| Home
Writings of the Institute Other Significant Writings Bibliography
17117 West Nine Mile Road, Suite
1407, Southfield, phone: |
|
|
IDOLATRY: THE IMPACT OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM ON THE CHURCHES OF NAZI EUROPE By James R. Lyons When the death camps and murder factories throughout Europe were first seen in all their horror, there was silence – silence from the survivors who were so traumatized they could not talk, and silence from a world that did not want to know. Isolated, in great pain, seeking to build and rebuild their shattered existence, survivors suffered alone or, on occasion, talked with other survivors who understood and spoke the same language of survival unknown to the rest of us. When a teenager, a survivor who had lost his entire family, arrived in California to meet an uncle who had immigrated to the U.S. prior to the war, the first words he heard were not a greeting of welcome, not a sign of compassion for what he had suffered, but only, "Don’t talk about it! I don’t want to hear." This is not an atypical example. Many survivors report similar stories. Over the last twenty years, there has been an increasing willingness to hear the story. Still, we have not been open to meeting the survivors in the "I-Thou" encounter described by Martin Buber. We’ve listened to their stories from an outside third person historical perspective rather than sharing their experiences with them. Dr. Emanual Tanay, a psychiatrist, in a brief article poignantly entitled, "Is There Honor Only After Death for Survivors of the Holocaust?" laments: "Do you realize that in more than 40 years since liberation I have never heard anyone say, "I’m glad you made it." (Tanay, 1988, p. 7) There are probably many reasons for our failure to encounter survivors, including psychological and social embarrassments. One clear reason, however, is that we have approached the Holocaust as a past historical event, whereas the survivors remind us that it is a present reality. We have talked glibly about the "lessons" of the Holocaust, but have buried ourselves in historical study. The very nature of the theme, "Remembering for the Future," demands our combining solid historical research with penetrating questions about our contemporary societies. To do this requires vision. Historically we must understand what happened and why, while recognizing present potential dangers within our own society. Nowhere is this more true than for the churches! It is ironic that the churches, which bore and continue to bear the heaviest burden for their lack of moral leadership in most of the countries of Nazi-dominated Europe, were among the first to raise questions about events leading to the murder of six million Jews. When the churches first began to reflect on this period there was a tendency to paint a picture of events with wide brushes in broad strokes in only two colors: absolute black or absolute white. After the collapse of the Third Reich, it was easy to condemn the churches and to speak with righteous indignation about what the churches in both Germany and occupied Europe should have done. Aesop once reflected that "It is easier to be brave from a distance." From a safe distance it is always easy to find fault with those who are actually facing a particular situation. Fortunately, as more study has been done and additional source materials revealed, it is possible to paint with ever finer brushes and in a wide variety of shades of gray rather than absolute black and white. It must be affirmed that painting with narrow brushes is not to excuse the lack of action of the churches, but rather to understand what they faced. If we are to remember for the future, we need to know what happened between those who would place the Holocaust in so broad a context ("Man’s inhumanity to man") that all meaning is lost, or so outside a historical context ("a diabolical period" or a "Satanic time") that historical study is impossible and meaningless. The very presence of survivors in our midst demands that we ask questions. We must ask the right questions now, for as the survivors themselves say, "Time is running out!" The very statement "Never again!" forces us, however inadequately, to ponder our own existence. "Lessons" will never be learned unless we face the questions and dare to listen to the reflective voices of those who were there. How are we to understand the failure of the churches? As we shall see, with rare exception, the churches fell into idolatry, and that idolatry so consumed them that moral, prophetic, godly responses were clouded if not completely hidden. Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik gives a simple definition of "idolatry": "Idolatry is not only the worship of objects of metal or wood; the most dangerous idolatry is the idolization and deification of man." (Besdin, 1979, p. 68) One might only add in addition to "the idolization and deification of man" the "idolization of nation." What are the lessons we can learn from the churches of Nazi Europe? Under the impact of their idolatry, we shall see that 1) the churches idolized (and at time deified) a particular political leader; 2) there was a tendency to identify a political system with their religion; 3) there was a failure to recognize the dangers they faced early enough to act, even if there had been the will or the courage for such action; 4) churches did not speak out on behalf of the Jews; 5) there was a failure to ask if religious institutions were leaders or followers of social currents; 6) the churches did not recognize the importance of the ecumenical movement. I. IDOLATRY AND THE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP While the process of Gleichschaltung (bringing into political oneness, eliminating opposition) began in Germany even before Hitler assumed control on January 30, 1933, it is indeed amazing how quickly the absolute power of the state under a dictatorship can be implemented. Conditions in Nazi Germany were described by a Swiss ecumenist, Henry Louis Henriod, in a "Strictly Confidential" report following a visit to Berlin on April 18-19, 1933, less than three months into the new regime. There is no longer freedom of the press, criticism is forbidden, the party in power controls the radio, telephone conversations are under surveillance, privacy of correspondence is no longer assured. All of the rights for freedom of the German citizens set down in the Constitution of the Reich are suspended. . . . Uncertainty for tomorrow haunts those who have assumed responsibility. (Boyens, 1969, pp. 292-293) The pressures brought on the German society as a whole stretched into every area. Writing in 1938, Erika Mann described the Nazi educational system in School for Barbarians. (Mann, 1939) This frightening account, which shows the systematic teaching against Jews and against both the Protestant and Catholic churches in the context of "education," gives much on which to reflect. There were people like Reverend Julius Kuptsch, who could idealize Hitler in the most idolatrous of terms, arguing that, "The similarity between the spirit and struggle of Christ and that of Hitler is in my opinion completely undeniable." (Zabel, 1976, p. 231) In Nazi Germany, students of kindergarten age began their day with the following "prayer":
Or again, a prayer:
The adoration is on-going:
While numerous other examples could be given of the idolatrous prayer and praise used about Hitler, both within the "official" churches and by those who adapted church language and life events to a National Socialist ideology, i.e., baptism, marriage, etc., one particular war-like hymn written by church musicians R.A. Schroeder and Heinrich Spitta should be noted:
We men are needed up front:
The same kind of false adulation directed toward Hitler was given to Marshall Petain in Vichy France. A very curious adaptation of the "Lord’s Prayer" was offered by a Georges Gerard:
In the parish bulletin of the Saint-Joseph de Paul Church of 1941, Petain was praised with the following:
The Prefect of Lyons encouraged students "to follow the Marshall as the Hebrews followed to column of fire in the desert." (Amouroux, Vol. II, 1961, p. 291) When Petain joined in on a pilgrimage to Notre-Dame, renewing a tradition which had not been followed for 400 years, a writer in the Nouveliste enthused: "Monsieur le Marechal, after the pilgrimage, France no longer considers you only as its head, but as the envoy of God and the instrument of Providence." (Amoureau, Vol. II, p. 286) At Saint-Jean-Lavetre, a school in the Loire region, the day began with the following prayer:
In Italy, this form of idolatry does not seem to have taken hold in the same manner as it did in both Germany and France. Nonetheless, there were instances when Mussolini did receive accolades about his having been sent as a savior from God. Cardinal Vannutelli explained once that Mussolini was "chosen to be Savior of the nation and to restore its Fortune." (Deschner, 1968, p. 7) Pius XI in 1926 and 1929 spoke of Mussolini as one who "Providence sent us." (Deschner, pp. 7, 9) No less a figure than Konrad Adenauer, when mayor of Cologne, sent Mussolini a congratulatory telegram in which he stated that Mussolini’s name would be inscribed in golden letters in the history of the Catholic Church. (Deschner, pp. 9-10) On the other hand, a satirical statement was secretly circulated in Italy. Satire has no meaning if there is not at least an element of truth in it. Thus the very nature of the statement is to show a tendency of some towards an idealization of Mussolini. A year in prison was the penalty for even possessing a copy of the following:
Lest we think that the dangers of such idolatry are past, we need only reflect on the election campaign when Ronald Reagan sought office for the second time. Without in any manner intending to compare Mr. Reagan to either Hitler or Petain, it is notable that some within the "religious right" in the United States have given adulation to Mr. Reagan similar to what we have seen in Nazi Germany and Viche France. Mr. Reagan was called "The greatest Christian since Jesus Christ" (though Christ was never a Christian!). "The greatest born-again Christian who has ever lived" is but another example. When a Black evangelist (and I emphasize "Black" since the Black community has generally been in the Democratic camp) argues on television, "I suppose that a born-again Christian could vote for someone other than Ronald Reagan, but I don’t know how!," we have certainly moved into dangerous areas of idolatry. Moreover, we recognize the kind of religious coercion that we see the Deutsche Christen brought to bear on their colleagues and churches. If, as one candidate for president in the United States, Pat Robertson, often declares, "God has told me to run for President," does any opposition mean that one is opposing a particular candidate or opposing the will of God? This problem is not unique to Christians, if the view of Rabbi Soloveitchik is even partially true. Reflecting on the period of the Holocaust and the failure of American Jews "to awaken Jewish leadership and to arouse the conscience of Christian America," Rabbi Soloveitchik wrote: Apparently, what inhibited Jewish action was the faith that American Jews had in the President; their adulation bordered on idolatry. But for this idolatry, millions of Jews would probably have been saved. President Roosevelt was a great leader for America, but he was a disaster for the Jews. (Besdin, 1979, p. 68) Thus, whether we are dealing with idolatry or adulation bordering on idolatry, the fact is clear that often political leaders are placed on such a pedestal that any criticism directed towards them is seen as being anti-Godly. Part of this is also due to the close identification of a religious system with a particular political movement. II. IDENTIFICATION OF POLITICS WITH RELIGIOUS BELIEF Perhaps one of the most devastating ideas which displays the out-and-out idolatry of the churches is the identification of a particular political view with its own message. This occurred in both Protestant and Catholic circles. During the opening period of Nazi rule, among the Protestant churches, there was a group known as the Deutsche Christen (German Christians) who not only accepted the National Socialist platform, but attempted to baptize it, making it seem to be at one with Christianity. Originally they called themselves "Evangelische Nationalsozialisten," but for the church elections to be held on July 23, 1933, Hitler himself changed the name to Deutsche Christen. The group received 70% of the vote. (Rohm, 1983, pp. 21, 154) On November 20, 1933, an agreement was signed between Ludwig Muller of the Deutsche Christen and Baldur von Schirach, head of the Hitler Youth Movement, uniting some 800,000 members of the Deutsche Christen youth groups with the Hitler Youth. Anyone who was not a member of the Hitler Youth could not participate in church youth activities. (Rohm, pp. 22, 43) The National Association of Catholic German Student Fraternities defined itself as "an association of German students of the Catholic faith, dedicated to educating its members in the spirit of the Nationalist ideology." (Remak, 1969, p. 95) This educational process included the adopting of National Socialist ideology against marrying non-aryans and being open only to men who spoke German as their native tongue. Bishop Wilhelm Berning of Osnabruck, who was active in the drawing up of the concordat between Germany and the Vatican, which was signed in 1933, could state with enthusiasm, though not complete accuracy:
As if identifying the goals of National Socialism with those of the church wasn’t bad enough, Muller turns the power of defining the church, its mission, and its workings over to Hitler.
Moreover, in what was an anti-Catholic theme often found during this period, Muller appealed to Luther in seeking to justify the "unique" relationship between the Protestant church and the state.
To be sure, there were church leaders who warned against this false identification. Writing in France and intimately aware of events in Nazi Germany and their impact on the churches, Henri Clavier described in vivid terms the relationship of the church to society:
Clavier further warns us:
Early in the Nazi period, the General Superintendent (and later Bishop) Otto Dibelius reflected on the same theme in writing for pastors in his diocese on March 8, 1933. The letter was later published in the Tagliche Rundshau on April 6, 1933. Henry Henriod quoted from it in his April, 1933 report:
III. "CHURCH STRUGGLE" LOST BEFORE 1933
Long before the actual assumption of power by the Nazis, the need for the "church struggle" had begun, but few recognized it or took it seriously. There was a tendency to downplay events or to ridicule them. Francois Delpech faced this period with rare candor when he reflected:
Karl Barth, writing in the summer of 1935, offered a similar lament:
IV. CHURCHES DO NOT SPEAK OUT ON BEHALF OF THE JEWS The churches must recognize both their long historic as well as their contemporary failure to speak out against anti-Semitism. Shortly after Kristallnacht on November 10-11, 1938, Karl Barth wrote on December 5, 1938:
