In the eyes of the average American, the Communist attitude toward religion is summed up in the epithet “atheistic Communism” (or “Godless Communism”). If he knows anything more about the subject, it is probably that Marx once said: “Religion is the opium of the people.” In short, Communists have been reputed to look upon religion and religious institutions as unmitigated evils which must be annihilated.
A greater distortion could not be imagined. Marxism, it is true, is materialist in its philosophical outlook and rejects all belief in the supernatural as contrary to science and scientific method. It also sees in religious beliefs a means used by exploiting classes to inculcate resignation, and acceptance of the status quo among the exploited. And with the growth of scientific enlightenment and the abolition of exploitation, it envisions the ultimate disappearance of religion.
But this is only part of the picture. Marxism also regards religion as a private affair, as a matter of personal choice. Hence it stands for complete freedom of religious belief and for complete separation of church and state. V. I. Lenin once expressed it as follows:
“The state must not concern itself with religion; religious societies must not be bound to the state. Every one must be absolutely free to profess whatever religion he likes, or to profess no religion, i.e., to be an atheist, as every Socialist usually is. There must be no discrimination whatever in the rights of citizens on religious grounds (Religion, International Publishers, 1933, p. 8.)”
Nor do Communists judge people politically on the basis of whether or not they are religious. Communist parties seek to unite all working people in struggle for a common cause-believers and non-believers alike. They do not think workers should be divided in such a struggle by differences on religious doctrine. Hence, they do not make atheism a condition for membership and include in their ranks practicing adherents of all religious groups.
Finally, Communists distinguish between the role of religious beliefs and the social role of religious institutions. As a social force, the church is of necessity involved in the secular struggles of its day, and in these it may play a progressive as well as a reactionary role. Indeed, such conflicts may find reflection within the church itself, as they have in the debate between the “liberal” and “conservative” wings in the Catholic Church today a debate which has been brought to a head by the Encyclical of Pope John XXIII, Pacem in Terris.
Communists see in their position on religion no bar to collaboration with religious groups for common objectives, and they welcome the opening of the door to such collaboration in the Encyclical. Consequently Gus Hall, as the leading spokesman of the Communist Party of the United States, responded to the Encyclical by seeking to open a dialogue between Communists and Catholics-a dialogue designed to explore the possibilities of collaboration on specific questions in the common cause of peace on earth and the advancement of human welfare.
We present in this pamphlet the initial phase of this dialogue, in the hope that it will contribute toward its further unfolding along fruitful lines.
HYMAN LUMER,
Editor, Political Affairs.
Catholics and Communists – A Dialogue by Gus Hall
The Importance of the Encyclical
“Peace on Earth”
By GUS HALL
(The following is a somewhat abridged version of a set of notes which served as the basis for a discussion of the Encyclical by a group of U. S. Communist Party leaders shortly after its appearance, and which were afterward mailed in mimeographed form to a large number of leading figures in the Catholic Church. The notes have been extensively edited to eliminate repetition and to make for better continuity. Their substance, however, remains unchanged. The Editor.)
I THINK everybody understands that the Encyclical Peace On Earth, issued on April 10, 1963, by Pope John XXIII, is a very important document. It is important because it is a political document. It is an encyclical letter not only to all Catholics but also “to all men of good will, in establishing universal peace, in truth, justice, charily and liberty.” We have a responsibility to discuss it and to react to it.
The following are some of its main features:
There is no red-baiting. There are some sections that express sharp differences and opposition to the Communist viewpoint, but no direct red-baiting.
Though some sections lend themselves to interpretation in a number of ways, the important thing is that it takes a stand for peace in a new manner, for democracy in a new way, for disarmament in a concrete fashion.
Some of the strongest sections are those against racism and colonialism.
It gives new recognition to the existence of the working class as a fact in life, and in a new way it places human rights than ever before.
It takes a stand for capitalism, but with proposed rest and great pressures for reforms and corrections.
Indirectly, it speaks about socialism and communism in a positive vein. It opens the door to a positive attitude to peaceful coexistence and objective evaluation of socialism. This is very important for all Americans.
I propose to deal with two main questions: 1) the deeper meaning of the Encyclical; 2) our reaction to it, especially our tactical reaction.
The Deeper Meaning of the Encyclical
There are certain concepts in the Party and its leadership that we could use this occasion to burn out, concepts that are a hindrance to our Party and especially to our united front relations. We must discard all concepts of cynicism, disdain and scoffing in our approach and deal with this Encyclical in the manner in which most Americans are already dealing with it, that is, with the utmost respect and seriousness.
Because of some of our old concepts, especially in regard to religious institutions, there is a tendency to scoff at this document which may well become a hindrance in our understanding, appreciation and use of it. We must restate our position and discard hangovers of syndicalist, anarchist and oJd Ingersoll attitudes which are deeply embedded in our Party and its leadership. We have to understand that such an attitude towards the Encyclical actually betrays our own lack of understanding of the forces and currents of the new epoch.
