AI f THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT: A STUDY IN AMERICAN RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By Thomas John Ferris, B.A. Denton, Texas August, 1963 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chatpter Page . ... .. I. INTRODUCTIONCTIO.0...0. 0 1 II. BILLY JAMES HARGIS AND THE CHRISTIAN CRUSADE 15 I II. EDGAR C. BUNDY AND THE CHURCH LEAGUE OF AMERICA -.-0.*.*.0.0.*.0.0.0.0.0.*.0.0.0.0.9 54 IV. CARL McINTIRE AND THE AMERICAN COUNCIL OF CHRISTIAN CHURCHES .*.,*..*,0.0***0 97 V. CONCLUSION . * . , . * . * . , . 119 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 APPENDIX . 0 . 0 . 0 . BIBLIOGRAPHY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 **. 00 0 0 0 . 0 0 139 iii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Conservatism in America declined during the 1930's, then in the post-war years began to revive in what has been termed a "wonder"l and the most surprising development of the post-war period. Yet an even more surprising develop- ment has been the re-emergence of an important American phenomenon within conservatism: the far right. 3 Far right activities gained national attention during the McCarthy era, and again in 1960 as a result of the controversy over the Air Reserve Center Training Manual, the San Francisco student riots against the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), the possibility of a young liberal Roman Catholic's becoming president of the United States, and 1 Clinton Rossiter, Conservatism in America: The Thankless Persuasion (New York, 1962), pp. 3-4.~~Rossiter epTains the trend of the 1950's as "creeping conservatism" rather than "creeping socialism." 2Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Politics of Hope (Boston, 1962), p. 72. 3 Donald Janson and Bernard Eismann, The Far Right (New York, 1963), pp. ix, 1-10; Rossiter, Conservatis in America, pp. 166-170, Synonyms for "far right" include: ultra- conservative, ultra-rightist, rightist, and radical right. Far-rightists themselves label those who do not share their position as liberals, leftists, or ultra-leftists. Though dangers are involved, labeling is merely a recognition that ideas, programs, and activities do fall into certain categories which are then assigned a descriptive name. 1 2 the alarm that President Eisenhower would soon retire from public life.4 Of the more than two thousand ultra-conservative organi- zations in operation in the post-war period, 5 three will be examined in detail to determine their origin and history, views, personalities, goals and methods of operation. These are Billy James Hargis and the Christian Crusade (CC), Edgar C. Bundy and the Church League of America (CLA), and Carl McIntire and the American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC). Two factors were considered in selecting them: each claims to be fundamentalist in religion, and each is signif- icantly active on a national scale. They are regarded by Louis Cassels, religious editor of United Press International, as the "big wheels" of the religious right. 4 New York Times, March 28, 1960, p. 1; Eugene V. Schnei- der, "The Radical Right," Nation, CXCIII (September 30, 1961) 202; Fred J. Cook, "The Ultr 7 Nation, CXCIV (June 30, 1963 , 570. 5Betty E. Chmaj, "Paranoid Patriotism," The Atlantic, CCX (November, 1962), 91, citing New York Times, December, 1961. 6 Louis Cassels, "The Rightist Crisis in Our Churches," Look, XXVI (April 24, 1962), 46. The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Bt rith considers Christian Crusade "among the three or four most important organizations on tiie ultra-right." Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, Facts, Rev. Billy James Hargis: The Christian Crusade (New York, 19627, pp. 229, 231. Rossiter considers Bundy's and McIntire's activities to be "so harsh and malevolent" that they may be considered fellow travelers of Fascism; they are "out-agitating the Left in providing 'the dynamic of dissent' in America to- day!" Their dissent, according to Columbia University historian Richard Hofstadter, is not as powerful as that of the liberals in the thirties, but it does affect political life and causes a "kind of punitive reaction" throughout the nation. Rossiter, Conservatism in America, pp. 171-172. 