Article Note: New Research on Churches in Postwar Germany

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 3, September 2011

Article Note: New Research on Churches in Postwar Germany

Francis Graham-Dixon, “A ‘Moral Mandate’ for Occupation: The British Churches and Voluntary Organizations in North-Western Germany, 1945-1949,” German History 28, no.2 (2010): 193-213.

Ian Connor, “The Protestant Churches and German Refugees and Expellees in the Western Zones of Germany after 1945,” Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe 15, no.1 (April 2007): 43-63.

By Steven Schroeder, University of the Fraser Valley

The extraordinary transformation of Germany after 1945 from Nazism to peaceful integration into international systems continues to draw considerable interest, as scholars attempt to render clarity to the complexities of postwar reconstruction. By looking at the various motives and actions of British government representatives, churchmen, and relief workers in Germany—and the interplay between them—Graham-Dixon’s study of the British zone sheds new light on the nature of occupation, and aspects of reconstruction, in this part of Germany.

The author argues that Britons agreed, in general, about their ‘moral mandate’ in Germany after the Second World War. However, some believed that the mandate “embodied a moral, Christian purpose,” whereas others wished to merely “exploit its use for propagandistic purposes” (193). Regardless of motive, the moral campaign proved useful for all British activities in Germany, especially when British policies and actions proved questionable, or even immoral. Focusing on the humanitarian crisis of the 1945-1946 population transfers (which was particularly acute in Schleswig-Holstein), Graham-Dixon asserts that it was church leaders and voluntary organization personnel (e.g., Bishop Bell of Chichester, Victor Gollancz) who ensured maintenance of the moral component in British policy, devoid of the exploitative component. Rather than resenting this action, British policy makers (e.g., Anthony Eden, Ernest Bevin)—who were generally less optimistic than churchmen about German rehabilitation—made good use of church leaders and relief workers in forging peaceful relations with a generally disgruntled German public, and in “validat[ing] … the worthiness of the British cause” (201).

The fusing of these two viewpoints became evident in 1947, when British troubles were at a peak. Some British church leaders (e.g., British Anglican Church head, Geoffrey Fischer) and some politicians (e.g., Lord Pakenham), openly tied the work of the Church and the Crown. Most politicians disavowed the connection and relied on voluntary organizations to work directly in aiding, and rehabilitating, the German people. Voluntary organizations (e.g., Save Europe Now!) labored in concert with German church organizations (e.g., Hilfswerk, Innere Mission, Caritas) to fulfill the occupiers’ goal of solving the humanitarian crisis in Germany. The British government hoped that this work would embed “higher spiritual and moral values within German society,” (208) and foster general goodwill. With demonstrable success in material aid and improved relations between Britons and the German people, these organizations filled the “policy vacuum,” and fulfilled the moral mandate claimed by the British government.

This is an important article that exposes new aspects of British occupation politics. It also reveals the significance that voluntary organizations can (and did) have in post-conflict stabilization. In this case, the British government exploited the goodwill of voluntary organization personnel by having them alleviate the humanitarian crisis it had helped create. In the end, good things came of their combined efforts regardless of motive and despite the misallocation of credit. One wonders how these elements of occupation appeared in the other zones, and about their long-term impact in Germany, and in British-German relations.

Ian Connor is well-known for his 2008 book Refugees and Expellees in Post-War Germany, in which he describes how the millions of displaced persons in occupied Germany posed numerous challenges to German reconstruction after 1945. This article is an offshoot of that larger project. It examines how some leading German Protestant churchmen and relief personnel feared that ethnic German expellees would stray from mainstream Protestantism to embrace Communism or Catholicism. Playing an “active role in the reconstruction of Germany” (44) by employing their “wide-ranging autonomy” (43), Protestant Church elites prevented, in a few cases, the escalation of political radicalism, even while operating on some misguided assumptions.

Connor argues that the central concern of Protestant elites (i.e., some pastors, but mainly key figures in Protestant relief work) was “the political and ideological implications of the refugee problem” (60). Protestant churchmen viewed the expellees as not only physically, but spiritually, dislodged and impoverished. Protestant churchmen founded the Hilfswerk of the Protestant Church in August, 1945 to assist the expellees, and to keep them from turning to political and religious alternatives. The idea was that the material aid and spiritual support of the organization would keep the expellees on the right track by providing them with stability and hope for a brighter future.

The Hilfswerk provided shelter, food, and clothing for expellees primarily in the western zones, while its eastern office operated under the wary surveillance of Soviet authorities. Indeed, fused into its material aid campaign was the Hilfswerk’s political agenda of expunging Soviet influence in the political unification of Germany. Whereas Protestant churchmen were overly concerned about the refugees embracing Communism (few voted for the KPD), they “ignored or failed to recognize the refugees’ undoubted susceptibility to the slogans of radical right-wing parties” (60). With questions lingering about the ideological and political foundation and motives of the Hilfswerk, the author offers an example of the organization’s success. When Trek Association leaders threatened to lead thousands of expellees on marches to less crowded areas within western Germany, Hilfswerk personnel intervened. Negotiations between the two organizations averted what one Protestant aid leader called, “a terrible catastrophe” (57).

Study of the immediate postwar period reveals widespread concern over political radicalism in western Germany. For example, the formation of the Catholic Kirchliche Hilfstelle in October 1945 stemmed, in part, from concerns about Catholic expellees turning to political extremism. Questions arise regarding German attitudes and agency under occupation, particularly concerning the establishment of the Federal Republic (and the GDR). Connor argues that relief organizations, like the Hilfswerk, played an important role in German reconstruction by fostering peaceful relationships. Still, the political agenda of the Hilfswerk, and other relief organizations, remains unclear. So does the broader implications of their work. Laudably, the author has contributed a significant component of an under-researched portion of the postwar development of Germany, and has opened doors for further examination of the role of relief organizations and other NGOs in the construction of the two Germanies.

Article Note: Edward Mathieu, “Public Protestantism and Mission in Germany’s Thuringian States, 1871-1914”

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 3, September 2011

Article Note: Edward Mathieu, “Public Protestantism and Mission in Germany’s Thuringian States, 1871-1914,” Church History 79 no. 1 (March 2010): 115-143.

By Heath A. Spencer, Seattle University

In this article, Edward Mathieu examines the religious and social activism of Thuringia’s bourgeois Protestants. His conclusions are not earthshaking, but his focus on a particular region allows him to qualify some of the conventional wisdom on topics such as secularization and the interplay of theology, class, and politics.

Mathieu challenges the notion that religion was simply retreating from the public sphere by the end of the nineteenth century. In fact, Thuringia’s voluntary Protestant associations were on the rise even as church attendance declined. Rather than fading out, Protestant religiosity was taking on new forms. Mathieu also counters the argument that Lutherans were driven by their theology to leave social problems to the state and limit the church’s role to an exclusive focus on the inner, spiritual life. Rather, Thuringian Protestants demonstrated a high level of social and civic engagement. On the flip side, “secular” press organs such as the Weimarische Zeitung and associations like the Meiningen District Education Association openly expressed an interest in religious and moral questions, and one cannot help but note the “religious tone of bourgeois public discourse” (125). Finally, Mathieu points out that there was considerable overlap in membership across Protestant associations that—at least on the national level—seemed to represent different political, theological, and social-cultural milieus (for example, the Protestant League and the more “conservative” Home Mission).

