Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Cross vs. the Swastika
Boundless ^ | 1/26/02 | Matt Kaufman

Posted on 01/26/2002 1:14:46 PM PST by Paul Ross

The Cross vs. the Swastika

Boundless: Kaufman on Campus 2001
 

The Cross vs. the Swastika
by Matt Kaufman

I vividly remember a high school conversation with a friend I’d known since we were eight. I’d pointed out that Hitler was essentially a pagan, not a Christian, but my friend absolutely refused to believe it. No matter how much evidence I presented, he kept insisting that Nazi Germany was an extension of Christianity, acting out its age-old vendetta against the Jews. Not that he spoke from any personal study of the subject; he just knew. He’d heard it so many times it’d become an article of faith — one of those things “everyone knows.”

Flash forward 25 years. A few weeks ago my last column (http://www.boundless.org/2001/regulars/kaufman/a0000528.html) refuted a number of familiar charges against Christianity, including the Christianity-created-Nazism shibboleth. Even though I only skimmed the subject, I thought the evidence I cited would’ve been hard to ignore; I quoted, for example, Hitler’s fond prediction that he would “destroy Christianity” and replace it with “a [pagan] religion rooted in nature and blood.” But sure enough, I still heard from people who couldn’t buy that.

Well, sometimes myths die hard. But this one took a hit in early January, at the hands of one Julie Seltzer Mandel, a Jewish law student at Rutgers whose grandmother survived internment at Auschwitz.

A couple of years ago Mandel read through 148 bound volumes of papers gathered by the American OSS (the World War II-era predecessor of the CIA) to build the case against Nazi leaders on trial at Nuremberg. Now she and some fellow students are publishing what they found in the journal Law and Religion(www.lawandreligion.com), which Mandel edits. The upshot: a ton of evidence that Hitler sought to wipe out Christianity just as surely as he sought to wipe out the Jews.

The first installment (the papers are being published in stages) includes a 108-page OSS outline, “The Persecution of the Christian Churches.” It’s not easy reading, but it’s an enlightening tale of how the Nazis — faced with a country where the overwhelming majority considered themselves Christians — built their power while plotting to undermine and eradicate the churches, and the people’s faith.

Before the Nazis came to power, the churches did hold some views that overlapped with the National Socialists — e.g., they opposed communism and resented the Versailles treaty that ended World War I by placing heavy burdens on defeated Germany. But, the OSS noted, the churches “could not be reconciled with the principle of racism, with a foreign policy of unlimited aggressive warfare, or with a domestic policy involving the complete subservience of Church to State.” Thus, “conflict was inevitable.”

From the start of the Nazi movement, “the destruction of Christianity was explicitly recognized as a purpose of the National Socialist movement,” said Baldur von Scvhirach, leader of the group that would come to be known as Hitler youth. But “explicitly” only within partly ranks: as the OSS stated, “considerations of expedience made it impossible” for the movement to make this public until it consolidated power.

So the Nazis lied to the churches, posing as a group with modest and agreeable goals like the restoration of social discipline in a country that was growing permissive. But as they gained power, they took advantage of the fact that many of the Protestant churches in the largest body (the German Evangelical Church) were government-financed and administered. This, the OSS reported, advanced the Nazi plan “to capture and use church organization for their own purposes” and “to secure the elimination of Christian influences in the German church by legal or quasi legal means.”

The Roman Catholic Church was another story; its administration came from Rome, not within German borders, and its relationship with the Nazis in the 1920s had been bitter. So Hitler lied again, offering a treaty pledging total freedom for the Catholic church, asking only that the church pledge loyalty to the civil government and emphasize citizens’ patriotic duties — principles which sounded a lot like what the church already promoted. Rome signed the treaty in 1933.

Only later, when Hitler assumed dictatorial powers, did his true policy toward both Catholics and Protestants become apparent. By 1937, Pope Pius XI denounced the Nazis for waging “a war of extermination” against the church, and dissidents like the Lutheran clergyman Martin Niemoller openly denounced state control of Protestant churches. The fiction of peaceful coexistence was rapidly fading: In the words of The New York Times (summarizing OSS conclusions), “Nazi street mobs, often in the company of the Gestapo, routinely stormed offices in Protestant and Catholic churches where clergymen were seen as lax in their support of the regime.”