3 Unifying characteristics of ultra-conservative organiza- tions are their opposition to Communism and their conspira- torial view of society. To them the fight against Communism is merely another phase of Satan's ancient conspiracy against the church; the battle between freedom and Communism is actually a battle between good and evil, Christ and anti-Christ. This conspiracy has evidenced itself in a number of ways. For example, during World War I the American " 10 0 per centers" saw a conspiracy by the German-Americans to poison American soldiers by putting ground glass in their food. Now some among the contemporary ultra-conservatives see the same kind of conspiracy to poison the American people through adulter- ated Polish hams and the use of fluorides and bromides in foods.7 Rather than viewing the current upsurge in the Negroes' desire for equality as a natural process, the far right sees it as a plot by the Communists to disrupt harmo- nious race relations. China's fall to the Communists was not due to her internal problems, but is seen as a plot by the State Department. Indeed, these small plots are only ex- pressions of the eternal, international plot which through the ages has borne the name of Jew, Catholic, or Communist, with Satan behind each. If the plot can be exposed, the 7 John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism 18-1925(New York, 1963), p. 207; Christian Beacon, August 2, 1962, pp. 2, 4. The Christian Beacon is published weekly at Collingswood, New Jersey. 4 ultra-conservative reasons, life will return to peace and order.8 The ultra-conservative is considered apart from the conservative in that he generally desires to remake America's institutions and eliminate from American political and in- tellectual life anyone who differs from his value system.9 He is defined by Clinton Rossiter as one who is a "mixture of sober conservativism, timid standpattism, and angry re- action (a mixture rendered even more extraordinary by a careless penchant for radical methods))." 1 0 The rightist classifies an individual on the basis of his attitude toward Communism: "hard" or "soft." To the rightist a liberal cannot be anti-Communist, because he is "soft" on Communism. A person is "soft" if he insists that there is little danger from Communism internally, while a "hard" anti-Communist makes no distinction between the dangers of domestic and international Communism. One who is "hard" usually believes that the threat from domestic Communism is even greater than that from international Communism. Even though domestic Communism is small in its numerical strength 8 Billy James Hargis, What's Wrong with Jesus? (Tulsa, [n.dj); Christian Beacon, May 21, 1963, pp. 1-8; Schneider, "The Radical Right,"pT200; News & Views, December, 1962, pp. 1-6. News & Views is published monthly at Wheaton, Illinois. 9Seymour Martin Lipset, "The Sources of the 'Radical Right,"' The New American Right, edited by Daniel Bell (New York, 1955)~ pp~ 166-167. 10 Rossiter, Conservatism in America, p. 170. 5 it is still considered an extreme danger, for the ultra- conservative believes that Red infiltration has been successful in every major institution in American society.1 1 Since Communism is considered by the ultra-conservative as morally evil, he gladly supports organizations formed to combat it. As de Tocqueville observed a century ago, forming new organizations is an old American custom.1 2 Before the Civil War, organizations were formed to rid the country of the alleged un-American tendencies of the Catholic and the immigrant. The most important of these was the American Party of the 1850's, commonly known as the Know-Nothing Party. Its goal was the exclusion of Roman Catholics from politics.1 3 As a result of its controversy with the Catholics, a perma- nent scar of the Know-Nothing movement may be seen at the 153-foot level of the Washington Monument. When they learned that the Pope had sent a gift block of marble to be used in constructing a monument to George Washington, the Know-Nothings broke into the construction ground, destroyed the plans, and dumped all the marble into the Potomac. When work on the monument was resumed 25 years later, the color lDaniel Bell, "Interpretations of American Politics," The New American , edited by Daniel Bell (New York, 1955 7pp.22-25. 1 2Lipset, "The Sources of the 'Radical Right,'" p. 181. 1 3 Lipset, "The Sources of the 'Radical Right,t" p. 169; Gustavus Myers, History of Bigotry in the United States (New York 1960), pp. 129-163;~Higham, Strangers in the Land, pp. 4, 6-7. 6 of the original 153 feet of marble could not be dupli- cated.14 Another organization arose in the 1880's, taking the place of the then-defunct Know-Nothings, to protect American society against what was thought to be a foreign enemy. The American Protective Association (APA), founded by Henry F. Bowers in 1887 at Clinton, Iowa, had as its central purpose opposition to Catholicism, restriction of immigration, and preservation of the public school system from Catholic subversion. A representative pamphlet of the APA was George P. Gifford's Our Republic in Danger--A Clarion C g to the Rescue, which stated that there was a "Romanist" movement afoot to overthrow the schools. This movement was supported by the Roman Catholic hierarchy, considered by Gifford "a separate political government, despotic, tyrannic, absolute and anti-republican." It was always, Gifford wrote, "seek- ing international conquests." The APA called for freedom- loving Americans to rise up and oppose the Catholics.