Thank you , Rebecca. I did not have full access to that article before. It certainly explains the ambivalencies in LDS doctrine that permitted a great injustice to Huebener, in that he did not enjoy the support of his ward in his effort, and was therefore arrested and executed.
Doubtless, he would, if he were living in today’s USA, he would have ended up “apostasizing”. A very tragic hero of WWII Germany.
I read that article…and he did not enjoy the support of the branch president, who was a member of the Nazi party. That does NOT mean he did not enjoy the ‘support of his ward.’
I think…
You should re read that article rather than skimming the blurbs. It was a well written, well conceived exploration of the problems Mormons (and every other German) had with the Nazi regime. It is so very easy for us, from our vantage point of over half a century and all the facts that have come to light, to condemn those who were dealing with the situation as it was happening.
Doing so, however, would be unjust.
By the way, Jerusha? The church did not excommunicate young Heubener, as you would know if you had actually read the article rather than skimming it for anything you could use to fuel your own hatred. In order to excommunicate someone, a hearing MUST be held; none was. As well, the papers MUST be authorized and signed by the proper authorities…and the ‘proper authorities’ refused to do that.
I found nothing in that article that paints the church in a particularly nasty light. Does it have some bad things to say about some Mormons? Yes.
I think, however, that you should be very, very careful about saying that actions taken by a Mormon who is not in contact with the leadership of the church, or even a group of such Mormons, represents the whole of, or even the prevailing attitude of, the church.
Not when it was Monsignor Ludwig Kaas and the Zentrum (the Catholic Centre party) was the swing vote that allowed the Enabling Act of 1933 that made Hitler, in effect, the dictator of Germany.
Not when, just a few days after the Catholic Centre party got the Enabling Act passed, Cardinal Adolf Bertram wrote a letter to German Catholics advising them to “reject as a matter of principle all ellegal or subversive activities”…gee, doesn’t that sound like telling the Catholics to cooperate with the powers that be–which happened to be the Nazis?
Not when Hitler’s move to pull Germany out of the League of Nations got the approval of the Catholic Press and several Catholic bishops.
Then there was the infamous Concordat, which required Catholic bishops to abide by the following, and to swear this oath:
‘Before God and on the Holy Gospels I swear and promise as becomes a bishop, loyalty to the German Reich and to the [regional - EC] State of . . . I swear and promise to honor the legally constituted Government and to cause the clergy of my diocese to honor it. In the performance of my spiritual office and in my solicitude for the welfare and the interests of the German Reich, I will endeavor to avoid all detrimental acts which might endanger it.’”
(the above is the Vatican authorized translation of the oath. The ACURATE translation follows
“Before bishops take possession of their dioceses, they perform an oath of allegiance in the hand of the Reichsstatthalter [Governor of the Reich, the representative of Hitler in the Reich provinces, whose task was to guarantee the implementation of Hitler’s political directives - SC] in the regional State concerned, or of the President of the Reich, according to the following formula:
”‘Before God and on the Holy Gospels I swear and promise, as becomes a bishop, loyalty to the German Reich and to the [regional] State of . . . . I swear and promise to honour the Government formed in accord with the Constitution and to cause my clergy to honour it.
“‘In dutiful solicitude for the welfare and the interest of the German State, I will, while exercising the religious post that has been assigned to me, strive to prevent any harm that could threaten it.’” [2]
By the way, the Concordat was signed AFTER the Germans issued their forced sterilization law, so…well, you figure that one out.
Why am I pointing this stuff out?
Because nothing that the Mormons ever did in regard to Nazism comes close to what the Catholics pulled off…that is, seeing to it that Hitler obtained complete dictatorial authority over Germany.
Now…do I think that these actions make Catholicism wrong or Catholics evil?
No.
I think that it means that nobody was expecting the sheer horror and level of evil that Hitler represented…and that pointing fingers at another group because they were also fooled, or not certain what to do, or made choices that turned out to be very wrong, is pretty damned stupid when members of one’s own religion/group were guilty of the same thing.
So…
Stop it.
NOTHING that German Mormons ever did came close to the damage Catholic bishops and Cardinals did–and in the case of both groups it was not evil that prompted the actions of either group; it was underestimating the sheer satanic evil that Nazism represented.
So, Jerusha, you are ‘wroth’ with me.
and think that it is appropriate to call me a Nazi.
Think about that for awhile, why don’t you?? Personally, I think calling someone a Nazi just because I disagree with their religious tenets, their personalities or even their writing style is to greatly diminish the sheer horror of Nazism. Such an epithet should be reserved for someone much nastier than me–or even you. It should be reserved for someone who advocates Nazi principles…
And I’ll bet you anything you like that you have NO clue what those are.
for God’s sake, that happened 155 years ago. Can’t you let go of something that happened that long ago? Or are your temple vows still in force? That deeply offended me.
That is a fine comment.