful deceiver. But the siren call of Marxism to the
altruist, who clings to the title of "Christian" for the sake of lingering senti-
ment, or financial or political expediency, is that it promises to obtain by
foul means a pure, just, classless, equalitarian society; by means of rage and
hate to usher in the reign of brotherly love; by means of plunder and gory
class war to achieve peace; and by means of anti-moral propaganda to ele-

32 The Red Network

vate mankind. By discouraging the lazy, incompetent and debauched man
from the belief that his condition is in any way the result of his own faults,
but rather that all sufferings and inequalities are due to capitalism, it promises
to eradicate these sufferings through revolution.

The kindly man cannot see that, as Hearnshaw says: " Socialism debili-
tates and demoralizes those whom it seeks to succor." It "is the cry of adult
babyhood for public nurses and pap bottles" and "by means of doles, poor
relief, free meals, free education, free medical services, free everything all
paid for by the industrious and careful it breeds and fosters a vast demoral-
ized mass of paupers and vagrants . . . battening contentedly and permanently
upon the industry of their more efficient and self-respecting neighbors."

"The ultimate source of our social evils is not economic," says T. W.
Headley (in "Darwinism and Modern Socialism"), "and as soon as we realize
that whatever social malady we have to deal with, it originates with human
weakness and folly more than with outward circumstances, we have a prin-
ciple that will guide us."

"Socialism" That Is Christian Is Not Socialism

There is an epigram to the effect that "Socialism is Christian only in so
far as it is not Socialism and Socialism only in so far as it is not Christian."

Modern predatory Socialism despises and ridicules as "only sham Social-
ism," the religious, purely voluntary "Associations for Cooperative Produc-
tion" which were formed in England subsequent to 1848 by Christian groups
calling themselves "Socialists." Dr. Robert Flint says of these Christian
"Socialists": "They did not teach a single principle or doctrine peculiar to
socialism but rather by their ethical and religious fervor struck at the very
roots of socialism." They had no quarrel with the existing social system as
such; they gave no countenance to projected raids on land and capital; they
utterly rejected the doctrine that character and destiny are determined by
materialistic circumstance; above all, they repudiated with abhorrence the
idea of the class war and the ferocious savagery of the Communist Manifesto
of Marx and Engels.

Dr. C. E. Raven's "Christian Socialism" tells the pathetic but ridiculous
story of forty-one of these community enterprises all of which failed dis-
astrously and failed in a short time. He illustrates and specifies as causes of
their uniform collapse: the vicious principle of equality of reward irrespec-
tive of output or ability; lack of business capacity; quarrels; indiscipline;
greed; dishonesty; slackness; inefficiency it was said, for example, "you
could always tell a Christian socialist by the cut of the cooperative trousers."
When the incentive of competition and private profit is removed only com-
pulsion remains as a driving force. Without dictatorship and force, any form
of Socialism collapses. As Socialist-Communist G. B. Shaw has said: "Com-
pulsory labor with death as the final punishment is the keystone of socialism"
(Fabian Tract No. 51, 1906).

F. J. C. Hearnshaw in "Survey of Socialism" (1929) says: "It is a pro-
found truth seen equally clearly by keen sighted Christians and by keen
sighted socialists that the principles of the religion of love are wholly incom-
patible with the only operative form of socialism viz. that which incites

"Methodists Turn Socialistic" 33

the proletariat to attack all other classes ; which seeks to drag down the pros-
perous to the level of the base; which lusts for confiscation of capital; which
projects the extermination of landowners; which envisages the eradication
of competition by the reintroduction of slavery under a criminal dictatorship.
'In their strictest sense Christianity and socialism are irreconcilable/ said
the Rev. T. W. Bussell in a recent Bampton lecture. 'It is a profound truth
that socialism is the natural enemy of religion,' echoed the British Socialist
Party in its official manifesto."

"Marxism . . . sublimated robbery into 'restitution.' It enabled the impe-
cunious to regard themselves as 'the disinherited'; the ne'er-do-wells as 'the
defrauded'; the unsuccessful as 'the oppressed'; the unskilled as 'wage slaves';
the incompetent as 'the exploited'; the unemployed as 'the sole creators of
wealth and value'; the proletariat as 'the people'; and the violent revolution-
aries as 'vindicators of the rights of man.' "

"Marxian socialism is potent just because of its appeal to the primitive
individualism of the subnormal man. It excites his passion for plunder; it
stimulates his love of fighting; it bemuses his rudimentary conscience, mak-
ing him believe that he is out for justice and not for loot; it muddles his
immature mind with ineffable nonsense concerning complicated economic
theories of value and surplus value. Of the potency and efficacy of its appeal
there can be no doubt. It is the only really effective type of socialism in
existence. It entirely supersedes its Utopian predecessors; for they postulate
self-sacrifice and hard work, and depict an ideal community which provides
its own modest sustenance by cooperative toil a most unattractive paradise
to a cave-man. Only Marxian socialism offers brigandage systematized,
rationalized, moralized, glorified. Hence, as Thorstein Veblen says: 'The
socialism that inspires hopes and fears today is of the school of Marx. No
one is seriously apprehensive of any other so-called socialistic movement. . . .
In proportion as the movement in any given community grows in mass,
maturity, and conscious purpose, it unavoidably takes on a more consistently
Marxian complexion. . . . Socialists of all countries gravitate toward the theo-
retical position of avowed Marxism.' So, too, Clayton: 'Modern socialism
is Marx and Marx modern socialism : there is no other foundation.' . . . Prof.
Ely concludes: 'In socialism Karl Marx occupies a position ... all going before
him in a manner preparing the way for him and all coming after him taking
him for a starting point/ " (Hearnshaw).

