According to J. C. R. Wright, in Above Parties: The Political Attitudes of the German Protestant Church Leadership 1918-1933, 60 percent of Germany's population was Protestant at the time Hitler took power. As people raised in the Protestant tradition, their participation in the Hitler regime was not inconsequential. Wright adds, that Church leaders knew that there was "strong support for the NSDAP [Nazis] among their parishioners" (90).

Wright, concluded that about one fourth of those listed as Protestant were considered active members. The majority of the inactive members were from the working classes. So what of these three-fourths of the remaining Protestants who made up the inactive members? They apparently had lost hope in the church as an institution, but still clung to the values within the doctrine of Christian hope of abundant life to which the church had introduced them. In the troubled and confusing years from the end of World War I through the years of the Weimar Republic and the Third Reich, many of these anticipated a resurgence of that hope in the nationalistic claims asserted by Hitler.

As we pointed out in our Case Study about Nationalism, Martin Luther reasoned, "there is really no difference between laymen and priests, princes and bishops, 'spirituals' and 'temporals,' as they call them, except that of office and work, but not of 'estate'; for they are all of the same estate." (Works 69) This blending of sacred and secular provided the means for all persons to share in the fulfillment of God's will, not just the clergy. Luther says "the temporal power has become a member of the body of Christendom, and is of the 'spiritual estate,' though its work is of a temporal nature.

Therefore its work should extend freely and without hindrance to all the members of the whole body; it should punish and use force whenever guilt deserves or necessity demands, without regard to pope, bishops and priests" (Works 71). Based on these tenets of Luther, for the Nazis, it was acceptable for the state to define and correct the church, and from this, it can be derived that destruction of the Jews is the state's responsibility in their God-given authority as a means of correction and definition.

As German nationalism resurged under Hitler, the prophetic tradition understood by Luther clearly legitimized the movement in the eyes of the state and the interpretive claims of Luther became popular viewpoints of the state. This mandate thus defining the state obligation and right to foreordain the church's position within the law follows quickly into the scope of Nazism. At the beginning of the rise of Nazism, professor of canonica1law at the University of Strasbourg, Rudolph Sohm wrote: The state is the highest authority. It is so, that every other authority within the commonwealth may be subject to it. The church is no exception. The state exists that the church too shall be subject to it Equal authority of state and church contradicts both the essence of the church and state. . . .

By reason of its sovereignty the state has the right, and by its own initiative, without the consent of the church, to determine the latter's position within the law. The state decides whether the church is a public or private corporation. The power of the church, while ethically on equal terms with the state, is legally not equal with the latter, but subject under it. (qtd. in Schroeder 1467)

The emergence of the force of this theological reasoning reflects the capacity for the continuing authority and influence of the Nazi government in all areas of the society. No doubt such logic became familiar and routine. Martin Schroeder concludes, "In view of this generally accepted doctrine, it can be seen that the chancellor (Hitler) did nothing out of the ordinary when he applied the theologians' logic and made them [NJazi one and all" (1467). This line of thinking illustrates how German Protestant origins made a significant impact on how the people involved in forming the fledgling governments of the more unified Germany in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries would organize and understand themselves. As the church of the Reformation spread across the many and various princely realms of what would become Germany, the churches continually welcomed the civil administration already in place in each municipality. The church would take on the subservient role to the governing authorities.

Schroeder provides a fitting conclusion to this background of Protestant influence in the rise of Nazi culture: Facing the evidence, how can one feel that Chancellor Hitler, by raising his swastika upon the pole (maypole image) of Romans XIII (Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers), has added any revolutionary principle? Germany's dictator has received in this matter more credit than he either asks or deserves. What he has done is to gather loose threads blown to him over the ages and from many theological camps. These he has twisted into a solid rope which, round the church's neck, with a knot tied to it, is lodged securely in his hand. (Schroeder 1468)

But did the Protestant church perceive itself as having a rope tied round its neck? How did it welcome the Third Reich taking into account its precarious kinship to the body politic?

