Bookmark and Share

Saturday, May 31, 2014

Hitler and the Nazis hated the Catholic Church

Bergman, Darwinism And The Nazi Race Holocaust, #3

by StFerdIII

 

The Nazis had a 30 point plan to destroy the Catholic Church and erect a Nazi church. The Catholic Church was the only institution which stood up to the Nazis, and the ethos of the church – to protect the weak, the suffering, the poor, the dispossessed – is the direct opposite of Nazi Darwinian fascism which demands the liquidation of inferiors. The Church actively opposed evolution and was declared by Hitler to be anti-science. Starting from 1935 the Nazis, after signing an 'accord' with the Vatican to protect the Church, began their active control and prosecution of Church leaders and leading laity. Catholic papers, pamphlets and books were banned and could not be printed after 1935. Thousands of dissenting Catholics were murdered from 1935-1939. In 1942 the Bible and Catholic liturgy were outlawed replaced by Mein Kampf and Nazi propaganda. In total 5 million Catholics were murdered in Nazi death camps, along with anyone else who opposed Nazi-Evolutionary racism.

Highlights are mine.


===

Nazism and Religion

Much of the opposition to the eugenic movement came from German Christians. Although Hitler was baptized a Catholic, he was never excommunicated, and evidently ‘considered himself a good Roman Catholic’ as a young man, and at times used religious language. He clearly had strong, even vociferous, anti-Christian feelings as an adult, as did probably most Nazi party leaders. As a consummate politician, though, he openly tried to exploit the church.55 Hitler once revealed his attitude toward Christianity when he bluntly stated that religion is an:


 

    ‘ … organized lie [that] must be smashed. The State must remain the absolute master. When I was younger, I thought it was necessary to set about [destroying religion] … with dynamite. I’ve since realized there’s room for a little subtlety …. The final state must be … in St. Peter’s Chair, a senile officiant; facing him a few sinister old women … The young and healthy are on our side … it’s impossible to eternally hold humanity in bondage and lies …. [It] was only between the sixth and eighth centuries that Christianity was imposed upon our peoples …. Our peoples had previously succeeded in living all right without this religion. I have six divisions of SS men absolutely indifferent in matters of religion. It doesn’t prevent them from going to their death with serenity in their souls.’ 56


 

His beliefs as revealed in this quote are abundantly clear: the younger people who were the hope of Germany were ‘absolutely indifferent in matters of religion’. As Keith noted, the Nazi party viewed Darwinism and Christianity as polar opposites. Milner said of Germany’s father of evolution, Ernst Haeckel, that in his Natural History of Creation he argued that ‘the church with its morality of love and charity is an effete fraud, a perversion of the natural order’.57 A major reason why Haeckel concluded this was because Christianity:

    ‘ … makes no distinction of race or of color; it seeks to break down all racial barriers. In this respect the hand of Christianity is against that of Nature, for are not the races of mankind the evolutionary harvest which Nature has toiled through long ages to produce? May we not say, then, that Christianity is anti-evolutionary in its aim?’ 58

Photo: Prisoners' bodies laid out in a mass grave.

Marvin Springer Collection, courtesy of USHMM Photo Archives
Prisoners’ bodies laid out in a mass grave.
 


 

The opposition to religion was a prominent feature of German science, and thus later German political theory, from its very beginning. As Stein summarized Haeckel in a lecture titled On evolution: Darwin’s Theory:

    ‘ … [Haeckel] argued that Darwin was correct … humankind had unquestionably evolved from the animal kingdom. Thus, and here the fatal step was taken in Haeckel’s first major exposition of Darwinism in Germany, humankind’s social and political existence is governed by the laws of evolution, natural selection, and biology, as clearly shown by Darwin. To argue otherwise was backward superstition. And, of course, it was organized religion which did this and thus stood in the way of scientific and social progress.’ 59


 

Martin Bormann, Hitler’s closest associate for years and one of the most powerful men in Nazi Germany, was equally blunt: the church was opposed to evolution and for this reason must be condemned, but the Nazis were on the side of science and evolution. Furthermore, Nazi and Christian concepts are incompatible because Christianity is built:

    ‘ … upon the ignorance of men and strive[s] to keep large portions of the people in ignorance …. On the other hand, National Socialism is based on scientific foundations. Christianity’s immutable principles, which were laid down almost two thousands years ago, have increasingly stiffened into life-alien dogmas. National Socialism, however, if it wants to fulfil its task further, must always guide itself according to the newest data of scientific researches.’ 60


 

Bormann also claimed that the Christian churches have long been aware that:

    ‘ … scientific knowledge poses a threat to their existence. Therefore, by means of such pseudo-sciences as theology, they take great pains to suppress or falsify scientific research. Our National Socialist world view stands on a much higher level than the concepts of Christianity, which in their essentials were taken over from Judaism. For this reason, too, we can do without Christianity.’ 60


 

As Humber notes, Hitler believed that Blacks were ‘monstrosities halfway between man and apeand therefore he disapproved of German Christians:

    ‘ … going to “Central Africa” to set up “Negro missions,” resulting in the turning of “healthy … human beings into a rotten brood of bastards.” In his chapter entitled “Nation and Race,” he said, “The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable.” A few pages later, he said, “Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live”.’ 61

Photo: Former prisoners of the 'little camp' in Buchenwald, Germany, stare out from the wooden bunks in which they slept three to a 'bed'.

National Archives, courtesy of USHMM Photo Archives
Former prisoners of the ‘little camp’ in Buchenwald, Germany, stare out from the wooden bunks in which they slept three to a ‘bed’.
 


 

A literature review shows that German racism would have had a difficult time existing if the historical creation position, void of race curse theories, had been widely accepted. One of these biblical theories was the claim that Genesis teaches that ‘two types of men’ were originally created; Adam and Eve, the superior race line, and the ‘beasts of the earth’, the inferior black race line.62,63 Few people, though, accepted this idea.


 

Relatively few scientific studies exist which directly deal with Darwinism and Nazism — and many evolutionists avoid the subject because evolution is inescapably selectionist. One of the best reviews of Darwinism and Nazism documents clearly that Nazism felt confident that their programs of extermination was firmly based on evolution science.64 Recently, a number of popular articles have covered this topic in a surprisingly candid and honest way.65 The source of the worst of Nazism was in Darwinism and we must first understand history to prevent its repeat. Paraphrasing the words of Hitler, those who ignore the lessons of history are condemned to repeat it.66 Admittedly, some persons who did not accept evolution espoused non-evolution theories which accommodated or even espoused racism. Nonetheless, these persons were few and the theories that were developed seem to be mostly in response to preconceived ideas or to justify existing social systems

====

 

Link to online excerpt