|
Part I: National Socialism and Christianity Incompatible Part II: The German Churches Under Hitler By AHRS
Part I: National Socialism and Christianity Incompatible?
The quote—“National Socialism and Christianity are incompatible”—was, in all probability, not made by Adolf Hitler. The original statement made by Hitler was more than likely distorted by editor Martin Bormann—a staunch anti-Catholic and “anti-Semite”. Though, it may also be that Hitler meant Judeo-Christianity when he referred to any form of Christianity or Catholicism. There are two reasons as to why we can be fairly certain about this conclusion:
1) The statement is inconsistent with Adolf Hitler’s views of Christ and Christianity in general. Albert Speer had documented that Bormann used to misquote Hitler, or distort his quotes, in order to use them as mandates for attacks on the churches.
Furthermore, it is inconsistent with the evolution of Hitler’s general feelings about the racial qualities of Germans, as compared with other Europeans and peoples. Hitler was not the same person by the end of the war—as he had been at the beginning. Nor was he the same man who wrote Mein Kampf—his views on religion and race evolved quite dramatically.
For instance, according to Otto Wagener (1985), Hitler had stated early on (circa 1934):
...The third point is that a person must be racially flawless. Let him be Germanic, or Roman, or Chinese, or a Jew, or an Indian, or a Negro, and so on. I respect all equally. We can work with and count on all of them. Each has his established traits. ... Once one has established the proper race for a particular task, one can rest assured that the task will be resolved (p. 143).
However, Hitler’s racial ideology had evolved immeasurably by the latter half of the Second World War. Evidence of his personal growth in this respect comes through in the following May 1944 account of historian John Lukacs (1998):
We have this people of ours that is not to be identified with a race, and this is not clear to millions… But when I began [speaking] about twenty-five years ago this was not so. I was told by [counterrevolutionary] circles: Yes, Volk and Race are one and the same! No! Volk and race are not the same. Race is a component of blood, a hematologic kernel, but the Volk is very often composed not of one race, but two, three, four, or five different racial kernels…Each of these racial kernels possesses particular talents.
He went on to say, on 26 May 1944:
The strongest of these racial kernels, with a commercial but no creative talents, would have been the Jews among us, in the long run, and with the difference that this Jewry would not have been absorbed racially by the German people but that it would have destroyed the German Volk gradually, step by step.
While speaking with Bormann, Hitler had stated:
Pride of race is a quality which the German, fundamentally, does not possess. We use the term of Jewish race as a matter of convenience, for in reality and from the genetic point of view there is no such thing as the Jewish race” (p.123) [Emphasis added].
Hitler’s Development
If Hitler's racial ideology had evolved to this higher plane, and to such an extent, would it not be logical that his Christian ideology would also have evolved to a higher, as opposed to lower [plane], and ideological extent? If we were to adopt the position that Hitler started off as a good, solid Christian, as argued by historian Steigmann-Gall (2003), but had [de-]evolved into a staunch anti-Christian, then why would he not have become more of a racist, as opposed to non-racist over time? Moreover, Hitler had exempted tens-of-thousands of Jews and half-Jews for military service, even during the war; why would he have taken a lenient position on Jewry, whom he had always viewed with the utmost contempt, as well as the racial issue, and not Christianity? It simply does not fit the evolutionary process of the man's thinking with regards to other issues.
Getting back to the original point…
2) The statement is comparable to the anti-Christian statements made by Martin Bormann during the latter half of the war. Hitler, as quoted by David Irving in Hitler's War (2002), was the only individual who was to address the Church Question, as well as the Final Solution—both of which were to be dealt with after the war was over (pp. 181-186). At no time did Hitler even delegate the Church Question to Bormann or Rosenberg, and as a matter of fact, both were condemned and disciplined for their respective anti-church activities, even though Hitler certainly had no affinity for the churches (Helmreich, pp. 303-304; 348.) But, his anti-clericalism cannot be mistaken for anti-Christianism; Hitler never attacked the Christian faith. Nor did he ever attack the person of Jesus Christ.