The Nazis still paid enough attention to public perception to paint its church critics as traitors: the church “shall have not martyrs, but criminals,” an official said. But the campaign was increasingly unrestrained. Catholic priests found police snatching sermons out of their hands, often in mid-reading. Protestant churches issued a manifesto opposing Nazi practices, and in response 700 Protestant pastors were arrested. And so it went.

Not that Christians took this lying down; the OSS noted that despite this state terrorism, believers often acted with remarkable courage. The report tells, for example, of how massive public demonstrations protested the arrests of Lutheran pastors, and how individuals like pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer (hanged just days before the war ended) and Catholic lay official Josef Mueller joined German military intelligence because that group sought to undermine the Nazis from within.

There is, of course, plenty of room for legitimate criticism of church leaders and laymen alike for getting suckered early on, and for failing to put up enough of a fight later. Yet we should approach such judgments with due humility. As Vincent Carroll and David Shiflett write in their book Christianity on Trial (to repeat a quote used in my last column), “It is easy for those who do not live under a totalitarian regime to expect heroism from those who do, but it is an expectation that will often be disappointed. . . . it should be less surprising that the mass of Christians were silent than that some believed strongly enough to pay for their faith with their lives.”

At any rate, my point is hardly to defend every action (or inaction) on the part of German churches. In fact, I think their failures bring us valuable lessons, not least about the dangers of government involvement in — and thus power over — any churches.

But the notion that the church either gave birth to Hitler or walked hand-in-hand with him as a partner is, simply, slander. Hitler himself knew better. “One is either a Christian or a German,” he said. “You can’t be both.”

This is something to bear in mind when some folk on the left trot out their well-worn accusation that conservative Christians are “Nazis” or “fascists.” It’s also relevant to answering the charge made by the likes of liberal New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd: “History teaches that when religion is injected into politics — the Crusades, Henry VIII, Salem, Father Coughlin, Hitler, Kosovo — disaster follows.”

But it’s not Christianity that’s injected evil into the world. In fact, the worst massacres in history have been committed by atheists (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot) and virtual pagans (Hitler). Christians have amassed their share of sins over the past 2,000 years, but the great murderers have been the church’s enemies, especially in the past century. It’s long past time to set the historical record straight.


Copyright © 2002 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved. International copyright secured.
When Matt Kaufman isn’t writing his monthly BW column, he serves as associate editor of Citizen magazine.

The complete text of this article is available at http://www.boundless.org/2001/regulars/kaufman/a0000541.html


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 621-624 next last
Comment #501 Removed by Moderator

To: Ol' Sparky
Did you even bother to read the link I posted in #498 on thermodynamics and evolution?
502 posted on 02/03/2002 11:09:48 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
One of the most basic laws of science, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, states that things in nature always tend to dissolve and breakdown, not grow more complex as in evolution. Obviously this is most devastating to the theory of evolution, and desperate arguments about developing cells and organisms using the energy of the sun to overcome this tendency toward breakdown are irrelevant because developing cells would not have the ability of fully-developed organisms to capture and utilize such energy.
503 posted on 02/03/2002 11:19:21 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Are you going to answer my question or just ignore it?
504 posted on 02/03/2002 11:22:26 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Let's get you on record. Are you stating that Second Law doesn't apply to this planet?

Get on the record, Sparky? What planet are YOU on? I've BEEN "on the record" for the past 2 or three days. CAN'T YOU READ? How many times does it have to be restated for you? NO ONE IS CLAIMING THAT THE 2LoT DOES NOT APPLY to thermodynamic systems on Earth, except perhaps for the voices in your head. Got it?

The Second Law was primarily observed on the planet. And all you and your fellow evolutionists have is lame theories as to why the effects of the Second Law don't apply.

You're hearing voices again, Sparky; NO ONE EVER SAID ANYTHING LIKE THAT. NO ONES CLAIMS THE 2LoT DOES NOT APPLY.

Why do you persist in mischaracterizing what others write?

505 posted on 02/03/2002 11:24:36 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
[Your 503]

What an interesting opening statement! Shall I start all over, too?

506 posted on 02/03/2002 11:27:59 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
What did you think of my link! :)
507 posted on 02/03/2002 11:28:26 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
VOMIT ALERT!

VOMIT ALERT!

