Part 37 (1/2)

I received two replies to my circular letter; the first is from Dr. Andrzej Wantula, Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

I quote the following from his letter:

”During the war, our Church was liquidated by the Germans and the majority of the pastors imprisoned, the remainder working in a newly founded German Church. Our Church, therefore, could not carry out any activities.

Individual pastors privately have helped the Jews. I myself, in my former parish, have tried to relieve the position of the Jews and partly succeeded in this. These, however, are individual cases, which are outside the scope of your interest.”

The second reply came from the Executive of the small ”Polish-Catholic Church”. [610] I quote the following:

”Our Polish-Catholic Church was exposed to many persecutions, under the National-Socialist domination during the second World War. However, we protested many times, against the persecution of the Jews, also publicly whenever this was possible.

In addition to material help, we provided the persecuted Jews with baptismal certificates, enabling them to obtain ration cards and ident.i.ty cards. In this way they were protected from further persecution.

We cannot, unfortunately, send you any proofs, e.g. doc.u.ments, letters or photostats concerning our activities, as all the material was destroyed during the war.”

It is difficult for me to believe that the Polish-Catholic Church has ”protested many times and publicly”, if one is to understand that these protests were made in writing, and officially sent to the German authorities.

But perhaps pastors of this Church expressed their protest in their sermons, and if this is so, it was at least something, especially in Poland.

<285> The activities and att.i.tude of the head of the Greek-Catholic Church in Galicia, the Metropolitan Andrew Shept.i.tsky, whose Church is united with Rome, is outside the scope of our subject and is thus not related here. [611]

e. Finland

Finland refused to give up her 2,000 Jews. ”We are an honest people,”

declared Witting, the Finnish Foreign Minister. ”We would much rather die with the Jews than give them up.” [612]

I received the following reply to my circular letter:

”...Finland was never actually occupied by the German army, with the exception of the Northern region...

Finland remained a sovereign country and it was, as far as I know, the only country within the German sphere of influence where Jews were protected against German claims. It seems to be very difficult to ascertain whether the Church had any direct involvement in this.

It must remain, therefore, more or less an academic question, since nothing actually happened, in spite of the hesitation of the Government during some critical days.” [613]

f. Italy

There are hardly any non-Roman Catholic Churches in Italy. Best-known is the Waldensian Church. The Waldenses themselves have been severely persecuted throughout the centuries. The right of free wors.h.i.+p was granted to them by the Const.i.tution of 1848. This ”pre-Reformation Protestant Community” has 25,000 members.

Official declarations against anti-Semitism of such a small minority Church could hardly expected, though the majority of the Waldenses had been strongly anti-fascist. [614]

<286> g. Russia

The Orthodox Church was the established Church in Russia, until 1917. Under the Communist regime many Church leaders were imprisoned or murdered; many church buildings were closed, some turned into museums. The Const.i.tution of 1936 allows the Church freedom of wors.h.i.+p, but not of propaganda. Printing of Bibles was not permitted. Anti-religious propaganda, however, was systematically carried out. In the wake of the German invasion (June, 1941), the Patriarch of Moscow declared himself loyal to the Russian cause and to the Soviet government. Anti-religious measures were relaxed to some degree.

As far as we know, no public declaration against anti-Semitism was issued by the Orthodox Church, nor by any of the smaller Christian communities in Russia. [615] It is estimated that 1,500,000 Jews perished in the n.a.z.i- occupied part of Russia.

37 IN CONCLUSION

I have tried to give the answers to some questions related to our subject, but there remain many unanswered questions. It is beyond the scope of this investigation, to a.n.a.lyse the influence of Luther's att.i.tude towards the Jews upon the German Protestants. Suffice it to say, that many anti-Semites quoted from Luther's brochure ”Concerning the Jews and their Lies” (1542), and not from his earlier: ”Jesus was born a Jew”. (1523) The anti-Jewish sermons of St. Chrysostom, preached at Constantinople at about the turn of the 4th century, are well-known. We have not investigated as to how far these sermons had an influence upon the Eastern Churches in our time.

<287> Another question: What exactly was the influence of the Lutheran conception of the ”two dominions” through which G.o.d rules this world (the spiritual one, or the Church, and the secular one, or the ”worldly authorities”) on the att.i.tude of the Lutheran Churches towards the persecuted Jews? Why did the Lutheran Churches in Denmark, Norway, Slovakia and Sweden denounce anti- Semitism whilst the record of the Lutheran Churches in America is poor in this respect?

The people, according to Luther, have not the right to resist the authorities; only princes have. Was there a notable difference between the Lutheran Churches and the Churches of Calvinist origin regarding their att.i.tude towards the ”unG.o.dly government” of Hitler in the 20th century, just as such a difference is said to have existed in the 16th century?

What about possible differences between continental and Anglo-Saxon Protestants regarding their theological conception of the Jews, between Protestant Churches in the West and Orthodox Churches in Eastern Europe, between non-Roman Catholic Churches and the Church of Rome?

How far did the conception of St. Paul about the people of Israel, as expounded in Romans 9-11, encourage the Churches to stand up for the Jews, or how far did the opinion that the Church has ”replaced” Israel as the people of the Covenant, prevent Churches from taking action?

We have hardly touched on practical questions such as the dilemma of whether ”to speak or to save” (”reden oder retten”).

It would be easy to make up a much longer list of unanswered questions, but it is difficult to establish facts even though they happened in our lifetime, and it is even more difficult to interpret them correctly. I can only hope that the doc.u.mentation provided by this book will stimulate others to further study and investigation.

I hope that I have succeeded to some extent in showing how complicated the situation was, and how careful we ought to be if we try to answer the question, how far Christian leaders and Churches fulfilled or failed to fulfil, the commandment which they profess to consider divine: ”Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself”. <288> However, I do not suggest that to understand all is to pardon all. To me, Dr. Visser 't Hooft's conclusion seems to be well-balanced:

”We may conclude this section by pointing out that while many Christians failed in their duty to resist in word and deed the inhuman racialism of National Socialism, there were a not inconsiderable number of Church leaders and simple Church members who rendered a clear witness to the reality of the Christian faith.

The Christians who were involved in the struggle know better than anyone how often the Churches and they themselves failed to do what ought have to be done.

Thus the Churches in Germany spoke not only for themselves, but for others who had been in a similar situation when after the war they confessed publicly their sense of guilt in this respect.” [616]