It might also be poignant to mention that Hitler said that the problem with coexistence was not within National Socialism; rather, within Christianity. He told Bormann that he wanted the two ideologies to coexist harmoniously but, “the problem was in Christianity itself.” That is not at all the same as saying that the two ideologies “cannot coexist.” This statement could have easily been distorted.
In the Bormann memoirs, entitled Hitler's Table-Talk: 1941-1945 His Private Conversations (2000), Bormann alleged that Hitler had said that Christianity and National Socialism (N.S.) could not be synthesized, or reconciled (pp. 144-145). However, most people ignore the fact that Hitler went further with this precept by explaining that the problem with the synthesis was not to be found in N.S., but rather, Christianity. He made it quite clear to his listeners that Christianity had to overcome its own flaws and biases, which he believed N.S. had already overcome; if the two were to co-exist harmoniously and successfully.
Indeed, Hitler really did believe that the priests and churches had committed far more crimes—against the German and European peoples throughout history—than good deeds. He cited the churches' criminal role during the Thirty Years' War, and the Inquisitions, quite often, while addressing this subject. Also, keep in mind, that Bormann was not nearly as educated as Hitler, nor did he have the capacity to synthesize what he had heard or read to the same degree that Hitler was capable of, so, he misconstrued and misinterpreted numerous monologues of Hitler's on numerous occasions. This issue has been addressed by Wagener (Hitler--Memoirs of a Confidant), von Lang (The Secretary Martin Bormann: The Man Who Manipulated Hitler), Helmreich (The German Churches Under Hitler), and Steigmann-Gall (The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity), just to name a few.
Evidence of this line of thinking on Hitler's behalf can be seen in this edited passage by Bormann (2000), where Hitler had said:
Kerrl, with the noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don't believe the thing's possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself. I think I could have come to an understanding with the Popes of the Renaissance. Obviously, their Christianity was a danger on the practical level—and, on the propaganda level, it continued to be a lie (p. 145).
Essentially, the problem really boiled down to Hitler's attempts to resurrect the pure Christian faith of the Founder, as opposed to the Bolshevised "Christianity" espoused by St. Paul and others. Hitler had declared, in a monologue to Wagener, that God for him was "the Logos of St. John" (p. 224).
The Problem of Christianity
I have read what Mr. Berg has written about Christianity, most of which I can certainly understand, and possibly even defend on many occasions, but again, we see the same line of thinking in FB’s arguments as with those of Hitler.
The problem of Christianity, as I have come to call it, is that it had undergone a deceptive and destructive Judaization process over time. The Old Testament, for example, was strangely attached to the New Testament; this is a problem that is still not fully understood by historians (as per a CSUSM World History class lecture circa 2004). Now, if that is the case, could it not be that Jewry was behind this move in a frantic and desperate effort to undo the damage it had inflicted unto itself by advocating the murder of Jesus of Nazareth and the mass persecution and murder of His Christian followers? This is not only highly possible and logical; it's also quite probable. Remember, Constantine had converted to Christianity, which made the situation for Roman Jewry very uncertain, especially in light of the fact that the Jews had been so vicious and relentless in their treatment of Christians and their Founder.
According to Hitler and Eckart, St. Paul had undermined Christ's teachings, and if one can accept that, then one can fully understand where Hitler was trying to take Christianity, and why.
I will leave you with this quote from Steigmann-Gall’s The Holy Reich, as I feel it helps to really explain Hitler’s feelings regarding Christianity:
… Another BdK leader, the Flensburg pastor Friedrich Andersen, elaborated on his theology in his book Der Deutsche Heiland, published one year after von Harnack’s Marcion. In it, Andersen identified Christianity as the religion of progress, emphasizing Christ’s loneliness, individuality, and ascent to spiritual mastery. Andersen also reduced Christianity to the person of Christ alone, insisting that “foreign underpinnings” like the Old Testament were unnecessary. In his argumentation, Andersen made explicit reference to both Chamberlain and Harnack. Andersen’s rejection of the Old Testament was based on an insistence that the Christian God of the New Testament was a God of love, not the vengeful, unjust God of the Old Testament. He also posited Christian spirituality in the eternal over [and] against Jewish carnality and crass materialism. These views were established widely in the BdK” (pp. 74-75).
