Remembering the Ministry of
The Reverend Dr. Carl McIntire
Listen to Carl McIntire at

Site Index
· Home
Return to the main welcome page.

· Radio Free America
View documents and written acounts of Dr. McIntire's historic battle with the FCC over the first-ever use of the "Fairness Doctrine" against his radio broadcasts.

· Church Information
Explore documents and pictures from the formation and history of the Bible Presbyterian Church in Collingswood.

· Commemorative Items
We have collected a number of items looking back at Dr. McIntire´s ministry in pictures and words.

· Sermon Transcripts
Select from a large variety of Dr. Mcintire´s transcribed sermons to read online (or download and print).

· Speeches
Dr. McIntire was a prolific speaker who made his voice heard on a variety of issues pertinent to the Church in society. A selection of his speeches are included here in transcript form.

· Newspaper Articles
The media corps in America has always had something to say about Dr. McIntire. Read a sampling of articles.

· Obituaries
Read obituaries for Dr. McIntire and his wife Fairy.

· Other Items
Here is a collection of other pieces which did not fit in any of the other categories above.

The Truth About The Federal Council of Churches And the Kingdom of God
by Carl McIntire

The Truth about the Federal Council of Churches is the title of a document dated February 6, 1950, and released by the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America . The forward says that it is a reply two baseless attacks upon the council and it is beamed primarily against chapter 10, The Kingdom of God, of John T Flynn's disturbing book, The Road Ahead. Mr. Flynn exposes the Kingdom of God as a cover for the promotion of socialist revolution by leaders in the Federal Council of churches.

When I landed in San Francisco, on February 6, from a 12 weeks trip around the world, in which I had been speaking in behalf of the International Council of Christian Churches, and against the modernist, revolutionary program of the World Council of Churches and the pro communists in the World Council, I learned, to my delight, that Mr. Flynn's book had become a bestseller; that newspapers all over the country were running it in serial form, and that whenever Chapter 10 was reached a virtual volcano erupted. Local ministers and councils of churches affiliated with the Federal Council could not take it. The Federal Council of Churches has received, without doubt, the greatest jolt of its entire history.

A popular secular writer, with a gifted and penetrating pen, had had the courage to brush some dust off the sacred cow of American Protestantism, so the lay people in the pews could see its color. In The Road Ahead Flynn presents evidence that socialism, of the style of the British Fabian model, is being sold to the American people under a false name, the Kingdom of God, and the machinery and money of churches in the Federal Council are being employed for this revolution.

When Mr. Flynn charged that leaders in the Federal Council do not frankly avow their real intention, naturally, it was to be expected that there would be some fireworks.



At least three documents have now been issued by Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert, general secretary of the Federal Council. One, an abridged edition of the present document, entitled, The Truth About the Federal Council, and another, A Memorandum Concerning the American Council of Christian Churches, have been published and scores of religious periodicals and papers throughout the nation.

Yet Mr. Flynn has not been answered. Denounced? Yes, flayed with every conceivable device, including an attempt to hang him upon me or me upon him with my activities for the historic faith in the past years. It is all the appearances of the "war" Mr. Flynn described.

The present document has a foreword by the president of the Federal Council, Bishop John S. Stamm, and the vice president, Mildred McAfee Horton The 32-page booklet consists of several documents, starting with an official statement by the executive committee, unanimously adopted on January 17, 1950; and the most amazing feature about it is that, after declaring the council has been misrepresented, misunderstood, and inexcusable erroneous statements made, it concludes by stating that the council seeks first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness. Yet, that is the title of Mr. Flynn's chapter, the Kingdom of God, and the point at issue. No where is this "kingdom" discussed, denied, described, or defended.

Now what is this "kingdom"? Is it a social order, and is its structure the socialist pattern that Mr. Flynn has produced documentation to prove? Or is it something else?


The 155 members of the executive committee, representing 27 denominations and 28,948,483 members, completely begged the question. They also indicated that the council is interested in other matters and has a wide variety of interests. But still they admit their first concern is the Kingdom of God! And they leave Flynn's description standing unchallenged.

We also find atypical phrases, such as, The Council has had a continuous concern for social welfare prompted by the Christian conscience. But what are these matters of social welfare? That's the point.

Again, like its constituent denominations, the Council is also deeply concerned with the relationships of men to one another in the economic, industrial realms. And, if it is to bear witness to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of the whole of man's life, what does the lordship of Christ mean for the economic realm? They admit that they do deal with it. What do they offer for it? This is the point. Why not discuss the Kingdom of God and leave off the hair pulling?

Immediately, we are given a Who's Who in the Federal Council's Executive Committee. Each man is listed with his titles. The purpose apparently is to impress people. But this does not answer the charges or deal with the Kingdom of God. It does indicate that some respectable Christian men in all sections of the country are implicated at a party to the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America , and, consciously or unconsciously, are involved in the support of these revolutionary Kingdom of God propaganda.

NEXT, we see a section in which the Laymen Bear Testimony, and the names of 46 influential Protestant laymen are appended to a statement expressing full confidence that the Federal Council functions with complete fidelity the Christian ideals. These are the so-called character witnesses brought to the stand solemnly to declare that the Federal Council has denounced Marxian Communism has atheistic. And so it has, and nobody has denied that it has. Flynn announced the fact in his Chapter 10. But the Council has not announced this Kingdom of God, with its planned and controlled "communist" or "socialist" economy! It does not like the evil in communism. No one does, but it is silent about the "good" in it! There is contained in their statement some of these mystical and foggy phrases which are so familiar: There is deep concern for evangelization, for human freedom and for social justice with equal opportunity for all. What is the justice, and what is the evangelism? That is the point. We shall deal with both in this reply.


All the lay supporters are then lined up in a Who's Who Among the Lay Signers, and followed with, Twenty Concrete Accomplishments of 1949 of the FCC. Dr. Cavert then presents and Analysis of Chapter X of John T. Flynn's The Road Ahead. There is no analysis. One wishes that he had given an analysis of the chapter and dealt with the quotations from John C Bennett's book, Christianity and Communism, with Dr. E. Stanley Jones' writings in which the Kingdom of God is presented as a social order, and with the error of the references to my Rise of the Tyrant. Oh, kingdom, where art thou?

Mr. Flynn's error in this matter is understandable, they insist, because he is supposed to have gotten his information and errors from an unreliable book written by me (The Rise of the Tyrant), which they do not mention; and I am a "deposed" Presbyterian minister, whose animus against the established churches and their agencies is easy to understand.

All the "animus" they can imagine, although "deposed" preachers they can count, do not change the facts Flynn offers. The question of where Mr. Flynn may or may not have obtained his facts does not enter into the merits of the facts. And it is the facts their Kingdom of God Mr. Flynn has been discussing. It is even alleged that Mr. Flynn has not so much as read the Social Creed which he is presenting to discuss.



