User:Yt95/Roman Catholic Church in Nazi Germany

Some notes for a proposed article(s) with the emphasis on the church in Germnay rather than a Vatican centred article

The role and influence of the Roman Catholic Church in Germany is a frequent topic of discussion in works that deal with the rise of the Nazis and the Holocaust. In part this is due to the moral authority of Church not only in Germany but in the wider world in which the Nazi regime emerged. The initial widespread hostility of the German Church towards National Socialism was subject to significant changes through the signing of the Concordat between Nazi Germany and the Holy See in early 1933. The subject was and still remains controversial and is noted for its polarised opinions.

Rise of the Nazi Party
The Weimar constitution had ended all traces of Bismark's restrictive 1870's laws relating to the Roman Catholic Church in Germany and it had since prospered. By the end of the 1920's the Catholic Church in Germany had twenty-million members served by twenty-thousand priests. This compares with forty-million protestants and their sixteen-thousand pastors. Many Catholic lay societies existed with substantial memberships. Karl Bachem in 1931 described the situation in 1931 “Never yet has a Catholic country possessed such a developed system of all conceivable Catholic associations as today's Catholic Germany.” Roman Catholicism in Germany was also marked by a vibrant and flourishing intellectual life with a strong daily press with noted political representation through the Centre Party (a mainstay of the Weimar Republic). Though there was “impressive cohesiveness and unity” in defending the rights of the Church against Bismarck this was much less marked in socio-politico-economic spheres. During the period of the Kulturkampf over 80% of German Roman Catholics voted for the Centre party but this was to drop to around 60% as some Catholics switched supported left wing parties and others were drawn towards more nationalistic parties that had grown in response to the Treaty of Versailles. Roman Catholic's only formed a small part of the Hitler movement in the 1920's but many more, including some priests, were attracted by 1930 by the strong anti-communist, anti-liberalism and anti-pacifistic policies of the Nazis. Up until the time of the German Church hierarchy making statements regarding Nazi policies their comments were restricted to cautions about exercising restraint in public speeches by priests. In February 1924 Cardinal Faulhaber drew a distinction between Hitler, who understood that the rise of the German nation required Christianity, and his underlings who didn't. This theme, an essentially good Fuhrer but bad associates, would at times resurface after the Nazi's took power. On a number of occasions during his rise to power Hitler had denied any intention of religious warfare and this is thought to have been in part due to his avoidance of antagonising the predominately Roman Catholic population of Bavaria. In the wake of the economic collapse of 1929 the Nazi party made significant gains in the elections of September 1930 but it's increasing share of the vote was smallest in predominately Catholic areas in which Catholic parties share of the votes had actually increased. Alfred Rosenberg's book, “The Myth of the Twentieth Century”, was also published in 1930 which interpreted the Nazis “positive Christianity” in a way that called for the eradication of the “Jewish” Old Testament and the cleansing of the New Testament along with a calls for a German Church that was rooted in blood, race and soil, rather than dogma or denominations.

