Nazism a Worldview?

[TimV]

One thing, of course, the Fuehrer and all of us, I too, stood for: to remove politics from the Church in as far as possible. I did not consider it right - and that I should like to say quite openly - that one day the priest in the church should humbly concern himself with the spiritual welfare of his flock and then on the following day make a more or less belligerent speech in the Parliament.

This separation was planned by us - that is to say, the clergy were to concentrate on their own sphere and refrain from getting involved in political matters. Because we had in Germany political Parties with strong Church leanings, a considerable muddle had arisen, and that is the explanation of the fact that, because of this political opposition that originally played its role on the political level in the Parliament and in election campaigns, there arose in certain of our people an antagonistic attitude toward the Church.

I myself am not what you might call a church-goer, but I have gone now and then, and have always consciously belonged to the Church and have always had those functions over which the Church presides - marriage, christening, burial - carried out in my house by the Church.

My intention thereby was to show those weak-willed persons who, in the midst of this fight of opinions, did not know what they should do that, if the second man in the State goes to church, is married by the Church, has his child christened and confirmed by the Church, then they can do the same. From the number of letters which I received as a result, I can see that I did the right thing.

From Goering's IMT statement
Trials of German Major War Criminals: Volume 9

 

[Scott1]

As I thought about whether to respond to this post, it was not clear whether I disagreed more with the conclusion or the reasoning to get to it. Both are disheartening.

as I considered responding to this thread, I kept saying to myself, "remember, no one knows anything about Germany, remember, no one..."

What do you mean by this?

Tim is correct. Bonhoeffer was a "party member". He was sometimes refered to as the "party padre" . After his falling out with the leadership he became an anti-Hitler partisan, and ultimately a conspiritaor.

Are you really insinuating here that any evangelical Christian would not be "an anti-Hitler partisan?"

When someone would insert himself as the Head of the Church and restrict its members to Aryans would any biblical Christian not be "anti" and hopefully "partisan"?

Please keep in mind that there were many "nazi" christians.
I've already said I don't buy this or "fine Nazi Christians" any more than "fine atheist Christians."


just as there ar many "republican" or "democratic" christians. I know christians that are members of the green party & that are socialists. I also know a good many that are neo-cons!

Naziism around Hitler is not merely a political party. It was an entire world view with an aim toward consolidating races based on inferiority. It taught evolution. It taught a dialectical view of history.

Are you unaware of entire world view brain washing, taught in schools that went along with it?

There is no comparison to someone being merely biblically ignorant and registering as a party affiliation. None demand the rank idolatry, submission and world view of Hitler.

 

[TimV]

Scott you are speaking from emotion rather than cold facts

Are you really insinuating here that any evangelical Christian would not be "an anti-Hitler partisan?"

While Kevin may have mixed bios a bit, your opinion of what a Christian should or should believe is just that; your opinion. When I look at the huge central government the Republicans built up, the antiArab mentality that is just as racist as the nazi view of Jews, the preventive wars, etc...I can't see how a Christian could possibly vote Republican. Hardly any of my Reformed friends do. But that's just my emotions talking, and when I calm down, I remember that.

When someone would insert himself as the Head of the Church and restrict its members to Aryans would any biblical Christian not be "anti" and hopefully "partisan"?

Who are you talking about? Who was head of the church? I gave a summation above. Do you disagree with it? The Catholic Bishop and Bishop of the Reich (Muller, not Miller as I said) didn't have control over anyone who wanted to leave their organisations. The whole Confessing Church movement was about that. Himmler's mysticism was a joke to Hitler, Goering, Doenitz, Jodl, Kaltenbrunner and most of the others. To say Nazis were pagan mystics would be like saying Republicans are Jews who write pornographic novels because Scooter Libby did.

The Nazis were a political party.

 

[Kevin]

Scott, I think that you are utilizing a form of post hoc falacy. In this case it takes the form of historical provincialism.

Your assumption is that since all "right thinking" people abhore Nazism (as they understand it), then all "right thinking" people have always treated nazism/the nazi party, at every point in history the same way I would treat it (from my perspective in 2010). And that those people understood it (nazism/the nazi party) the same way as I do.

This is false.

I had a first- hand expirience with this in the late 80's when 20+ Romanian christians were enrolled in my Christian University immediately after the fall of Chachescu. I learned that the relationships of christians within totalitarian states to the ruling party were much more complex, and that they changed over time.

Much to my surprise. I learned that my views were one dimensional & idealistic.

Scott I am not going to begin debating this issue, because it very soon degenerates to the "Reducto ad Hitlerum". However I will point out that thousands of German christians were party members. Even the Dutch Reformed church (the succession NOT the state church) had 8,000+ Nazi party members!

The idea that every evangelical christian was NOT an anti-nazi partisan is proven by the fact that active anti- nazis never numbered more then a few thousand & the numer of evengelicals was many hundreds of times that.

peace,

---------- Post added at 02:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:04 PM ----------

sorry for the confussion I created by typing Bonhoeffer, when I meant Niemoller above...

one was a christian statesman & a martyr the other was not.

 

[TimV]

I figured something like that. Niemoller ran a Freikorps battalion during the chaos years and was an important part of the struggle to the top for the nazis. He was housed comfortably in Buchenwald, but wartime conditions in camps being what they were, one of his kids died of disease there, another was killed fighting the Russians and another wounded. He offered his services to the nazis, but they declined knowing his temperament. After the war he was converted to Soviet style socialism through his friendship to Karl Barth.