Furthermore, according to Lukacs (1998), anti-Nazi Cardinal Faulhaber’s anti-Communist pastoral letter had stated, “N.S. in Berlin has undoubtedly eliminated the very dangerous agitations of socialism and Communism, as well as many phenomena of smut and dirt [Schmutz und Schund] so very dangerous to religion and morality”. And, Cardinal Bertram had written in a letter to Hitler in 1939, “I told the children Heil Hitler—this is valid for this world; Praised be Jesus Christ—that is the tie between earth and heaven” (p. 217).
As far as Christianity being a “Jewish philosophy of life,” well, that could not be further from the truth. The Nazis, more so than anyone else in this world, since the death of Christ, came to the true and full understanding of the teachings of Christ; although, I do believe that Thomas Jefferson had also come to a full understanding of Christ’s religion (see The Jefferson Bible). But, your statement is as unjust and as unqualified as the claim that Communism was, or is, a Jewish movement. That is not true, however, Jews became attracted to Communism as it grew in mass appeal and its ability to consolidate power into the hands of a few tyrants. Jewry has always been attracted to particularly easily undermined and populist movements and organizations [as argued by Dr. MacDonald in Culture of Critique] throughout history, but, to establish a causal link between Jews and these particular movements and/or organizations would prove to be impossible. This is the same case with Christianity.
The primary reasons for this are two-fold:
1) The Jews are a non-creative people [Hitler donned them “culture destroyers” in Mein Kampf], and they have repeatedly proven themselves to be a parasitic people who can only survive off the labor and resourcefulness of others. This was the main reason why they had worked so diligently to supplant the worker and the barter system with the merchant and the lending system.
2) The Jews have always revealed themselves to be attracted to whatever movement, organization, or ideology was most prevalent or prosperous at the time. Christianity proved to be an exception; as well as National Socialism. These two movements specifically attacked Jewry and that is why both were ultimately destroyed by the post-Modern world. Christianity had to be Judaized and Bolshevised if Jewry was to continue to flourish. Nazism had to be utterly wiped out for all eternity because it proved to be the single most anti-Jewish movement since Christ. Had Christ and Nazism placated to Jewry, both would have lived out their entire rightful existence.
The Jew St. Paul was very clever in his subtle pilfering within the Christian faith, but that is why Christians must read what Nazi Christians, in particular, had to say about what Christianity had become. Jesus, Luther, and Hitler had all called Jews, “the children of the devil,” and Hitler had named the Old Testament, “the arsenal of the Antichrist.” St. John had also revealed that Jewry was “the Antichrist” in I John. Well, who have all of these Christians identified as the agents of Satan on earth? Who has been pilfering away at America and Europe, and is now attempting to remake the Kingdom of Islam in the Mid-East? It is the same people who have been trying to feed Western civilization the greatest lies of all… the lie that Christianity is a universal religion, the lie that Jewry is the Chosen race of God, the lie that Jesus was Jewish, and the lie that Adolf Hitler was evil.
From Christianity to Neo-Conservatism: The Jews Ruin Everything
Since the Jewish ideological jump from Christianity to Bolshevist-Communism, the recovery of Christianity has been astounding. Moreover, since the Jewish ideological and political jump from Soviet-Communism to Neo-Conservative Americanism, the situation and recovery in Russia has been astounding; and, the decline of America in every realm unprecedented, namely morally and economically.
The former bearing of the Jewish burden in Christianity had transpired to the Soviet Union and has recently transpired to the United States. The real question that remains is: Who’s next? The Jews collectively and undoubtedly will the annihilation of the Kingdom of Islam, but there are two factors that will more than likely prevent the realization of the Project for the New Antichrist Century, as drafted by the Jewish Neo-Cons Paul Wolfowitz [who dogged President Bush and hauled off to head the World Jewish Bank of Impoverishment] and William Kristol [who serves as a Fox Jew News “Which War Will Benefit Jews Most” Analyst]. First of all, they have not accounted for the resurgence of true Christianity, which I suppose we could label Positive Christianity, Christian Nationalism, or even non-Bolshevised Christianity.