The Protestant groups discussed in P.2, welcomed the Fuehrer in hopes of fulfilling their particular agenda for the church. Nicholas Railton tells of the German Evangelical Alliance hopes for the new Reich Chancellor: On 20 August 1933, the paper (Allianzblatt) said the Protestant Church had another occasion to be thankful to the Reich Chancellor who had done his utmost to free the Church from its inner strife. He had freed it from the decay caused by parties', he had broken the 'chains of rationalism' which a past age had clamped on it. He had made it possible for the Church to return to its confessional foundation and, finally he had led the Church back again into the 'great national throng'. This had been a great service to the Church, for it was now in a position to win the masses for Christ. (Railton 101)

These were optimistic words in contrast to the despair experienced during the Weimar years. The churches could only see brighter days under the strong leadership of Hitler and the Nazis. Ludwig Mueller would become the first Reichsbishop of the newly "unified" church. Again, Railton:

Mueller is quoted as saying that Germany needed a strong Protestant Church capable of renewing the nation's moral senses and of keeping all 'poisonous, un-German' influences like materialism, Bolshevism, and 'undignified' pacifism away from the German body politic. These modern heresies had to be dealt with. Such a Reich Church, if that was all that was intended, would have been most acceptable to evangelicals. (Railton 97)

Fulfilling all these things, the Nazi regime was taking care of the church in its God-given role according to the Lutheran ideal. Railton relates another episode in which a "torch-lit procession" welcomed Mueller's rise to power in which the German Christians, the Free churches, the Salvation Anny and others were present. "Seig Heils" were shouted "in honor of Hindenburg, Hitler and Mueller." Speeches were made to 20,000 Protestants in support of the new government in the name of the "silent moral majority" (Railton 104-105).

Prominent Protestant theologians joined in welcoming Hitler to power for a variety of reasons, both personal and professional. Robert Ericksen provides the most revealing study of three theologians who endorsed Hitler and his policies. We learn how highly educated, scholastically gifted people were able to reconcile their Christian ideals with those of the Nazi leader. Paul Althaus, Emmanuel Hirsch, and Gerhard Kittel become examples of different ways theologians took part in the Third Reich.

Upon Hitler's ascendancy, Althaus proclaims: "Our Protestant churches have greeted the turning point of 1933 as a gift and miracle of God. . .. So we take the turning point of this year as grace from God's hand. He has saved us from the abyss and out of hopelessness. He has given us - or so we hope - a new day of life" (qtd in Ericksen 23-24). In these remarks we see immediately the connection of Hitler's rise to Christian hope. The pronoun "He" refers to God and not Hitler, suggesting that God is the one who has brought forth this change in German history and destiny. It assumes that God is at work through the political system of the German Volk in bringing Hitler to power.

Hitler's use of Providence resonates with these words of endorsement. Althaus advocated that Hitler's totalitarianism will provide a means for Germans to take "responsibility for the freedom, legitimacy, and justice of volkisch existence" (qtd. in Ericksen 24). This is in con1rast to what had been experienced in the Weimar years of democracy. For this the church "may express our thanks to God" (qtd. in Ericksen 24).

Emmanuel Hirsch, like Althaus, voiced his ascent to Hitler's prominence. He writes, "All of us who stand in the present moment of our Volk experience it as a sunrise of divine goodness after endless dark years of wrath and misery" (qtd. In Ericksen 26).

Hirsch joined the Nazi party and supported the SS, remaining a Nazi through the end of the war. Hirsch longed for a re-emergence of the German Volk as a prominent people.

Both Hirsch and Althaus, loved Germany but Hirsch spoke of "passionate" expressions of nationalism as a means to bring about "a German rebuilding" (Ericksen 27). Here, passionate expressions of what are perceived as good ideals easily led to passionately evil behaviors with a lack of awareness of the dangers inherent in these expressions.

Christian hope appears to be operating as a set of blinders, rather than an illuminating characteristic of what may lie ahead.

Kittel's connection with the Nazi take over focused more on his work as an New Testament scholar and his expertise in the study of Judaism. While Althaus and Hirsch wrote extensively about the racial issues of Christian thought and the Nazi program, Kittel's influence was most focused on anti-Semitic justifications.

