862.404/112
The Ambassador in Germany (Dodd) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 29.]
Sir: I have the honor to report that Protestant Church affairs have been in a state of agitation during the past week owing to [Page 346] particularly bold action taken by the Prussian branch of the Opposition Confessional movement.
Starting off on the offensive once again, this branch has issued a manifesto which is the most strongly worded attack yet brought out against the Rosenbergian neo-pagan movement fostered by elements in the National Socialist Party. This declaration, which was read in a number of churches in Prussia and elsewhere in Germany on Sunday, March 10, begins, “We see our people threatened by a deathly peril. The peril consists of a new religion.” Invoking the first Commandment, the manifesto strikes out against beliefs which raise considerations of race, nationhood and honor to the position of idols and substitute the idea of an “eternal Germany” for faith in the “eternal Kingdom of God.” It then takes up the Confessional Church’s position relative to the State, declaring that the former “gratefully recognizes the authority of the State founded and limited by God’s Word.” Adverting obviously to the National Socialist conception of the transcendent sacredness of the oath to the Führer, it states that every oath must be taken before God’s countenance and places the obligation thus taken under God’s responsibility. Copies of the declaration are enclosed with this despatch.3
It is understood that the manifesto was drawn up in two private meetings of the Prussian Confessional Synod held March 4 and 5, and in order to obviate any charges of political disloyalty, explanations were given that it was in no way intended to be an attack upon National Socialism or the State but merely a declaration in favor of Church liberty. The danger of further delay in the face of the threats of neo-paganism was emphasized.
The Confessional pastors are understood to have pledged themselves to read the manifesto on the first suitable occasion and in Berlin last Sunday it was proclaimed from several pulpits. In the suburb of Dahlem, Dr. Niemöller, who has been the outstanding Confessional leader in Berlin, convoked his congregation in the Parish Hall, finding the church too small to hold the large attendance, and after reading the manifesto, administered to all present a joint oath of allegiance to the Confessional movement. It is reported that outside of Berlin the manifesto was also widely proclaimed in the Rhineland and Westphalia.
Official reaction to the reading of the manifesto does not seem to have followed any coherent plan. It is said that at the last moment, Dr. Frick, Minister of the Interior, forbade its reading and endeavored to communicate his decision to the Confessional pastors, by telephone, through the civil authorities. Most pastors, however, disregarded the interdiction, considering that the Minister of the Interior lacked competence to dictate what they might or might not say from their [Page 347] pulpits on important Church matters. Several pastors in Pomerania are stated to have been temporarily detained by the Secret police, although the absence of drastic action in the German capital raised questions as to whether the police in these cases may not have acted through excess zeal and perhaps have gone further than was first intended. On the other hand it was reported that the Confessional movement had been proscribed in Silesia, presumably because of the manifesto. Although no arrests were made in Berlin, copies of the manifesto were quietly confiscated after the services and it is understood that Dr. Niemöller was prevented by police questioning from immediately proceeding to another church from his own to read the manifesto a second time. The apparently deliberate leniency exercised at least in Berlin, seemed to be confirmed by a statement made by Dr. Goebbels4 at an informal reception tendered him by the Foreign Press Association, to the effect that, despite the latest “unheard-of impudence of the Opposition pastors,” the Government had no intention of giving in to their burning desire to be made martyrs.
It has been noted that the dissolution of an organization in Hamburg known as the Evangelical Church Union has been played up in the foreign press as an example of government persecution of the Church. The Consul General in Hamburg5 reports, however, that police action was taken against the head of this body, a certain Pastor Rubanovitsch, because of complaints that he had been misusing its funds rather than on grounds of his religious activities. That the authorities are determined on the other hand to act with utmost severity against church ministers who in any way run afoul of the law, is illustrated by the sentence of a year’s imprisonment recently passed by the Special Court at Stuttgart upon a priest who had repeated to a chance acquaintance, with a view to confirming their accuracy, certain reports regarding Germany which he had picked up from the French broadcasting station in Strassbourg.
Although it clarifies considerably the Opposition movement’s stand, the recent manifesto leaves German Church affairs generally in a highly confused state. First of all, there is the question of Reichsbishop Müller whose ambiguous position has been described in previous reports, it not yet being known whether he will eventually be dropped entirely for the sake of Church peace, or be armed with executive powers, through the agency of a Cabinet Minister for Church Affairs, to enforce his decrees. While certain prominent government officials repeat in private conversation with apparent sincerity that they are tired of the prolonged Church strife, it may be presumed that the neo-pagans in the Party would welcome its continuance as leaving [Page 348] the way open for the advance of their belief. Evidently the Churches recognize this danger and are now endeavoring to close their ranks. The Union described in the Embassy’s despatch No. 1839 of March 11, 1935,6 which brought together under the Confessional Synod the Lutheran and Reformed Churches of Bavaria, Hanover and Württem-berg, was a step in this direction and there are reasons for believing that the Catholic Church is acting in concert with the Protestants in this matter, it being said that the Catholics, smarting from their defeat in the recent schools’ campaign in Bavaria, played a certain role in the issuance of the Prussian manifesto.
At the press reception cited above, Dr. Goebbels is reported to have remarked that the Government, had prepared a “peppery answer” to the Opposition pastors. The next day it was announced officially that a decree had just been signed by Minister of Education Herr Bust, and by the Prussian Minister of Finance, providing for a reduction of the Church tax in Prussia by a fifth for the coming year. It was argued that the general tax situation had greatly improved and that therefore a reduction in this sphere might be safely undertaken.
In reality the move may be regarded as the Government’s first reply to the Prussian manifesto. Although aimed against the Confessional Churches which are in the overwhelming majority, this “peppery answer,” it appears, may in practice bear especially upon the Reichs-bishop’s Church, which depends in large measure upon the taxes collected on its behalf, as its finances are in very bad condition owing to the decline in its membership; as regards the Confessional Church, on the other hand, while its adherents in many districts have refused to pay Church taxes, they have turned the amount of the taxes directly over to their parishes, these together with their voluntary contributions, keeping revenue at a fairly stable level. The decree is regarded as having particular significance in view of the signature of the Minister of Education, who, apart from the question of schools, would normally have little to do with Church affairs; his association with the decree is difficult to explain in any other way than that more serious consideration is perhaps being given to the possibility of appointing him as Minister of Evangelical Church Affairs in accordance with the plan, mentioned above, for increasing State control.
The threat of government intervention has apparently aroused the Confessional leaders to prosecute with even greater determination their newly reopened campaign. It is understood that all Opposition pastors who for one reason or another were prevented from reading the proclamation last Sunday will do so tomorrow. This step had originally been planned for Sunday, March 24, as tomorrow is the Day of National Mourning for those who fell in the War, but in view of the [Page 349] point matters have now reached, it was decided to advance the date set for the second reading of the manifesto. It is learned that in the country districts where the pastors failed to receive the manifesto in time last Sunday, the police have specifically warned them that it is forbidden to read it. The present controversy has been entirely kept out of the German press, but those who are aware of the situation as it now stands, are inclined to regard it as particularly tense.
Respectfully yours,