Throughout the article, Mathieu’s coverage of Protestant discourse is often more descriptive than analytical. However, he does note that Thuringia’s Protestants assumed a close correspondence between Protestant Christianity and German-ness, that liberal ideology and Protestant theology drew inspiration from one another, and that Protestant and bourgeois values (duty, hard work, respect for authority, objectivity, tolerance, intellectual freedom) were often indistinguishable from one another. Like their counterparts throughout the rest of Germany, bourgeois Protestants defined themselves against Catholics on the one hand and proletarians on the other. They found it hard to imagine working-class people as anything other than socialists, delinquents, and a threat to public order—antithetical to Christianity as they imagined it. Mathieu also points to some interesting parallels between Home Mission rhetoric oriented toward working-class Germans and foreign mission pronouncements regarding “savages” in overseas colonies.

Mathieu reminds us that the story of German Protestantism during the Kaiserreich cannot be reduced to a conservative/liberal binary, nor can German religious history be reduced to a simple story of secularization and declining church attendance. Thuringia’s liberal Protestants were involved in the “conservative” Home Mission, public school teachers were affiliated with Protestant missionary societies, bourgeois associations working with delinquent youth tried to place them in “proper” Christian homes, and Protestant liberals and conservatives were members of many of the same associations and united in their opposition to Catholics and socialists.

Article Note: Marcus Tomalin, “Exploring Nineteenth-Century Haida Translations of the New Testament”

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 3, September 2011

Article Note: Marcus Tomalin, “Exploring Nineteenth-Century Haida Translations of the New Testament,” Journal of Religious History 35 no. 1 (March 2011): 43-71.

By John S. Conway, University of British Columbia

It is interesting to find an article about a Canadian missionary experience, written by an English scholar, and appearing in an Australian journal. Dr. Tomalin, a Fellow of Downing College, Cambridge, gives us a detailed account of the translations by Church Missionary Society (CMS) missionaries sent out in the nineteenth century to the Haida Gwai, (formerly known as the Queen Charlotte Islands), a collection of islands off the coast of north-western British Columbia. Early contacts with white traders and settlers had brought diseases which rapidly reduced the Haida population. But the missionaries believed the language was still vibrant enough and that the New Testament and various Offices of the Book of Common Prayer should be translated for daily use. By the end of the century however, the Haida communities themselves wanted to learn English, so these translations have largely been forgotten. Study of the Haida language was largely left up to secular ethno-linguists. Tomalin’s detailed examination of these texts explores the difficulties and complexities involved in such trans-cultural transfers. Their authors’ efforts were clearly prodigious and thus form an integral part of the story of the Anglican Church’s establishment in western Canada.

Program and Conference Report: Mennonite Studies at the University of the Fraser Valley

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 3, September 2011

Program and Conference Report: Mennonite Studies at the University of the Fraser Valley, British Columbia, Canada

By Steven Schroeder, University of the Fraser Valley

The Fraser Valley, nestled between Vancouver and the coastal mountains of British Columbia, is home to a diverse population of which Mennonites comprise roughly 20 percent. Wishing to reflect the regional population in its academic curriculum, the University of the Fraser Valley (UFV), in cooperation with the local Mennonite community, has launched a program in Mennonite Studies. January 2011 marked the implementation date for the Mennonite Studies Certificate. Currently, the University is working toward the establishment of a Centre, and a Chair, in Mennonite Studies.

To raise awareness for the program, the University launched a speakers series in Mennonite Studies in fall 2010. Two events took place in Abbotsford, on the main campus of UFV. The first, entitled “Perceptions,” took place on October 19, 2010. A panel of Royden Loewen, Chair of Mennonite Studies at the University of Winnipeg, Marlene Epp, Associate Professor of History at Conrad Grebel University College, and Bruce Guenther, Associate Professor of Church History and Mennonite Studies at Trinity Western University addressed the question: what constitutes Mennonite Studies? In various ways, all three panelists responded by tackling the thorny, but central, question of Mennonite identity. Loewen identified seven categories of Mennonites, all of which related in some way to how the individual situates him/herself vis-à-vis the Mennonite faith tradition and Mennonite ethnicity. Riding above this taxonomy was Loewen’s notion that: “if you say you are a [Mennonite], you are one,” which underscored the diversity of the Mennonite community, and study of it. Epp agreed with Loewen’s assertion of Mennonite diversity, and focused her talk on aspects of Mennonite ethnicity. Referring to her own work, Epp posited that studying Mennonite culinary practices is a useful way to understand Mennonite ethnicity, particularly as food and cookbooks have been used to preserve Mennonite traditions amidst acculturation. Finally, Guenther addressed Mennonite diversity and identity differently, asserting that Mennonite ethnicity, like all ethnicities, is dynamic. In his view, academics building Mennonite Studies programs must broaden their scope beyond focus on the Dutch-German roots of the Anabaptist movement to reflect the diverse worldwide Mennonite community—including its many ethnicities—and to foster dialogue with non-Mennonites.

The second event, held on November 23, 2010, centered on the theme “Reflections,” and the question: what is the reciprocal relationship between Mennonite writing and Mennonite culture? Responding to this question were Andreas Schroeder, Rogers Communications Chair in Creative Writing at the University of British Columbia, Hildi Froese Tiessen, Professor of English at Conrad Grebel University College, and Rudy Wiebe, Professor Emeritus at the University of Alberta. Schroeder provided an historical overview of Mennonite literature from the inauguration of its “golden age,” with the advent of Rudy Wiebe’s work in the 1960s, to the present. Therein, he revealed how Mennonite writers—most of whom are not affiliated with, or interested in promoting, the Mennonite faith community—have, for decades, represented the Mennonite community to the outside world. Tiessen agreed, but blurred Schroeder’s demarcation locus by pointing out that this “outsider’s group” also included people who were members of Mennonite churches, and that negative stereotypes of Mennonite writers are inaccurate. Pointing to the “insider’s knowledge” of the writers, she stressed the positive contributions that they have made to understanding Mennonite life—including its many ethnic sub-groups—both inside, and beyond, the Mennonite community. Finally, Wiebe offered an historical narrative that complimented Schroeder’s and stressed Tiessen’s focus on the positive. Wiebe pointed out that the “the origins of Anabaptism is rooted in anything but fundamentalist, conservative, rural, uneducated people,” and that Mennonites owe their very existence to the scholarly acumen of people like Felix Manz, Conrad Grebel, and Menno Simons. Over the centuries, Mennonites worked as artisans and architects throughout Europe, often shaping the local landscape and culture. Moreover, Mennonite communities had songwriters and poets who commemorated Mennonite experiences and crafted the Mennonite heritage. All three panelists encouraged the University to promote the Mennonite literary tradition, which contributes significantly to Mennonite, and Canadian, culture.

These events provided useful information and engendered important discussion at a timely juncture, as UFV administrators and faculty move forward the Mennonite Studies program. During the question period after each event, the panelists offered specific recommendations for the new program, all of which were well-received. A third event in the speakers series, with the theme “Engagement,” will take place at UFV’s Abbotsford campus in fall 2011.