Like Althaus, Hirsch, and Kittel, not all Americans who had problems with the totalitarian views of the Nazis were convinced that Hitler's takeover was a negative development. In the summer of 1933, Reformed Church Pastor E. G. Homrighausen, writing for the weekly journal The Christian Century. revealed great ambivalence about the detrimental effects of the Nazi regime on the German people. He gives several examples of the way young lives have become morally disciplined since Hitler took power. He cites the way Hitler squashed the communists. He even points to increased church attendance. This author concludes by wondering if he were in Germany, would he choose to be a Nazi himself. All this he shares in contrast to Karl Barth's criticism of the Nazi takeover (Homrighausen 1085-1087). Others, like Theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, were also ambivalent, but seemed to be more skeptical about the early intentions of the German Christians:

It is difficult for an outsider to arrive at fair judgments in all this confusion. The church conflict seems to me to be a clear case of honest Christians trying to save the church from political enthusiasts who want to subordinate the church completely to the state. Furthermore, the "German Christians" who are behind the [N]azi program are so impossible in their anti-Semitism that my sympathies are naturally with the more Lutheran church leaders. Yet I have mends whose judgment I trust who think that the people who are trying to keep the church free of politics are on the whole those who have made the church a reactionary institution in Germany, and that in the ranks of the "German Christians" are many young men who are honestly anxious to establish the church again in the life of labor. I cannot arrive at a conclusive judgment between these conflicting claims. No party has ever made promises quite so fervently or has been as fervently believed. ("Notes" 872)

This entry ends in a rather ominous tone as to the nature of the Nazi Party policies and the level of support perceived by those outside the German arena. A "wait and see" attitude was adopted by outsiders showing an unwillingness to rush to judgment. In the early months of 1933, articles in The Christian Century displayed a lack of comprehension that Hitler would actually be allowed to come to power. Each week, there was a new development that in the previous week seemed unlikely or impossible, yet it would all come to pass quite systematically. This may have contributed to the attitude of ''wait and see" ftom the outside. Within Germany, however, people were doing just the opposite. They were caught up in the fervor and hope of the new regime, even if it seemed heavy handed at times. In fact, heavy handedness seemed to be just what was needed after all the chaos. It was a time to celebrate, but not for long.

According to Zabel, the Reich Church was locked in a struggle in the closing months of 1933. There was dissent among the ranks. Radicals on the right pushed for the elimination of the Old Testament and a reworking of the New Testament Some continued to oppose the Aryanization of the church and questioned whether the church should be placed in a position to worship something other than God as contained in the Scriptures. The Confessing Church movement was established to counter the Aryanization and keep the church independent and focused on the more orthodox doctrines and values of the church. Parties remained active within the church. The goal of church unity would have to wait The Nazi government withdrew its support oftbe GDC as the main body, yet all groups remained loyal to Hitler, in varying ways (Zabel 34).

The commentary found in this editorial sums up the new relationship of the government to the church:

The government does not 'desire high church officials to pursue party politics' because it does not believe in party politics, in the state or in the church. There are no parties in Germany. The all-Nazi Reichstag assembled December 11. All other parties have been eliminmed. To have a Nazi party in the church would imply that the rest of the church constituted an anti-Nazi party, and that would never do. ("Change" 1595)

Under the Nazi party, any doctrine of Christian hope would be defined as absolute and fulfilled under one authority, there could be no dissent or it would call into question the single authority of the Fuehrer.

Mueller also had his hands full, and appeared to be saying two different things at once on several occasions. The Christian Century reports: "Reichsbishop Mueller says with one breath that the Bible and the creed will remain the foundation of the church, and with the next that 'with Hitler we will build a new German church,' and that those who obstruct the nazification of the church are 'criminals against the unity of the German nation" ("Spirit" 1523). And in a later editorial:

Reichsbishop Mueller is still facing both ways - on the one hand, restraining extremists like Hossenfelder and withdrawing support from them when it comes to a crisis and, on the other, delivering to the Protestant youth movement an ultimatum which demands that its members shall be under the instruction and direction of Nazi leaders two weekdays and two Sundays a month. (''Nazi Anti-Semitism" 1628)

This kind of double-speak would become the hallmark of much of what would come forth from the Third Reich. Mueller's desire to see the Protestant church emerge as the model for Christian unity is driven by a sense of greater fulfillment of Christian hope through passionate expression of Nazi ideals and values.

