Theologians Under Hitler

Vital Visions is a project put together by a small band of southerners fighting to stem the rising tide of nationalism in the U.S.  One of the most interesting resources they have put together is an hour-long video "Theologians Under Hitler: Why Religion and Politics Matter".  Three important Protestant professors of theology -- Gerhard Kittel, Emanuel Hirsch, and Paul Althaus -- supported Hitler during the years of the Third Reich. Their scholarship and Christian devotion is unquestioned, yet their political choices set them solidly on the wrong side of history.

This workshop can be structured in several different ways ranging from an evening event to a three-day workshop in a retreat setting.  You can contact the Vital Visions staff to discuss an appropriate format for your organization.

The goal of Vital Visions is to reach evangelical churches, but I doubt that many of them would like to see the movie. Suggesting that they compare themselves with the exuberant Christians who backed Hitler will only make them angry. Although I think that the parallels between Germany in the 30s and the US today are chilling, nothing is particularly unusual about religion being used to promote nationalism. As Jared Diamond pointed out in Guns, Germs and Steel, religion was invented to convince young men to be suicidal in the defense of those with most of the money and all of the power. Although some of us like to think that in the U.S. we have separated church and state, I am sad to say that the truth is otherwise. As long as I can remember, churches in this country have joined in the celebration of military holidays: 4th of July, Veteran's Day, Memorial Day. We provide chaplains for the armed forces. Our clergy offer prayers at political events. We send our sons and daughters off to war with the blessing of the church.

Even though I deplore the use of religion in promoting patriotism, I don't think that the parallels between religion in Nazi Germany and Christianism in the U.S. are as clear as they seemed at my first viewing of the video. Germany was a fairly homogeneous society in 1933. America in 2005 is incredibly diverse. Germany had had only a brief experience of democracy when Hitler rose to power. We have been governing ourselves for over two centuries. The Christianists are dangerous, and people of faith must expose and oppose them, but I don't think that comparing them to the exuberant Christians of Nazi Germany will help.

Comments

[Growing Pains]

I think you've missed the point here. The "liberal Christians" have become so diluted with warm fuzzies and the "conservative Christians" have become so sidetracked with meaningless issues that the "Church" no longer knows what it belives in! When you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything. THAT'S what happened in Nazi Germany. It is a convicting lesson for both "sides" of the Christian church. It should make us all "angry." The Church must wake up and realize (hopefully sooner than later) that we have some work to do if we want to change the world in a positive way!

[Dale]

Growing Pains wrote this: "When you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything. THAT'S what happened in Nazi Germany."

Maybe you missed the point as well. There was, and still is, in Germany, a highly educated theological tradition. They BELIEVE deeply. They had the "values" and they had their volkskirche.

Similarly, the conclusion drawn by Jim:
"Germany was a fairly homogeneous society in 1933. America in 2005 is incredibly diverse. Germany had had only a brief experience of democracy when Hitler rose to power. We have been governing ourselves for over two centuries. The Christianists are dangerous, and people of faith must expose and oppose them, but I don't think that comparing them to the exuberant Christians of Nazi Germany will help."

Also misses the point, in fact, almost gives a demonstration of how easy it was for the German intelligensia to justify their particpation and support of the Nazi regime; they had all their sphisticated reasons how what they were doing was "best in the long run". Making all these fine sociological comparisons and then stipulating how "we're not susceptible to that anymore" only increases the chances that we ARE indeed. I find that the breadth of support for Bush and thus the Iraq debacle is a minurature version of the same kind of national/cultural blindness.