Please visit the following websites for additional information:

For details on the event to be held at UFV in fall, 2011:

http://www.ufv.ca/MarCom/newsroom.htm

For details about the Mennonite Studies Certificate at UFV: http://www.ufv.ca/arts/Arts_Programs/Certificates/Mennonite_Studies.htm

Conference Announcement: Celebrating the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English Edition

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 3, September 2011

Conference Announcement: Celebrating the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English Edition, November 13-15, 2011, Union Theological Seminary, New York.

By Victoria J. Barnett

Plans are well under way for the upcoming conference celebrating the completion of the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English Edition. Organized by the International Bonhoeffer Society, “Bonhoeffer for the Coming Generations” will take place at Union Seminary in New York, where Bonhoeffer came to study and teach in 1931 and 1939. The conference program is as follows:

Sunday | November 13

11:00 a.m. Optional Worship at Abyssinian Baptist Church

3:00 p.m. Check-in at Union Theological Seminary

8:00 p.m. Keynote Address “Bonhoeffer: Theologian, Activist, Educator. Challenges for the Church of the Coming Generations” | Sam Wells, Duke University

Monday | November 14

Bonhoeffer, Ethics, Public Life 1945-2010

“Inspiration, Controversy, Legacy. The Response to Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Three Germanys” | Wolfgang Huber, Germany

Panel: Bonhoeffer in International Contexts | John de Gruchy, South Africa; Keith Clements,

United Kingdom; Larry Rasmussen, USA; Carlos Caldas, Brazil; Kazuaki Yamasaki, Japan

Emerging Issues, New Research 2011-

“Bonhoeffer’s Strong Christology and Religious Pluralism” | Christiane Tietz, Mainz

Panel: New Research, New Issues | Florian Schmitz, Mainz; Reggie Williams, Pasadena; Brigitte Kahl, Union Theological Seminary

Tuesday | November 15

Translation and the Interpretation of History and Theology

“Translating Bonhoeffer. Intercultural Theological Challenge” | Hans Pfeifer, Düsseldorf

Translators Panel: Bonhoeffer in Translation: Challenges and Discoveries | moderated

by Victoria Barnett, USA

Historians Panel: History and Theology in Bonhoeffer Interpretation | moderated

by Andrew Chandler, Chichester

Theologians Panel: Reading Bonhoeffer the Theologian | Michael DeJonge and Clifford Green

Concluding Banquet

A banquet celebrating all the translators, editors, publishers, financial supporters and volunteers of the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English Edition will mark the conclusion of the conference on Tuesday evening.

For more information about the conference, as well as the registration form, please go to http://dietrichbonhoeffer.org/BonhoefferConf.brochure_Feb.2011.pdf.

Letter from the editors: June 2011

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Letter from the editors: June 2011

By Kyle Jantzen, Ambrose University College

Stained glass windows from the Augustinian Monastery in Erfurt, Germany.

Our summer 2011 issue of the ACCH Quarterly deals almost exlusively with people and issues which are international in scope. We have reviews of two new books on Christians whose influence extended (or extends) far beyond Germany. The first is Wolfgang Sommer’s study of Lutheran leader Wilhelm Freiherr von Pechmann, whose antipathy to Bavarian church policy ultimately led to his departure from the Lutheran Church. The second is an edited volume of letters and writings from Franz Jaegerstaetter, an Austrian Catholic conscientious objector and martyr whose life and death was first made known widely throughout the English world several decades ago thanks to a biography by Gordon Zahn.

Alongside these reviews, two article notes examine the politics of the World Council of Churches and the relationship between the League of Nations and the WorldAlliancefor Promoting International Friendship through the Churches.

On behalf of my fellow editors, let me wish you all the best for a relaxing summer. If you have any suggestions for books we should review or issues we should comment on, please contact me at kjantzen@ambrose.edu.

Review of Wolfgang Sommer, Wilhelm Freiherr von Pechmann: Ein konservativer Lutheraner

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Review of Wolfgang Sommer, Wilhelm Freiherr von Pechmann: Ein konservativer Lutheraner (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 255 Pp. ISBN 978-3-525-55005-2.

By Diana Jane Beech, University of British Columbia

Wilhelm Freiherr von Pechmann was one of the most influential laymen active in the German Protestant Church in the early twentieth century. Born into a well-respected family on 10 June 1859 in Memmingen, Bavaria, von Pechmann was raised with a profound respect for his German homeland and was christened and educated into the specifically Protestant tradition. From an early age, von Pechmann saw himself as both “christlich und deutsch” (Christian and German). The compatibility of these religious and national identities came under question, however, much later in his life when Adolf Hitler and his Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP) came to power in Germany. From this point on, von Pechmann became engaged in a continual struggle not only against the Nazi State and its blatant intention to ‘de-Christianise’ the German nation, but also against his own Lutheran church, which he saw as all-too-submissive to Nazi hegemony.

Having been thrust into the world of work as a legal advisor to the Bayerische Handelsbank in Munich in 1886 following the untimely death of his father, von Pechmann never allowed his new professional obligations to distract him from his true passions of national politics and church affairs. As early as 1901 he was called to serve as the lay representative of the Munich diocese on the Bavarian General Synod. In 1909 he was called to the most prominent office of the Bavarian Protestant church as President of its highest instrument of church administration—the Oberkonsistorium. Only his professional standing as a lawyer and not as a theologian prevented his proposed presidency from coming into fruition.

In 1913 the University of Erlangen put an end to von Pechmann’s status as a layman by awarding him an honorary degree in theology. From 1919 to 1922 he thus became the first elected President of the Provincial Synod of the Bavarian Protestant church. His influence within ecclesiastical circles was not just restricted to a regional level, however, as he quickly grew in prominence within the worldwide Lutheran community as well as within the administration of the national German Protestant Church. For example, between 1921 and
1927, he headed the German Protestant Church Congresses in Stuttgart, Bethel, and Königsberg.

Despite being deeply conservative and “deutschnational” at heart, von Pechmann showed
great distain for the advent of National Socialism in Germany in the 1930s. From the very
beginning of the so-called Third Reich (1933-1945), he took aversion to both the totalitarian claims of Hitler and his NSDAP, and, in particular, the politico-religious heresy of the Glaubensbewegung Deutscher Christen (German Christian Movement). To initiate protest against Nazism, von Pechmann engaged in potentially risky correspondence with pastors, academic theologians, bishops, ecclesiastical lawyers, publicists, and politicians. In 1933, he became a card-carrying member of the Bekennende Kirche (Confessing Church), and fostered close relations with anti-Nazi theologian Karl Barth and Confessing pastor Martin Niemöller.

Von Pechmann’s increasing activism against Nazism brought him most notably into conflict with many of his fellow conservative Lutherans, in particular the leader of the Bavarian Protestant Church of the time, Provincial Bishop Hans Meiser. Von Pechmann believed that Meiser acted spinelessly against Nazi demands, and he was particularly disappointed with Meiser’s reluctance to defend the Jews and other so-called ‘non-Aryan’ Christians from Nazi persecution. As a result of his deep dismay over the compromising conduct of Bishop Meiser and other Lutherans of the period, von Pechmann took the radical step of not only resigning his positions in the church administration but also of legally leaving the Protestant Church which he had faithfully served for so long. Years later, after the fall of the Third Reich, he converted to Roman Catholicism and remained a Catholic until his death in Munich in 1948.

In his endeavour to demonstrate how Wilhelm Freiherr von Pechmann eventually came to abandon his willingness to accept episcopal direction and to become instead one of the most forthright opponents of Nazism to emanate from the German Protestant Church, Wolfgang Sommer presents an in-depth biographical account of von Pechmann’s life. Sommer begins with von Pechmann’s formative years in Memmingen and Augsburg and continues through to his eventual rejection of German Protestantism during the final years of his life. Accordingly, the initial chapters of Sommer’s work are devoted to detailing von Pechmann’s background, and his early struggles to locate himself neatly within both a political party and within the German Protestant Church. To depict von Pechmann firmly as a product of his time, Wolfgang Sommer pays great attention to the political developments and challenges facing von Pechmann throughout his life, with entire chapters devoted to the First World War (1914-1918), the November Revolution of 1918, and the reconstitution of German Protestantism during the Weimar Republic (1918-1933). In order to reveal the relevance of von Pechmann for world Protestantism and not just for the national German Church, Sommer also devotes a chapter to his impact on ecumenical relations and his collaboration with the worldwide Lutheran community.

Unsurprisingly, the largest section of Sommer’s study concentrates on the years of Germany’s National Socialist dictatorship and von Pechmann’s increasing opposition not only to Nazi measures but also to the actions of his own Lutheran church. By detailing von Pechmann’s timely recognition of the pitfalls of Nazism and his constant warnings to Bishop Meiser to refrain from assimilation to the Nazi Weltanschauung, Sommer effectively presents von Pechmann as the virtuous thorn in the side of the spineless Bavarian church.

Sommer continually emphasises von Pechmann’s morality and righteousness by contrasting his readiness to protest against the Nazi persecution of the Jews with Bishop Meiser’s reluctance to oppose the measures. This technique downplays the reality of the situation for Meiser, however. As the leader of one of the only Protestant churches in Nazi Germany not to come under the national administration of the Deutsche Christen, Meiser had an unspoken obligation not to infuriate unnecessarily Nazi authorities in order to protect the autonomy of his church and, by extension, that of German Protestantism per se. Although von Pechmann’s humanitarian, political, and theological insight was arguably impeccable
under the brutal conditions of Nazism, by overlooking the precarious predicament of the
Bavarian Bishop, Sommer enhances von Pechmann’s reputation at the expense of those churchmen in more complex and critical situations. Whilst Wolfgang Sommer should be praised, therefore, for shedding light on a man who was influential to the German Protestant Church despite not being a theologian himself, it is nonetheless important that his work is not used to disparage the efforts of those who were firmly trapped by the shackles of their Protestant and specifically Lutheran vocations.

Review of Erna Putz, ed., Franz Jaegerstaetter: Letters and Writings from Prison

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Review of Erna Putz, ed., Franz Jaegerstaetter: Letters and Writings from Prison, trans. Robert Anthony Krieg (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2009), 252 Pp. ISBN 978-1-57075-826-3.

By Beth A. Griech-Polelle, Bowling Green State University

This review appeared first in H-German, H-Net Reviews in February 2011 (URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=31488) and is reprinted by kind permission of the author.

This volume presents the life and thoughts of a once obscure Austrian farmer, Franz Jaegerstaetter (1907-43). Thanks in part to the research of Gordon Zahn in the 1960s, Jaegerstaetter’s name began to circulate as a conscientious objector to Hitler’s brutal war.[1] And now, thanks to the beautiful translations of Robert Krieg and the careful editing of Erna Putz, readers can be reintroduced to the deeply moving writings of a truly spiritual man who determined that it would be better to die for his Catholic faith than to serve the evils of National Socialism.

The collection begins with Jim Forest’s introduction and with Robert Krieg’s overview of the general outline of Franz Jaegerstaetter’s life and death. Readers are transported to the small village of St. Radegund (d. 587) in Austria, not far from Adolf Hitler’s birthplace, Braunau-am-Inn. It is perhaps fitting that Jaegerstaetter was born in St. Radegund, since Radegund had lived through political turmoil, family assassinations, a forced marriage, and finally the formation of her own convent. St. Radegund’s institution enforced strict rules of meditation and constant prayer, and this example might have been useful to Jaegerstaetter, although his early life showed no signs of potential sainthood or a calling to martyrdom. Born an illegitimate child, Franz was eventually adopted by his mother’s husband. He had only an eighth-grade education, got in fist-fights, fathered an illegitimate daughter himself, and rode around on the village’s only motorcycle. Jaegerstaetter’s life, however, took a more noticeable turn when he married the devout Franziska Schwaninger. The farming neighbors may never have known this, but prior to Franz and Franziska’s marriage, both of them had independently considered entering religious life. However, most neighbors thought that Franz’s new wife influenced his openly religious dedication.

Part 1 of the volume reveals the extent to which Franz and Franziska’s religious views overlapped and supported each another. Here, Putz provides correspondence between the husband and wife while Franz was completing required military training (1940 and 1941), and then later his letters from his imprisonment (March-August, 1943). Throughout the correspondence, the couple’s love and respect for each other is evident. During the military training period, most of the letters detail the everyday life on the farm for Franziska, Franz’s widowed mother, and the couple’s three daughters. These letters have at times a playful note, since the couple fully anticipated being reunited once the training period was over. Franz offers advice about running the farm, often urging Franziska not to work too hard and to leave things for him to do upon his return. He also wrote briefly to Franziska’s father, who often came to help at the Jaegerstaetter’s farm. At other times, Franz begins to allude to his trouble in accepting the membership requirements of the “Volk community.” As his military training progresses, Franz begins to express more of his frustration with what he refers to as “the stream,” that is, National Socialism. He constantly uses this metaphor of struggling against “the stream’s” strong current, and he expresses dismay at the futility of much of what the training has entailed.

Although all of these letters offer compelling reading regarding the state of mind of Franz and Franziska, they also offer historians insight into the everyday life of Catholic farming communities under National Socialism. In them we see how various local priests were denounced, arrested, and imprisoned for speaking openly against the policies of the Third Reich. We run across Franz mentioning a mental institution in Ybb, and he alludes to the murderous “euthanasia project” of the Nazis. In some of Franziska’s letters from home, we can see how children were not allowed to attend mass on school days, how feast days had to be moved so Catholics could attend mass, how local politics played a role in who received leaves of absence, and who got to run an inn and whose inn was shut down due to “political unreliability.” Throughout this entire period, Franziska experiences pressure to participate in the local Nazi organizations, such as the Women’s Association, including the threat of social ostracism when choosing to opt out in this very small community.

