862.404/144
The Ambassador in Germany (Dodd) to the Secretary of State
[Received September 17.]
Sir: I have the honor to report on the position of the churches vis-à-vis the State as it has evolved since the writing of the Embassy’s despatch No. 2270 of August 31, 1935.17
Attention since that time has been fixed upon the Pastoral Letter drawn up by the Conference of Bishops at Fulda and, significantly enough, first read at the tomb of Saint Boniface, the leader in the conversion of the early Germans to Christianity who was martyred by angry pagans in the year 754. A long statement of some fifteen typewritten pages, this address is remarkable for its eloquence and dignity, calling upon the faithful to stand firm as the “number of the enemies of the Christian faith and of the Catholic Church have become legion.” It refers to the campaign of calumniation (obviously that undertaken by Herr Rosenberg) which has drawn material from the “shadows and sins of Christians” during the past 2000 years, and indirectly reproaches the Government with the fact that freedom of the press and of meeting outside the churches is denied Catholics to combat anti-Christian propaganda. Proclaiming that Divine Law as expressed in the Ten Commandments is above changes in time and peoples, the letter declares that “if the law of the State comes into conflict with the law of nature and the commandment of God, the Word says: We must obey God rather than man.” While offenses against the just laws of the State are condemned, so also is “pharisaical pride” in high temporal quarters. It would be morally disastrous, it is stated, to view marriage solely from the standpoint of racial purity, and the letter refers to the Church as being ready in its own way to preserve and educate the nation.
Taking up the charge of “political Catholicism,” the letter points out that one cannot be a Christian at home and a heathen in the street, and that while much is heard of priests who trespass upon the province of the State, nothing is heard of politicians who encroach upon the domain of religion. Although direct mention of a break of the Concordat is avoided, it is made plain that the slogan “political Catholicism” has been misused to infringe upon religious liberties, and, it is declared, might even be extended to suppress ordinary Church activities as, for instance, the ringing of bells on the ground that they disturb public order. The letter subsequently directs Catholic parents to send their children to Confessional schools and not to be misled by appeals regarding the “National unity” (Volksgemeinschaft). In a [Page 363] thinly veiled thrust at the Hitler Youth, parents are urged to send their children only to youth groups where religion is respected and moral purity is not jeopardized. The letter then praises the Catholic organizations (by inference, the harassed youth and workers’ associations) for standing fast.
It is stated in the body of the letter that the Bishops have addressed a memorandum to the Führer himself, appealing for a cessation of abuses and of interference with freedom of conscience.
It is learned that the letter was first submitted to Minister for Church Affairs Kerrl, after which it was read in all the Catholic churches last Sunday without the police making any move to interfere as they did at last year’s reading of the Pastoral Letter. It appears that instructions were given the priests to omit the usual sermons in order to avoid all cause for giving provocation. The German press has made absolutely no reference to the results of the Bishops’ Conference and it is learned that even the various diocesan weeklies are not permitted to carry the text of the address.
Opinion is that the Pastoral Letter, while strong in its statement of the difficulties of the Catholic position, is primarily defensive and indicates that the German Catholic authorities are not yet prepared to force the issue. It is learned that it was considerably tempered in tone following the gesture at conciliation attempted by Reichs Minister Kerrl by sending an emissary to Fulda and by himself later conferring with Cardinal Bertram at Erfurt. The leading bishops are understood to have come to Fulda in a determined mood buttressed by support from the Vatican. Information regarding developments in that city received from Catholic sources here is to the effect that German Church affairs have come to be concentrated in the hands of an official in favor of action of an abrupt and direct nature, and that the cleric who has been advocating attempts at a settlement primarily along the lines of further negotiations regarding application of the Concordat, is now spending considerably more time on his knees. The Erfurt meeting seems therefore to have been a development for which the Vatican was not wholly prepared.
Confirming the advances made by his subordinate, Ministerialrat Schlüter, Kerrl is understood to have promised a statement at Nuremberg conciliatory to the Churches, and to have pledged that restraint would be put upon anti-Christian propaganda in the Party. Catholic authorities, while accepting his declarations as being Government policy, appear, however, to be unconvinced of the latter’s ability to put an effective check upon such Party radicals as Rosenberg and von Schirach, of the Hitler Youth. It therefore seems to be their intention to wait but stand firm as indicated in the Pastoral Letter. While present developments may bring a period of respite, the issue is being considered as being by no means bridged towards a settlement.
[Page 364]On August 30, Count Preysing, the new Bishop, of Berlin, took the oath of allegiance to the State provided for in the Concordat, and the addresses made by him and Reichminister Kerrl, translations of which are enclosed,18 gain all the more interest by contemporary events. The Bishop declared in one passage, “According to the teachings of Catholicism, the State is founded on the essence of human nature and is therefore to be recognized and approved by every Catholic as ordained by God. The Government reigns by the authority of God and at His command. ‘For there is no power other than God and that which exists is of God.’ ‘Through me do kings reign and the lawgivers decree that which is right.’ “Herr Kerrl declared in turn: “But if your office as Bishop of the Catholic Church assigns your activity to the sphere of caring for the soul, nevertheless the persons entrusted to your spiritual leadership are at the same time Germans and citizens of the National Socialist State.” This second speech is also interesting for the admission by a public official that “certain troubles exist at the moment between State and Church.” Because of the apparent lack of direct contact between the two addresses, someone has likened them to the gestures of two persons who hold out their hands to each other and then walk by without speaking.
Interesting developments are also taking place in Protestant circles, where Kerrl seems to be making strenuous efforts toward a composition of long-standing differences. It now appears that Kerrl has offered in discussions with various groups a Church administration appointed by himself from “neutral” elements or those which have taken no part in the struggle between Confessionals and German Christians (meaning probably that Reichsbishop Müller would retire) . Evidently in case this is not accepted voluntarily, a Church law is in preparation which would impose such a government with complete power to regulate Protestant administrative and financial affairs. It is learned confidentially that this law has passed a second reading in the Ministry and is ready for submission to the next Cabinet meeting, the date of which is uncertain but which may be determined by fact that the Confessionals plan to hold a Synod during the latter half of this month. The situation is highly confused by divergencies by the Protestants themselves and by various personal considerations, it being said, for instance, that while Herr Kerrl has marked out Pastor Niemöller as being one of the most independent members of the Confessional Opposition and one most likely to be restive under government control, he has so far hesitated to read him the riot act because he is much impressed by his personality and by his patriotism as proved by his having been a submarine commander during the War.
Summing up it may be said that the Government seems to be pressing for a conciliation of the Churches perhaps chiefly for reasons of [Page 365] internal political peace, but that there are as yet no indications that a fundamental change has taken place in certain Party leaders’ attitude toward the Churches or that the Government is wholly capable of exercising control over prominent anti-Christian speakers.
Respectfully yours,