My understanding is that Hitler received more resistance from Catholics than the fragmented Protestants. Hitler also saw the Catholics as more serious opponents than he did the fragmented Protestants.
___
Martin Niemoller, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and their fellows would respectfully disagree. There was opposition from both Protestants and Catholics alike, with the Catholic Church standing in especially strong opposition to the regime's policy regarding euthanasia.
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum states the general position of both churches this way, and it's sadly not positive:
"The general tactic by the leadership of both Protestant and Catholic churches in Germany was caution with respect to protest and compromise with the Nazi state leadership where possible. There was criticism within both churches of Nazi racialized ideology and notions of "Aryanism," and movements emerged in both churches to defend church members who were considered "non-Aryan" under Nazi racial laws (e.g., Jews who had converted). Yet throughout this period there was virtually no public opposition to antisemitism or any readiness by church leaders to publicly oppose the regime on the issues of antisemitism and state-sanctioned violence against the Jews. There were individual Catholics and Protestants who spoke out on behalf of Jews, and small groups within both churches that became involved in rescue and resistance activities (for example, the White Rose and Herman Maas)."
"After 1945, the silence of the church leadership and the widespread complicity of "ordinary Christians" compelled leaders of both churches to address issues of guilt and complicity during the Holocaust—a process that continues internationally to this day."
It appears you're forgetting about fascist, almost entirely Catholic Italy, an Axis power, allied with Hitler.
FS My understanding is that Hitler received more resistance from Catholics than the fragmented Protestants. Hitler also saw the Catholics as more serious opponents than he did the fragmented Protestants. -- yes. In the south the Christian Democrat party opposed him.
But the problem for the Protestant churches in Germany stem historically from the 19th century in Prussia where the Prussian King who was a Calvinist ruling over largely Lutheran subjects forcibly united the two ("the Prussian union") -- now between C and L there are very serious differences, especially in the matter of the Holy Eucharist -- Lutherans believe that the Holy Eucharist has the True Presence of Christ, while Calvinists (depending on which Calvinists of course) don't quite agree with that
the net result was chaos and worse, government control that made the German unified Protestant churches into branches of the government
The net result was that religion was dictated by the government so the next step to "Aryan Christianity" was easy
To you, mass -- Martin Luther was a complex figure. you cannot call him a racist anti-Semite by any means -- what he was, was a guy who strongly believed in his powers of persuasion. he believed he could convert the Jews to his way of thinking (like he believed that he could convert Catholics) and he was angry when he failed.
THAT led to his strong, vile diatribes.
BUT, he had no issue with a Jew who converted -- to him a Jewish convert was a Christians.
I know it is belabouring a point, but it is a defining point -- the Nazis hated Jews for being born. Luther despised those who didn't come to his way of thinking -- but if they did, they were A-OK in his eyes. If you were a Jew and converted, in Luther's eyes, OK, in Hitler's, no dice....that's a big difference