Churches in the nation’s capital divided sharply over the August 28 “March on Washington” by civil rights demonstrators.
Many top denominational leaders endorsed the march and urged constituents to lend full support. Several national churches in Washington, however, were among scores that have balked at participation and endorsement.
“I am a liberal in civil rights and social action,” said Dr. George R. Davis, minister of National City Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), “but I am against this demonstration. It has been a very difficult decision for me, but I cannot in good conscience support such method and procedure.”
National Presbyterian Church decided to cooperate, but on a very limited scale. The church will act as an “information center” at the request of United Presbyterian Stated Clerk Eugene Carson Blake. It will also open its Hospitality House to Presbyterian ministers. The church session hotly debated the extent of cooperation. Only by a narrow margin was the request for the “information center” approved.
Metropolitan Memorial Methodist Church, the national Methodist church, turned down a bid for cooperation, explaining that its ministerial staff was on vacation.
A number of other churches, by contrast, pledged to pitch in. Chief among them was Washington Cathedral, where officials endorsed the march enthusiastically. The use of the cathedral was offered, as well as beds and food.
Members of National Baptist Memorial Church were among slated marchers, but the church took “no official stand” (it was to be open for worship August 28).
No church leader seemed to question the right of public demonstration and protest. But some felt that the massive movement “on” Washington was objectionably coercive. If mob ultimatums more than juridical processes become the means of securing legislative changes, they contended, democracy will deteriorate to anarchy. Others insisted that the Church must rely on regenerative dynamisms for effective social change.
What put Washington churches on the spot was a letter from Executive Director Sterling Tucker of the Washington Urban League, a United Fund agency. The letter was sent to more than 450 churches in the District of Columbia. In it Tucker said that the league “has been delegated the responsibility of organizing the Washington churches willing to offer their facilities to house the delegates to the March on Washington on August 28, 1963.”
“At least one church will be needed for each state,” he explained, adding that one of the league’s officials will “need to know … Will your church be available?”
Arrival of the letters sent ministers scurrying to their boards for advice. A number obviously tried to avoid cooperation without appearing hostile to the civil rights campaign. At least one church got out of it by arguing that their insurance coverage would not allow it. A number of churches circumvented the decision because their ministers were on vacation. But in some churches, particularly the larger ones, ministerial absences served only to complicate matters.
Directors of the march subsequently changed their plans, and the request for accommodations was withdrawn. Out-of-town delegates were told that if at all possible they should arrange to arrive in Washington in the morning and leave in the evening, so that overnight lodging in the nation’s capital would not be necessary. Moreover, instead of reporting to assembly points, demonstrators were instructed to mass at the Washington Monument grounds.
The necessity for churches as assembly points and housing was thereby largely eliminated, and many congregations, thus taken off the hook, breathed a sigh of relief.
The league then declared that churches would only be requested to volunteer “on a standby basis for emergency use,” presumably in case of rain.
The reaction of local churches in exhibiting reserve toward the march came in spite of pleas of denominational leaders.
Dr. Robert W. Spike, executive director of the Commission on Religion and Race of the National Council of Churches, said in his call contained in a circular to church members:
“We need thousands of Christians, white and Negro, in Washington on August 28. Put everything aside and COME.”
A similar appeal came from Blake, who urged that his denomination’s 9,200 pastors participate.
“I expect to be there,” Blake said, “and I hope to see every one of you there who believes we must act now.”
The Presbytery of Washington City (United Presbyterian) was non-committal in spite of Blake’s enthusiasm. In a letter to constituents Moderator John H. Grosvenor, Jr., merely noted that “regardless of your feelings about the Civil Rights demonstration you should recognize that it does offer all of us an unusual opportunity to demonstrate how we believe Christ would have acted in such a situation.”
The National Council of Churches was under orders from its general board to hold a “Church Assembly” in Washington to demonstrate “how deeply the conscience of the American people is troubled about racial injustice.” Council officials, however, scrapped plans for an assembly of their own as the NCC Commission on Religion and Race joined “in sponsoring this massive witness to the nation’s most important commitment—racial justice now.”
The Capital Area Council of Churches’ board of directors was also reported as having voted support of the demonstration.