Dr. Benson Y. Landis, associate executive secretary of Research and Education of the Federal Council of Churches, is the author of a pamphlet, Religion and the Good Society, 1942. He quotes the social creed. The first two points are as follows:

1. Practical application of the Christian principle of social well being to the acquisition and use of wealth, subordination of speculation and the profit motive to the creative and spirit.

2. Social planning and control of the credit and monetary systems and the economic processes for the common good.

He tells us that this was adopted unanimously at a full meeting of the representatives of churches who were members of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America held in Indianapolis, Indiana, December, 1932. What does social planning in the control of the economic process for the common good mean? It certainly does not mean that the economic processes are to be left free; and it certainly means, from the denial of the freedom to do whatever degree of planning may be obtained, that it is to be social planning!

But this secretary tells us, The social ideals were the result of four years of work by a special Committee of the Federal Council's Commission on the Church and Social Service. In submitting them the Committee appended an explanatory statement, which included the following:

No one can contemplate the profound social changes involved in any successful carrying out of these social ideals without realizing that, while they would mean great advances in human welfare and happiness, they make unprecedented demands upon the intellectual and moral capacity both of individual leaders and of the whole people. The significance of these demands is the greater since the ideals expressed not only religious opinion but aspirations and goals which are stirring the heart of the world.


Dr. Landis himself, commenting upon these Social Ideals, says, In broad terms, the ideals have called for more social ends and more social means to achieve those ends that have generally been recognized by the leaders of society in the United States. The ideals that declared for an extension of democracy to industry and economical life generally were the bold challenge to the prevailing individualism of American life. Consequently these ideals have been unpopular with a large majority of the economic leaders of the nation. This sounds like Sidney and Beatrice Webb.

But this is exactly what John T. Flynn has said. Had he been a paid member of the Federal Council's staff and said it in these terms, his propaganda and pungent pen could be used to help change by democratic consent the free economy of the United States to the socialistic Kingdom of God.

Going back to the statement issued by the committee which prepared the creed, we read, What our people lack is neither material resources nor technical skill, these we have in super-abundance, but a dedication to the common good, courage and unselfishness greater than are now manifest in American Life.

The committee then indicates that the tasks are beyond us and their accomplishment will be indefinitely delayed or frustrated, unless there can be a nationwide spiritual awakening which has social goals.

This social revolution is to be accomplished in the name of spiritual awakening. Our supreme social need is spiritual awakening. What unsuspecting believer could possibly object to such a statement? Yes, they think it is faith in Christ that is going to give the stimulus to this revolution!

In our extremity, arising out of harrowing social conditions throughout the world, we therefore turn anew to Christ; for the faith of great endeavor, for an overwhelming disclosure of God in the life of humanity, for the dedication of innumerable individuals to [and this is the point] the creation of a more Christian social order. Could this possibly be the Kingdom of God they are seeking FIRST?

This Social Creed and these comments upon it or not by just a few leaders. This is the official action of the whole Council, the work of one of its official committees; and one of its official secretaries presents the damaging comments.



Listed among the concrete accomplishments of 1949, we find singled out for the first, Launched amid century United Evangelistic Advance, to continue throughout 1950 as a coordinated effort to win men and women to Christ. This evangelistic activity was also emphasized in the official statement by the executive committee. To the ordinary Christian, evangelism means persuading men to accept Christ as their personal savior and being "born again"; but the word in the conception of many Federal Council leaders has taken on a much different meeting.

The president of the Federal Council, Dr. Stamm, has written a volume entitled, Evangelism and Christian Experience, with a lengthy chapter on Evangelism and the New Order. He emphasizes the vital need for evangelism and says, If the church can Christianize the organized life she can hope for a real spiritual revival.

Then we get some idea as to what the organized life is. Much of the organized life of the present time is largely pagan and has never yet become subject to the Christian principle. Most of this is organized on the basis of self interest, carried on in a competitive spirit, and exists largely for material profit. This cannot continue and religion thrive. Men cannot hope to succeed in making the world Christian unless he is willing to make Christ supreme in all of life. Man's related life must express the Christian principle as well as his personal and private life.

It is clear that he is not talking here about anything of a personal and private nature so far as this evangelism and accepting Christ are concerned. But the president of the Federal Council continues, "The church true to her message in ministry stands committed to the fact of the reality and worth of personality, therefore, cannot condone any practice which treats man as less than personal." Mr. Green is right when he says the church must exercise its moral and spiritual influence on the side of justice, fair dealing and human betterment. Dr. FC Eiselen points out the need of an aggressive along these lines in these very searching words, "Our prevailing social order has been based upon self interest and has been utterly un-Christian. Until competition is replaced by cooperation and self interest by service there can be no healing of the nations."

But Stamm asserts, "The truth should be fully faced; if the church cannot make the Christian principle operative in man's related life she cannot win the world's Christ.""

When this so-called competitive order is done away with, and the cooperative order is established, what has taken place? One thing in short, the present competitive capitalistic system and the United States , made possible by a free economic order, will no longer exist. This is the terminology in which the whole revolution is proceeding - evangelism.


Furthermore, the main speaker in this United Evangelistic Advance, chosen by the Federal Council's committee, and who is now touring the United States in behalf of the advance is Dr. E. Stanley Jones. Dr. Jones' books are quoted by Mr. Flynn. Dr. Jones is one of the chief apostles of this kingdom as a social order, and in his book, The Choice Before Us, he actually stipulates what he means by this kingdom: "The fruits of that kingdom in a material life would be a fundamental justice to every man apart from class and race and birth; a holding of the means of production by it all in behalf of all; a brotherhood that would make life a family instead of a feud; a sense of destiny and direction coming from the fact God is in the corporate life giving meaning, permanence, depth, and redemption to the whole" (p. 30).

In this same volume, he deliberately discusses the nature of communism: "It is attempting to bring unity into life by the recognition of what is to it the universal principle, the economic interpretation of history, basing life upon the economic, with the more just and equitable distribution of goods through the pudding of the means of production into the hands of society for the benefit of all labor" (p.14).

This principle he recognizes in the communist system and his description, then, of the Kingdom of God involves a statement of the same principle. Whatever Dr. Jones may think now about communism, one thing ashore, his idea of the kingdom is not changed. And his idea of the kingdom is that it will be a holding of the means of production by all in behalf of all.


But Dr. Jones follows the demands of his kingdom society right on through to the bitter end. "In this new society of the kingdom we shall exclude none, but when some exclude themselves in spirit, then they there by exclude themselves in sharing. If they refuse to cooperate, then they are refused fruits of cooperation. The segregate themselves so they must live to themselves and perish by that very isolation. There will be a simple rule: from each according to his ability. If they refuse this, then they cut themselves off from the first part to each according to his need" (P. 203).

The minority perishes. One either cooperates and submits to the plan of the new society, or, to use the prevailing terminology, he is liquidated. It is totalitarianism all right. However, in his Christ of the American Road, 1944, Dr. Jones emphasizes: "the Kingdom of God is the complete totalitarianism which, when obeyed, gives complete freedom in the total life. Since we wouldn't choose this kingdom through intelligent choice, the rise of the pseudo-totalitarianisms was inevitable. They rose as a reaction against individualism" (page 130).