German Roman Catholic hierarchy and Nazism
In 1930 the vicar General of Mainze in responding to an inquiry asserted that Roman Catholics couldn't be members of the Nazi Party, specifically that Article 24  of the Nazi program was incompatible with Catholic doctrine and it “was a great error to demand that the Christian creed be made to conform with the ethical and moral sense of the Germanic race.” and that the Nazi concept of “positive Christianity”, with ideas of a German God and National Church, were opposed to Roman Catholicism. He was attacked in the Nazi press and defended by Bishop Hugo. In contrast Bishop Schreiber indicated the opposite, Roman Catholics were not forbidden to join the Nazi party. Cardinal Bertram in December 1930 unsuccessfully sought to produce a joint statement by the Bishops that would settle the matter so individual diocese published their own guidelines. In January 1931 Cardinal Bertram (who would later ask, and be denied, the Popes permission to join the Nazi Party in 1932 ) issued a public statement that condemned the glorification of the Nordic race and the attacks on divine revelation. In February 1931 the Bavarian Bishops Conference under the leadership of Cardinal Faulhaber issued instructions regarding Nazism. The Bishops refrained from passing judgement on National Socialism but warned against it “as long and insofar as it adheres to a religious and cultural program which is irreconcilable with Catholic teaching.” Roman Catholic were forbidden to have any part in the Nazi movement and prohibited at church services their formations and display of flags. Reception of sacraments by Roman Catholic Nazis would be decided on an individual basis depending on whether the person was only a “fellow traveller” or an active member. Bishops in the Cologne district issued a more limited statement in March 1931 which expressed regret that the warnings by Cardinal Bertram and the bishops of Bavaria had not been responded to positively by the Nazis but passed no comment on the issue of party membership The Bishops of the Paderborn diocese ruled that membership of the party  impermissible in the same month, emphasising that their motivation in doing so was religious and not political The bishops of Upper Rhenish in March also opposed the anti-Catholic views of the Nazis and forbade Roman Catholics to “acknowledge their adherence to them by word or deed.” In August 1931 an annual  Bishops Conference was held at Fulda, usually attended by the Prussian bishops and those from Upper Rhenish. The conference considered a proposal that condemned Nazism as being in opposition to Christianity and the Catholic Church, but since in doing so it also equated Nazis with Communists, Socialists and freethinkers it could not obtain a consensus. Guenter Lewy paints a portrait of the conference bishops, with the exception of Bishop Preysing, as being politically naïve, elderly, suspicious of liberalism and democracy, with many still being convinced monarchists. Cardinal Faulhaber had in 1920 objected to the Weimar constitution that “granted the same rights to truth and error” through the legal recognition of all religions and Bishop Galen had objected on the grounds that it had omitted mention of God. The bishops may also have been concerned at the number of Catholics now aligned with right-wing parties thus putting pressure on them to be more accommodating. The conference voted to issue an ambiguous statement that mentioned radicalism, communism and socialism and the need to use faith and not partisan politics to fight them. As bishops had also tied to their warnings about Nazism in the past affirmations about love of fatherland and suchlike the Nazis, on seeing that the Church was not united against them, and exploiting the bishops fears of left-wing politics, continued to push the line that only their success could protect Christianity from Marxism. When the bishops issued patriotic sentiments the Nazis publicised them as tacit support for themselves but omitted the bishops warnings about the dangers of extreme nationalism and the need to recognise the good traits of other nations. Similarly when the Nazis wished to depict political Catholicism as being under the rule of the Vatican they pushed to the fore the anti-chauvinistic passages issued by the bishops. Father Notges in an semi-official report on Nazism recalled to the reader that the condemnation of bishops relating to Nazism was conditional: only so long and relating to those particular principles opposed to Catholicism. By July 1932 all dioceses had banned membership of the Nazi Party. Lewy is of the opinion that the bishops guidance on nationalism would not have been a deterrent to those Catholics who wished to join the Nazi party.

Roman Catholic lay organisations
According to Guenter Lewy The Kulturkampf of the 1870's had engendered a “national inferiority complex” in German Catholicism. Bismarck had attacked the Catholic Church in Germany as being ruled by Rome and in league with surrounding Catholic countries such as Austria and Poland. In reaction to these charges, Catholics had tended to respond with exaggerated expressions of patriotism to prove their loyalty. After the success of the Nazis in the elections of 1930 representatives of all the significant Catholic groups met to discuss how they should oppose and respond to the growth of the Nazi party. Many of the policies they proposed were similar to the Nazis and whilst they sought to condemn Nazism as fascism, and an enemy of the Catholic Church, they did so with policies that have been described as “attempting to exorcise the devil with the help of Beelzebub.” The highly regarded Jesuit Friedrich Muckermann, who was later to be become a fierce opponent of the Nazis, counselled that Catholics should try to influence the National Socialist movement so that its positive core could be developed.

Political Catholicism and the Center Party
Between 1918-1933 the chancellorship was held by members of the CatholicCentre Party in eight out of a total of fourteen possible occasions. Monsignor Kass was elected to the chairmanship of the Centre Party in December 1928 and was regarded as conservative with a leaning towards authoritarianism. With the appointment of Bruning in 1929 as leader of the parliamentary party the Centre Party was now orientated towards the right and with a diminished commitment to the republic and the constitution. Many other clerics rose to positions of authority under Kass's chairmanship tending to place the emphasis on religious (the rights of the Catholic Church) rather than political issues such as the preservation of democracy and law and order. The breakdown of the coalition between the Centre Party, Social Democrats and the Peoples Party further reduced the commitment to parliamentary government. Bruning's nationalistic foreign policies formed part of a general strategy within Catholic groups of overcoming Nazism by taking and absorbing some of their policies considered to be acceptable. It did not have the desired result in bringing back to the Centre Party the estranged Catholic vote. Whereas the Nazis obtained 37.4% of the vote in the July 1932 Reichstag elections, doubling their representation, the Center and Bavarian Peoples Party only slightly increased their share of the vote, representing less than half of the total Catholic vote of 13 million. Lewy (1964) estimates the number of Catholics voting for the Nazis in this election as perhaps having exceeded 2 million. Catholic bishops had continued to encourage their laity to vote for the Centre Party. During the July 1932 election campaigns they commended to their flock voting for candidates of suitable character who would protect confessional schools, Christianity and the Catholic Church. Increasing number of voices were being raised in the wake of July election results for the bishops to drop their opposition to National Socialism as many Catholics were members of the party and caught in a crisis of conscience that might only be resolved by leaving the Church. At the bishops conference in Fulda held shortly after the July 1932 elections the bishops passed a resolution that that found it “inexcusable that many join the party pretending to want to support only the economic and other secular aims of the party.” but left it to the decision of the clergy if in a particular case it may indeed be excusable so long as cultural aims or propaganda were not indulged in. Acceptable excuses were ignorance, mass psychosis, coercion or to prevent a greater evil. Before the July election President Hindenburg had removed Bruning in May 1932 and replaced him with the “ultra-conservative” Franz von Papen of the Centre Party, marking the last possibility of achieving a parliamentary majority. Annoyed at the dismissal of Bruning, and hoping to rein in the Nazis, the Centre Party began negotiating, unsuccessfully, with the Nazi Party with the view of forming a coalition government. This caused confusion amongst the Catholic laity who had difficulty reconciling what the bishops had previously taught about Nazism and the current negotiations which seemed to undermine them. The editor of Der Gerade Weg wrote:
 * We are convinced that Hitler represents the incarnation of evil. It is for us a most shocking experience that...at a time when Hitler and his fellow leaders of the party in their statements about the assassins of Beuthen make an unequivocal confession in the principles of wickedness, the leaders of the [Catholic] Christian Bavarian Peoples Party and the [Catholic] Center [Party] sit down to negotiate with him and his comrades and even dare to call them suitable “guardians of right.”

Catholic clergy also shared in this disappointment and now observed increasing numbers of Nazis in uniform attend church services. A priest who had been an early member of the Nazis and who had previously agreed to submit for censorship his Nazi writings now published regardless a pamphlet praising Hitler and the Nazis as instruments of divine providence. Archbishop Grober (who was later to join the Nazi SS as a “promotive member” ) informed his clergy that the time was now right for the Church to take a more conciliatory approach towards National socialism.

Nazi Regime and the concordat
see main article Reichskonkordat

As the disintegration of the Weimar gathered pace the democratic spirit was on the wane  in Germany with little prospect of finding a coalition force in the political sphere that could save the republic. Rampant unemployment added to a mood of desperation. In the elections of November 1932 the share of the vote for the Nazi Party declined slightly as did that for the socialists Writing at the end of the year Walter Dirks wrote a editorial for a Catholic newspaper in which he expressed fears that Catholicism in Germany might retreat from the political into the strictly religious sphere by making peace with the Nazis should they obtain power, as it had already done in Italy with Mussolini  Other Catholic newspapers predicted that the Church and National Socialism would become enemies if Hitler came to power. In view of subsequent events Lewy views Dirk's article as reading like those of a prophet, though the Nazis would continue to attack the church. Franz von Papen came from a wealthy Catholic landowning family, belonged to the “ultra-right wing” of the Catholic Centre Party, and became chancellor in June 1932. Papen's government was rightist and authoritarian but lacked  a voting majority in the Reichstag. The Nazis formed the second largest party in Parliament, and von Papen lifted the ban on the Nazis' paramilitary Sturmabteilung in an attempt to appease them. In early 1933 von Papen, after losing the chancellorship to Schleicher (who had objected to his efforts to replace Germany's Weimar constitution with authoritarian rule), became responsible for what has been described as “one of the most egregious mistakes in the twentieth-century”  when he helped persuade Hindenburg that the political crisis in Germany could only be resolved if Adolf Hitler was made chancellor. Hitler became chancellor on the 30th January 1933 and established an absolute dictatorship. On the 23th March the Enabling Act was passed in the Reichstag which included the support of the Catholic Centre party deputies. Within three months all non-Nazi parties, organizations, and labour unions were dissolved. The dissolution of the Catholic Centre party was followed by a Concordat between Nazi Germany and the Vatican in July. Roman Catholic writer Gordon Zahn concluded in his study “German Catholics and Hitler's Wars: “Even in the midst of total military collapse, with the Third Reich tottering to it's death, [German] bishops were raising their voices to inspire men to offer their last drop of blood....We may justly conclude that the [German] Church did become an agency of social control operating on behalf of the Nazi State, insofar as insuring whole-hearted support of the war was concerned.”

Boycott of Jewish businesses (1st April 1933)
Five days after the passing of the Enabling Act that gave Hitler dictatorial powers a boycott of Jewish businesses was organised. Oskar Wassermann who was president of an “Interfaith Association of Peace” asked Cardinal Bertram for help against the boycott but was tuned down because “This is purely an economic struggle, alien to the Church interests” and that it “would be inappropriate intervention in affairs outside episcopal competence”, furthermore “the foreign press, which is in predominately Jewish hands, has kept perfectly quiet about the persecution of Catholics in various countries.” Alois Wurm, a Regensburg priest, wrote to Cardinal Faulhaber protesting that following the issuing of the boycott "not a single Catholic paper has had the courage to proclaim the teaching of the catechism, that no one may be hated or persecuted--certainly not on racial grounds. Many people see this as a Catholic failure." Wurm pleaded for the bishops to protest. Faulhaber wrote in his reply to Wurm that is was "so un-Christian that not only every priest but every Christian must protest." At the moment, however, Church leaders had more important matters to deal with. "The preservation of our schools and Catholic organizations and the question of compulsory sterilization [of the mentally ill] are more important matters for Christianity in our country--especially when we consider that the Jews, as we have already seen in some recent instances, are quite able to look after themselves. We must not give the government an opportunity to turn the campaign against the Jews into a campaign against Jesuits." Faulhaber further commented that he was "astonished" by repeated questions as to "why the Church is doing nothing about the persecution of Jews. When Catholics or their bishops are persecuted we hear not a peep. That is and remains the mystery of the passion." Another person who urged Faulhaber to act publicly in defence of the Jews was Franziskus Stratmann, a Dominican student chaplain in Berlin, and a leader of the German Peace League, who asked in a letter for Faulhaber to speak out publicly a few weeks after the boycott: “no one makes any effective protest against this indescribable German and Christian disgrace. Even priests find their anti-Semitic instincts appeased by this disgraceful behaviour. . . . We know that exceptional courage is required today to bear witness to the truth. But we know too that only through such witness can humanity and Christianity be saved. True Christianity is dying of opportunism." There is no record of a reply to Stratmann and Heinz Hürten noted in his standard work, “Deutsche Katholiken, 1918-1945” that "Stratmann was unable to move Faulhaber from the position he had adopted. The Cardinal's concern remained baptised Jews, members of his own Church, his own flock." Stratmann, a pacifist, in the same month also published in a Jesuit journal an article that  called for the unerring maintenance of principle and warned against compromise.   On October 23, 1936. Cardinal Faulhaber wrote to Cardinal Bertram that "The [German] state is justified in proceeding against Jewish excesses in civil society, especially when Jewish Bolshevists and Communists endanger public order.” but goes on to defend Jews who had been baptized and were now children of God.

Night of the Long Knives
On June 30, 1934, the so called “night of the long knives” took place which claimed, amongst many others, the lives of several prominent Roman Catholics. Erich Klausener, who was head of the Berlin Catholic Action, was killed despite having admonished a rally of Berlin Catholics to remain loyal to the people and the Fatherland and sending (with Bishop Bares) a telegram to Hitler containing their respectful greetings and pledging their loyalty. Two weeks later the Berlin Roman Catholic Chancery instructed the clergy “to maintain the necessary restraint and not to lose sight of the welfare of the Church as a whole.”<Lewy, 1964, p. 170 The leader of a Catholic sports organisation was also shot on the same night “while trying to escape”, according to the Gestapo. Monsignor Wolker notified the leaders of the organisation of the Gestapo's explanation and that this be circulated without any addition “in order to prevent the formation of wild or incorrect rumours.” According to Lewy this was “the sum total of the public response of the Church.” Bishop Bares of Berlin wrote a private letter to Hitler and recounted that Klausner had “repeatedly, both in private and public, professed his support of the National Socialist State.” and also discounted any suggestion that Klausner had committed suicide as the Nazis had claimed. He emphasised he wrote “not out of criticism of the state's actions, but out of concern for the preservation of the authority of the state. The German Catholic writer Waldemar Gurian wrote in a pamphlet from Switzerland “The silence of the German bishops is perhaps more terrible than anything else that has happened on June 30. For the silence destroys the last moral authority in Germany, it introduces insecurity into the ranks of the faithful, it threatens to lead to an estrangement between bishops and people who can no longer understand silence.”

Sterilization laws (14th July 1933)
On the same day as all political parties apart from the National Socialist were banned a new law was adopted that allowed for the sterilization of anyone who suffered from conditions such as schizophrenia, manic-depression, genetic epilepsy, alcoholism and various others conditions which were supposedly inheritable. On the same day the Concordat with the Vatican was approved at a cabinet meeting. The German episcopate had previously seen a draft of the sterilization law and, as expected, opposed it. In September the German bishops, who had discussed how Catholic doctors, judges and nurses could be made exempt from conflicts of conscience, submitted a protest to Ministry of the Interior and in response compromise proposals were put to the bishops along with permission for them to inform the Catholic faithful as to Church teaching on sterilization. Cardinal Bertram explained to his congregation that Catholics were forbidden to volunteer or apply for sterilization for another. Bishop Galen went further and expressed his dismay that people who through no fault of their own were subject to certain genetic traits were being subject to violence. The Nazis retaliated by accusing the Church with incitement to disobedience. Cardinal Faulhaber responded on behalf of the bishops:
 * The bishops repeatedly and in no uncertain terms have declared their willingness to promote the peaceful co-operation of Church and State. However, in those questions where a law of the state conflicts with an eternal command of God, the bishops cannot through silence betray their holy office.

Concessions were made to exempt Catholic physicians from carrying out sterilizations but not the duty of Catholic doctors and other personnel from processing them. L'Osservatore Romano defended German Catholics who felt duty bound to disregard the law and Cardinal Pacelli also registered in several notes to the government the Church's opposition. Guenter Lewy took the view that in practical terms the bishops were on the retreat and “with the help of an elaborate casuistry” they concluded that Catholic personnel might indeed report to the authorities those considered to have ills suitable for sterilization treatment and that nurses might indeed assist at such operations in order to avoid an irreligious person taking their place who might be unconcerned about the provision of Roman Catholic sacraments to patients in their care

In a memorandum to Ribbentrop, the German Minister for Foreign Affairs, in December 1943 Ernst Katenbrunner reported that the main obstacles to a good relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the Nazis lay in the National Socialists policies relating to sterilization and euthanasia. Michael Phayer notes that murder of the Jews was not part of the equation.

The occupation of Czechoslovakia (October 1938)
When the Nazis marched into the Sudetenland in October 1938 the German Catholic Bishops Conference sent a telegram to Hitler “respectfully to tender congratulations and thanks, and to order a festive peal of bells on Sunday”. On April 20 1939, Hitler's birthday, special votive masses were celebrated in all Roman Catholic churches “to implore God's blessing upon the Fuhrer and people.” Upon the entry of the Nazis into Warsaw, an overwhelmingly Roman Catholic country, church bells were rung in Germany in celebration of Hitler's first victory, similarly when France was defeated the German churches rang the bells at noon for a week.

Nazi Racial and Christian religious anti-Semitism
Christian religious anti-Semitism can be traced from the earliest years of the Christian religion and was prevalent throughout Europe in the run up to the Holocaust. Though differing from Nazi anti-Semitism, which was grounded on race, there are writers who consider the Holocaust to have been impossible without the prior conditioning of religious anti-Semitism. Martin Rhonheimer asserted “racism alone did not lead to Auschwitz, either. Something more was needed: hatred of Jews. Rooted in large part in Christian tradition, it was this hatred that made modern anti-Semitism possible.” and that “the precondition that made the Nazis' racial anti-Semitism (which led in turn to Auschwitz) even conceivable was the heritage of traditional anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism. “ Robert Runcie asserted 'Without centuries of Christian anti-Semitism, Hitler’s passionate hatred would never have been so passionately echoed....The travesty of Kristallnacht and all that followed is that so much was perpetrated in Christ's name. To glorify the Third Reich, the Christian faith was betrayed. We cannot say, "We did not know", We did - and stood by.. And even today there are many Christians who fail to see it as self evident and why this blindness? Because for centuries Christians have held Jews collectively responsible for the death of Jesus. On Good Friday Jews have, in times past, cowered behind locked doors for fear of a Christian mob seeking 'revenge' for deicide. Without the poisoning of Christian minds through the centuries, the holocaust is unthinkable'. Jules Isaac took the view that traditional Christian anti-Judaism was the breeding ground for "the teaching of contempt." and Martin Rhonheimer is of the opinion that without this modern racist theories would never have been able to forge an alliance based on enmity toward Jews and anti-Semitism.

In response to a letter from the American Jewish Committee in New York in 1916 requesting the assistance of the Popes moral authority to end persecution of Jews throughout the world, in particular the pogroms in Polish Galicia, Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Gasparri replied with a courteous refusal, since they had no means of verifying the claims. The reply did affirm the traditional church teaching on the universal call of love towards all people, including Jews, but didn't (as was later claimed) call for equality of Jews nor the ending of social, political, or legal restrictions relating to Jews and limiting their "harmful"  influences on society. In 1928 the Holy Office of Pius XI issued a directive that condemned anti-Semitic hatred and unjust treatment of Jews but at the same time promoted the traditional form of religious anti-Semitism that referred to Jews as “blind” and as the “former people of God”. The directive was issued to suppress the Catholic “Friends of Israel” organization which called for the abandonment of charges made against Jews of ritual murder, deicide, and also descriptions of them as cursed people. The Church rejected the aims of Friends of Israel as they were “contrary to sense and spirit of the Church, to the thought of the Holy Fathers and the liturgy.” The Vatican published Jesuit journal La Civiltà Cattolica continued to publish deicide and ritual murder claims against the Jews as late as 1942. When David Kertzer, Professor at Brown University, published a book (2001) on the role of the Papacy and the Jews he recorded that Civilita Cattolica “dipped deep into the well of anti-Semitism to defend the Vatican from any involvement in the rise of anti-Semitism.”

The German Jesuit priest Gustav Gundlach in 1930 wrote the entry on “permissible anti-Semitism” for the “Theology and Church Lexicon” which taught that anti-Semitism was only to be condemned when it was “politico-racial”, and not when it was “politico-governmental”. Jews should not be discriminated on the grounds of race but governments must protect themselves against the “assimilated Jews” who were largely given over to “moral nihilism”, without national or religious ties, or who operated within the “camp of world plutocracy [I.e Jewish bankers]” as well as within Bolshevism, the same peoples who had been expelled from their own fatherland. Gundlach referred to Jewish vermin in this article but he likely didn't consider this as racist since Aryan vermin are also mentioned. He would later be appointed to oversee what has become know as the “Hidden Encyclical”, a proposed encyclical of Pius XI that would deal with anti-Semitism which was never published as Pius XI died before giving it his approval. Ostensibly the encyclical was supposed to defend Jews but contains the traditional charges of deicide. It also alludes to segregation of Jews by warning of the spiritual dangers to souls through contact with them (a theme echoed in the Vatican daily newspaper as late as January 1939) )

In the Autumn of 1938 Pope Pius XI  told a group of Belgian pilgrims that anti-Semitism was  inadmissible “Spiritually we are all Semites”, a reference to the Missal liturgical texts that they had just presented to him. Saul Friedlander points out that the Pope in the same spontaneous outburst given to the Belgian pilgrims also made reference to undue Jewish influence and the right of peoples to protect themselves against it “We recognise that everyone has the right to self-defence and may take the necessary means for protecting legitimate interests.”

Th German Archbishop Grober in his popular “Handbuch” emphasised that Marxism was founded by a Jew and that Bolshevism was a group of terrorists led by Jews. Grober said in the 1930's that the Jews “hated Jesus and that their murderous hatred has continued in later centuries.” In March 1941 he wrote in a pastoral letter about how the Jews were responsible for the death of Christ and that “the self-imposed curse of the Jews, 'His blood be upon our children' has come terribly true until the present time, until today.” Nevertheless, he also at the same time expressed disapproval of  violence against Jews and appointed Gertrud Luckner to Caritas to work on behalf of Jews. Martin Rhonheimer concurs with Anton Rauscher who viewed the contemporary Catholic theology of the period as reflecting "a view of the Jews which provoked anti-Semitism on the one hand, while on the other undermining the ability to oppose it." and that arguments based on Jews as Christ killers and under a curse “soothed Christian consciences. They made Christians spectators, witnesses to a divine-human drama of guilt and expiation, of punishment and final conversion.”

In numerous diocesan publications that carried the imprimatur the Jews were described as having a “demoralizing influence on religiosity and national character” and who had brought the German people “more damage than benefit”. Pontius Pilate was described as an Aryan who would have liked to set free Jesus to whom the Jews displayed a “mortal hatred”.

On April 4, 1933, Cardinal Pacelli wrote to the Berlin Papal Nuncio Cesare Orsenigo in Berlin asking him to explore the possibility of a diplomatic intervention against "anti-Semitic excesses" in Germany. Orsenigo replied that any intervention by the Holy See was impossible, since anti-Semitism was now official policy of the German government and tp protest against would be rejected on the grounds of interference in internal politics.

In 1933 Cardinal Faulhaber preached "From the point of view of the church, there is nothing to object to in the honest pursuit and devotion to race." In one of his advent 1933 sermons he stated that the Church didn't have "any objection to the endeavour to keep national characteristics of a people as far as possible pure and unadulterated, and to foster their national spirit by emphasis upon the common ties of blood which unite them", but that this shouldn't lead to hatred of other nations nor loyalty to race supersede loyalty to the Church. Austrian Bishop Johannes Gföllner of Linz, issued as pastoral letter in January 1933, which condemned all contempt, hatred, and persecution of the Jewish people and the rejection of the “Old Testament on racial grounds No less irreconcilable with "the position of the Church" was "the rejection of the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament on racial grounds." "Nazi racial views," which in his opinion were a "regression into the worst kind of paganism . . . completely irreconcilable with Christianity, and must therefore be totally rejected." However, he also claimed that many "irreligious Jews had a very damaging influence in almost all areas of contemporary cultural life." and that their influence visible in business and trade, in the law, and in medicine such that "many of our social and political upheavals are permeated by materialistic and liberal principles stemming primarily from Jews. Every committed Christian has not only the right but the conscientious duty to fight and overcome the pernicious influence of such decadent Judaism." Martin Rhonheimer comments:
 * “Gföllner's words are a clear example of the tranquil coexistence of Catholic anti-racism in the service of the Church and a Christian anti-Semitism nourished by traditional anti-Judaism that made Jews the scapegoats for modern trends that opposed the Church. In this view, the Jews were held responsible for everything opposed to Christianity in politics and society--and Christians had a duty to distinguish between "good" and "bad" Jews, the latter being identified as irreligious and fully assimilated Jews.

Rhonheimer's opinion is that on the one hand the Church's repeated rejection of hatred- persecution of Jews, and that justice and charity must be used to solve the  "Jewish question" whilst at the same time fundamentally approving of measures to limit Jewish influence, helps explain why at first, Catholics saw little reason to defend Jews. “ Indeed, any attempt to do so would have caused astonishment. It also explains why Catholics were unable to react clearly to Nazi racial policy until the opportunity to influence events had long passed.” The article on "race" from the Handbook of Contemporary Religious Questions, published in 1937 in Germany and edited by Archbishop Gröber of Freiburg rejects Nazi racial theories but the article recognizes the need for measures to safeguard German racial purity which is endangered by the admixture of foreign blood.

In his 1937 encyclical “Mit Brennender Sorge” (written by German Bishops, principally Cardinal Faulhaber, with additions by Cardinal Pacelli and issued in German for added emphasis) Pope Pius XI protested at the violations of the Concordat Nazi Germany had signed with the Holy See as well  as  what the Vatican referred to as “neo-paganism” which exalted race and nationality to idolatrous levels. The encyclical didn't condemn Hitler or racism directly “as some have erroneously asserted.” It not only recalled Christianity's roots in the “Old Testament” (Rosenberg and the Nazis rejected Hebrew scriptures) but also that the Jews had killed Jesus. The encyclical defended Jews who were baptised (from a contemporary Catholic thought they ceased to be Jews and became “non-Aryan Catholics”) whom the Nazis considered to be still Jewish due to their racist theories, but it never discussed Jews in general.

Ratification of the Concordat took place in September 1933, and Cardinal Pacelli took the German chargé d'affaires, Hanns Kerrl, a "Promemoria" of the Holy See noting that "the Holy See permits itself a word in favor of Catholics who have come to the Church from Judaism." Jews in general were not mentioned. In Martin Rhonheimer's opinion this is “the point at which the policies of the Vatican and the German bishops (led by Cardinals Bertram and Faulhaber) began to converge, and the notorious "silence" about the Jews commenced”, concluding that “As the Nazi regime's campaign against the Church intensified, it became increasingly clear that Catholic opposition to racism had more to do with defending the Church than with any fundamental rejection of anti-Semitism or of hostility to Jews.” and that “the protection of baptized Jews--and not a general condemnation of all hostility to Jews--was always the dominant perspective whenever the "Jewish question" was discussed, and whenever the Church condemned racism. The Church's opposition to racism (though belated) was a defence of its own teaching as well as natural law. As such it merits admiration. Claiming that it was something more is questionable.” Furthermore “The Church's "silence" in the years prior to the outbreak of war arose from a complex combination of anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic thinking on the one hand, and on the other hand the feeling of Church leaders that other matters were more important. This feeling arose from the belief that they were really not responsible for Jews in general. It is of course not even remotely true to say that there was a positive intention not to help the Jews. It would be false, indeed slanderous, to claim that the Church deliberately delivered the Jews to their Nazi executioners”

Pinchas Lapide concludes “To illustrate fully the German [Roman Catholic] Church's successful attempt to swim with the anti-Semitic tide would take a black book of it's own.” He further notes that when Guenter Lewy published this information in 1964 the response from the Cologne Catholic diocesan newsletter ,“Is the author a Jew?", illustrated that the old ways had not yet died. Martin Rhonheimer wrote: “The tragedy is that due to Church-generated anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism, and also because of the Church's initial sympathy for a government that fought against liberalism and communism, the Church itself had done much to legitimize the very regime that persecuted it.”

Post war
See Main articles Nostra Aetate and  We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah

At he end of the war the Holy Office of Pius XII forbade bishops throughout Europe from returning baptised Jewish children who had been hidden in Catholic institutions to the Jewish fold. Pius also allowed the keeping of Jewish children who had not as yet been baptised but who had no family members left who claimed them. Roman Catholic writer Friedrich Heer asserted in 1962: “Christian resistance to Hitler during the Third Reich, from the beginning, had the character of the unique, the undesirable,...in 1945 the situation was so critical that only a gigantic attempt at concealment was...able to save and restore the face of official Christianity in Germany...I have to confess that all Catholics, from the highest to the lowest – priests, chaplains, laymen (anti-Semitic to this day) – are co-responsible for the mass murder of the Jews.” Another post-war Catholic writer, Carl Amery, was of the opinion that “The German Catholic milieu was ripe for capitulation, and nothing, literally nothing, not even the voice of the bishops or the voice of Rome would have prevented this capitulation.” Geunter Lewy wrote in 1964 of “the extensive mythology” which had obscured the relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and Hitler's Third Reich quoted from the 1939 diary entry of of German Catholic writer Theodore Haeker who asserted “It is safe to assume that the Germans will do everything, consciously and unconsciously, in order to forget as quickly as possible all that is now said, written and done.”

Reference works

 * ”The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany”, Guenter Lewy, 1964, Weidenfeld and Nicolson
 * ”The Catholic Church and the Holocaust”, Michael Phayer, 2000, Indiana University Press, ISBN 0-253-21471-8
 * ”Hitler the War and the Pope”, Ronald J. Rychlak, 2000, Our Sunday Visitor, ISBN 0-87973-217-2
 * ”Three Popes and the Jews”, Pinchas Lapide, 1967, Hawthorn
 * ”The Popes in the Twentieth Century”, Carlo Falconi, 1967, Weidenfeld and Nicolson
 * ”Nazi Germany and the Jews: The Years of Persecution 1933-39”, 1997, Saul Friedlander, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN 0-297-81882-1
 * ”The Vatican and the Holocaust in Italy: Under His Very windows”, Susan Zuccotti, 2000, Yale University Press, ISBN 0-300-08487-0
 * ”The Church”, Hans Kung, 1968, Burns & Oates,