There were rare voices which spoke out against the treatment of the Jews, but on the whole the churches, including the Confessing Church, were silent. (see Gerlach, 1987) The churches failed to recognize that all anti-Semitism, even that anti-Semitism which is found within the church, is not only un-Christian but at its roots is anti-Christian as well. Sometimes our enemies recognize the relationship between Christianity and Judaism in a way we ourselves fail to see as this hate-filled article found in the "Reichspost" of March 18, 1937, shows:
The following has written in large letters in the canteen of the railway workshop in Munich:
V. CHURCHES AS LEADERS OR FOLLOWERS OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS One of the fundamental questions which churches must continually face deals with their on-going role in society: Do churches lead society or do churches follow the trends of society? Do the churches set the moral tone for their membership, regardless of the consequences, or find theological justification for the positions, political or otherwise, espoused by their membership? This serious problem arose early in Nazi Germany as Henry Henriod stated in his April 1933 report:
The coercion to conform to Nazi ideas brought to bear on the churches, and in particular on Protestant and Catholic clergy, was unrelenting, with real danger to those who did not conform. Mann reports that 1,300 of the 18,000 pastors in Germany had been in jail or in concentration camps between 1934 and 1938. (Mann, 1939, p. 147) In Dachau alone, the best estimate is that there were 2,771 clergy interned, of whom at least 1,034 died in the camp. This figure does not include the large number of clergy and members of Roman Catholic religious orders whose deaths occurred before they arrived in camp or after being transferred from the camp. Of these 2,771 clergy, 2,579 were Roman Catholic priests of whom 1,780 were Polish priests, but there were 109 Protestant pastors, 30 Orthodox priests and 2 Muslim clergy as well. (O’Malley, 1987, pp. 351-352) A list found in the files of the Reichskanzlei dated October 1, 1939, contains the names of 344 clergy who were in concentration camps, under house arrest, forbidden to speak or travel, or in other ways were under the thumb of their government. (Rohm, 1983, pp. 98-100) Another list from the files of the Reichskirchen Ministry shows that in 1938 there were 2,760 Protestant and 1,272 Roman Catholic clergy under similar bans or punishments. (Rohm, 1983, p. 84) In spite of these pressures, individuals and groups of clergy, Protestant and Catholic, made rather courageous stands given the times. Remembering that clergy were (and still are) part of the civil service system in Germany, who depended on the government for their salary, health, and retirement benefits, it is easy to recognize the power which the state could exercise against individual clergy, particularly those who had families. How are we to acknowledge the quiet courage of the wife of a pastor with a family in Berlin who sent her husband off to a meeting of the Notbund with these words: "And now, I beg you, forget that you have a wife and children?" (Clavier, 1941, p. 144) This encouragement to vote conscience over potential family need and political fear is but one of the acts of courage we can only admire. On the other hand, particularly during the first days of the Third Reich, there was a period when expectations of Hitler were high and indeed an euphoria about the future under the new Nazi regime was rampant in the churches. Some of this enthusiasm remained to the very end of the war, although later, individual clergy not only broke with the regime, but also actively fought against it. Officially, the churches failed! Unofficially, individuals showed great courage. Questions about the ability of churches to lead both their members and society in general are as real today as they were in the Nazi period! VI. FAILURE TO RECOGNIZE THE VALIDITY OF THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT IN THE CHURCH STRUGGLE A last area which has an impact on our churches today deals with the "ecumenical movement." If we listen to the voices from the Nazi period, we will recognize that the Ecumenical Movement is an essential part of today’s world, and not merely another "nice" idea. In speaking of the role of the Catholic Church in France, Francois Delpech talked about the work the church had achieved, but that the actions taken
After the outbreak of the war, Karl Barth was among the first to speak out against the "spiritual neutrality" and the silence of the churches supposedly involved in the ecumenical movement. (Boyens, 1973, p. 49) Eugen Gerstenmaier argued against a conference with the church leaders lamenting that such "a consultation with the German church leaders would be suicide. They are not oriented towards ecumenism. . . . These church leaders don’t know the most important thing, namely the ecumenical atmosphere and the general ecumenical situation in other countries." (Boyens, 1973, p. 56) Bishop Otto Dibelius echoed this concern:
Willem Visser’t Hooft spoke of an "ecumenical confusion" (Boyens, 1973, p. 65) and the need for churches to support one another openly. The ecumenical movement failed because in a time of crisis, at that point where they most needed each other, the churches withdrew into their own shells. Certainly some of those involved in ecumenical affairs were suspect ("We ecumenists in Germany are essentially pro-English." Gerstenmaier, [Boyens, 1973, p. 56]), but given the needs of the church and the German citizens to escape the isolation imposed on them by Goebbels, (Boyens, 1973, p. 56) the ecumenical movement offered the only hope. The old canard has an element of truth: "United we stand. Divided we fall." We need an ecumenical movement which appreciates the differences, but is united in protecting partners from the on-going attempts to destroy them, be those partners Jews, other Christians, or any human in need. Ecumenical relations are essential to the health of religion and society! CONCLUSION Was there ever a "Church Struggle" in Nazi Germany? If so, what was the struggle about? Did the churches speak out forthrightly on the burning questions of the day or did they concern themselves only with church structure and church government? In forty years, will the same questions be asked of the churches of our day? If so, will the judgement be that we have been more interested in church bureaucracy and church politics than the burning moral questions of the day? It is relatively easy after the fact to make facile confessions about failures, confessions which never seem to speak to the heart of the matter. After the collapse of the Third Reich, the churches certainly did that. Statements like the Stuttgart Confession appear to be efforts directed more at the rehabilitation of both the church and some individuals than deep reflections on the very nature of the church, its role in society, or its moral responsibility. (see Prolingheuer, 1987, pp.75ff) How can a declaration made in October, 1945, fail to mention the fate of the Jews? Could the churches in Nazi occupied Europe have made a difference? If they had not succumbed to idolatry, paganism, anti-Semitism, and isolationism, could they have saved six million Jews? Or millions of others? One can never answer such hypothetical questions. Yet, this much is clear – if the churches had had the courage of some of their clergy and laity, they would have saved their own integrity, maybe even their own souls! REFERENCES Amouroux, Henri. La Vie des Francais sous L’Occupation. Tome 1. Les anees grises. Tome 2. Les an nee noires. Paris: Fayard, 1961. Barth, Karl. The German Church Conflict. Richmond: John Knox Press, 1965. Besdin, Abraham R. Reflections of the Rav: Lessons in Jewish Thought Adapted From Lectures of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Jerusalem: Alpha Press, 1979. Boyens, Armin. Kirchenkampf und Okumene, 1933-1939. Munchen: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1969. Boyens, Armin. Kirchenkampf und Okumene, 1939-1945. Munchen: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1973. Busch, Eberhard. Juden und Christen im Schatten des Dritten Reiches: Ansatze zu einer Kritik des Antisemitismus in der Zeit der Bekennenden Kirche. Munchen: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1979. Clavier, H. L’Eglise et la Monde. Paris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1940. Conway, J. S. The Nazi Persecution of the Churches. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1968. Deschner, Karlheinz. Kirche und Faschismus. Wuppertal-Barmen: Jugenddienst-Verlag, 1968. Delpech, Francois. "La Papaute et la Persecution Nazie," La France et la Question Juive. 1940/1944. Paris: Editions Sylvie Messenger, 1981. Dibelius, Otto. In the Service of the Lord. Translated from the German by Mary Ilford. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964. Duquesne, Jacques. Les Catholiques Francais sous L’Occupation. Paris: Editions Bernard Grasset, 1966. Leeds, Christopher. Italy Under Mussolini. London: Wayland Publishers, 1972. Mann, Erika. School for Barbarians. New York: Modern Age Books, 1939. Neuhauser, Johann. Kreuz und Hakenkreutz: Der Kampf des Nationsozialismus gegen die katholische Kirche und der kirchliche Widerstand. Zweite Auflage. Munchen: Katholische Kirche Bayers, 1946. O’Malley, William J. "The Priests of Dachau," America (Vol. 157, No. 14, Nov.14, 1987), pp. 351-353. Prolingheuer, Hans. Wir Sind in die Irre Gegangen: Die Schuld der Kirche unterm Hakenkreuz. Koln: Pahl-Rugenstein Verlag, 1987. Reichsbischof, Der. Die Deutschen Christen. Die Reden des Reichsbischof und des Reichsleiters der Deutschen Christen, Dr. jur. Kinder, im Berliner Sportspalast am 28. Februar 1934. Berlin: Gesellschaft fur Zeitungsdienst, 1934. Remak, Joachim, (ed.) The Nazi Years: A Documentary History. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1969. Rohm, Eberhard (Hrsg.) Evangelische Kirche zwischen Kreuz und Hakenkreuz. 3. Aufl. Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1983. Tanay, Emmanuel. "Is There Honor Only After Death for Survivors of the Holocaust?" The Jewish News. Detroit: February 26, 1988. Zabel, James A. Nazism and the Pastors: A Study of the Ideas of Three Deutsche Christen Groups. Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1976. |
|
For more information contact The Ecumenical Institute for Jewish-Christian Studies.
|