Over the next two years the conditions for the German Christians would deteriorate and Reichsbishop Mueller's position would be rendered powerless as new leadership was appointed directly from the Nazi party. Hans Kerrl would serve as the Minister of church Affairs (Bergen 17-18, Railton 108). Swiss theologian Karl Barth characterizes the changing situation this way: There were all those who still called the programme of the German-Christians - Christ and Hitler - basically good, and who only took offense at the robust methods and personalities of the German-Christians. especially those of the "Reibi". [reference to Riechsbishop Mueller] There were those who had understood the confessional declarations at Barmen and Dahlem [which defined the basis of the Confessing Church movement named for the cities where the declarations were made] about the sole validity of Holy Scripture and about the Church's freedom to govern itself, merely as the powerful words of a fine resolution which, however, could be shelved again on occasion, and who bad always understood the whole Confessing Church itself only as a "group' alongside which there might will be other "groups" without confession or with other confessions. There were those who still set their hopes on the supposedly "positive Christianity" of the National Socialist State, despite its long-established theoretical and practical paganism, or whose who were still afraid of the threat which also obviously stood behind Kerrl's programme. There were those who, as supposed Lutherans, had long been anxiously awaiting the moment which would bring them to an understanding with the authorities who, for them, were ordained of God. Or finally, there were those who did not credit their congregations or even themselves with the strength for further endurance. All these now fell into line, some hesitatingly, others with jaunty step, with Bishop Marahrens at their head, and became members of Church committees or were ready to work in co- operation with them. (Barth 49-50)

In this passage he rehearses the roles of certain people and groups that have taken part in the church struggle over the previous two years and the way in which many have given up the fight within the Confessing church. The church and its leaders have begun to look to its own sense of fulfillment of hope. Survival becomes the goal in an ever narrowing field of vision in the Nazi program.

 

Anti-Semitism

A month before Hermann Goering is credited with his infamous epitaph. "I would not wish to be a Jew in Germany," Stanley Lowell, writing in The Christian Century intones: "The Jew in Germany is in a bad way" (1191). Lowell writes as an observer in Nazi Vienna, Austria, attending a baptism service at the Church of England parish. The church is full to overflowing, but not with people one would normally expect at such a service. Most of those coming for the sacrament are Jews; Jews that are seeking a way out of the vortex of the Nazi tornado that is bent on obliterating them from the face of the earth. Baptism in the Christian faith becomes for them, the last best hope to flee the destruction gaining freedom to the British Empire, provided they get permission to leave the Third Reich. Lowell's images are quite moving in the ironies that are present in this desperate act. Lowell's readers were not yet aware of the coming cycle of terror for the Jews that would begin a month later with Kristallnacht and escalate to the ghettos, the resettlements, the death camps and the Holocaust.

In the years leading up to Kristallnacht, all the world was confronted with the rapid growth of the Nazi Empire and its anti-Jewish policies. The rector of the Church of England parish in Vienna responded to the situation the only way he understood by offering the sacrament as a way out for the Jews. How did the remaining Protestant churches under the Nazi sphere of influence respond to the totalitarian state and its policies of anti-Semitism? In the tradition of Martin Luther, the founder of German Protestantism, if they proclaimed, "Here I stand!" where were they standing?

The roots of anti-Semitism within the Protestant Church played a significant role in the unique way that Germans came to understand themselves during the years leading to Hitler's takeover allowing their anti-Semitic expressions after 1933 to emerge more freely. Because of the close relationship of the church and state, religious anti-Semitism grounded in the Protestant faith, blended easily with political expressions of anti-Semitism. Many attempted to differentiate between forms or degrees of anti-Semitism, but in doing so tragically discounted the effects of any and all anti-Semitic acts or ideology. Anti-Semitism. whether it was broadcast from a church pulpit or a stump on a campaign trail was born of the same parent. Nicholas Railton shows the easy connection between church and state expressions of anti-Semitism:

Apart from the political subservience and authoritarianism of German Protestantism, its anti-Semitism, rooted in part in the writings of Martin Luther and in part in its reading of various New Testament passages, had been a perennial feature of its character.

Anti-Semites were organized in a number of parties between 1887 and 1918-the German Reform Party, the German Social Party, the German Social Reform Party and, after 1907, the Economic Association-all of which were attempts to draw workers away from the labor movement (1914:2 million members) as well as from the Socialist party (1912: 34.8% of the vote making it the largest party in the Reichstag with 110 seats). The largest anti Semitic party in the Second Empire, the Christian Social Worker's Party, was founded in 1879 by the Lutheran minister at the imperial court, Adolf Stoecker (1835-1909). It was very conservative and monarchist, based on 'the Christian faith and love of King and Fatherland', and as such was at one time able to win 16 seats in the Reichstag. Like many conservative-minded Christians of that time, he resented and fought against what he perceived to be the economic dominance of Jews who he saw behind German capitalism. Equally, he railed against assimilated, areligious Jews who he blamed for the atheism and rationalism in society..... The psychology of hatred inculcated by Stoecker's and similar parties did much to destroy moral restraints, but nothing to end the economic and social enslavement of the laboring masses. (Railton 21)