We must view the Encyclical as a fresh look at the new epoch and a readjustment to the present balance of world forces by an important world leader and movement.
This message sheds new light on the struggle within the Catholic Church and broadens the struggle in the Ecumenical Council. Because of it, the reconvening of the Council will take on a new meaning.
We must give the Party as clear an understanding as possible of the issues involved in the struggle which came to the surface in the Ecumenical Council. It is plain the struggle is not only over interpretation of theological dogma or ethical practices. Rather, in a more fundamental sense, it is a struggle over the basic direction of the Church and its attitude and relationship to the new realities of our time.
It is important to understand this deep struggle because it is going to continue. This Encyclical will sharpen it. For the Encyclical is more than a reassessment; it is also a product of the new relationship of world forces and will in turn have an effect on these forces.
On the Role of Religious Institutions
It is true that social institutions like the church tend to conform to the idea that “might is right” and so to become instruments of the dominant class and serve it. Thus, historically the church has been an institution of feudalism or capitalism. Most of the upheavals in religious institutions have been reflections of economic-political upheavals of transition from the dominance of one class to that of another.
Because the Catholic Church has had a special relationship to feudalism, it has certain distinctive characteristics as a religious institution. And to the extent that it has· been an instrument of the feudal and capitalist classes during their declining periods, it has been an instrument of reaction. Thus the Catholic ·Church has been a mass base for Franco in Spain and Salazar in Portugal. Thus, too, an earlier Pope openly praised the bombing of Ethiopia by Mussolini and played a generally reactionary role.
The Church in the New Epoch
Though we have been generally aware of the new historical situation of today, we have not drawn the full conclusions from it. Because this is a period of transition from one system to another, we will have many new developments of which we must take account. We know that a new class has become dominant, and we must look into the full implications of that fact. All socialist forces must readjust to this new reality. And so must all other forces, including the Church.
This readjustment of the Church is now taking place. It is a struggle – part of the general upheaval now going on, of the historic transition from capitalism to socialism.
We must constantly strive to deepen our understanding of the qualitative leap that takes place in all things when the tipping of the scales between the two world forces is altered. This qualitive leap gives the forces of progress new leverage and makes possible escalated dividends from their actions.
More, the new objective reality itself now works further changing of the balance of forces in the new direction. Before the shift in the balance of forces, objective conditions made it possible to advance only by uphill struggle. Now, since the dominant element influencing human affairs is a progressive one, a new quality is added which is itself a factor in moving the balance of forces toward the side of progress.
The change in the position of the Vatican is not the result of one individual’s subjective reaction, but is due to the pressures of qualitatively new objective conditions. This, as the world discussion has made very clear, dogmatism does not see or understand. Dogmatism fails to grasp the new reality, the role it has played in the struggle, and the fact that there has been, a qualitative change not only in the Marxist world but in the world as a whole. If we want to take full advantage of all new developments, we must grasp fully the leap that has occurred and its effect on all social forces.
Eradicate Stereotyped Concepts
We must uproot a stereotyped concept of many years’ standing concerning the role of institutions such as the Catholic Church – a concept that still has a heavy hold, and because of which we fail to take initiatives and lack boldness in taking new positions.
Of course, what Marx said about religion in general still holds. But we must make a clear distinction between religion as a philosophy and the social role of religious institutions. We must avoid a dogmatic, doctrinaire, or mechanistic attitude· to religious beliefs, and to people who hold such beliefs.
We have not publicly stated our position on this question, and most Americans mistakenly think our attitude is the same as the old anarcho-syndicalist attitude. We must find occasions to make our true position clear.
Religion as a set of beliefs and a code of conformity remains basically as Marx described it, though we should perhaps restate it in more modem terms. But we must make a clear distinction between this and that church as an institution, and between our attitude toward religious belief as such and that toward members of the church and clergy. We must do so if we are going to be a vanguard party that leads, by and large, religious people.
The moral, ethical and humanitarian concepts of religion are not evil, and have not played a negative role in history. Indeed, many have joined the Communist Party because in it they saw the practical fulfillment of these same concepts. Many see the Communist movement as a vehicle through which they can work concretely for the realization of the essence of the sermons they hear on the Sabbath.
We cannot accomplish anything with the conception that we lead only those who are not religious. This is a fallacy of which we must rid ourselves.
Experience should have prepared us better for this kind of understanding. The role of the church in the struggles of the Black Americans should have given it to us. The role played by the clergy and the church in many instances in the struggle for peace should have prompted us to change, as should the role of the church in many socialist countries.
The present struggle in the Catholic Church and other churches will continue, as a process of readjustment to the fact that a new class is moving into the forefront. This is the meaning of the Pope’s message and of the struggle in the Ecumenical Council. The Encyclical indicates that the forces that want a readjustment are in the dominant position in the Council. Its new attitude towards peace, disarmament, racism and imperialism, and its reassessment of the Church’s attitude towards the working class are indications of this.