The situation changes dramatically for the Jaegerstaetters on February 22, 1943. Franz receives notification that he is required to go to Enns for military service on February 25, 1943. By this time, Franz had written essays in various notebooks at home, which helped him to decide to refuse to fight for the Reich. Arriving at the Enns’ induction center on March 1, 1943, Franz had to return the next day due to a long line of men ahead of him. On March 2, 1943 Franz declared himself unwilling to fight for National Socialism, and, as he had anticipated, he was immediately arrested. Chapter 4 contains the correspondence between Franz and Franziska (although there was censorship of the mail) while Franz was in the prison in Linz. At this point of Franz’s incarceration, he still remained hopeful that he would be able to live, writing, “I want to save my life but not through lies” (p. 82). Indeed Franz writes to his wife that he would be willing to serve as a military medic, as that would not contradict his Christian conscience (p. 86). Ultimately, Franz decides that he cannot serve in any capacity in the military because he would be required to take the military oath of unconditional obedience to the Führer. What also emerges in this section is Franz working through his position, struggling with commands to obey earthly authority while serving the will of God. He resolves that it is far better to obey God than men. Jaegerstaetter determined that his eternal salvation was more important to him than his physical well-being, or even life. At the moment of his transfer to Berlin’s Tegel Prison, he quickly writes to Franziska, “Concerning my decision, I can tell you that I have come to no different decision as a result of the process that has played itself out. I am resolved to act no differently” (p. 108).

Arriving in Berlin on May 4, 1943, Franz was immediately incarcerated in the Tegel prison where he awaited his trial and sentence. At this point, Franz was only permitted to write one letter per month to his wife, but Franziska was allowed to send at least twelve letters to her husband. She was also able to visit him for twenty minutes on July 13. In Franz’s letters, he constantly offers his wife consolation, telling her that he is eating well, and is not physically suffering. He nonetheless exhorts her to continue to pray for him. Franziska sends him prayers, Communion petitions, and updates on village and farm activities. At one point, she is even able to send him a photograph of their lovely young daughters, which surely broke his heart. No less emotionally daunting for Franz would be the surprise visit of Franziska and Pastor Fürthauer on July 13, 1943. Franz’s defense attorney had arranged the meeting, urging Franziska and the priest to convince Franz to sign a statement that he would be willing to serve in the military. The twenty-minute meeting did not go smoothly. Franz became agitated with the priest, and in the days leading up to Franz’s execution, he wrote his last letters to Franziska, asking her, “Do you believe that all would go well for me if I were to lie in order to prolong my life?” (p. 128).

Franz, his hands in chains, wrote, “Do not be overly concerned about earthly things. The Lord indeed knows what we need…. In the next life we need suffer no longer. And the greater the suffering here, the greater the joy there” (p. 128). This letter was mailed the morning of August 9, the day that Franz was transferred to the prison at Brandenburg. There he wrote a final letter to his family, asking them for their forgiveness if he had offended them. At 4 p.m., August 9, 1943, Franz was guillotined. The priest, Pastor Albert Jochmann, reported that Franz went to his death peacefully.

Part 2 of the collection shows the evolution of Franz’s religious and political thought. There are two poems he wrote in 1932, and then a longer letter that he had written to his godson in 1935. The first of the notebooks was written by Franz in the period between his military training and his imprisonment. Each of the essays describes Franz’s thoughts on various aspects of Christian life, ranging from “On Faith” to “On our Fear of Other People” to “A Brief Reflection on the Current Era.” He addressed all of the essays to his family. They reveal Franz’s deep concern to preserve his integrity despite pressure from many sides to superficially accept the Nazi regime. He refused, stating, “What a terror it would be for us if we were sentenced by an earthly judge to life in prison. Yet it would be an even greater terror if we were sentenced by the eternal Judge to eternal damnation” (p. 158). The final essay in this notebook again directly references the dangers of swimming along with seemingly everyone else in “the stream,” and the dangers to one’s eternal soul.

Notebook 2, written in 1942, addresses the demands of National Socialism, opening with the important question: “Can someone be both a Catholic and a National Socialist?” (p. 173), to which Jaegerstaetter answers no. Catholics need to pull themselves “out of this swamp in which we are stuck and to become eternally blessed” (p. 176). He argues that suffering and martyrdom are part of working for Christ and one way to earn a place in Heaven. In subsequent essays, Franz explains that it will take true courage to be able to separate oneself from the “anti-Christian Volk community” (p. 178), but the promise of eternal salvation far outweighs any earthly suffering one might endure. He also argues that an acceptance of Nazism based on its fight against atheistic Bolshevism does not justify the taking of lives and property of Russian people (p. 183). He criticizes the lack of guidance and instruction from Catholic Church leaders: “Finding the right path is especially difficult when those who know about this path refuse to answer questions or give false information” (p.187). He then writes that Pope Pius XI warned that National Socialism was, in fact, more dangerous than communism (p. 190).

Chapters 9 through 12 contain separate essays and shorter notebooks, in which Franz continues his exploration of his faith and his understanding of the world and its demands. Throughout these writings, Franz argues that people must move beyond being Catholic in words but not in action. He refuses to judge National Socialists or people who claim to be Nazis, but he states that he does judge National Socialism as an evil ideology that endangers people’s souls. He asks, “Is death so horrible for us Catholics that we must gladly do everything so that we can lengthen our lives? Must we experience all of life’s enjoyments? Would we find much in this world to be difficult if we were to keep in mind the eternal joy of Heaven?” (p. 203). Throughout his final writings, Franz insists that Catholics take action in order to save themselves: “Who fares better in this world: the person who places earthly life before eternal life or the person who puts eternal life before earthly life?… For instead of being concerned about saving me from serious sins and directing me toward eternal life, these people are concerned about rescuing me from an earthly death” (p. 243). What Franz Jaegerstaetter concluded was startingly simple: “People want to observe Christians who have taken a stand in the contemporary world, Christians who live amid all of the darkness with clarity, insight, and conviction” (p. 211). He decided to live and to die with that clarity and conviction.

This deeply moving book is more than a collection of letters and essays by an uncompromising individual. It poses universal questions about the moral and physical consequences of the decisions that people make every day–questions about obedience to different institutions and individuals, and whether one should accept the cost of remaining quiet and going along with situations that give us ethical misgivings. Readers will be challenged and even inspired by the clear-sightedness of one obscure, straight-talking Austrian farmer, who decided that his “No,” even if it brought him an earthly death, was worth eternal life.

Note

[1]. Gordon Charles Zahn, In Solitary Witness: The Life and Death of Franz Jaegerstaetter, revised ed. (Spingfield, IL: Tempelgate,1986).

Article Note: Hedwig Richter, “Der Protestantismus und das linksrevolutionäre Pathos. Der Ökumenische Rat der Kirchen in Genf im Ost-West Konflikt in der 1960er und 1970er Jahren”

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Article Note: Hedwig Richter, “Der Protestantismus und das linksrevolutionäre Pathos. Der Ökumenische Rat der Kirchen in Genf im Ost-West Konflikt in der 1960er und 1970er Jahren,” Geschichte und Gesellschaft 36 no. 3 (July-September 2010): 408-436.

By John S. Conway, University of British Columbia

Hedwig Richter, who teaches in Bielefeld, takes a highly critical, indeed sceptical, look at the World Council of Churches’ political attitudes in the 1960s and 1970s, claiming that these amounted to an attempt to give legitimacy to left-leaning utopian ideals, including even the idea of revolutionary violence.