This erosion of moral restraints is a key element that permitted Germans in all walks of life, including Protestant Christians, to participate in the persecution of the Jews during the Nazi period. The passionate creation of a greater and stronger German homeland, which most nations would find respectable when viewing their own patriotic pride. Was more easily achieved by sublimating a segment of the population through the use of images of divine guidance and hope. During the exhibition of the anti Jewish, "The Eternal Jew," in Munich in late 1937, a neighboring theater presented an event which included a staged production of Luther's Against the Jews and their Lies (Friedlander 253). This use of the father of the Reformation gave greater credibility to the Nazi program of Jewish hatred. The Nuremberg laws nearly parallels Luther's diatribe which also inspired the behaviors of those who perpetrated the events of Kristallnacht. These parallels will be explored at greater length later in this and the next chapter.

This use of Luther by the Nazis was not a fabrication on their part. Little imagination is required to present anti Semitism through the lens of Lutheranism. A tradition of harsh communitarianism concerned with establishing and protecting the well being of the state and the Christian community provided fertile ground for anti-Semitism.

It contains an apodictic case for penalty to those who do not conform. Martin Neimoeller, who later became a hero of the anti-Nazi resistance, ironically becomes the one to articulate this position. He grounds the argument in a sermon delivered on the tenth Sunday after Trinity, stating that the "gospel lesson of this Sunday throw a light upon the dark and sinister history of this people [the Jews] which can neither live nor die because it is under a curse which forbids it to do either" (qtd. in Davies 110).

Niemoller's basis for the statement includes the command to "love your enemies" along with the Cain and Abel story. Cain receives God's mark after having killed his brother.

The mark was the indication that no one was to kill Cain. Niemoeller concludes the argument by saying that, "we cannot change the fact that until the end of its days the Jewish people must go this way, being under the burden of God's mark and Jesus' decree, 'behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord!'" (qtd. In Davies, 110).

Niemoeller, who was the champion of the Confessing Church against the totalitarian Nazi government, is the person attributed as the author of the famous poem which entreats the reader not to stand by when others are persecuted.

"When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak up, because I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the social democrats, I did not speak up, because I was not a social democrat.When they came for the Jews, I did not speak up, because I was not a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me."

His behavior as a bystander appeared passive when he did nothing for those who were systematically taken by the Nazis as his famous quote might suggest; rather, his passivity was controlled by his anti-Semitic interpretation of his Lord's decree. His behavior as such, illustrates that there is no such thing as passive anti-racism.

Theologians took part in establishing a racial position aligned with Nazi policies, but based on widely held Protestant Christian theology in the German tradition. While Paul Althaus had the most moderate views on Jews and Judaism of the three theologians Ericksen examines, he could not escape the racist undertones of his endorsement of Hitler's plans and of the volkisch spirit he advocated. He tried to express his opinion with calling the Jews inherently evil, but that "[the Jewish influence] does involve the threat of a quite specific disintegrated and demoralizing urban spirituality, whose representative now is primarily the Jewish Volk" (qtd. in Ericksen 108). Only after the events of Kristallnacht, did Althaus begin to turn away from the Nazi program. He did not change his previously expressed views, -and he never spoke out about the plight of the Jews, but he could no longer endorse the Nazi party and Hitler's direction from then on.

Emmanuel Hirsch, in contrast to Althaus, maintained a strong anti-Semitic attitude throughout the Nazi era. Hirsch worked to discount the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament as not connected to Christianity and that Judaism was to be seen only as a religion in negative contrast to the positive value of Christianity. He systematically devalued all aspects of the Hebrew writings and of the practice of Judaism as being counterproductive to Christian experience and expression. Hirsch was one of the theologians who backed the German Christians in their support of the Aryan Paragraph in 1933. Also. He endorsed the Nazi policies that removed Jews from the wriversity (Ericksen 28-31).