Secondly, they have not accounted for the resurgence of regionalism [or better defined as Nationalism]. The post-Modern world is not conducive to the survival of Western Civilization or Islam; hence, both will unite against their common enemy, who is Antichrist. According to Jesus, Luther, Hitler and St. John, he and his followers have already been made known to the world. This is why true Christianity is not only extremely dangerous to the New World Order, but so too is Nationalism. Anyone who even conceives of the unification of these ideologies will either face the sword or run from it in cowardice. Hitler chose to face the sword, but he could not carry the rest of Europe with him because they had proven themselves to be too weak to fulfill the will of God.
As argued by Lukacs, the death of Hitler marked the end of an era. He went on to say:
… But if Western civilization melts away [a civilization in which Christianity serves as the linchpin of its moral, economic, religious, educational, and ethical ideologies and dogmas, which the Jews and their Liberal minions are so ardently working to break], threatening to collapse,… dangers lie in the future. During a rising flood of barbarism [which Western societies are seeing with the current immigration influx of non-Christians and anti-White racists] [Hitler’s] reputation may rise in the eyes of orderly people, who may regard him as a kind of Diocletian, a tough last architect of an imperial order (p. 268).
Part II: The German Churches Under Hitler
According to Ernst Helmreich (1980), during Hitler’s first radio address after coming into power in 1933, he had stated the following: “The national government… will defend and maintain the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the basis of our collective morality” (p. 128). Indeed, even in the private recollections of anti-Christian Martin Bormann, Hitler had indicated that a Christian-secular education was preferable to a purely secular education. He had also indicated that the teachings of Christ served as the very centrum of Nazi-German ideology. As Steigmann-Gall (2003) has noted, the “ ‘school policy statement of the NSDAP,’ “… insisted that ‘the German school shall be the Christian community school… Education should not offer dead knowledge, but should impart those things that mould the soul and character of young people. The living sources are the German Volkstum, the German Heimat and the eternally living antecedents of the German people. The basic premise of education is active Christianity’” (p. 77). And, as a matter of fact, when Heinrich Hoffmann (1955), Hitler’s photographer and close friend, had asked Hitler what kind of school he ought to commit his son to, Hitler had matter-of-factly stated, “I strongly recommend you send him to a convent school” (p. 132).
Hitler paid visits to churches quite often, and this has been documented by Otto Dietrich (The Hitler I Knew), as well as Heinrich Hoffmann. Hoffmann (1955) had recollected a few particular visits in his memoirs. One such visit was photographed by Hoffmann, and it resulted in the photo of Hitler with the cross right above his head. When Hoffmann showed the photo to Hitler, Hess had demanded that it be withdrawn, but Hitler had said, “That I visited the church is a fact. What my thoughts were, you could not photograph, and it wasn’t you who put up the cross which happens to be just above my head in the snap. Leave it just as it is, Hoffmann—if the people think I’m a devout man, well, no harm will come of that” (p. 134)! Hitler was certainly no church-goer, but nevertheless, he had always expressed sincerity about his feelings for Christ, the Christian faith, and Providence during his speeches and conversations.
Hoffmann (1955) had said, “Hitler firmly believed that he had been chosen by Fate to lead the German people to hitherto undreamed of heights; and his rise to power, the great success he achieved immediately after his assumption of power only strengthened this belief, not only in Hitler himself, but also in his adherents.” He continued on, “When in his speeches he referred to Providence, he did not do so simply to achieve rhetorical effect; he really believed what he said, and this conviction could not but be strengthened by the truly miraculous manner in which he was again and again preserved” (p. 134). Hoffmann was referring specifically to the numerous occasions whereupon Hitler’s life was miraculously spared. Hoffmann went so far as to describe it as Hitler’s “sixth sense” that had always “warned him of imminent danger” (p. 140). Indeed, it would not be wholly dismissible to argue that this “sixth sense” of Hitler’s may have been the main driving force for his resilient and stubborn steadfastness during the last months of the war. He had convinced himself, and possibly many others around him, that the tide would turn in his favor at the last minute, as it had for Frederick the Great. It may well be that Hitler’s superstitious inclinations, along with his deteriorated mental and physical state, due to Parkinson’s, may have been his two greatest detriments during the latter half of the war. While many may have perceived his state to be one of “madness,” people like Hoffmann, who knew Hitler very well, would have been more inclined to believe it was the overtly innocent and regretfully tragic belief in a superstitious miracle that kept Hitler’s hopes up, to the very last minute. However, the fact that Hitler wanted to stave off the Soviets as long as possible must also be accounted for. He knew that if the Americans and British could be granted enough time to advance further than the Soviets, it would mean a much brighter future for Germany, as a whole. This point has been argued by historian John Lukacs in 1945: Year Zero.