INCOMING!!!

Only idiots would try....... [snip; emphasis added to highlight Sparky's obnoxious juvenile argumentation tactics]

508 posted on 02/03/2002 11:29:43 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Funny, I used the same link earlier to show Asimov didn't side with Sparky, but failed to notice Ross on there. Good find! It doesn't matter, however. Sparky has reached gore3K levels of unresponsiveness, seeking only the illusion of answering.
509 posted on 02/03/2002 11:31:58 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Funny, I used the same link earlier to show Asimov didn't side with Sparky, but failed to notice Ross on there. Good find! It doesn't matter, however. Sparky has reached gore3K levels of unresponsiveness, seeking only the illusion of answering.

He may even surpass G3K at this rate! :)

510 posted on 02/03/2002 11:35:19 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
NO REAL FOSSIL EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION The fossil evidence confirms creation. In 1859 when Darwin published his Origin of Species, there had not been enough fossils discovered to decide the issue. Today, the evidence is in, and it shows life burst forth suddenly in completed forms. The so-called oldest sedimentary rocks, called Precambrian, while containing single cell microbial forms and micro-fossils, show no actual trace of evolutionary ancestors to the complex multicellular invertebrates that explode onto the scene to mark the "Cambrian" boundary. Archaeopteryx, the alleged reptile-bird transition is the most popular "transitional form" found in evolutionist oriented text books. But, Sir Fred Hoyle, the prominent British scientist, in his book Archaeopteryx the Primordial Bird, "a case of fossil forgery," says that someone took a small fossil, put cement on it, and pressed a modern feather into the cement to create a forgery. The person then sold it to the British Museum for 36,000 gold marks, a hefty sum in 1861. The missing links are simply, missing!
511 posted on 02/03/2002 11:37:49 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Click me!
512 posted on 02/03/2002 11:42:45 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Archaeopteryx, the alleged reptile-bird transition is the most popular "transitional form" found in evolutionist oriented text books. But, Sir Fred Hoyle, the prominent British scientist, in his book Archaeopteryx the Primordial Bird, "a case of fossil forgery," says that someone took a small fossil, put cement on it, and pressed a modern feather into the cement to create a forgery. The person then sold it to the British Museum for 36,000 gold marks, a hefty sum in 1861. The missing links are simply, missing!

Argument from forgery refuted

Dromaeosaurid Archeaopteryx

We've been over all this before and you have no answer but brazen repetition of the original lie.

513 posted on 02/03/2002 11:50:02 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Aw rats! You beat me to it! :)
514 posted on 02/03/2002 11:53:00 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
a description from the book 'auschwitz' by miklos nyiszli
(jewish doctor who was forced to work with mengele)

mengele saw a father and son in the camp who both walked with a limp.
he ordered them killed and the skeletons removed so that he could study the bones.
nyiszli had the bodies put in a vat of boiling water to make removing of the flesh easier.
when some of the starving workers came upon it they couldn't help themselves and in a frenzy were grabbing the meat and eating it. i believe the guards had to beat them away from it.
nyiszli didn't have the heart to tell them what it was.
he and his wife and daughter survived the camp.

now, any comments on 'witch burnings'?

515 posted on 02/03/2002 11:53:01 AM PST by rockfish59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Aw rats! You beat me to it! :)

When I say "before," I mean some number of replies ago on this very thread. Even with my memory, that makes it easy.

516 posted on 02/03/2002 11:57:23 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
What's really silly about posting that Archy-was-faked stuff is we have all kinds of feathered-dinos now, including feathers on Velociraptor. The picture is supported by a lot more than one fossil or even one fossil species.
517 posted on 02/03/2002 12:00:34 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Thanks for reposting my link, I hadn't realized it was broken.
518 posted on 02/03/2002 12:09:06 PM PST by Scully
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 490 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I am reminded by a colleague that you also reposted my link. Thank you! :)
519 posted on 02/03/2002 12:13:56 PM PST by Scully
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
What's really silly about posting that Archy-was-faked stuff is we have all kinds of feathered-dinos now, including feathers on Velociraptor. The picture is supported by a lot more than one fossil or even one fossil species.

Thats pretty cool! :) I noticed O'l Sparky hasn't commented on your links yet.

520 posted on 02/03/2002 12:32:33 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 621-624 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson