Part 17 (1/2)

A decree, which initially did not seem so dangerous, actually resulted from the desire to isolate the Jews from other Dutchmen in order to exterminate them more easily. It was the regulation to place a notice ”Forbidden to Jews”

on public gardens, public baths and cinemas. At the beginning of 1942 it was ordered that such a notice must be placed on all public buildings. The Churches refused to obey this order:

”It is absolutely forbidden to place the notice on any church building or on premises used by the Church. On a building with Christian purposes the notice in question cannot be permitted as a matter of principle, because it would be a denial of the Gospel.”

In some church buildings concerts were held, which required placing the notice.

But the advice of the leaders of the Church was, that in such cases the concerts must be cancelled. The advice to sports clubs which were compelled to display the notice was: ”For reasons of principle there is no other way but to stop the activities”. [293]

Many ministers of religion were fined or imprisoned because of their refusal to display this notice. <127>

b. Ma.s.s Deportation

Ma.s.s deportations of Jews began in June, 1942. The Jews were a.s.sembled in Westerbork camp; trains to the extermination camps in Poland left every week.

The last large-scale deportations were in the spring and summer of 1943.

In January, 1941, there were 160,000 Jews in the Netherlands, of whom 138,000 were Dutch citizens, and 22,000 foreign Jews. At least 104,000 of them were murdered.

After the systematic rounding up of Jews had started in Amsterdam, the representative of the Remonstrant Fraternity proposed to the Council of Churches, to turn the ”New Church”, in the centre of Amsterdam, into a house of refuge for persecuted Jews, and that attired in their robes of office the ministers of the different Churches should occupy the entrances of the church and stand or fall with the Jews in the church.

The proposal was not accepted. The majority of the Council believed that it would be a sublime but useless gesture which might well cause a bloodbath and at the very least an acceleration of deportations. [294]

The Council decided, however, to send a telegram of protest to Seyss-Inquart, to General Christiansen, and to the two German General-Commissioners Rauter and Schmidt.

The telegram read as follows:

”Dismayed by the measures that have been taken against the Jews in the Netherlands by excluding them from partic.i.p.ation in the normal life of the community, the undersigned Churches have now learnt, with horror, of the new measures whereby men, women and children, as well as whole families, are being deported to Germany or countries now subservient to it.

The suffering which this brings to tens of thousands, the recognition that these measures offend the deepest moral sense of the Dutch people, the opposition to G.o.d's laws of justice and mercy, all this forces us to address to you the most urgent plea not to implement these measures.

Moreover, as far as Christians of Jewish origin are concerned this plea is strengthened by the fact that they have been debarred by this decree from partic.i.p.ation in the life of the church.” [295] <128>

Thereupon the Germans offered a concession. They declared their readiness not to deport Christians of Jewish origin. On the other hand, they made it clear that the sending of the telegram of protest had better not be made public during church services. This was accepted by the General Synod of the DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH.

The Synod considered that ”among decent people one party does not publish any doc.u.ment if the other party objects”.

Another important argument was the fear that all that had been gained in favour of the Christians of Jewish origin might be lost. [296]

None of the other Protestant Churches followed the example of the DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH, nor did the Catholic Bishops. [297] The Germans took their revenge: all Roman Catholics of Jewish origin (amongst whom was the philosopher Edith Stein) were deported, on July 26, 1942, and perished, while most of the Protestants of Jewish origin survived. On September 24, 1942, Rauter wrote to Himmler:

”... Since my last report the Catholics among the Christian Jews have been deported because the five Bishops, with Archbishop de Jong of Utrecht at their head, did not abide by our original agreements.

The Protestant Jews are still here, and attempts to break through the united front presented by the Catholic and Protestant Churches have indeed been successful.

Archbishop de Jong declared at a Conference of Bishops that he would never again form a united front with the Calvinists and other Protestants.

The storm of protest raised by the Churches when the evacuation began has thus been greatly undermined and has now subsided...” [298] <129>

Rev. H.C. Touw, the historian of the resistance of the DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH, asked the questions:

”Did the Synod take the right decision? Or did it succ.u.mb to a satanic temptation? Was it unfaithful to its Lord in order to save the lives of its own members?” [299]

The question of choosing between ”quiet diplomacy” and public protest now seems to be easy: negotiations with the devil are senseless. We should not forget, however, that Church leaders who issued a public protest not only took considerable personal risks, but also took upon themselves the responsibility for endangering the freedom and life of others.

Noteworthy is the opinion of a group of Christians of Jewish origin who addressed themselves to the Synod of the DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH:

”Be a.s.sured that - if the proclamation of the Word of G.o.d (concerning the persecution of Jews) needs to be more clearly emphasized at this time - those among us who truly belong to the Lord are willing to be deported to Poland, confidently trusting in the lord.” [300]

In the summer of 1942, regular contact was established between Protestants in Holland and Dr. Visser 't Hooft, general secretary of the World Council of Churches, Geneva. Couriers brought copies of protests of the Churches (and much other information) in microfilm to Geneva, Dr. Visser 't Hooft sent the microfilms to the Dutch Government in London.

The Churches expressed themselves again in a protest which was sent to Seyss-Inquart on February 17, 1943, and which was read from the pulpits in all the churches.

We quote from this protest the following:

”The Churches would be culpable if they failed to point out to the authorities the sins they committed in the execution of their authority, and if they failed to warn them of G.o.d's judgment. The Churches have already drawn your attention to the increasing lawlessness, the persecution unto death of Jewish compatriots... <130> But it is also the duty of the Churches to preach this Word of G.o.d: 'We ought to obey G.o.d rather than men'. This commandment is the touchstone in all conflicts of conscience, also in those that arise out of the recently taken steps. Because of G.o.d's justice, no one may partic.i.p.ate in unjust actions since thereby he would become equally guilty of injustice.” [301]

It was important that this protest was read out in all the local churches for it frequently happened that Dutch police agents were ordered to arrest Jews and others. The Churches thus warned the faithful that ”no one may partic.i.p.ate in unjust actions”. [302]

c. The ”privileged categories”; the ”other G.o.d”