Hoffmann (1955) had recollected Hitler’s visitations with a couple of prominent cardinals. He recalled that, “Cardinal Faulhaber appealed to Hitler [with regards to the anti-church book Bormann had published and distributed en masse] and was invited to lunch at Obersalzberg. In their ensuing conversation, the Archbishop of Munich petitioned Hitler to order the suppression of this very questionable work. His arguments convinced the Fuehrer, who at once ordered Bormann to destroy all copies” (p. 131). Hoffmann had gone on to indicate that “when relating the details of this interview to a few of us in his own intimate circle, [he] displayed a moderation towards Church affairs…” (p. 131).
Even though Hoffmann accounts for the fact that there was political expediency involved in Hitler’s leniency towards the churches early on—before the latter years of the war—he points out the fact that the churches had brought much of Hitler’s latent wrath upon themselves. First of all, Hoffmann had indicated that Hitler, the statesman, had “refused to ride rough-shod over the deep convictions of [the] people” (p. 131). For this would have amounted to Hitler’s being “no statesman,” and he had always believed that a good leader could never force people to follow him. Hitler had told Hoffmann, “A real leader of men… gains control of his people not by force, but by convincing them that he is right. Only against those who, notwithstanding public opinion, still oppose him to the detriment of the common cause, should he use force; and then he should, indeed, he must, be utterly ruthless” (p. 131). And, this is exactly what had happened to church dissidents— who had caused harm to the German cause during the war, at least in Hitler’s opinion—such as, Pastor Niemöller. And, needless to say, even Niemöller’s various accommodations were met, even though he remained in a concentration camp until the alleged “liberation.” So, Hitler’s “utter ruthlessness” is actually unqualified, because he was far less ruthless than he had imagined himself to be, as far as the treatment of all of these alleged “survivors” has shown. Furthermore, Hoffmann has accounted for the fact that Niemöller was offered release from the camp upon his promise to refrain from political tirades against Hitler’s government from the pulpit. He refused to sign and thus remained in the camp until the war was over (p. 133).
Hoffmann had also recollected Hitler’s preferential treatment of Abbot Schachleitner. The Abbot had visited Hitler quite often, and the two of them regularly discussed Church matters (p. 131). In fact, Hoffmann had stated, “When visiting the Rhenish monastery Maria Laach, Hitler had a long and animated discussion with the Abbot of that famous pilgrim center” (pp. 131-132). And, upon Hitler’s recommendation to Hoffmann to place his son in a convent school, Hoffmann had recollected this scenario:
This advice rather astonished me, for Hitler, of course, knew that I was a Protestant. But I took his advice, and he drove my son down to the convent in his new Mercedes and personally handed him over to the Mother Superior. ‘See that you make a decent man of him,’ he admonished her, on departing. And on the drive home he turned to me. ‘You should make a present of a really good picture to the convent,’ he said. When next I visited my son, I took with me a fine oil painting of the Holy Family, for the chapel, and it was accepted with great joy and gratitude (Hoffmann, p. 132).
As documented by Hamann (2005), in A Life at the Heart of Hitler’s Bayreuth, Hitler had also told little Verena Wagner not to leave her church—he told her that it would be best if she remained a Catholic. She asked him if he had left the Church. He answered, “No.” She asked, “But Wolf, I thought you were kicked out?” He answered, “No, I wasn’t. I am a Catholic.”
So, Hitler did care about his faith, as well as how others perceived his faith; or, perhaps he had retained some level of God-fearing, as perhaps even Himmler had. If Himmler was so gung-ho on attacking Christianity, then why did he insist upon retaining his Catholicism, even though he dabbled in Paganism? Indeed, his children had to say grace and attend mass. He went with them. Hitler had even casually joked about how Himmler worshipped Odin by week and Christ by weekend. Nevertheless, Himmler sustained an undeniable attachment to the Christian faith—either out of fear or respect. No one in the SS was allowed to insult the person or legacy of Jesus Christ either.