Tactical Consequence of the Encyclical
1. Among Catholics. The effect of the Encyclical within Catholic ranks, clearly, will be to sharpen the struggle over policy. On a world scale, while there will be strong resistance in some Catholic circles, it also will shake up old alliances and create new ones. As in the splitting of an atom, all kinds of new particles will come into being.
In the United States, this message will land on well-prepared soil, and will start many fires in Catholic ranks. There have been great pressures for exactly such a new direction and there have been feelings of frustration over failure to move into the fight for peace. The Encyclical will give new strength and status to the forces in the Catholic Church who have been trying to move in this direction.
Of course there will be resistance on a world scale, as well as in the United States. It is no accident that Cardinal Spellman has been silent for some time, and it is to be expected that he will most likely continue to struggle against this change. The Catholic War Veterans, with their ties with the ultra-Right, will have problems, as will the Knights of Columbus. But there are other top forces that will wholeheartedly support it.
2. In the Trade Unions. Possible some of the best effects will be evident in the trade union movement. We should carefully study the attitude of the ACTU, which will possibly play a different role in the future.
3. In the Civil Rights Struggle. The Encyclical will give new strength to the struggle for equal rights. The Catholic Church will be emboldened. Those elements which have been moving in this direction will be strengthened, and they can be a very important factor in raising the struggle for human rights to new heights.
4. In the Peace Movement. The peace forces will be alerted and the struggle for peace will be greatly advanced. We have already discussed this question in The Worker.
5. In the Struggle against the Ultra-Right and for Democracy. It will have a powerful effect on the struggle against the ultra-Right, some sections of which have concentrated on winning over Catholic organizations. It will likewise greatly affect the struggle for democracy and against such laws as the McCarran and Landrum-Griffin Acts.
The effect of the Encyclical can be tremendous, but we must have no illusions that it will all be smooth going. There will be attacks against it and distortions. There will be attempts to interpret sections as meaning an attack on communism when they are actually an attack against fascism, or to interpret the document as an attack against all “totalitarianism.”
Our Struggle
As for ourselves, we should not be bashful about getting into this debate. More concretely, we should take the following approach:
We should give it a wholly positive interpretation, as I have already indicated. We should not hesitate on the grounds that it may be demagogic or that “they do not mean it” but should accept it at its face value.
We have to find ways to help bring it to the Catholic masses and to others in the United States, and to do it in a way that is understandable to the Catholic masses and will create the greatest unity.
We should see this message as a new instrument with which to press for our policies on every front-to fight against the ultra-Right pressures on the Kennedy Administration, and as a means of pressure on the Kennedy Administration itself for peace, equal rights, disarmament, etc. Our Catholic comrades in particular must get into the debate and discussion in every possible way.
One of the important new sections in this document is that dealing with the question of united front relations with us. It opens the door to such relations and we must accept this bid in its fullest sense and extend our hand to the Catholic masses in the most positive fashion. We must utilize this Encyclical to the utmost in the struggle for peace.
We should send a special letter to the Catholic leaders in various cities in refence to this Encyclical, suggesting speakers and debates on the document, on the Communist position and on those sections in which the Pope indicates we have a positive contribution to make. We should encourage discussion in catholic colleges. And we should discuss its effects in the trade union movement.
The Catholic Church is mainly a working class church of the big cities, of the workers in heavy industry and transport. The Democratic Party has its base largely in the Catholic Church. Think of the advance of the Catholic Church in the South where it has 750,000 Negro members. This the base for a broad coalition in America, toward which the document can be very effective.
Many Catholic organs will take up the struggle for the new outlook. For example, the Pittsburg Catholic, which has been the most advanced on these questions, expressed its initial editorial reaction in these following words:
“… we have seen enough of the Encyclical to feel a real excitement for its contents. Plainly, the document is infinitely more than a collection of occasional exhortations and generic remarks about peace on earth; it seems a systematic blueprint on how peace can be secured in an orderly world.
The Encyclical is certain to disappoint many, including those Catholics who have attempted to link their nationalist and supremist positions on the United Nations and on racial matters to the alleged or imagined dispositions of the Holy See. For them the Encyclical is a complete rout.” (Emphasis added.)
There are many venues, if we take the time to explore them. And if anyone is inclined to argue that the Encyclical was put out just to get members for the Church, the answer is: as long as it is done on the basis of working for a progressive program, what of it? If there is any party that has to keep fighting for realistic tactics based on confidence in victory and to do away with abstractions that are basically wrong, it is our Party. There must be no underestimation of the role of our Party on this issue, and on our relations with Catholics. It is not a static role. There is need for initiative, for a positive and bold approach.
Most Catholic workers are enthused and excited about the Encyclical. They feel that their Church is moving away from its ties to a reactionary past.
This can become a source of new strength for the forces of peace, progress and democracy, of a new outlook for millions.