The World Council of Churches was officially established in 1948,but had been preceded by several decades of endeavour to foster ecumenical cooperation between the Protestant churches, and to overcome the doctrinal animosities which had for so long marred their relationships. In the eyes of church leaders, these scandalous divisions had rendered in vain the churches’ witness for peace and international brotherhood in a century when the world was torn apart by war and revolution The task of creating a credible international institution to give effect to these goals was superbly carried out by the first General Secretary, Willem Visser ‘t Hooft. But its political outreach concentrated on rebuilding Europe after the catastrophes of the Second World War, which had shown the fragility of church relations, and their lack of influence on national politics.

By the end of the 1950s, however, a new era began. This was a period of rapid secularization. The churches lost support, their social relevance diminished, and their funding bases declined. In this crisis, Richter contends, the WCC’s leaders believed they could regain credibility for the Christian cause and for their institution by embracing the left-wing politics of the radical Christian fringe. Under the leadership of the third General Secretary, Philip Potter, a West Indian, the WCC promoted the slogan that the Church and the WCC shoud become “the voice of the voiceless” and that its resources should be used to advocate policies of benefit to the world’s neediest and most oppressed peoples. Such a stance included a deliberate bias against colonialism, capitalism, overseas exploitation, the arms race and other forms of military tyranny. Not surprisingly, the increasing power of the United States, and its European-based military alliance, NATO, became an easy target, despite the fact that the American Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, had been an early champion of the WCC in the 1940s.

In 1961, at the WCC’s third General Assembly in New Delhi, representatives of the Orthodox Churches, including those from the Soviet Union, joined the Council, obviously with Moscow’s agreement. The predictable result was to curtail criticism of conditions in the Soviet-controlled parts of Europe, and the suspicion, which Richter does not refute, that the WCC was used to infiltrate Soviet agents to the west. The fact is undoubted that in the 1960s the WCC’s witness was unbalanced—polemic against the West, silence towards the Communist empire. Even the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 was passed over without protest. Khruschchev’s anticlerical persecution in Russia, and the Orthodox Church’s apparent complicity, though deplored, was not allowed to hinder the continued adherence of this Church in Geneva.

In the 1970s the WCC took the significant step of promoting its Programme to Combat Racism, which sought to oppose, and even overthrow, those regimes, particularly in southern Africa, which practised racial discrimination. Large sums of money were raised to support the opponents of apartheid. Enormous controversy arose when it was rumoured that these monies were being used to purchase arms for revolutionary attacks by guerrilla forces against the oppressors. The World Council was at pains to claim that its assistance was solely for humanitarian purposes, but the lack of controls and its unilateral approval of the anti-apartheid cause weakened its stance. In Richter’s view, a double standard prevailed. By adopting what she calls the “mythology” of the anti-racial campaign, the WCC sought to gain institutional legitimacy and popular endorsement from left-wing circles beyond the church doors. This policy, she believes, was a serious distortion of the WCC’s original priorities to promote mission and church unity. Theological insights were displaced by overly political considerations, as though the vocal support of left-wing policies could restore the churches’ fortunes when their proclamation of the Gospel had so obviously failed.

Article Note: D. Gorman, “Ecumenical Internationalism: Willoughby Dickinson, the League of Nations and the World Alliance for Promoting International Friendship through the Churches”

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Article Note: D. Gorman, “Ecumenical Internationalism: Willoughby Dickinson, the League of Nations and the World Alliance for Promoting International Friendship through the Churches,” Journal of Contemporary History 45 no. 1 (March 2010): 51-73.

By John S. Conway, University of British Columbia

The League of Nations was the twentieth century’s most idealistic project in international politics. It failed because of the entrenched nationalism of Europe’s leaders, particularly Germany. Consequently the reputation of its supporters suffered in the history books. Amongst them was the upper-class Englishman Willoughby Dickinson (1859-1943), whose life was devoted to moral uplift and public service. His contributions have now been excellently described in this fine article by Daniel Gorman, who teaches at Waterloo University, Ontario.

Dickinson’s career began with his service on the newly-created London County Council in the 1890s, where he campaigned eagerly for progressive causes. It was a natural step-up for him to become an M.P. in the Liberal landslide of 1906. His vision was enhanced by his sincere devotion to his Anglican faith, refuting the calumny that the Church of England was ”the Conservative Party at prayer”. Likewise he was drawn to the Quaker ideal of world peace, and already before 1914 was active in promoting this cause. In 1919 he became very involved with an international body of church laymen called the World Alliance for Promoting International Friendship through the Churches. This group sought to mobilize the churches on an ecumenical basis for the prevention of any future war. They deliberately avoided any kind of denominational or theological controversy, but instead concentrated on the world’s need for a new political order to replace the militarism and jingoism which they believed had caused the catastrophe of the Great War.

In the 1920s the World Alliance spread rapidly throughout Europe and North America. Dickinson gave much of his time and wealth in organising high-minded meetings to propagate this programme of international peace. A parallel endeavour, with the same aims of promoting peace, cooperation, disarmament and world order, led Dickinson to become a vocal supporter of the League of Nations, and of its public education activities through the League of Nations Societies established in each member state. In the 1920s Dickinson worked hard to bring about the international collaboration of these volunteer groups, and eventually became President of the International Federation of League of Nations Societies (IFLNS).

In 1930 the Labour Government gave him a peerage,but he found increasing opposition to his ideals for genuine peace and international friendship. His final years before and during the Second World War were a period of bitter disillusionment. Nevertheless his example deserves to be better known. His campaign for what he called ecumenical internationalism, designed to ameliorate world conditions through public education and leadership, combined religious motivation with political planning.

Gorman’s article is a valuable contribution by throwing light on this ardent crusader for peace and the institutions he helped to build in order to bring about this ideal at a most unpropitious period of the world’s history.

Conference Report: Fourth Annual Powell and Heller Holocaust Conference, March 17-19, 2011

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Conference Report: Fourth Annual Powell and Heller Holocaust Conference, March 17-19, 2011, Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, WA.

By Robert Ericksen, Pacific Lutheran University

On March 17-19, 2011, Pacific Lutheran University hosted the Fourth Annual Powell and Heller Family Conference on Holocaust Education. This event began on the evening of March 17^th with the showing of a film, The Last Survivor. This documentary focuses on survivors of four genocides—one from the Holocaust and one each from Rwanda, Bosnia, and the Congo. The co-directors, Michael Pertnoy and Michael Kleiman, introduced and discussed the film. They were joined by Justin Semahoro Kimenyerwa, a child survivor of the genocide in the Congo who now resides in the United States. The next morning Carl Wilkens spoke about another recent genocide. He was the only American to stay in Rwanda throughout the killing there, despite many who urged him to leave. His description of the genocide, in words and photos, helps explain his present work, which is to travel around the United States, sometimes by bicycle, raising awareness about genocide and other extreme forms of injustice.

Another highlight on Friday involved a discussion of the Huguenot rescue of Jewish lives in and around Le Chambon, France. This story about Pastor André and Magda Trocmé, along with other rescuers, is well known. Patrick Henry, a recent author on the rescue of Jews in France, gave the main presentation. He was assisted by Nelly Trocmé Hewett, a teenage daughter of the Trocmés at the time, who gave her first-person account of the rescue activities. Saturday morning included a dramatic presentation by “Living Voices.” This involved a one-woman show, “Through the Eyes of a Friend: The World of Anne Frank.” We also had a presentation on artistic responses to the Holocaust, including the work of Anselm Kiefer. A session on “Poetry after Auschwitz” began with a presentation on Theodor Adorno, followed by readings of poetry by writers such as Irena Klepfisz, a poet in Yiddish and English, who is also a child survivor of the Warsaw Ghetto. An afternoon session on Saturday included a presentation by two professors from Concordia University in Portland, Oregon. Kevin Simpson (psychology) and Joel Davis (history) described their interdisciplinary course on the Holocaust in a presentation under the title, “Explaining Evil: Cross-disciplinary Approaches to Teaching the Holocaust.”

Readers of this journal are reminded that PLU will host a Holocaust conference each spring. Planning for the next conference, scheduled for March 15-16, 2012, has just begun. Interested persons are invited to contact Robert Ericksen at ericksrp@plu.edu.

Conference Announcement: Celebrating the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English Edition, November 13-15, 2011

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Conference Announcement: Celebrating the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English Edition, November 13-15, 2011, Union Theological Seminary, New York.

By Victoria J. Barnett

Sunday | November 13

11:00 a.m. Optional Worship at Abyssinian Baptist Church

3:00 p.m. Check-in at Union Theological Seminary

8:00 p.m. Keynote Address “Bonhoeffer: Theologian, Activist, Educator. Challenges for the Church of the Coming Generations” | Sam Wells, Duke University

Monday | November 14

Bonhoeffer, Ethics, Public Life 1945-2010

“Inspiration, Controversy, Legacy. The Response to Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Three Germanys” | Wolfgang Huber, Germany

Panel: Bonhoeffer in International Contexts | John de Gruchy, South Africa; Keith Clements,

United Kingdom; Larry Rasmussen, USA; Carlos Caldas, Brazil; Kazuaki Yamasaki, Japan

Emerging Issues, New Research 2011-

“Bonhoeffer’s Strong Christology and Religious Pluralism” | Christiane Tietz, Mainz

Panel: New Research, New Issues | Florian Schmitz, Mainz; Reggie Williams, Pasadena; Brigitte Kahl, Union Theological Seminary

Tuesday | November 15

Translation and the Interpretation of History and Theology

“Translating Bonhoeffer. Intercultural Theological Challenge” | Hans Pfeifer, Düsseldorf

Translators Panel: Bonhoeffer in Translation: Challenges and Discoveries | moderated

by Victoria Barnett, USA

Historians Panel: History and Theology in Bonhoeffer Interpretation | moderated

by Andrew Chandler, Chichester

Theologians Panel: Reading Bonhoeffer the Theologian | Michael DeJonge and Clifford Green

Concluding Banquet

For more information about the conference, as well as the registration form, please go to http://dietrichbonhoeffer.org/BonhoefferConf.brochure_Feb.2011.pdf.

Call For Papers: Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations, 2011 Volume

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2011

Call For Papers: Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations, 2011 Volume.

The editorial board of Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations, a peer-reviewed electronic journal, invites submissions for its 2011 volume. SCJR publishes scholarship on the history, theology, and contemporary realities of Jewish-Christian relations and reviews new materials in the field, providing a vehicle for exchange of information, cooperation, and mutual enrichment in the field of Christian-Jewish studies and relations.

Submissions on the 2011 volume’s feature topic “Constructing Saints and Heroes” are especially welcome: A recurring issue in Catholic-Jewish relations has been the beatification and canonization of men and women who, from the perspective of those involved in dialogue, have had questionable qualifications for this elevation. Given that humans of all religious traditions identify certain individuals as heroes who served and serve as sources of blessing to the world in various ways, the editors of Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations invite submissions for volume 6 (2011) that explore this phenomenon from any relevant perspective. What qualifies a person to be considered a saint or tzaddiq or religious role model in Judaism or Christianity? To what extent does (or should) that person’s evaluation by other denominations or religions play a role? What sorts of issues require clarification for inter-religious understanding on these issues? Figures that authors might want to address may include historical figures like Martin Luther, the various cults connected to medieval blood libels, or sainted authors of Adversos Iudaeos literature; or more contemporary figures such as Pope Pius IX, Pope Pius XII, Edith Stein, Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa, Martin Niemoeller, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Krister Stendahl, Martin Luther King, Theodor Herzl, Baruch Goldstein, or Abraham Joshua Heschel. Papers may be comparative or address the question from within a single tradition.

Interested authors are encouraged to contact the editors in advance. For publication in the 2011 volume, papers should be submitted by September 1, 2011 through the journal’s website. All papers will be subject to peer-review before acceptance for publication. For more information, please see www.bc.edu/scjr.

Letter from the editors: March 2011

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2011

Letter from the editors: March 2011

By Mark Edward Ruff, St. Louis University, and Kyle Jantzen, Ambrose University College

Greetings from the editors, and welcome to the March issue of the ACCH Quarterly. It is a true pleasure to be able to bring you this spring issue. Its contents are drawn from the annual meetings of the American Historical Association, under whose umbrella the American Catholic Historical Association and the Conference Group for Central European History sponsored their annual gatherings.

The panels discussed in this issue were particularly germane to this year’s larger theme, “History, Society and the Sacred.” Doris Bergen gives us a run-down of a panel entitled, “Christianity during the Era of Total War.” Two of the papers on this panel focused on Catholic military chaplains during the conflagrations which tore the European continent apart between 1914 and 1945. Mark Edward Ruff provides a synopsis of the panel, “German Catholics Negotiate National Socialism: Three Case Studies” which underscored the ambiguities and ambivalences of the relationship between church leaders in the Third Reich and the National Socialist movement.

This issue also features the repertoire of reviews to which you have long been accustomed. Heath Spencer reviews Jeremy Cohen’s book, Christ Killers: The Jews and the Passion from the Bible to the Big Screen. In a collective review of four books, John Conway takes on an equally massive subject – Christianity and Communism in East Germany. Robert Ericksen assesses a book written by a relative outsider to Holocaust studies, David Cymet’s History vs. Apologetics: The Holocaust, the Third Reich, and the Catholic Church, while John Conway reviews Antonia Leugers’ Jesuiten in Hitlers Wehrmacht. Kriegslegitimation und Kriegserfahrung.

It is also our pleasure to welcome Suzanne Brown-Fleming as a new member of the ACCH Quarterly editorial board. Dr. Brown-Fleming is the director of Visiting Scholar Programs at the Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. She brings a wealth of experience not only in coordinating international scholarly programs on the Holocaust but also in carrying out research into the churches and the Holocaust. She is the author of The Holocaust and Catholic Conscience: Cardinal Aloisius Muench and the Guilt Question in Postwar Germany, which was published in 2006 by the University of Notre Dame Press. On a related note, it is with a mixture of sadness and gratitude that we announce the departure of Dr. Randall Bytwerk from the editorial board. For many years, Dr. Bytwerk faithfully archived the contents of John Conway’s monthly newsletter (forerunner to the ACCH Quarterly), which are still available at hisCalvinCollege website (http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/akz/). We would like to thank him for his service.

