Germany 500 Years after Martin Luther – What Happened?

(If you have ever wondered why God allows evil regimes are allowed to succeed, at least for a time, read Habakkuk 1:2-17 for the question why? (from a different time) and Habakkuk 2:4-20 for God’s answer)

In the 20th century, the nation that claimed the founder of the protestant Church in Europe became the home of one of the most unchristian states ever to exist. What could have caused an advanced, industrialized and, at least apparently, Christian nation to forsake all of the basic teachings of Jesus and to allow (or even support) a government that was the antithesis of its most basic beliefs? There is no easy answer to this question, but (I believe) there are some important lessons to be learned for us today.

One important consideration is that Martin Luther and the Luther Bible were extremely important to the creation of what became the German nation. In his book “Bonhoeffer” (a pastor in Germany whom we shall discuss more later), Eric Metaxas says, “ …the Luther Bible was to the German Language what Shakespeare and the King James Bible were to modern English”. Prior to this there was no unified German language and, after the publication of the Bible everyone read it and began to speak the language as written in it. Out of this grew a common heritage and culture. As a result it became difficult to separate religion from Germanism.
In the book “When a nation forgets God” Dr. Erwin Lutzer outlined 7 lessons to be learned from this era that are relevant to the United States today. As he points out, it is easy to overstate this, but there are some points here worth consideration.

1)When God is separated from government, judgment follows
2)It’s always the economy
3)That which is legal might also be evil
4)Propaganda can change a nation
5)Parents – not the state - are responsible for a child’s training
6)Ordinary heroes can make a difference
7)We must exalt the cross before the gathering darkness

Clearly, there are many differences between post World War I Germany and America today, but there are some important (and disturbing) similarities that are worth noting. Here we will look at some of these and, particularly, at the reaction of the Church in Nazi Germany.

The rise of Nazism is probably most attributable to the focus of the majority of the population on the economy. The defeat of Germany at the end of the first World War and the subsequent reparations forced by the treaty of Versailles, resulted in an enormous debt placed on Germany. This resulted in runaway inflation, unemployment and discontent. The weak government left in place (Weimar Republic) was ineffective in many ways. Just as things were beginning to improve, the Great Depression descended on Europe (as in America) and devastated the economy. The people wanted someone to fix the economy and to restore the pride of the German nation. This overriding concern for an economic revival created the conditions when the majority of people were willing to accept a loss of freedom so long as conditions would improve. Thus, after his election, Hitler was able to get the majority of parliament to amend the constitution giving him authority to make laws. Shortly thereafter, he decreed that the Nazi party would be the only one allowed.

Do you see any parallels today with this thinking?

It seems that economic concerns are certainly paramount today and that there is a strong desire for someone to “fix” it and to produce a solution to the problem.

Where were people (generally) not turning?

There was little attention to Biblical teaching to turning to God and his instruction on the management of what we have. It certainly appears that the focus was on the government to produce a solution.

Look at Job 2:4 What do you think?

The question here is an essential one – what will someone give up for his life (or prosperity)? There is no easy answer, but it is certainly asks an important question about priorities.(see also John 6:27)

It’s clear that Hitler and all of the leadership of the Nazi party were not Christians. While some, like Hitler and Goebbels (Propaganda Minister) remained nominally Roman Catholics, they only remained so for public relations reasons.

“It’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” - Adolf Hitler

If there were a unifying theme to their philosophy it would probably be Nietzschean or Darwinian in that they believed in a genetic superiority of certain (i.e. Germanic) peoples (“…of blood and soil”) and they also had a ruthless disregard for all those who were not of this ethnic heritage. They viewed other races as inferior, sub-human or, in the case of Jews and some others, not really human at all. They also viewed the sick (including the mentally handicapped) and weak as a burden on the state that should be eliminated (*see separate sheet on philosophy).
So how did Christians allow a leadership that was antithetical to the teachings of their religion? The answer appears to be that some agreed with them, some were strongly opposed and did so at great cost and the majority simply went along for a variety of reasons including the fact that they were confused or unprepared to take a strong stance if it meant opposing their own government or risking their own lives.

What does this say about their understanding of the Bible or commitment to Christianity?

It really appears that for many (but not all) Christians the commitment to their faith was less central than their concerns about the economic times and thus, a government that could (and did) improve economic conditions prior to the war was able to engage in activities that were racist and anti-Biblical. It may be that many did not have a clear or strong enough understanding of Biblical teaching to refute Nazi actions or were simply afraid to do so.

See Galations 3:28, Revelation 7:9-10 for examples of why (there are many others) the Nazi philosophy was completely incompatible with the teachings of the Bible.

One outspoken critic of the Nazis was a pastor named Dietrich Bonhoeffer who was committed to acting against all that Hitler and his party stood for from the beginning. Forty-eight hours after the election of Hitler he went on the radio and delivered a speech on, “the Younger Generation’s Altered Concept of Leadership”.