Dr. E. Stanley Jones has been enraged by Mr. Flynn's references to him. He has published a complete reply, appearing in the Ohio Christian News, official organ of the Ohio Council of Churches, Columbus, Ohio, for February, 1950. He admits that he is one of those who advocate social change, but he insists that, unless this change is brought about, communism will win. His way of fighting communism is to discard our present capitalistic system. He says he has denounced the atheistic mass man, and Mr. Flynn, of course, stipulated this in his book. Nobody has denied it. He also said, I further pleaded that the Kingdom of God be the pattern for that new order. That is right.

So Dr. Jones has not changed his mind about the Kingdom of God, and that is the point of the whole debate. He thinks Mr. Flynn is taking his references to Russian communism out of their setting and has been unfair. No, Mr. Flynn did nothing of the kind. Mr. Flynn simply declared that Dr. Jones' kingdom is built upon the red principles of economic planning, on the socialist pattern, and quoting his writing to prove it.

Dr. Jones accuses Flynn of taking things out of their setting and out of the time when Russia was an ally. But he has published some books just recently along the same line. His book on Gandhi, 1948 has the same passion for the kingdom, and lauds the same controlled social order. He has now come forth with the book, The Way to Power and Poise, a devotional study in which he claims the kingdom inevitable.


In his "complete reply" he used strong words against Flynn's delivered falsehood, indistinguishable from lying. He thinks it is a perversion of the worst kind to indicate that he has been sent out periodically by the Federal Council from city to city to preach the glory of Red Christianity. If it is not a "red Christianity", what is it?

But, the biennial report of the Federal Council, 1948, reads, during the biennium the department has arranged for and sponsored a series of 23 preaching missions, held by E. Stanley Jones. And Dr. Jones, though the featured speaker on the Evangelistic Advance, which the Federal Council now claims is its number one accomplishment of 1949, insists that he does not represent the Federal Council.

Concerning his tour he writes, They pay me nothing and I do not represent them. But he adds, along with scores of others I hold evangelistic missions under the Department Evangelism of the Federal Council. The Federal Council, in answering Flynn, claims credit for his meetings and any help. Dr. Jesse M Bader, secretary of the Department of Evangelism, outlining the Advance in the June, 1949, Federal Council Bulletin, announces Jones's acceptance of their invitation to spend the entire 15 months of the United Advance in America .

Then Dr. Jones continues, "I think America is 75% right and Russia is 75% wrong. How about the 25% right of Russia ? Could be just what is needed to make our 75% equal to the Kingdom of God?" Dr. Jones reemphasizes what Flynn said he says! "I [Jones] said that America embodied individualism for the most part and Russia embodied collectivism for the most part. Both individualism and collectivism are half truths. You must get them both to change and come to an order beyond individualism and beyond collectivism, to an order where you love your neighbor, the truth in collectivism, as yourself, the truth and individualism, a Christian order, the Kingdom of God. It is to them bringing in of that order, the Kingdom of God, to which I dedicate my life. I am neither Communist nor a Socialist. I am a Christian."


When you combine the two in the way Stanley Jones has stipulated, you have a socialist kingdom, and no more capitalism.

The men whom Flynn has unmasked are determined that they will not permit him to take away their false face terminology from them. This is Christian, no matter how socialistic it may be. Jones ends by saying Flynn's is an "irresponsible journalism," while, as a matter of fact, everything that Jones has had to say in defense of himself simply underscores the truth of what John T. Flynn wrote. Jones did more than the 155 member executive committee in answer - he defended the kingdom!

The point is that Dr. Jones offers this teaching in the name of evangelism, and he is peddling these ideas around the country, exactly as has been charged, but the decisive point is that Jones says; "It is to the bringing in of that order, the Kingdom of God, to which I dedicate my life." Would he participate in this "Evangelistic Advance" without preaching his "kingdom," when his life is dedicated to it? The Federal Council offers Jones in the name of evangelism. The editorial in the June, 1949, Federal Council bulletin, says, "The movement is evangelistic. It does not forget the need for social and economic and political betterment." Jones makes the nature of this betterment plain.



The third service which the churches are carrying on united way through the Federal Council, listed in "Twenty Concrete Accomplishments of 1949," reads: "Through Church World Service secured contributions and relief supplies valued at $8,715,486, distributed to the suffering through churches in Europe and Asia."

This was headed up, of course, in the "One Great Hour" radio program of 1949. The appeal was made in the name of humanity, but behind it and a part of it was a so-called educational relief program, in which selected books were given to churches, mission schools, and preachers throughout Europe and Asia. The money also brings over the ablest youth, future church leaders, to study and some of the most "liberal" and pro socialistic seminaries in the United States . The students are approved by a committee of the World Council of Churches before they can get the money given for suffering and relief.


A long list of pro-socialist books by leading Federal Council lights was included. Among the books sent was John C Bennett's Christianity and Communism. Bennett is one of the gentleman mentioned by Flynn, and his book is referred to at some length. Later, Church World Service announced that Bennett's book was being translated into "a tract for the times" and distributed in various languages throughout the world. This book openly says communism is a mixture of "half-truth and positive error." Positive error, of course, everybody is against. But the half-truth is the thing which Dr. Bennett expounds as the Christian element, and, so far as capitalism is concerned, he writes, as Mr. Flynn quoted him, "Christianity has no stake in the survival of capitalism." He thinks Communism inherits from the Biblical faith and passion for social justice (P. 46). And moreover, he says, "It is often been pointed out that Communism could only have been developed on soil prepared by Christianity (P. 46). And, there is, therefore, in Communism a deposit of Christian influence of great importance." (P. 46).

Dr. Bennett has this to say, "Communist materialism is not fatalistic. On the contrary, it has been a stimulus to action. Moreover, Communist movements depend to a considerable extent upon the leadership of those who are attracted by its social purpose, who are themselves move by moral conviction. Marx and Lenin were supreme examples of this. There is a very confused relationship between determinism and freedom in Communist thought and also in some forms of Christian theology. It is true that Communism does not recognize explicitly and not the capacity of men to be moved by nonmaterial or non-economic factors in life and that it does not understand the full implications of the freedom of the human spirit to make history, which Communists themselves often exemplified. But it is misleading to make this criticism of Communism a ground for accusing it of denying all human freedom." (P. 25).


Dr. Bennett, a professor in Union Theological Seminary, New York, is credited with drafting the attack upon the capitalistic system and the famous pronouncement of the World Council of Churches: "The Church in the Disorder of Society" ( Amsterdam, 1948). In it we read, "Christians should realize that for many, especially for many young men and women, communism seems to stand for a vision of human equality in universal brotherhood for which they were prepared by Christian influences."

When I was in New Zealand recently I found his book being distributed by the Presbyterians, having been published by the Student Christian Movement.

