Nazis Against Christianity

More evidence, not based on Wikipedia or recent scholarly disinformation but from contemporaneous sources, that Nazism was not conservative, not Christian, not anti-Atheist: This should not even be in question, given the Nazis’ widespread demonization of Jews, Freemasons, and Christians. But it is, due to decades of leftist (Nazi and Communist) smears of Christianity having been accepted and propagated by pro-Communist and anti-Christian media.

Christianity is perfect anti-Nazism and the Nazis knew it. Members of the Hitler Youth were forbidden to join church organizations and membership in the Hitler Youth was more or less compulsory. Hitler Youth meetings were deliberately scheduled to coincide with Sunday church services. Hitler Youth were taught to be rebellious against their parents, contemptuous of religion and to use crude and offensive language. Lowenstein in 1941 wrote that in the Hitler Youth the neo-pagan cult began to fill the gap which was the result of a conscious erosion of Christianity.

The Nazis even forbade parents to give their children Christian names and ordered babies instead to be given names like Dietrich, Otto or Siegfried. The teaching of Christianity by parents in the home was forbidden. Churches were not allowed to collect funds for charitable work. The Nazis transferred Catholic clergy to Protestant areas and Protestant clergy to Catholic areas. Nazis smeared excrement on church altars and church doors, desecrated shrines, and threw statutes of saints into dung piles; and when synagogues were not available to attack and loot, churches were the target with Nazis yelling: “Down with Christians and Jews!” In many places, historic church feast days and holidays were banned and even the display of religious flags and banners was outlawed; often Nazis cordoned off areas necessary for church pilgrimages and offered free beer and sausages for secular events that deliberately coincided with church festivals. [link]

Read the whole thing.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Advertisements

6 responses to “Nazis Against Christianity

  1. “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
    Mein Kampf

    My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice…. And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people…. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.

    -Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922

    We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.

    -Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933

    You lose.

  2. Read the whole thing. It requires more than a few populist speeches and cherry-picked fragments from Hitler to prove what he and the Nazis really believed.

  3. And yet you attempt to do just that. Hitler and the Nazis were not Atheists, and there is a good chance they thought they were Christians. You still lose, son.

  4. Why don’t you try reading the rest of Mein Kampf, since you think it such a good source of truthful and unbiased information?

    From Mein Kampf, Vol 2 Chap 5:

    Christianity was not content with erecting an altar of its own. It had first to destroy the pagan altars. It was only in virtue of this passionate intolerance that an apodictic faith could grow up. And intolerance is an indispensable condition for the growth of such a faith.

    It may be objected here that in these phenomena which we find throughout the history of the world we have to recognize mostly a specifically Jewish mode of thought and that such fanaticism and intolerance are typical symptoms of Jewish mentality. That may be a thousandfold true; and it is a fact deeply to be regretted. The appearance of intolerance and fanaticism in the history of mankind may be deeply regrettable, and it may be looked upon as foreign to human nature, but the fact does not change conditions as they exist today. The men who wish to liberate our German nation from the conditions in which it now exists cannot cudgel their brains with thinking how excellent it would be if this or that had never arisen. They must strive to find ways and means of abolishing what actually exists. A philosophy of life which is inspired by an infernal spirit of intolerance can only be set aside by a doctrine that is advanced in an equally ardent spirit and fought for with as determined a will and which is itself a new idea, pure and absolutely true.
    Each one of us today may regret the fact that the advent of Christianity was the first occasion on which spiritual terror was introduced into the much freer ancient world, but the fact cannot be denied that ever since then the world is pervaded and dominated by this kind of coercion and that violence is broken only by violence and terror by terror. Only then can a new regime be created by means of constructive work. Political parties are prone to enter compromises; but a philosophy never does this. A political party is inclined to adjust its teachings with a view to meeting those of its opponents, but a philosophy proclaims its own infallibility.

    From Mein Kampf, vol 1 chap 10, displaying dislike of Christianity and admiration of Islam, but refusing to do anything about Christianity now because of tactical concerns.

    How widespread the general disunity was growing is shown by an examination of religious conditions before the War. Here, too, a unified and effective philosophical conviction had long since been lost in large sections of the nation. In this the members officially breaking away from the churches play a less important role than those who are completely indifferent. While both denominations maintain missions in Asia and Africa in order to win new followers for their doctrine-an activity which can boast but very modest success compared to the advance of the Mohammedan faith in particular right here in Europe they lose millions and millions of inward adherents who either are alien to all religious life or simply go their own ways. The consequences, particularly from the moral point of view, are not favorable.

    Also noteworthy is the increasingly violent struggle against the dogmatic foundations of the various churches without which in this human world the practical existence of a religious faith is not conceivable. The great masses of people do not consist of philosophers; precisely for the masses, faith is often the sole foundation of a moral attitude. The various substitutes have not proved so successful from the standpoint of results that they could be regarded as a useful replacement for previous religious creeds. But if religious doctrine and faith are really to embrace the broad masses, the unconditional authority of the content of this faith is the foundation of all efficacy. What the current mores, without which assuredly hundreds of thousands of well-bred people would live sensibly and reasonably but millions of others would not, are for general living, state principles are for the state, and dogmas for the current religion. Only through them is the wavering and infinitely interpretable, purely intellectual idea delimited and brought into a form without which it could never become faith. Otherwise the idea would never pass beyond a metaphysical conception; in short, a philosophical opinion. The attack against dogmas as such, therefore, strongly resembles the struggle against the general legal foundations of a state, and, as the latter would end in a total anarchy of the state, the former would end in a worthless religious nihilism.

    For the political man, the value of a religion must be estimated less by its deficiencies than by the virtue of a visibly better substitute. As long as this appears to be lacking, what is present can be demolished only by fools or criminals.

  5. Why don’t you not put words in my mouth? I didn’t say Mein Kampf was truthful or accurate in factual terms. Although, it’s no surprise you would slander me with that after your initial article, which is long on assertions and short on facts.

    The first passage quoted is admiring Christianity for the claimed strong line it took with Judaism; in the second, he is talking about the established churches of Germany. And frankly, the rather clumsy attempt at equating Muslims with Hitler is rather disgusting; but, again, I can’t say that I’m surprised by the bigotry.

  6. mek1980, not everybody who proclaims themselves a Christian is one, especially when that person is a politician. The proof is in the behavior.

    By the way, you come on like a pitbull and then you accuse Wolf of slandering you for directing you towards a couple of passages from Mein Kampf. A little hypocritical don’t you think?