Hitler always held the churches and religious life in the highest esteem, even though he himself was not a church-goer. He also greatly admired many cardinals and pastors, but most of them had not returned the admiration. According to Hoffmann (1955), “Unfortunately, the Church did but little to try and bridge the ever-growing rift between itself and National Socialism.” Here, we can see that Hoffmann was being critical of the Church, and he was a devout Protestant, not a “pagan” or “Christ-hater.” He went on to say, “The attitude which Cardinal Innitzer recommended all Catholics to adopt towards National Socialism in Vienna in 1938 was observed, for the most part in theory only. Again and again from the pulpits came political exhortations, which had no result but to give Bormann a legitimate cause to intervene; and in consequence many a preacher found his way into the concentration camps. They were interned in this fashion only after they had been tried and condemned by a properly constituted court.” Hitler had even said, “I would release any priest,… provided he were willing to sign an undertaking not in future to interfere in politics, but to restrict himself to his spiritual duties. But this they refuse to do—a proof, to my mind, that they attach greater importance to political affairs than to things spiritual. If these gentlemen are determined to play the martyr—so be it” (p. 132)! In spite of all the contention between the Hitler government and the Churches, there was still “never any really tragic conflict between Church and State” (p. 133).
Hitler was also prone to the influence of prophecies, especially those of Nostradamus. He kept this fascination of his somewhat secret, possibly for fear of appearing ridiculous or superstitious to others. Nonetheless, he had one of his officials check out the various books by Nostradamus, “but on no account to say for whom he was getting them.” According to Hoffmann (1955), Hitler would comb the prophecies line-by-line interjecting himself or Germany into the projected scenarios (p. 136). He did not think that all of the prophecies had direct bearing on himself, but “he did feel that they constituted an inexplicable phenomenon; and in this connection, he quoted Hamlet: ‘There are more things in Heaven and earth…’ (p. 137).
Hitler’s Pro-Church Measures
Helmreich (1980) had stated, that on 4 February 1933, “a desecration or defamation of religious institutions was threatened with civil punishment; at the end of the month steps were taken in Prussia to abolish the 295 secular schools in which religion was not taught, and religion was again made a regular subject of instruction at vocational and continuation schools.” Furthermore, “Such measures were welcome to church people, who contrasted them with the decrees against religion in the schools enacted in the first revolutionary days of 1918. … The religious formula was again made part of the oath, and the phrase Gott mit Uns was restored to the official seal of Prussia. Laws and ordinances designed to safeguard Sundays were issued repeatedly.”
Helmreich had also stated, “In order to strengthen his cause in the March, 1933, election, Hitler had the idea of proposing that the government proclaim a day of prayer for ‘folk and fatherland.’ He asked Secretary Hans Heinrich Lammers, head of the Reich Chancellery, to consult with Minister of the Interior Wilhelm Frick about the proposal” (p. 129). This national prayer day had solely been Hitler’s conception; unfortunately, the pettiness of the churches stood in the way of Hitler’s prayer day becoming a reality for his people.
And, in a speech at Stuttgart, 16 February 1933, Hitler had confirmed his position in support of the Christian religion. He said, “Today Christians and no international atheists stand at the head of Germany. I speak not just of Christianity; no, I also pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity…. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit, not just theoretically. No, we want to burn out the rotten developments in literature [which the Nazi-Sozis literally did during the “notorious” public book-burning ceremony] in the theater, in the press—in short, burn out this poison which has entered into our whole life and culture during these past fourteen years” (pp. 128-129).