But Dr. Bennett does not aid our cause. In his little book, Christian Ethics and Social Policy (1946), in discussing the logical trend that is often labeled "Neo-orthodox," he says that most of the representatives of this viewpoint "are themselves radical in the sense of being anti-capitalistic in their understanding of the Christian social imperative." It fixes a footnote naming these anti-capitalists: I refer to such theologians, however they are labeled, as Karl Barth, Emil Bruner, Reinhold Niebuhr, Nicolas Berdyaev, William Temple, Paul Tillich. Niebuhr and Tillich are his fellow teachers in Union Seminary, New York.

In light of this praise of communism's half truth, the situation is this: when a man accuses these Federal Council leaders of favoring communism, they, as we have seen, vehemently deny it and point to their denunciation of Marxism as being atheistic. The man who, on the basis of their praise of the half-truth, cries out "Communist," has been made to appear as a "liar and a thief", while they have covered themselves in the sight of those who do not investigate the facts. To praise the half-truth of communism (and there is no such thing) justifies the charge that they favor the communist economic theory. This is the whole point at issue. Such praise does not justify their blanket denials.


The relief program of which Federal Council boasts gives this socialist relief free in the name of the churches to perplexed Europe and Asia. Church World Service is a creation of the Federal Council and the American Committee of the World Council of Churches (which is almost the same people) and the Foreign Missions Conference of North America (which is also the same group plus a few extra). Did the American Christians know that they gave their money in the name of humanity, with President Truman gracing the "One Great Hour" program, only to have it used to spread socialism and help condition the world for a world socialist revolution?

Recently, however, The Ecumenical Review, winter 1950, official organ of the World Council of Churches, announced that the funds which have been distributed have been distributed in the interest of World Council "solidarity" and the whole program was designed, according to this report, to promote the ecumenical movement of the World Council of Churches. The writer of the article, Robert C. Mackie, calls it "true ecumenical cooperation," and states and that the funds were carefully distributed in a determination to achieve an even wider and deeper cooperation today.

But the World Council of Churches has put itself on record against capitalism and has called for Christians to "seek new creative solutions which never allow either justice for freedom to destroy the other." "Capitalism" (not laissez-faire Capitalism, as the paper was amended in one place), the World Council says "put the emphasis upon freedom, and promises that justice will follow as a byproduct of free enterprise; that, too, is an ideology which has been proved false." And 85% of the World Council's budget to support this worldwide attack on American capitalism is provided by American capitalists as faithful Christians. Offerings collected in Federal Council and World Council churches on the Lord's Day help to do the Devil's deed!



Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, president of the World Council of Churches of the Western Hemisphere, one of the six presidents in all, is in the center of this movement to destroy the capitalistic order of the United States and to embrace socialism.

The New York Times, October 7, 1948, carries a report by George Dugan, of the World Mission Assembly in Columbus, Ohio. The article first tells of President Truman's message, and then reports Bishop Oxnam's speech as follows:

"Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, of the New York area of the Methodist Church, told the delegates that the mission of the church in the modern world is to 'move in on the economic order so that it will be rebased and remotivated.

The primary drive of self-interest, he said, must be supplanted by a service drive to the end that the autocratic principle may give way to the democratic.

The church, said Bishop Oxnam, must recognize that the age old fact of hunger is not primarily a task of relief but rather a problem of re-ordering our economic life so that every man has enough to eat, enough clothe, and a place to live.

The 3,500 Protestant church officials attending the conference heard Fabian socialism offered as Christianity and the mission of the church.


Because it represents so many Protestants, the Federal Council receives multiplied millions of dollars' worth of free radio time from the great networks in the United Stats. The time is also used to sell the American people this revolutionary idea of the Kingdom of God. Oxnam was featured in a series on the American Broadcasting Company's Sunday program, which addresses are published in the volume, The Stimulus of Christ (1948). Oxnam casually discusses this problem and appeals to his listeners, insisting that those who love freedom "must move out resolved to labor, to face the problems with cool and resolute mind, ready to live and die that a society may emerge fit to be called the Kingdom of God" (P. 66).

The heart of the message, combining the various elements which are now being thrust into the American mind to induce the revolutionary change, Oxnam offers: "Many fear that revolutionary economic movements will conquer the world, but they are so determined to hold fast to their own selfish privileges that they are unwilling to take on a scar or two to b uild within freedom of society that is at once just and brotherly. Communism will never win a democratic and just America . It does not grow in the soil of freedom and justice. It takes root in the soil of exploitation. It makes no headway where plenty exists. Poverty is the open door through which it enters. Its propagandists do not reach the heart of a man who knows he is treated justly, whether white, red, black or yellow. It thrives in the jungle growth of racial discrimination. It has no message to a society that has abolished the exploitation of man by man, that alerts the man who is exploited" (P. 65, 66).

This is an appeal to accomplish what the communists have accomplished, but do it in "a just and brotherly society." Then he says, "I am convinced that within the freedom of democracy we can build a society at once just and brotherly, in which creative talent may be fully evoked and human beings may live in peace and security, enjoying fearless leisure and fruitful labor, and in which the impulse to creative action and service will be stronger than the acquisitive impulse" (P. 66).

To build this society, the free capitalistic society, which the United States has known and in which these inequalities, injustices, and unbrotherly situations prevail, must first be destroyed. So the drive is on.


I personally have talked with the responsible representatives of the four great networks in the United States . These networks will not permit an exposure of this Kingdom of God idea. Repeated objection has been made to the networks, but to permit an exposure of this is to "attack another religion." Their "code" forbids it. And so, with the free time made possible by the millions that are in the Federal Council, its leaders carry on their propaganda, unmolested, uncriticized, absolutely secure, behind the microphone of the four major networks of the United States . Our cries and protest for freedom and the "hearing of the other side" are silenced, our appeals to the First Amendment notwithstanding. And what is equally as serious, the positive Christian doctrines supporting our free capitalistic society are not given. Silence as to this, with propaganda for the other, with no criticisms heard, is a perfect condition for stepping up the tempo of the revolution. America is being conditioned for the socialist revolution, and radio is making its contribution. I do not believe this is just a happen-so, either!

Exhibit A should be Oxnam's new book, Personalities in Social Reform (Abingon-Cokesbury, $2), "Six heroic thinkers" and their pioneering work for justice and brotherhood among men. This gives us some idea, now, of the content of the pet phrases, "justice and brotherhood," that Oxnam himself has been constantly using . The first of these six "heroic thinkers" are Sidney and Beatrice Webb. Of 172 pages, the first 41 are given to the Webbs, with unmistakable praise and approval. Reviewing the chapter briefly, Oxnam says, "These devoted scholars are chiefly responsible for the social reform that marks the passing of Britain from a capitalist empire to a socialist commonwealth" (P. 28). "In a generation cursed by violence and repudiation of democracy, the transition in England was characterized by peaceful change and democratic consent" (P. 28). Oxnam quotes from their dedication to A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain: "It is to a free democracy, inspired by the spirit of social service and illumined by ever-increasing knowledge, that we dedicate this book" (P. 29).


In his own words, he says, "Social reform, scientifically and democratically won, was a constant objective" (P. 31). Then he asks, "What were their essential ideas? Under the Capitalistic System, the government of industry is vested in the hands of a relatively small fraction of a community, namely, the private owners of the instruments and production.

The Dictatorship of the Capitalist is directed fundamentally to one end the extraction of the largest attainable income for the owners of the land and capital in the form of interest, profit and rent the poor nor the riches of the rich: it is the power which the mere ownership of the instruments of production gives to a relatively small section of the community over the actions of their fellow-citizens and over the mental and physical environment of successive generations" (P. 42).

Oxnam insists that the Webbs were convinced advocates of democracy. The factor of consent was basic in their thought. He quotes them again from Soviet Communism: A New Civilization; "This fundamental transformation of the social order, the substitution of planned production for community consumption instead of the capitalist profit making of so called Western Civilization, seems to me so vital a change for the better, so conducive to the progress of humanity, virtue and wisdom, as to constitute a new civilization" (pp. 43, 44).


Oxnam cannot get away from the new civilization idea. It makes the kingdom idea glitter. They were of the opinion that this new civilization, with its abandonment of the incentive of profitmaking, its extinction of unemployment, its planned production for community consumption, and the consequent liquidation of the landlord and the capitalist will spread (P. 44).

Again, rejecting as they did Marxian economics, they accepted his theory of the historical development of profit-making capitalism. "There can be no permanence of social peace in a situation in which we abandon production to a tiny proportion of the population, who own the means of production."

He closes his chapter with a word of personal praise: "They lived simply and labored prodigiously. Their researches discovered the data essential to the syntheses expressive of social principle. They served to the end that principle might be embodied in the institutions and practices requisite to freedom."

So these "heroic thinkers" have hold of the ideas which work for "justice and brotherhood": a socialist USA .



"Basic Christian Principles and Assumptions" is the title of a Statement adopted by the Executive Committee of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America , September, 1948. Heading this statement, we read, "The Church and Economic Life." In this statement one feels the sharp, cutting edge of the ecclesiastical knife separating free society from its foundations. The God of history, of nations wants, we are told, this Kingdom again, "it is the kingdom realized among men that his lordship be established over all of the principalities and powers of this world, over every department of life, including all economic institutions and policies." Immediately we are informed, "All economic institutions that tend to increase social conflicts, that divide men because they enhance pride, envy, and bitterness, stand under Christian moral judgment."

The text, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," is used in the Council's attack upon the free economic order. These "biblical" teachings, according to the Federal Council's executive committee, are a part of the great traditions of Christendom; but the churches in their teachings and behavior have often obscured them in the past because of two misconceptions. "The church needs a better understanding of the revolutionary social criticism that is implicit in its own teaching."


These misconceptions are, first, "The belief that the existing economic systems are ordained by God. This belief has been applied to Feudalism and Capitalism, as under other circumstances it might have been applied to Socialism or Communism. A passive attitude toward the status quo simply because it is here, and therefore must be here by divine providence, through the centuries has been characteristic of major interpretations of the Christian tradition in relation to the secular order. We should now recognize that God's providence works both for the modification or destruction of some old forms of economic institutions and for the creation of some new forms." Feudalism is dead, of course, and the impact of this paragraph is against capitalism. Let that be clear!

The second misconception is "the assumption that in basic economic relationships Christian love can best be expressed in terms of a benevolent use of power, which leaves uncriticized the power of the few over the many." Private ownership is here attacked, and this is exactly what has to be done if the American free enterprise system is to be destroyed. This last question is significant in view of the statement of the executive committee in reply to Flynn, It has never advocated the ownership of the means of production and distribution by the State. Maybe those exact words have not been used, but does not the phrase, "the power of the few over the many," mean that the means of production are in the hands of the few? Have not Jones and others stated it in those terms?


Under Section II of the statement, "Specific Ethical Principles for the Economic Order", and it is an order we read, "There can be no Christian sanction for one sided support of either economic individualism or economic collectivism." The economic individualism and economic freedom of the past in American life, therefore, was wrong. The Federal Council's official family is set for its destruction. Here is the conflict of the combination of individual freedom with collectivist economy. It is the conflict which must be resolved in the acceptance of a collectivist system like socialism in which, of course, there is a claim for individual freedom in that the individual votes the socialist system into being. An economic system that permits large scale unemployment or long continued unemployment for a few is gravely defective. It is clear that it is the "system" the Council is after is our American system at that.

But there is another way: "Economic decisions are in large measure group decisions for which both political and economic forms of organization are necessary."


The third section speaks of "The Church and Modern Social Movements." Here we have the emphasis upon the church's ministry of reconciliation. Another Biblical term twisted, which means, in effect, that there must be a compromise between the system of freedom and the system of collectivism. This is what Dr. E. Stanley Jones is talking about, and this is what the Federal Council leaders have said, and now the whole Federal Council itself puts itself on record as favoring. This blending of freedom and collectivism is the disastrous act which destroys freedom.

The attack upon a so called benevolent concept of a man's responsibility in a free capitalistic society strikes out such texts as "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing that is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth (Eph 4:28)." This frontal attack upon the foundations of American capitalism and the free system which makes it possible, in the name of Christian teaching, if it does not bring socialism, will bring confusion and pave the way for communist revolutionary forces to grasp the reigns.



A plan of the Federal Council leaders for selling these ideas to the people in the National Study Conference on the Church and Economic Life. They have had two. When the Council (December, 1946) authorized the establishment of the first, it said that this would bring together the best thought and devotion of our churches so that the Christian way may be discovered and followed in a day when only the light of Christ can make clear our direction. The first conference, done in the name of laymen, was held in Pittsburgh, February 18-20, 1947, and worked well. One-third were preachers, with agriculture, labor and business supplying other others. The "radicals" of labor and agriculture joined with the preachers to oppose the businessmen. I listened to unending attacks upon our free enterprise system. I went as a reporter for the Christian Beacon. I saw a small struggling group of businessmen pounded until they scarcely knew what was transpiring . The conference declared, "Production exists to serve necessary and desirable consumption. Implementation of the principle is especially imperative at the present juncture, because of the Christian commandments to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and in general to make the neighbor's need." It is a principle of socialism.


When the second conference came up, February, 1950, Bishop Stamm issued "The Call." He said of the first that it "affirmed that the churches have a responsibility for economic life." It led to wide sturdy and activity by denominations, councils of churches, and local churches in their relations to economic life. Through its Department of the Church and Economic Life, the Federal Council has continued to proide guidance and stimulus to this movement.

The second was like the first, with many of the same men present. Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam took a leading part. The business "minority" which believers in our free enterprise system found itself at a great disadvantage, yet the atmosphere was courteous, gracious, "Christian." Their commitment to "Christian principles", whatever one may consider them to be, held all together. When the documents were released, the minority was a party to the whole program in the name of laymen. The attacks upon our private enterprise system in the general, attractive, religious terminology were there. Socialized medicine was also endorsed. Why must men and freedom be victimized in such a group without producing a document that involves compromises with freedom, and this is the way the socialist advance is made. You cannot compromise freedom and keep it. The "middle way" in such circumstances destroys freedom.


This brilliant scheme is the foundation of the Department of the Church and Economic Life. John C. Bennett, Dean Liston Pope of Yale Divinity School, Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, Professor Reinhold Niebuhr, these men and others, with their anti-capitalistic and socialist passion, turn upon in this particular department. The guidance this department offers reflects their socialism, too. Liston Pope does not help their cause, because at time he lets down his guard. He uses the forbid word "socialism." He visited Princeton Seminary, largest Northern Presbyterian training center for preachers, and insisted that in this critical hour the Christian leadership must be like a "trumpet" with "profound and clear social vision." The first point of the vision Pope offered the boys reads: "A socialism akin to that now emerging in Great Britain which strives to combine individual freedom and common economic security, is more in keeping with the Christian doctrines of a good human community than is either Capitalism or Communism." (Princeton Seminary Bulletin, Spring 1948).

As another accomplishment in 1949, the Federal Council lists, undertook a three year study of ethical aspects of economic practices, with the aid of a grant from one of the great foundations. One hundred thousand dollars from the Rockefeller Foundation does this. Who turns up on this committee but Prof. John C. Bennett! With him and others with his views serving on this committee, can it be expected that there will come out a pronouncement which will defend the principles on which the capitalistic system rests? This should be answered. We know what is coming; the pattern is the same.



The Federal Council leaders, unable to meet the facts Mr. Flynn produced, inject into the debate an element which evidently they feel will turn people away from the facts. Flynn is a Roman Catholic, they say. Dr. Jones also dwells upon this. The implication is that Mr. Flynn, therefore, is attacking the Protestants. They talk about "brotherhood, love and tolerance," but the minute they are caught flatfooted, all such matters are cast to the wind. This appeal to prejudice and religious emotion has no weight with those who want facts, and this is all the more reason the facts must be exposed.

Mr. Flynn replied. He is a citizen of the United States . If the kingdom which the Federal Council promotes wins, every Roman Catholic, Jew, Mormon - it makes no difference what a man's religion may be - will be the victim of its restraints. The program of the kingdom is not just a program for Protestants; it is a program for the whole country; the whole world. And the whole country has a right to jump on it. These socialist planners include all in their contracting grasp. Christians of the United States who love our free society, the system which has made America the most powerful nation on the face of the earth and I have just returned from a forty-thousand mile journey around the world, where I laid my eyes upon these other lands, and have appreciated anew the incomparable prosperity, comfort, and liberty which the United States enjoys, ought to be the first to cry out against this kingdom propaganda. They owe a debt of gratitude to Mr. John Flynn for having the courage to probe into what I know to be a hornet's nest. Be it hornets or bumblebees, it has to be dealt with if America is to be saved from socialism, and the hour is late.


It is in this same spirit that the Federal Council's secretary has, in every document, at the first and prominently displayed, declared that I am a "deposed minister." Apparently he thinks this will turn people from the facts, too. He writes, "Deposed from the ministry of the Presbyterian Church in the USA , after full trial, on June 30, 1936, and who has since been engaged in a campaign of bitter attack upon that Church, upon other historic denominations, upon the Federal Council of Churches, in which denominations cooperate with one another. According to the official record, this minister, Rev. Carl McIntire, was found guilty by his Presbytery of: 'Disapproval, defiance, and acts in contravention of the government and discipline of the Presbyterian Church in the USA , Not being zealous and faithful in maintaining the peace of the Church, Violation of his ordination vow."

This is the authority to whom Mr. Flynn's book refers again and again. Indeed, there is virtually nothing in Mr. Flynn's discussion of the Federal Council which is not found in the publications of the deposed Presbyterian minister, whose animus against the established churches and their agencies is easy to understand.

This has now been printed in scores of papers and questions have been coming to me from many places about it. A long distance telephone call from a city in the Middle West opened with a gentleman saying, "Mr. McIntire, are you a deposed minister?" Dr. Cavert has deliberately left the impression that we are guilty of something that is of shameful import. He does not dare indicate what our "guilt" was! In fact, it was this very issue that we are now dealing with, the Kingdom of God, that was at the bottom of the whole affair.


I have always been a Presbyterian, even born in a Presbyterian manse, and when the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the USA began to send out some missionaries with a false gospel, and with this false kingdom, there was a vigorous protest within the denomination, led by the late Dr. J. Gresham Machen, formerly of Princeton Theological Seminary. Every effort was made in the church to have the denomination remove these modernists and pro-socialist missionaries. The denomination refused. That was back in 1932 when the Federal Council came out with its "Social Creed." Whereupon, Dr. Machen took the lead in establishing an Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions, outside of the denomination. A member of the executive committee of the Federal Council, Dr. William B. Pugh, the stated clerk of the General Assembly, named in this Federal Council pamphlet, wrote a so-called Mandate, ordering Dr. Machen and the members of this Independent Board (and I was privileged to be a member) to resign immediately and to support the official denominational program regardless, or be tried. We all refused. After a struggle in my Presbytery, by a vote of 38-40, the Presbytery obeyed the demands of the General Assembly and put me on trial for my "disobedience." Our appeal was to the Bible, the supreme law of the church, which commands men to support the commandments of Christ and not to support false doctrine or another gospel. On this we stood, and stand!

Dr. Pugh is credited with framing the charges which are now quoted; specifications are deliberately omitted. We confessed that we had not resigned and chose to obey God's Word, rather than the General Assembly's order, but that we were not guilty of sin before the head of the church. Dr. Cavert is very careful not to bring this part of the picture to the minds of the people, but sooner or later this will catch up with the Federal Council, too, because the rank and file of God's people who love freedom love the Bible and know that it must be obeyed above all earthly considerations, both ecclesiastical and political.


The Presbytery's Judicial Commission declared I was guilty of sin. A minority opinion written by a Presbyterian lawyer, the Hon. Samuel Iredell, of Bridgeton, NJ completely vindicated my stand. The Commission decreed:

"That the defendant, the Rev. Carl McIntire, shall be suspended from the communion of the church and from his office as a minister of the Gospel until such a time as he shall resign from the Independent Board of Presbyterian Foreign Missions and shall give such further evidence of repentance as the Presbytery of West Jersey may deem adequate."

This makes it clear that my membership on an independent mission board and refusal to resign was, as I have said, the reason for my trial. The high sounding charges which my action was supposed to support, spread over the country by the Federal Council of Churches to accomplish its ends. Dr. Cavert, a Presbyterian minister himself, uses the action of his church to help shield his Federal Council.

On June 1, 1936, the General Assembly upheld this suspension, and the denomination split.

The Independent Board, 153 Maplewood Ave, Germantown Philadelphia 44, Pa., has grown, receiving funds from God's people all over the land. It has missionaries on five continents and it is rendering invaluable service not only in saving souls but in helping to deliver the national churches, the fruit of sound missionary work, from the schemes and devices of the same leaders in the Federal and World Council of Churches.


Thank God, my congregation in Collingswood, the largest missionary church in the Presbytery at that time, with 1275 members, renounced the jurisdiction of the denomination. We fought for our church property in the court, but the General Assembly of the church won the decision and took all the property and every penny we had in the bank. The congregation's 1200 walked out of the beautiful Gothic structure which they had themselves built; sang, Saviour, Like a Shepherd Lead Us, went down to an empty lot, put up a large chataugua tent (See Time, April 11, 1938, p 46) took some communion in paper cups, built a wooden tabernacle in which we still worship, and every year since the congregation has increased in number and financial strength, until today it has a membership of 1660 and a budget of $81,650, more than $3,000 above last year's and with one-half of it going to missions. In addition to all this, we have a large building program, including first our Sunday school, and after that, we pray, a new church.

One Sunday morning, March 5, 1950, the day of our Every Member Canvass, I told my people about Mr. Flynn's book and the Federal Council's propaganda against me as "deposed," "unfrocked," "discredited," etc. The congregation on the day over subscribed its budget, bringing in at the close of the day over $83,000 in pledges and cash, the largest ever presented on a Canvass Sunday. God answers these men. Faith in the Bible makes a glorious church. I believe it is churches such as this that our country is in desperate need of today.


The Bible Presbyterian Church was born. Now it has ten presbyteries, 76 churches, and 170 ministers. Presbyterians all over the country are waking up what has happened inside of their denomination. The same struggle is going on in the Baptist churches, only they are able to keep their properties. (Presbyterian churches ought to be able to keep theirs.) More than five hundred under the leadership of Dr. Robert T. Ketcham have separated from the Northern Baptist Convention because of these issues and have formed the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches. Other churches are in the struggle, too. When a man takes a stand, as we have done, out of love for Christ, and has stood, and stood, and cried out against what we believe to be a departure from the faith, and now against what we see so clearly to be a destruction of our free society in the United States of America, to have the secretary of the Federal Council dig this up, and, in a one-sided way, present it to his seven hundred councils of churches all over the country, and in addition, for it to be published in scores of newspapers, only in this form, illustrates the limit to which these men are willing to go to cover up, to turn people against that which they simply cannot answer. And they use an action of one of their own denominations to attempt to cover themselves. God knows this, and when God's people see it they will understand.

One thing this illustrates to me. It is that the Federal and World Council program for "one church" is an exceedingly dangerous affair. These Federal Council men cry out against monopoly in the capitalistic system to aid the socialist and communist propaganda, but they are asking for a monopoly in religion, and, as they build this up and are building it, they have a tremendous apparatus with which they can oppose and crush anyone who dares cry out against them.


When the General Assembly upheld the action in my trial, I renounced the jurisdiction of the denomination, too, the privilege of every man in a voluntary association, as the church is supposed to be. It was only after we refused to accept the judgment of suspension for the holy communion, that the so called deposition, without trial, or "unfrocking," as they like to call it, took place. When the Bible Presbyterian denomination was formed, one of the first acts of the First General Assembly was to declare null and void the whole proceedings of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the USA , as contrary to the historic position of the Presbyterian Church, its constitution and creed, and the commandments of the Bible.

Instead of being an unfrocked clergymen, I am a clergyman in good and regular standing in the Bible Presbyterian denomination. After our battle the Presbyterian Church in the USA amended its constitution to read that any minister who renounces its jurisdiction must be "divested of his office." So the company of the "unfrocked" grows and the Bible Presbyterian Church is indeed the church of the "unfrocked."

There is one place that Dr. Cavert is right. He charges that I have carried on a campaign against the Federal Council and the denominations in it, and by the help of God we shall continue with renewed energy and courage. We pray that many more shall join us in the struggle to save our free land and to preserve the church as a witness to the Christ of the Scriptures. There has never been any animus, but always a love for Christ and His Word.



Since Dr. Cavert has introduced this so called trial, it will help the cause tremendously to point out that one of the conditions protested by Dr. Machen in his brief "The Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the USA and Modernism," 110 pages, was the support of mission work in China which was pro-communistic. One of the pro-communists named by Dr. Machen, with a number of pages of documentation to support his un-Christian and pro-communist views, was none other than Dr. T.C. Chao, dean of the School of Religion at Yenching University, Peiping, China . Now this same Dr. Chao turns up at the top of the heapone of the six presidents, with Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, of the World Council of Churches! The very thing that Dr. Machen and those of us who stood trial, rather than submit to the General Assembly's demands, the very thing that we believe to be wrong in the light of the commandments of Christ has now come to the place where the whole world can see the fruit of it. Dr. Chao has accepted a position on the People's Consultative Council, established by the Red regime of China , to help set up the "new democracy." And all these years American mission money has supported Dr. Chao's work and made possible what he is now accomplishing. Chao has signed an appeal to the Christians of the West that they continue to send money to China , without any strings, that they may use it.


Dr. Chao has written two articles which have been published in the Christian Century, USA , modernist independent weekly. The first, "Days of Rejoicing in China " (March 2, 1949), tells how he and his students welcomed the communist armies as "liberators." The second, "Red Peiping After Six Months" (Sept. 14, 1949), says, "Recently I have seen other evidence that one can be both a Christian and a Communist in China ." He tells of entertaining "an old Communist friend, also a Christian." He then raises the question about fellow travelers: "In some quarters there seems to be a deadly fear of an increase in 'fellow travelers' among missionaries. If travelers are going in the same direction, seeking the liberation and welfare of the underdog, why should not they become fellows? And if they do not become fellow travelers after miles and miles, how can they land finally in the fellowship of Christ?"

The Federal Council's Bulletin, February, 1950, has editorial comment concerning the motives of missionaries that fits in just here: "Missionaries are not leaving China along with the consular officials of the State Department." This fact should help to convince the skeptics that missionaries are not nationalistic agents of "capitalistic imperialism," but are ambassadors of Christ.

Then we read: "The charge is now being made by some Americans here at home that the missionaries who choose to remain in Communist controlled China are thereby proving their sympathy with Communism." This is the "red smear" technique of spreading suspicion on the main body of American Protestantism. It is palpably absurd."

The communists have made it very plain that they will permit missionaries to stay who will cooperate, but the missionaries who hold to the orthodox ideas of the Christian religion will not be tolerated.


I have from China the January, 1950, New Construction, edited in Peiping, China . It gives a communist analysis of Christianity. The article is entitled, "Christianity During the Past year," (1949) by Chiang Hsueh-Yen. Chiang tells us that people with Chao's hope for the future are illusioned. Discussing what he says are "vain illusions," he writes; "This state began with the opening of the People's Political Consultative Council and lasts until the present time.