On behalf of all of the ACCH Quarterly editors,

Mark Edward Ruff, St. Louis University

Kyle Jantzen, Ambrose University College

Review of Jeremy Cohen, Christ Killers: The Jews and the Passion from the Bible to the Big Screen

Leave a reply

ACCH Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2011

Review of Jeremy Cohen, Christ Killers: The Jews and the Passion from the Bible to the Big Screen (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 313 pp. ISBN: 978-0-19-517841-8.

By Heath A. Spencer, Seattle University

In this book, Cohen explores the origin and evolution of the Christ-killer myth from the first century to the present, focusing his analysis on religious texts, sculptures, paintings, stage plays, and films. The result is a fascinating but sobering study of an idea that has troubled Christian-Jewish relations and contributed to considerable anti-Jewish violence.

Cohen begins by noting that New Testament stories of Jesus’ crucifixion stood firmly within Jewish traditions, drawing inspiration from the Akedah, Passover, and “suffering servant” motifs as well as themes like deliverance and atonement that were already present in Jewish theology. Unfortunately, the passion narratives also assign Jewish leaders a key role in Jesus’ arrest and trial, and they depict a Jewish crowd that demands his death. In Matthew’s Gospel, the crowd even cries out, “His blood be on us and our children!” Cohen is aware that Christians do not all draw the same conclusions from these stories, and he introduces the reader to a range of views among contemporary New Testament scholars, from those who see the passion narratives as historically reliable to those who understand them as “prophecy historicized” (23) or “the Christian faith put in narrative form” (16). However, even if some of this scholarship has the potential to mitigate anti-Jewish readings of the New Testament, most Christians are not familiar with it and are more likely to be influenced by a long tradition of anti-Jewish thought that builds on and embellishes the already problematic content of the New Testament passion narratives.

Cohen continues with a survey of Christian theologians from antiquity to the early modern era who commented on the passion, noting that most of them promoted the idea – already present in Matthew’s Gospel – that all Jews were guilty of the crucifixion. Theologians from Augustine to Anselm argued that first-century Jews killed Jesus in ignorance, not realizing he was the Son of God. However, from the twelfth century on a more sinister view gained currency, as theologians like Peter Lombard, Thomas Aquinas, and John Duns Scotus imagined that Jewish leaders were willfully ignorant, killing Jesus out of hatred and envy. They would have known Jesus was divine, so the argument ran, if they had not been blinded by their malice. The notion that Jews were obstinate in their unbelief coincided with more hostile appraisals of Talmudic Judaism and dovetailed with accusations of ritual murder, ritual cannibalism, and host desecration that emerged in the twelfth century and continued into the modern era. Devotional manuals from this period also instructed readers to imagine Jesus’ suffering (along with those who inflicted it) at length and in exquisite detail. Together, these developments indicate an intensification of the Christ-killer myth and a tendency to see contemporary Jews as intentional Christ killers.

Cohen’s exploration of “The Myth and the Arts” reveals a fascinating correlation between developments in Christian theology and the visual arts. For example, early medieval depictions of the figures “Synagoga” and “Ecclesia” reflected the belief that Jews rejected Christ out of ignorance, whereas works from later periods depicted Jews (but not Romans) enthusiastically torturing Christ in his final hours. Often, the Jewish tormentors were shown wearing the same kinds of clothing as the artist’s contemporaries, collapsing past and present in a provocative manner.

The book ends with analysis of the Christ-killer myth on stage and on the screen. Cohen tracks the evolution of the famous Oberammergaupassion play, which had a strong anti-Jewish slant until quite recently but then went through considerable revisions in 1980, 1984, 1990, and 2000. The blood curse of Matthew’s Gospel has been eliminated, Pilate is portrayed less sympathetically, and Jesus’ Jewish identity is acknowledged. However, the Jewish priests still conspire against Jesus and the Jewish crowd still demands his death, so Cohen sees the changes as largely cosmetic. Films about the passion also get mixed reviews. Il Vangelo secondo Matteo (1964) portrays Jews as obstinate, but it also universalizes the story, making it suitable as a commentary on twentieth-century Italy. The Gospel of John (2003) does a better job than the Fourth Gospel itself in placing Jesus in his Jewish context, and it projects much of the evil onto a single Jewish antagonist. Nevertheless, Cohen still sees an anti-Jewish bias in the depiction of the Pharisees and the crowd. The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) and Jesus of Montreal (1989) largely avoid overt anti-Judaism, though the public controversy over Scorcese’s film brought some antisemitic rhetoric out into the open. Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ (2004), on the other hand, exonerates Pilate, demonizes Jesus’ antagonists while highlighting their “Jewishness,” and serves as a stark reminder that the Christ-killer myth still resonates with many in spite of all the work that has gone into debunking it.

One serious weakness of Cohen’s book is its almost exclusive emphasis on intellectuals, artists, and other elite individuals. Several other recent studies on religion and violence demonstrate that the behavior of ordinary people did not always correspond to the decrees of rulers or the writings of intellectuals. Benjamin Kaplan’s Divided by Faith: Religious Conflict and the Practice of Toleration shows that in early modern Europe, hateful ideas were often combined with a kind of pragmatic toleration. New Testament scholar Amy-Jill Levine (The Misunderstood Jew: The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus) sees a similar phenomenon in contemporary American society. Cohen promises that his book will explore “the direct effect that theology had on the treatment of Jews in Christian lands” during the Middle Ages (6), but in most cases he simply assumes that bad theology will have uniformly bad effects, as if ideas had a consistent and autonomous power regardless of context. For example, Cohen presents the famous example of Thomas of Monmouth, who used a ritual murder accusation to promote the cult of St. William of Norwich. However, one might also want to know what impact such a story had in a given locale. Did it lead to popular violence, judicial murder, or apathy? How many people cared enough to visit the shrine? Anthony Bayle’s “Fictions of Judaism in England before 1290” (in Patricia Skinner, ed., Jews in Medieval Britain) reveals that donations to the shrine of St. William of Norwich eventually fell as low as 6d per year, an indication that ritual murder accusations did not always gain traction or maintain their appeal. Medievalists Robert Chazan (In the Year 1096…The First Crusade and the Jews) and Jonathan Elukin (Living Together, Living Apart: Rethinking Jewish-Christian Relations in the Middle Ages) also highlight the broad spectrum of Christian attitudes and behaviors toward Jews, even during episodes of intense conflict. Understanding the causes of anti-Jewish violence – or its absence – requires more than a mere survey of anti-Jewish ideas.

Cohen does acknowledge important shifts in Christian teaching following the Holocaust, most notably in the Catholic declaration Nostra Aetate. However, he finds such developments insufficient because they fail to challenge the historicity of the New Testament passion narratives and often refuse to acknowledge the contribution of the churches to a long history of anti-Jewish thought and action. If the source of the Christ-killer myth is the New Testament itself, Christians are faced with an intractable problem, and Cohen expresses little optimism they will achieve a satisfactory resolution. Nevertheless, his book can raise awareness among Christians that their scriptures and institutions have created an anti-Jewish mythology with destructive potential. Perhaps such awareness will deny the myth some of its power, even if it can’t be eradicated.