Hitler held fast to all of the precepts put forth in this speech, and to his convictions; to re-make German society into a flourishing and wholesome one. The Jewish-led Weimar years saw such cultural garbage as human trash masturbating on stage as a form of “entertainment”; Jewish-owned brothels encroaching all over the cities; homosexual sex-bars establishing themselves in the cities; and, increasing single-parent households throughout Germany. Hitler was able to eliminate and/or reverse nearly all of these trends of cultural depravity and sickness. As a matter of fact, German marriage rates and church membership increased dramatically during the Hitler years. So, the truth is that the Jewish-led Weimar government was far less Christian and family-oriented than was the Nazi-Sozi government; but, the Jews will never acknowledge or produce the statistics to prove this to be the case. They will always focus on the “anti-Christian” and “anti-church” proclivities of a few Nazis, such as Bormann and Rosenberg.
In 1933, Reverend Charles S. Macfarland, the general secretary of the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America, wrote:
The fact of the matter is Adolf Hitler is the conservative and restraining personal force in Germany today (in contrast to such leaders as Göring and Göbbels). One can discover many indications of that influence to some extent in his speeches, but still more in his counsels and guidance. And now, even if he may be charged with having laid hands on the church, it is quite possible that he may become its protector from his own original mistaken measures and more particularly those of his overzealous and somewhat delirious followers in the Church.
If the present ground is held, the Church may not only free itself from National Socialism, but also from the state and may do it largely with the help of Adolf Hitler (p. 149).
And, as a matter of fact, Hitler had indeed utterly refused to launch any campaigns against the Christian faith, or the churches. He had discussed this ongoing battle between himself, and various of his adjutants and Gauleiters, with Wagener, Ludecke, Hoffmann, Degrelle, Goebbels, and even Bormann. Hitler had actually come to the aid of the churches on numerous occasions. As an aside, Pastor Niemöller and 2, 500 other Evangelical pastors, had openly supported Hitler’s withdrawal from the Disarmament Conference and the League of Nations. The day after Niemöller had sent his letter of support to Hitler, some 20,000 German Christians gathered at the Sportspalast in Berlin to demonstrate their support for Hitler’s “manly deed” via plebiscite (p. 149).
Himmler’s Godly Schutzstaffel
On 15 September 1934, Himmler had ordered that all SS members refrain from “tactless behavior” and “interference” with regards to the religious services of any and all confessions. SS men were ordered to demonstrate the utmost respect for one another’s religious beliefs, and anyone in violation of this order was to be excluded from SS service. SS members had to read this directive every three months, as this became mandatory at SS roll calls. On 20 September 1935, Himmler “forbade all members of the SS to take any leadership part in any confessional organization, including even the German Faith Movement. If they did not want to resign their church offices, they would have to withdraw from the SS. On the other hand, they could continue to be ordinary members of any church, and he again enjoined all SS members to respect religious customs, statues, and pictures, on pain of being dismissed [emphasis added].” Interestingly enough, Himmler had gone so far as to actually forbid “… every attack on Christ as a person, as such attacks, or denunciation of Christ as a Jew, was unworthy of the SS…” (pp. 217-218). So, even though many of the Nazi-Sozis denounced the churches or members of the clergy, not one of them—not even Rosenberg or Bormann—had ever denounced the person or historical role of Jesus Christ, no matter their religious views. All of these measures were taken in an effort to separate church and state, and to “deconfessionalize” the Party, in order to make the Party and the SS a comfortable place for all Germans. Furthermore, it would probably be important to note that tens-of-thousands of Jews served in the SS and Wehrmacht, and had the Nazis endorsed particular confessions and faiths over others, it most certainly would have made Jewish soldiers feel quite unwelcome. Himmler was not at all de-Christianizing the SS—he simply did not want religion to interfere with the vital duties and tasks of the SS.
It is essentially along the same lines as an individual who joins the American military for the perks, and then decides to become a conscientious objector when it comes time to fight in a war. That is a complete and total cop-out and utter display of bigotry and cowardice. Himmler wanted to avoid those types of people for SS service, because they were worthless when it came time to get the job done. What’s more, is that Himmler had written to the mother of a prospective SS member, on 19 December 1942, “I will not tolerate in the SS a man who does not believe in God… What confession the individual belongs to, or if he designates himself as ‘God believing,’ is his own decision.” In December 1938, 51.4% of the SS were Protestant; 25.7% were Catholic; 22.7% were God believing; and 0.2% were Others (p. 219).