Kittel was one who openly favored the policy of removing Jews nom positions of power. He changed his theological views to accommodate the current trend, when Nazi policy became law and Jews could be removed as a matter of public welfare. While he denied any connection or that he had changed his view, this points to a critical function of law as it relates to the relationships of different people in a society. When it becomes legal to exclude and oppress a segment of society, even educated people will oblige the law, especially when it feeds underlying prejudice regardless of one's spiritual value system. Oddly. Kittel expresses that this transition might be hurtful for those excluded and even troublesome for those who are doing the excluding, but nonetheless, for the German Volk. this must be done. It is to be done with the hope that Christian existence will be able to flourish without Jewish interference. Kittel continued to write for various Nazi anti-Semitic groups, one publication which comes very close to endorsing the killing program against Jews as a pre-emptive strategy (Ericksen 34-36).

The tendency toward achieving a greater sense of fulfillment of Christian hope on the part of the Protestant churches had deep implications for the Jews in Germany and the growing Empire. Protestant visions for fulfillment of hope were present from the beginning of the Nazi era. As the churches. bolstered by the teaching of pastors tutored by Nazi-inspired theologians, began to narrow their views of Christian hope to thoughts only like their own, they closed themselves off more and more to the suffering of the Jews. Some even intensified their anti-Semitism as a means to galvanize their place in the Third Reich as described by Friedlander:

When Pastor Umfried criticized the attack on the Jews of his town, no church authority supported him; when Jewish businesses were boycotted, no religious voice was heard; when Hitler launched his diatribe against the Jews, Bishop Berning did not respond. . .. Such total collapse is more than unusual. As the first months of 1933 went by, Hitler must have seen that he could count on the genuine support of church and university; whatever opposition may have existed, it would not be expressed as long as direct institutional interests and basic dogmatic tenets were not threatened. The concrete situation of the Jews was a litmus test of how far any genuine moral principle could be silenced; although the situation was to become more complex later on, during this early period the result of the test was clear (Friedlander 59-60).

Paul Hutchinson mentions how the images placed before the Germans identifying the role of the church in the Nazi regime are appealing to their sense of national pride and instruction. There is the perception that the church is finally doing something, ''making a Germany that seems to these hitherto religiously indifferent millions worth making"(Hutchinson 1301). Another editorial in The Christian Century dated Aug. 7, 1935, indicates that the Nazi attack on the Jews is easing up, but then concludes that while this is good news for the Jews it probably means that the churches will be the target of the regime's ire (''Nazi Intolerance" 1004). When the Nuremberg laws went into effect in 1935 without qualification the tensions between the German identity and the Protestant Church took on the role of protecting modem civilization. The absolute harshness of the Nuremberg Laws pervades into the legalism interpreted in the Bible. Together, these two perspectives allowed for social formation to defend exclusion of the Jews in the community as a result of the perception that Jews were a morally corrupting element.

The body of Nazi Nuremberg laws moved the general population and is "warmly welcomed" by Protestant Church leaders. The Gnadau Association's principles "accepted and welcomed the laws as being in accord with the Bible" (Railton, 182).

Church leader, Otto Dibelius states, "I have always known myself to be an anti-semite" (qtd. in Railton 181). Dibelius not only recognizes that he is an anti-Semite, he understands it fully as an acceptable way for a prominent chw-ch leader to express himself. It is engrained in who he is as a Protestant Christian, and he is who he is as defined by his hope. His conclusion that Jews are morally corrupting compels him to work toward eliminating Jews either by conversion, rejection, or extermination. In his passion to bring about a more effective church and bring all people into its saving grace which he viewed as a good goal of the Protestant church, he drifts into the evil practice of  characterizing all Jews as immoral, therefore galvanizing his view of the Nuremberg laws as a help toward the church's goal.

There is an episode concerning a memorandum [May-July, 1936] sent to Hitler by the Confessing Church denouncing Blood, Race, and Volkstum as a violation of the first Commandment; the sinfulness of humankind countered the glorification of the Aryan; and forced hatred of the Jew by Nazi anti-Semitism would be answered by Christ's command to love thy neighbor. Their "full Jew" lawyer, Friedrich Weissler, in charge of disseminating the Confessing Church's message outside Germany, leaked the memorandum. When backlash occurred as a result of the memorandum, Weissler was given up as the scapegoat. He later died at Sachsenhausen on Feb. 19, 1937 as "the first martyr of the Confessing Church." References to the memorandum that were made in the pulpits on August 23, 1936 downplayed these themes, stressing only the tribulations of the church (Friedlander 189-190; Gutteridge 158ff.). Theologian Karl Barth adds: "The Lutheran Regional Church had no worse worry in this matter than how to remove itself as far as possible from the Berlin leadership of the Confessing Church, which had been 'compromised' in this way" (62-63). One could argue that their motive for stressing the orthodox view of theology was in their own self-interest in fulfilling their hope while remaining viable within the Nazi state. Niemoeller, who was presented above as an example of how Lutheranism was tainted with anti-Semitism, has several more episodes in which one might question his own understanding of Christian hope in view of the Nazi movement. Railton points out:

Niemoller, who had voted ever since 1924 for the NSDAP, in an audience with Hitler on 25 January 1934, emphasized that the Emergency League was loyal to the Chancellor and stressed that its struggle for the maintenance of the Church's character was 'not directed against the Third Reich' but 'for the sake of this Reich'. Dietrich Bonhoffer, in a letter to his Swiss friend, Erwin Sutz, called Niemoller one of those 'naive people and dreamers who still believe they are the true National Socialists'. It was not forgotten that Niemoller had welcomed the new government in 1933. Years later, on 7 September 1939, Niemoller asked to be let our of his concentration camp so that he could serve his country by returning to his old job as a U-boat commander (Railton 78-79).

While these are not flattering in light of the way Niemoeller has been celebrated as one of the founders of the Conf~ Church, one begins to see the way in which pressures in the Nazi regime along with the ingrained notions of anti-Semitism. affect the choices, behavior and attitudes of groups and individuals as it relates to fulfilling Christian hope.

The Ecumenical Conference held in Oxford, England, in July 1937 provided the setting for an expression of fulfillment of hope based on wholehearted support of the Nazi regime. Bishop Otto Melle of the German Methodist Church and Paul Schmidt of the Baptist Church represented the Evangelical Alliance at the conference. While there, they expressed their assurance to the gathering that under Nazi control the churches were tree to proclaim the gospel as they pleased (Railton 34-35). Barth reflects differently on the incident concluding that the free churches took "this opportunity of stabbing the Confessing Church in the back." He is highly critical of them and suggests that the gospel that they proclaim freely is not free from the state, that is, what they freely preach is the party line (Barth 68-69).

Stanley Lowell's experience in Vienna is concluded with a statement of the ironic reality of the Jews. As some I 00 or more Jews made their way toward the baptismal font that day, "One intelligent woman remarked with no trace of levity, 'All the waters of the Danube couldn't wash the Jew off these faces!'" (1191).

As the Nazis consolidated their power, motifs of Christian hope were utilized in propaganda to relay the Nazi message and ideals more effectively. The familiarity of Christian hope and the passionate nature of expression provided a ready-made framework within which to work. Leni Riefenstahl's film, Triumph of the Will. serves as one of the first and foremost examples exploiting this common theme. The film portrays the events at the Nazi party rally at Nuremberg in 1934. Film was a relatively new medium of communication and talking films even more so. The world was becoming more enamored with the motion picture as a means of entertainment and of gathering information.

Within the making of a documentary style film, like Triumph. there are three aspects of expression inherent in the project. First, there is the event which is being filmed. While much of the event was staged for the purpose of filming, the event itself left a strong and favorable impression on the million people who attended including the impression of being part of documenting the event on film. Second, the event is filmed and edited. Here Riefenstahl's talents flourished. She and her editing team had to decide what was important to include for its maximum effect on the viewer. In spite of the staged aspect of the event, she still had to capture the spontaneous and genuine expression of the people responding to Hitler's and the Nazi's achievements. Third, is the finished film itself, portraying the original event as it was later shown across Germany and Europe. Here the viewers, who were not present at the event, were transported to the event and experienced it as the Nazi Party wished them to see and hear it. Each aspect of expression was orchestrated for the most effective use of the technology that film had to offer at that time in its early history. The film was also infused with a strong element of hope for the rising Nazi empire as threads of Christian hope were woven throughout.

The film's purpose was to show the advances that the Nazi Party had made in the months that followed their takeover of Germany in 1933. Images are presented with more power than any of the speeches made during the rally. Within this presentation of images is a strong appeal to the historic representation of Christian hope in the Protestant tradition. Significant images and motifs are utilized to trigger inspiration within the viewer, based on deep spiritual values formulated over generations of German Christian expression. The close connection of church and state throughout Germany's history allows for easy transference of religious and national loyalties expressed in the film.