 

[Scott1]

Kevin
Your assumption is that since all "right thinking" people abhore Nazism (as they understand it), then all "right thinking" people have always treated nazism/the nazi party, at every point in history the same way I would treat it (from my perspective in 2010). And that those people understood it (nazism/the nazi party) the same way as I do.

This is false.

No.

The assumption is Naziism under Hitler was a world view, encompassing theology, economics, philosophy, education, etc. and that it was COMPLETELY antithetical to Christianity and a Christian world view, and all the major components of that.

Instead, your apparent logic is that it was merely a voter registration selection.

That's one place we differ.

We also, apparently, differ on whether a Christian would accept the infamous individual as head of "the church" rather than Christ Himself. That's exactly a trigger Mr. Bohnhoeffer led opposition on.

The derogatory, public statements the infamous individual made about our Lord are indefensible, as the movement centered on his person.

And to rationalize acceptance of that movement under any pretense of Christianity whatsoever is to only create a stumbling block and is, in itself, biblically perverse and detestable.

 

[LawrenceU]

It is interesting to 'hear' all this hashing out of what it was like under Nazi control in Germany, what the church was and was not doing, and so on . . . . from people who did not live there. I know and have known many Germans and Austrians who did live in the Third Reich. Some of them were Christians, others were not. Some became Christians after the war. I prefer their view of what took place in Germany. And, it is different from all of the views posted here. It would require a corpus of immense proportions to envelop all of what happened, why it happened, what it was like to live as a true disciple of Christ in that period of Germany's existence, etc. One of the best men I have met who seems to be able to amalgamate well what took place is Hilmar VonCampe. It would be wise to read his materials and hear what he has to say. We can learn much from men like him, and there are not many left. In a few years there will be none.

 

[Scott1]

Hilmar VonCampe. It would be wise to read his materials and hear what he has to say.

Are there any links to his writings?

 

[LawrenceU]

Hilmar VonCampe. It would be wise to read his materials and hear what he has to say.

Are there any links to his writings?

Politics, ethics, Communism, and Christianity discussions with Hilmar von Campe

He is a dear man. We will be hosting an lecture and open discussion with him in the very new future. If you are in the area it would be well worth your time. I'll post the details when they firm up.

 

[Scott1]

Politics, ethics, Communism, and Christianity discussions with Hilmar von Campe

From the foreward...

I lived the Nazi nightmare, and as the old saying goes, “A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument.” Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don’t want to see a repetition. The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part.

Only having perused this, it looks like a good book, taken for what it is- a first person account of someone who realized they were duped by this world view.

With theology (of God) at center of the book, here in the forward, I would say this supports a main point made earlier...

The assumption is Naziism under Hitler was a world view, encompassing theology, economics, philosophy, education, etc. and that it was COMPLETELY antithetical to Christianity and a Christian world view, and all the major components of that.

Responding to Kevin,

Instead, your apparent logic is that it was merely a voter registration selection.

That's one place we differ.

The tenor of this book seems that their propaganda is to accept a world view, including a theology that is COMPLETELY antithetical to Christianity and a Christian world view.

Part of the difficulty here is the effect of the nonsense propaganda.

But beyond that, its a superficial understanding of the implications of Scripture on all of life, and an assumption that a political affiliation centered on Nazism and the person of an infamous individual is merely an impliedly harmless voter registration selection.

That is simply not true by reason or on the merits, and it looks like this book and life story makes that case.

Thanks for posting the link.

 

[Edward]

A couple of useful links:

Nazi Memo on Leaving the Church

Robert Ley Speech (3 November 1936)

 

[Peairtach]

I think the fact that Christians (I make no comment on how many of them were true Christians; you can be a Christian without being a true Christian, which just means double-trouble for you) supported the Nazis shows

(a) The condition of the church in Germany at the time, it being riddled with higher criticism and liberalism, Germany being the heartland of the same.

(b) The (willful) ignorance of Germans about Hitler's true intentions regarding war and the Jews. Indeed the Nazis and Hitler himself didn't seem to have a specific "plan", but things unfolded. They hated the Jews and wanted lots of lebensraum, but how that was going to pan out was less certain.

(c) The ability of the Nazis to hoodwink the churches with promises of "cleaning up" Germany and bringing in traditional moral standards. The Nazis, ironically, were going to be the party of morality.

(d) The willingness of German Christians to ignore less savoury parts of the Nazi programme because they were more afraid of Communism and the left and admired the Nazis willingness to "clean things up" morally and culturally.

(e) It shows the willingness of Christians to despise and hate a minority enough that they don't care what happens to it - although in this case they may have been shocked to know the Jews were eventually being deliberately murdered.

(f) It shows the willingness of the Christians to support the radical or reactionary right because they are "associated" with traditional and authoritarian "Christian" values and morality, Western civilisation having developed from Christian roots, rather than the left, which are seen as wanting to get as far as possible, as quickly as possible from the Christian roots of the West.

 

[TimV]

(d) The willingness of German Christians to ignore less savoury parts of the Nazi programme because they were more afraid of Communism and the left and admired the Nazis willingness to "clean things up" morally and culturally.

This is a point made by many modern German historians. Jews and Communism were seen as one and the same thing. Whether it was right or not is a totally different subject. Perception at the time was that Communism was a Jewish movement. I could quote all day, but this from Winston Churchill in 1920 was typical of what western leaders thought about Communism from the Illustrated Sunday Herald on 8 February 1920:

"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new. From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany) and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders."

(e) It shows the willingness of Christians to despise and hate a minority enough that they don't care what happens to it - although in this case they may have been shocked to know the Jews were eventually being deliberately murdered.

We have that today here in the US with another Semitic people, and I could quote all day, but those who follow the Christian Zionist movement know what I'm talking about.