Here is an excerpt:
“Only when a man sees his office is the penultimate authority in the face of the ultimate, indescribable authority, in the face of the authority of God, has the real situation been reached. And before this authority the individual knows himself to be completely alone. The individual is responsible before God. And this solitude of man’s position before God, this subjection to the ultimate authority, is destroyed when the authority of the Leader or of the office is seen as the ultimate authority…”
The “Führer principle” literally meaning the Leader was the idea of almost a supreme leader and Bonhoeffer saw this as setting himself up as a god. This had been the subject of the radio address that was scheduled before the election of Hitler, but its message as to the true source of all authority is clear.
What positions did the Church take?
German Christians

A pro-Nazi group that became the religious arm of the Nazi party that sought to remove the “Jewish” influence on Christianity. They went so far as to change scripture removing much (or sometimes all) of the Old Testament. They also portrayed Jesus as hero of the “Aryan” people. They also declared the idea of grace “un-German.” They would become the nemesis of the churches that attempted to remain faithful to Christian teaching. (Ultimately, the goal of some in the Nazi party was to replace Christianity with a religion more like the ancient pagan beliefs with the swastika as its symbol replacing the cross and Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” taking the place of the Bible).

Confessing Church

“It must be made quite clear – terrifying though it is – that we are immediately faced with the decision: National Socialist or Christian…” – Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Once a schism between Christianity and Nazism (e.g. German Christians) was clear a number of churches (though only a minority) formed what was termed the Confessing Church. These churches maintained orthodox Christianity was impossible to reconcile with Nazi teachings. The essence of their stance was articulated in the Barmen Declaration (Bonhoeffer helped write this).

Some key points:

8.23 We reject the false doctrine, as though the State, over and beyond its special commission, should and could become the single and totalitarian order of human life, thus fulfilling the Church’s vocation as well.

8.24 We reject the false doctrine, as though the Church, over and beyond its special commission, should and could appropriate the characteristics, the tasks, and the dignity of the State, thus itself becoming an organ of the State.

8.26 The Church’s commission, upon which freedom is founded, consists of delivering the message of the free grace of God to all people in Christ’s stead, and therefore in the ministry of his own Word and work through sermon and sacrament.

8.27 We reject the false doctrine, as though the Church in human arrogance could place the Word and work of the Lord in the service of any arbitrarily chosen desires, purposes, and plans.

Critical events that occurred in the Church:

Aryan paragraph 1933 - as part of the Nazi policy of “synchronization” all government employees had to be of “Aryan” stock. If the German Church (essentially part of the state for a long time) agreed, all pastors that had a Jewish heritage were banned from the ministry (regardless of whether they were baptized Christians). This ignited an intense debate within the Church. The Confessing church was adamantly opposed to this as it violated the basic tenants of Christianity.

Pastor’s Oath 1938 – All pastors would be required to take the following oath: “I swear that I will be faithful and obedient to Adolph Hitler, the Führer of the German Reich and people, that I will conscientiously observe the laws and carry out the duties of my office, so help me God.”

What is wrong with this oath?

Pastors were told to swear an oath to a man (Hitler) and to the law – this would mean that they would have to divide their loyalty between God and man. This would be incompatible with Biblical teaching.

In response to these demands the majority of Churches and pastors simply went along. Indeed the synod of Churches decided each pastor/Church should make up their mind individually. This made it easy for the Gestapo (Nazi secret police) to identify those who opposed the Aryan paragraph and oath. Despite this, many pastors of the Confessing Church refused to take the oath. A number (800-1000) went to prison for refusing to submit.

Ordinary Heroes Can Make a Difference

Martin Niemoller – German pastor – initially tried to find common ground with the Nazis, but came to speak against them. He was arrested and imprisoned for eight years in a concentration camp (as a personal prisoner of Hitler).

(1934 sermon)
“…It is now springtime for the hopeful and expectant Christian Church – it is a testing time and God is giving Satan a free hand, so he may shake us up so that it may be seen what manner of men we are!...”

His famous writing after the war:

“First they came for the Socialists and I did not speak out – because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew. And then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

A leader in the Confessing Church – he would ultimately join a conspiracy that helped Jews escape Germany and attempted to kill Hitler. He would be imprisoned for three years and, ultimately, executed at Flossenbürg concentration camp in 1945.
A quote from his largest volume entitled “Ethics” can give us an overview of the conflict between the world and Christianity.

“In a world where success is the measure and justification of all things the figure of Him who was sentenced and crucified remains a stranger and is at best the object of pity. The world will allow itself to be subdued only by success. It is not ideas or opinions which decide, but deeds. Success alone justifies wrongs done… With frankness and off-handedness which no other earthly power could permit itself, history appeals in its own cause to the dictum that the end justifies the means… The figure of the Crucified invalidates all thought which takes success for its standard.”

In his communication to his family we see his resolution to follow through on what he believed God was calling him to do.

“My calling is quite clear to me. What God will make of it I do not know… I must follow the path. Perhaps it will not be such a long one (Phil 1:23). But it is a fine thing to have realized my calling… I believe its nobility will become plain to us only in coming times and events. If only we can hold out.”
See Matthew 10:16-22

A fitting summary to this period is given by Albert Einstein, himself a Jew forced to flee Europe.

“Being a lover of freedom, when the (Nazi) revolution came I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but no the universities took refuge in silence.

Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers, whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks.

I then addressed myself to the authors, to those who had passed themselves off as the intellectual guides of Germany, and among whom was frequently discussed the question of freedom and its place in modern life. They are, in turn, very dumb.

Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler’s campaign for suppressing the truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration for it because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly.”