862.404/109
The Ambassador in Germany (Dodd) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 9.]
Sir: I have the honor to report as follows concerning developments which have recently occurred in Catholic and Evangelical church circles in Germany.
Multiple incidents indicate that the Catholics are still fighting against attacks upon their religious liberty by National Socialist extremists …
[Here follows description of incidents of friction between the Catholic Church and the National Socialists.]
The national significance of these developments seems very difficult to judge at this stage. The two principal parties, if by that is meant the German State and the Vatican, are apparently holding themselves apart from the conflict. The latter particularly seems to be playing a waiting game, for while reports are current of protests having been made by the German Catholics to the Holy See, it does not appear that the latter has made any formal representations through the Papal Nuncio here. In certain informed quarters it is believed that both the Vatican and the conservative elements in the German Government are willing to let the anti-Catholic movement go to an extreme where it will ultimately defeat itself, it being said that the Vatican Attachés particular importance to the restraining influence of the Reichswehr, which is against such disturbances, although in certain circles the question is being asked whether the Vatican’s reported trust in the Reichswehr, which is a predominantly Protestant group, may not be a little naive. In any case, the Vatican [Page 344] apparently has not yet made a formal issue of the anti-Catholic agitation and the Government for its part has adopted a policy, for the moment at least, of inactivity and ambiguity. Evidence of an attempt at conciliation may perhaps be seen in Hitler’s message to the Pope on the latter’s coronation anniversary and his intimacy with the Papal Nuncio, while on the negative side the Government has refrained as yet from curbing the anti-Catholic extremists in the party. During this friendly armed truce, so to speak, the negotiations begun a while ago on the subject of the application of the Concordat of 1933 have remained at a deadlock. From a confidential source I learn that an approach made about two weeks ago directly to Cardinal Pacelli, the Papal Secretary of State, by the Papal Nuncio in Berlin, with a view to their being resumed, has to date had no result.
In the Evangelical Church, on the other hand, there have lately been signs of a renewed activity which may possibly bring to a head shortly the question of Dr. Müller’s position as Reichsbishop. It has been reported in well-informed quarters that leaders of the “German Church” faction who were formerly his followers have decided that he is a liability to their cause and have requested his resignation. The Reichsbishop is understood to have refused, however, claiming that he still held the Führer’s confidence; it appears that his opponents within the “German Church” then suggested that he prove it by being received by Herr Hitler, his attempts to obtain an audience having until now only met with successive postponements. The Reichsbishop’s position is apparently weak in both official and party circles, one report, believed to be reliable, being to the effect that the Ministry of the Interior has handed down an unfavorable opinion on the legality of his tenure of office and on this ground has informed him that it could no longer pay to him sums allocated in the Ministry’s budget for his Reich Church administration. It is stated that an appeal from this decision addressed by him to leaders of the National Socialist party has been coolly received.
In the meantime the leaders of the opposite faction, the so-called Confessional Movement in the Evangelical Church, have been playing a strong hand, going so far, it is understood, as to address an ultimatum to the Minister of the Interior,1 demanding Müller’s resignation and state recognition of the Confessional administration. Their movement has gained ground in the Rhineland, where they have been emboldened to reconstitute the old Provincial Church Council of 1932, thus disregarding the Church “election” of July 1933 which carried the so-called “German Christians” to power. It is thought likely that similar measures may shortly be taken in the province of Westphalia. Should Dr. Müller’s resignation be forced [Page 345] both by his own party and by the opposition, his logical successor would be Dr. Marahrens, Bishop of Hanover and head of the provisional administration of the Opposition movement, unless the “German Christians” could bring forward from their ranks a man in whom the Evangelical Church as a whole has more confidence.
The attitude of the State towards these church matters remains more or less enigmatic and consequently it is difficult to say when the crisis may be reached with respect to Reichsbishop Müller. There are signs, however, that the Government is becoming weary of this Church strife and may even be contemplating measures for an eventual and more complete separation of Church and State. Evidence in favor of this possibility is seen in a recent decision to compel the Prussian Bible Society to pay taxes, and it is understood that on the initiative of Nazi party leaders, assessments of the properties of the Evangelical and Roman Catholic churches are being quietly carried out with a view to the possible imposition of taxes. In the case of the Roman Catholic Church it is difficult to foresee how this could be accomplished under the Concordat, but with respect to the other churches, the principle of tax assessment might be asserted and the churches still keep on their feet by continuing the clerical allowances to-day paid by the State. Even this arrangement might prove crippling to the Protestant churches for a while but it might eventually teach them the necessity for greater self-reliance and thus restore to them some of their lost freedom of action.
It might be mentioned in conclusion that Herr von Ribbentrop2 in a recent conversation with a diplomatist remarked that the Churches as organized at present were subject to serious failings and that something should be substituted in their place, as they did not seem to grasp the nationalist movement. This remark is reported for what it may be worth in view of the fact that Herr von Ribbentrop’s convictions are likely to follow the prevailing trend of high governmental opinion.
Respectfully yours,
Counselor of Embassy