Other Proclamations
In closing, Hitler had made a profound speech, which was to be shared with bishops, but “treated confidentially” otherwise. He said:
Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith. From our point of view as representatives of the state, we need believing people. A dark cloud threatens from Poland. We have need of soldiers, believing soldiers. Believing soldiers are the most valuable ones. They give their all. Therefore we will maintain the confessional schools in order to train believing people through the schools, but this depends upon having truly believing teachers, not by chance Marxists who do not stand fully by their religious faith, as teachers (p. 241).
It might be worthy to cite the American youth and military of today as an example of what Hitler was referring to in this declaration. The modern American youth are a lost cause, and appear to have descended into an absolute depravity that is unprecedented in American history. I would go so far as to proclaim that the American youth culture of today is near rock bottom; that it cannot get much worse. Furthermore, this depravity and lack of character and culture, as well as faith, is really rearing its ugliness in Iraq. Our soldiers are raping and murdering Iraqis, and actually gang-banging in Baghdad; Himmler had his own men executed for such gross displays of misconduct. He addressed this very issue during his Posen Speech.
Moreover, a vast number of American soldiers are criminals, and were released from jail only after they had signed up for military service. That being said, it is no wonder America lost Vietnam, and is now losing in Iraq. The faith level and overall quality of the average American soldier is menial at best. Hitler was right when he had stated that a German soldier was worth about 10 enemy soldiers. Suffice it to say, that each Hezbollah soldier is worth about 20 Jewish soldiers. Not only do the Hezbollah fighters have a much more impressive and believable faith in their people and in themselves, but more importantly, they have a moral and ethical code that puts American and Jewish soldiers to absolute shame. This is what makes them appealing—it is there steadfast belief in their God, their culture, and their people. That tri-fold nationalism will prove to be impossible to defeat, especially in light of the fact that its enemy is a liberalized cesspool of godless and faithless American spoiled wussies, and whining, crybaby-wussy Jews.
Don’t get me wrong, a lot of good, solid and honorable Patton-style American soldiers still exist, but they are truly few and far between. The battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan is beginning to resemble the political wasteland of American parliamentary politics. Fatass, murderer Kennedy, slack-jawed Jew Lieberman, greedy “my hubby is a Jewish developer” Fartstein, and all the other self-serving pieces of absolute human waste need to be hurled out of office. They all reek… every last one of them.
Lastly, according to Helmreich (1980), “Hitler did not have a high opinion of the Nordic groups and never lent them his personal support” (p. 408). So, the idea that Hitler was a Nordic-pagan, or had based his Party’s religious ideologies on a Nordic-pagan precept, is completely unfounded.
References
Bormann, M. (2000). Hitler’s Table-Talk 1941-1944: His Private Conversations (Hugh Trevor-Roper, Ed.). (Norman Cameron & R.H. Stevens, Trans.). New York: Enigma Books. (Original work published 1953)
Eckart, D. (1999). Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin: A Dialogue Between Adolf Hitler and Me. (W. Pierce, Trans.). West Virginia: National Vanguard Books. (Original work published 1923)
Hamann, B. (2005). Winifred Wagner: A Life at the Heart of Hitler’s Bayreuth. London: Granta Publications.
Helmreich, E. (1980). The German Churches Under Hitler: Background, Struggle, and Epilogue. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. (Original work published 1979)
Hoffmann, H. (1955). Hitler Was My Friend. (Lt.-Col. R.H. Stevens, Trans.). London: Burke Publishing Company, Ltd.
Irving, D. (2002). Hitler’s War: Millennium Edition. London: Focal Point Publications.
Lang, J. V. (1981). The Secretary Martin Bormann: The Man Who Manipulated Hitler. (Claus Sibyll, Asst.). (Christa Armstrong & Peter White, Trans.). Ohio: Ohio University Press. (Original work published 1977)
Lukacs, J. (1998). The Hitler of History. New York: Vintage Books.
Lukacs, J. (1978). 1945: Year Zero. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc.
Steigmann-Gall, R. (2003). The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Wagener, O. (1985). Hitler—Memoirs of a Confidant (Henry Ashby Turner, Jr. Ed.). (Ruth Hein, Trans.). London: Yale University Press. (Original work published 1978)
|