"When five Christian leaders were invited to participate in the People's Political Consultative Council [Dr. Chao is one of the these], most churches in every place felt encouraged. This, they thought is concrete proof that Christianity has a status and a future in New China. And after the 'Common Program' was adopted, and they saw that Articles Five and Fifty-three guaranteed freedom of religious belief, they felt even more encouraged than before. They considered this a turning point. Now they had hope! Thus much vain and wishful thinking was produced."

The communist writer says that these who think, since China urgently needs such assistance [finances from missions], the very least that can be hoped for, by the very simplest conditions, is that the Central People's Government will not fail to tolerate them and nod their heads in assent, are wrong. This is a very childish kind of imperialistic dreaming. Fundamentally these people do not recognize the times; they do not understand the nature of China 's revolution.


This communist praises Jesus: "Christianity's Founder, the revolutionary youth Jesus, has given an example of the actual practice of the theory of sacrifice." But when we come to professionalized Christianity, all this becomes a dead myth. The revolutionary, creative spirit of life which Jesus left has completely changed to empty and dead doctrines and creeds." This sounds very much like the popular modernist doctrines being offered in the United States by some Federal Council men.

He continues: "Doctrines and creeds are all man-made, and can always be changed according to the times, but as soon as they become the code of the organized and professionalized church, then they are completely changed into subjective, idiotic, dead fossils of Idealism."

As to the future, he says: "If Christianity's enlightened, progressive, democratic and revolutionary elements can undertake to display Christianity's positive, scientific revolutionary and universal religious spirit; if the church is also willing to walk toward that road, then, of course, the church has a future. However, whether or not there is a future depends on nobody else but the church itself. It is completely dependent on whether or not the Christians themselves can manifest a creative and progressive spirit."

Finally: "When Christianity has the scientific revolutionary point of view, then it can avoid superstition; then it can make progress. Given the basic standpoint of all the people, with the method of serving the masses, then we may assume that Christianity has a theory and practice which are integrated."

The World Council and Federal Council leaders know these terms. But they are willing to meet them in order to bridge the gap between the two worlds and claim to be the spiritual tie, redeeming, reconciling, producing the new order.

(The Federal Council will become the National Council of the Churches of Christ in America in December, 1950, when a number of agencies will be combined with it.)



In Dr. Cavert's attack on the American Council of Christian Churches we are grateful for all the recognition he gives. Dr. W.O.H. Garman, Wilkinsburg, Pa., president of the American Council of Christian Churches, has also been attacked by Mr. Charles P. Taft, former Federal Council president, as deposed. In reply Dr. Garman wrote the following:

"The truth of the matter is that Mr. Garman left the United Presbyterian Church voluntarily and was not "unfrocked" or "put out" as some declare. For a long time prior to leaving, he, together with other United Presbyterian pastors, has been expressing disapproval with apostate trends, the inroads of the social gospel, and the denomination's membership in the modernistic, pacifistic, and near-communistic Federal Council of Churches. He left to accept the pastorate of a church affiliated with The Independent Fundamental Churches of America . He wrote Presbytery a letter requesting that his name be dropped, but his request was ignored. When the next Minutes of the General Assembly were printed his name was not only included but that of Callender Memorial Church. He again wrote Presbytery and insisted that both names be dropped. This time, to his amazement, the clerk of Presbytery replied by informing him that he had been deposed the month previous. There had been no trial. He had not been cited to appear for trial. Naturally he wrote Presbytery and protested and wanted to know on what grounds this action which was contrary to their own Book of Government had been taken. The clerk ignored this correspondence. He has yet to receive a reply other than to have stories brought to his attention that he and a friend are supposed to have stolen the records of the trial."

The American Council is small, but it is the Federal Council's only competitor. It will not remain small long, if it can reach those who love the Bible. Dr. Calvert's objection to our trips around South America (July-August, 1949) and Southeast Asia (December, 1949-January, 1950) indicates that our opposition is taking hold. I am thankful that wherever we went (14 were in Buenos Aires to present facts about the World Council of Churches and 18 representing the International Council of Christian Churches were in Bangkok) God's people are determined to fight against the monster and monopoly of the World Council and the activities of those connected with the World Council in attempting to close mission doors to the groups that will not go along with their ecumenical movement. The struggle is joined world-wide.

I cannot pass Dr. Cavert's attack on Mr. Flynn for a reference to the American Council of Christian Churches. Dr. Cavert writes: "He says that an 'American Council of Churches' was formed when a small group of clergymen broke away from the Federal Council, although the fact is that not a single one of the little denominations comprising the American Council ever belonged to the Federal Council." Dr. Cavert knows that I was in the Federal Council, and other American Council leaders were in it. He knows that. He knows we broke away. How do you leave the Federal Council? Only by getting out of the body that put you in the denomination. When the denomination will not leave, the only way you can leave is to withdraw from the denomination. That is what Flynn said we did. God's people should get out of the Federal Council, out of its fellowship, out of its "numbers" which give it radio time and the right to speak for 28,948,483.

That is the way the "little denominations," some of them, started. It is church history. It was when they were out that they saw that the one and most effective way to deal with the Federal Council, its power and false program, was to organize another council, a true council, free society of our free land, and out-and-out in its opposition to the Federal Council's false program.

All subsequent events and Dr. Cavert's own reply have now confirmed the wisdom of this. The Federal Council must face the American Council, and the World Council of Churches has the International Council of Christian Churches to deal with. The International Council will hold its Second International Congress in Geneva, Switzerland , August 16-23, 1950. In faith and hope an uncompromising, militant testimony is being made to the Bible and the faith of our fathers. Dr. Cavert does, I believe, what our Lord spoke of when He said that there are those that "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." The camel today is their crazy collectivist kingdom.


I cannot close without some statement about the kingdom and capitalism or free enterprise. This earthy kingdom of the religious social planners does not come from God's Word. It was conceived in another world. Let that be shouted from the housetops. Only departure from the Bible and ignorance of the Bible makes possible their plan. Every man who believers the Bible should oppose the plan with everything he has. The real basis for the battle is down on the rock foundation of the Bible.

Our system of free enterprise is right, but there are many abuses and injustices. I condemn them all, and I discuss some of them at length in my book, Author of Liberty, 1946. But let us not scrap the free system to remedy its abuses. Why not save the system and change the people? To change the free competitive system will bring a loss of freedom to all. To change the people will make salt in the earth. We have that which alone can save the people. Yes, we have it, the true church has it, the Bible offers it: the Gospel of grace, which the church everywhere should be preaching instead of this socialism.

"Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God." (John 3:3).

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16).

Instead of the mission of the modern church, as Bishop Oxnam says, begin to "re-base" the economic order, it is to preach the Gospel that men might be born again and given the power to love one another and to serve one another in freedom. The remedy, the only remedy for all our ills,is the preaching of the Gospel and the bringing of men by faith into the true and eternal and glorious spiritual Kingdom of God and of His Christ. If we do this, we shall keep our free America .

Listen to Carl McIntire on: Listen to Carl McIntire for FREE on Website design by Audioposting, LLC