The film begins in Gothic lettering, expressing a theme of Christian hope related to death and resurrection. The death of Germany through the troubles of the war and the suffering of the reparations of Versailles gives way to the resurrection of Germany through the triumph of the will of the Nazi Party and their leader, Adolf Hitler. This death and resurrection motif resonates with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The comparison of Adolf Hitler, as the one who possessed the will to bring about this new creation, with Jesus Christ, who was willing to sacrifice himself for the salvation of humanity, is instantly made clear in these opening credits. Hitler also utilized the idea that he was giving of himself as the Fuehrer for the good of the people as a part of his understanding of the Fuehrerprinzip. For the Christian mind, death and resurrection is the strongest of beliefs, because it is ultimately what brings hope in a world that is often dominated by death. For Riefenstahl to appeal to this particular theme so early in the film indicates the importance that Christian hope played for her and those in the party who assisted in editing.

This theme continues as the screen goes dark for a moment and then opens up to an image of flying through a panoramic sky off luffy white clouds on a beautiful day. It is an image of peacefulness and anticipation. One gets the impression of eventually descending through the clouds, and as the clouds break, there below, is the tranquil village and countryside around Nuremberg, complete with church spires reaching up toward you.

Protestant Christian hope is expressed through the anticipation of the return of Jesus Christ at a time set aside by God for a final judgment of humanity. In Mark 13 :26 we hear Jesus say to his disciples, "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory." The account of the ascension of Jesus after his resurrection in Acts of the Apostles explains that "as they (the disciples) were watching, he (Jesus) was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight" (1 :9).

As the story continues, two angelic men address the disciples as they are gazing toward heaven and say to them, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking up toward heaven?

This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven" (1: 11). The assumption is that Jesus will return in a cloud.

This image is further affirmed in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 as Paul writes to the church members there about death and resurrection. He assures them: [F]or the Lord (Jesus) himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel's call and with the sound of God's trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord forever."

So the image of the descent through the clouds in Triumph of the Will carries with it a great deal of meaning for those who have been instructed in the tradition of Protestant Christian hope. In addition, as the airplane passes over the town, the camera captures the shadow of the plane going down the main thoroughfare of Nuremberg. The shape of the shadow forms a moving cross, the chief symbol of Christian salvation and hope. Bolstered by these vivid apocalyptic images from the Bible, the viewer nurtured in the Protestant church can easily make the connection that a savior is coming from the heavens to bring salvation and fulfill their hope. The relatively new technologies of film and flight combine to bring to view the biblical image of the return of Christ in a realistic way never seen before.

As the film progresses there are idyllic characterizations of the architecture of the town, including several of the churches with their spires and symbols. There is a balance between viewing the old Gothic architecture and the massive new structures being built as a sign of revival and recovery. As the town is being made ready for the welcoming of the "savior" and his "triumphal entry" the churches are included in local vistas provided on the film. As Hitler enters the town in the triumphal parade, the expressions on the gathered crowds indicates that they are looking to Hitler as a Messiah come to restore new life to their embattled past. Crowds gather outside Hitler's hotel chanting, "We want our Fuehrer, we want our Fuehrer," recalling the times when crowds gathered and clamored to see Jesus on several occasions (John 6:2, 15,24; Matthew 4:24.25; Luke 5:17-26; Mark 11:1-11).

As the masses gather at the review fields for the rally, everything points heavenward. Flags, towers, arms are all raised in the familiar salute. Even in the midst of such a large gathering, the focus always returns to the one man for whom the film is made. As night falls, shafts of light reach into the night sky creating a cathedral of light, while light also used to focus on Hitler as the new light of Germany. In one shot during the parade, Hitler's raised hand glows above him as it is bathed in a shaft of sunlight. Hitler remarks that "the German people are happy in the knowledge that the constantly changing leadership has now been replaced by a fixed pole." This also stimulates the historic relationship between church and state and the desire for a sole authority to which they can look for guidance. In his closing speech, Hitler states, "The Party (Nazi) will for all time come to represent the elite of the political leadership of the German people. It will be unchangeable in its doctrine, hard as steel in its organizational tactics, supple and adaptable; in its entity however, it will be like a Holy Order." This allusion to doctrine and the Holy Order appeals to the religious sense of the people and their fulfillment of hope.

 

Bibliography and Works Cited

For updates click homepage here