Roman Catholics of the Archdiocese of New York were urged to take part in the march in a letter signed by Auxiliary Bishop John J. Maguire and read at all Sunday masses. A spokesman for the Archdiocese of Washington said he did not know whether similar endorsement was forthcoming in that jurisdiction.
A carefully worded resolution adopted by the Protestant Episcopal House of Bishops observes that “participation in such an assemblage is a proper expression of Christian witness and obedience.” The resolution welcomes “the responsible discipleship” of participants and “supports them fully.”
One of the bishops subsequently commented that he voted for the resolution even though he thought clergymen ought not to march. Said another: “Mass meetings don’t help anybody, and I certainly won’t be marching on Washington.”
The National Lutheran Council and the American Lutheran Church were reported as being officially identified with the march through representatives. The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, said President Oliver R. Harms, would not participate.
Historic New York Avenue Presbyterian Church will be open to demonstrators, but its session and trustees issued a statement which said that access to church facilities does not imply endorsement of the demonstration.
The Lutheran Church of the Reformation on Capitol Hill indicated no cooperation, but a spokesman said a prayer in behalf of the marchers would be offered during the regular Wednesday noon service on August 28.
Metropolitan Baptist Church, also on Capitol Hill, declined to share its property with demonstrators. Its minister, Dr. R. B. Culbreth, said that the church has tax exemption because it preaches the Gospel, and it does not engage in direct political activities.
First Congregational Church pledged all-out support and urged its members to march.
First Baptist Church “has taken no official position on the civil rights march,” according to a statement released by its moderator and deacon chairman. A meeting of church officials to discuss cooperation with demonstrators was called off when leaders of the march changed their minds about separate state assemblies.
Mount Vernon Place Methodist Church, said a spokesman, supported the goals of the marchers, but the church’s officials differed on the propriety of the march itself.
A minister at the Church of the Epiphany (Episcopal) in downtown Washington said, “I’m not sure whether we’re in it or out of it.” The vestry had not discussed it, he added, but demonstrators will probably find the church open and “the coffee pot on.”
A proposal was made that the march begin with an interdenominational church service, and the cathedral was offered for that purpose. But leaders of the march were unable to agree on the idea. An “official Episcopal service” will be held at noon at St. John’s Church, Lafayette Square. A specially organized “D. C. Clergy Committee for Freedom March” called a meeting of all clergymen and religious leaders on August 19 “in order that an organized spiritual emphasis may be exhibited in the Freedom March … and that we may be of the greatest possible assistance to our out-of-town brothers and sisters who will gather for the demonstration.”
Dr. Martin Luther King, meanwhile, said in New York that he was proposing to President Kennedy creation of a federal civil rights police force “to protect demonstrators against possible police brutality.” King said the proposal would be made to the President if he agrees to meet with Negro leaders spearheading the Washington march.
In Chicago, meanwhile, Dr. Joseph H. Jackson, head of the nation’s largest Negro church body, resigned as president of the Century of Negro Progress Exposition. The president of the National Baptist Convention of the U. S. A. Inc., said he had “too many other commitments” to carry on his work with the exposition.
Jackson told newsmen there had been no pressure for him to resign the post. They had noted that the Negro leader and the mayor of Chicago were booed recently at a rally of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Groups in the crowd had said Jackson was too moderate in the campaign for Negro civil rights.
Jackson said he wants to “give more time to working for passage of the President’s civil rights legislation.” Jackson on numerous occasions has questioned the value of mass civil rights demonstrations.
Growing Indignation
Fifteen thousand U. S. clergymen conveyed a joint protest this month against the persecution of Buddhists in South Viet Nam.
The “Ministers Vietnam Committee,” in a letter to President Kennedy, assailed “the loss of American lives and billions of dollars to bolster a regime universally regarded as unjust, undemocratic, and unstable.”
The Rev. Donald S. Harrington, minister of the Community Church of New York and secretary of the committee, transmitted the letter to the president.
The protest, he noted, had grown out of an appeal by 12 noted U. S. clergymen including Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr, Bishop James A. Pike, and Dr. Ralph W. Sockman.
Harrington said the fifteen thousand signers included clergymen “of various faiths and denominations.”