The Lusk Report says: "In fact the only scientific, concrete and per-
fectly systematic scheme" (of Socialism) "is the scheme of Karl Marx. This
is the basis for materialism inherent in present day socialism, for its antago-
nism to religion, to ethics, to all idealism based on principles . . . that do not
relate to purely material life and wealth interests.' 7


If the great voice of John Wesley with its call to Christianize individual
souls should finally be stilled by the voice of Karl Marx with its call to class
war disguised as a call to preach the "social gospel of economic justice"
not only Methodism but the whole world will suffer.

Ominously, the Socialist "Christian Social Action Movement" of Chicago

34 The Red Network

Methodist Church headquarters says of its opportunities for teaching Social-
ism-Communism: "Our most fruitful field of accomplishment we believe to be
within and through the agency of the Church of which we are a part. It is
difficult to overemphasize the significance to the social and economic move-
ment in America if the Methodist Church should be won to whole hearted
advocacy and support of the social gospel. To this endeavor . . . we pledge
ourselves." (p. 41 of its Handbook).

"Methodists Turn Socialistic" is the title of an article written by Socialist
Chas. C. Webber (jailed in a radical strike in 1930 and defended by the
A. C. L. U.), which appears in the Socialist, Garland-Fund-aided "World
Tomorrow" of July 1933. In it he felicitates the Annual Conference of the
M. E. Church held at Central Church, Brooklyn, N. Y. for its report on "The
Necessity of Social Change from capitalism to a socialistic economic system,"
and says that the motion to change the words "social ownership" (complete
Socialism) in the final report to "social control" just barely passed. He says:
"This debate clearly showed that the majority of the members of the N. Y.
East Conference of the M. E. Church are convinced that 'capitalism' must
be brought under some form of social control."

The Northeast Ohio Conference of the M. E. Church exhibited similar
tendencies when "Socialized ownership and control of the country's financial
and industrial system as a substitute for capitalism were recommended"
(Associated Press report, Sept. 20, 1932). Other conferences have likewise
adopted communistic-socialistic resolutions.

The Methodist Federation for Social Service is headed by Bishop Francis
J. McConnell, Socialist, A. C. L. U., etc., and its Bulletin is edited by Harry
Ward, of radical fame, and Winifred Chappell, frankly of the Communist
Party campaign committee. As an ex-Communist said to me, "Most of those
Bulletins sound like the Daily Worker, only more so." The April 15, 1932
Bulletin, which I have, not only frankly admitted Federation cooperation
with Communist organizations but under the heading "Is it a Coincidence?"
said: "The nature of the membership of the Federation and the penetration
of the church by this movement is indicated in part by the fact that entirely
without design one third of the Delaware Conference membership belonged
to the Federation. This overlapping included every member of the com-
mission on 'Modern Business and Industry,' 10 of the 14 commission chair-
men, and two secretaries of the Board of Foreign Missions who were largely
responsible for the conference, and the presiding officer, the president of the

Of the "Call to Action," which had just then resulted in the formation
in Chicago of the Socialist Methodist "Christian Social Action Movement,"
it also proudly observed that "most of the sponsors were members of the
Federation." Concerning the Federation's financial support it said the Rock
River Conference had originated and systematically used the plan of donat-
ing "one half of one per cent of the preacher's salary including house rent"
to the Federation (for its Socialist and Communist-cooperating activities)
and that "Philadelphia uses it in modified form."

The editorial of Dr. E. P. Clarke, editor of the Riverside Daily Press and

"Methodists Ttirn Socialistic" 35

himself a prominent Methodist layman, is reprinted in the National Republic
of October 1933. To quote from it:

"The Methodist conference at Long Beach adopted resolutions urging
the pardon of Mooney. It seems rather pertinent to ask what these ministers
know about the Mooney case. The evidence has been reviewed by four
governors Stephens, Richardson, Young and Rolph and they all refused
to pardon Mooney. The courts have also acted unfavorably on his case in
several hearings. The average citizen may well give some heed to the find-
ings of these various investigations; and it looks as if the Methodist con-
ference went far afield in seeking some subject on which to adopt resolutions.

"For centuries of human progress and recession it has been a controversial
question as to the supremacy of church or state, but the Methodists appar-
ently have no fear of stepping over the line. The action on the Mooney ques-
tion might seem to line up the Methodists with the unsavory and violent
element of Russia and America.

"Other resolutions were of similar dubious propriety. To issue its demands
upon the mayor of Los Angeles to abolish the 'Red squad' of police, foe of
communistic rioters, and to investigate the Better American Federation, and
other organizations outside of church affiliation is hard to reconcile with the
teachings of the gentle Carpenter from Nazareth, which the church is sup-
posed to further.

"The Methodist Church is probably the most powerful of all religious
denominations. It has done a marvelous good, but when their conference pre-
sumes to rule on things religious, moral and political without regard to
courtesy or courts of justice we fear the church's popularity is endangered,
especially with the youth of the land."

The communist Daily Worker of May 13, 1933 under the heading "Negro
Bishops Back I. L. D. Fight" says: "The General Board of the Colored
Methodist Episcopal Church in session in Jackson, Tenn. with 8 Bishops and
9 general officers, with more than 250 pastors and lay representatives through-

Online LibraryElizabeth Kirkpatrick DillingThe red network; a who's who and handbook of radicalism for patriots → online text (page 4 of 59)