Was hitler a catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_II
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t know Hitler as well as some of you seem to. In what sense was he a lunatic or nuts? I’d have thought he was awfully lucid in a lot of ways - at least compared to the guy who talked to me on the bus for half an hour yesterday about how he was the creator of all and had been to space and was given power by the great alien and had all power and was on 8 mils of Zantac daily and had spent the whole 55 years of his life on medication, etc.
 
I don’t know Hitler as well as some of you seem to. In what sense was he a lunatic or nuts? I’d have thought he was awfully lucid in a lot of ways - at least compared to the guy who talked to me on the bus for half an hour yesterday about how he was the creator of all and had been to space and was given power by the great alien and had all power and was on 8 mils of Zantac daily and had spent the whole 55 years of his life on medication, etc.
They’re using the term in a loose way. he was at times a masterful, brilliant politician and military tactician, and at other times, obviously a total failure. We can all agree that someone who caused the deaths of 40,000 people was down a cylinder.
 
I think Hitler was insane, but obviously this has to be decided from afar, since he has been dead over 65 years. His physician is known to have kept him loaded with a variety of drugs during the war years, and those closest to him made sure his public appearances were few and far between during that period because of his physical appearance.

The question surfacing here about his insanity can only be settled by judging his actions. Certainly his decision (in 1943?) to order Pope Pius XII to be kidnapped by one of his generals does not speak well for his mental state. His well known megalomania is surely symptomatic of a neurotic condition, and the extent of the mass murders approved by him must rank him among the most successful homicidal maniacs in history.

The question here is whether one can appear to give the semblance of being logical while at the same time being insane. Except possibly for the early years as dictator, there is little evidence that Hitler was a master logician so far as reasoning logically to achieve the ends he had set for himself and Germany. The invasion of the different countries of Europe, the declaration of war against the United States, and the invasion of Russia signify that Hitler overreached to a degree unimaginable by any sane person. As early as 1938 it is evident that the absolute power he had achieved had absolutely corrupted him to the point of being mentally unbalanced. Men who have given themselves over to evil ways have a way of going berserk sooner or later (the Marquis de Sade is a classic instance). If insanity can be defined (in one way) as the deliberate undertaking of evil actions that will inevitably result in assassination or suicide, Hitler surely qualifies as suicidal and insane.
 
They’re using the term in a loose way. he was at times a masterful, brilliant politician and military tactician, and at other times, obviously a total failure. We can all agree that someone who caused the deaths of 40,000 people was down a cylinder.
Is it loose or outright inaccurate? It seems like a funny focal point as “the one thing we can all agree on.” It also seems unfair to the man on the bus who suffered from schizophrenia to put him and Hitler in the same category. I think that dismissing Hitler as a lunatic can be an all too comfortable way to alienate him and who he was from us and who we are.
 
Is it loose or outright inaccurate? It seems like a funny focal point as “the one thing we can all agree on.” It also seems unfair to the man on the bus who suffered from schizophrenia to put him and Hitler in the same category. I think that dismissing Hitler as a lunatic can be an all too comfortable way to alienate him and who he was from us and who we are.
You’d know yourself best, of course, but I’m not a lunatic.

I don’t mind being alienated from hitler, I welcome each opportunity. As many have pointed out, he was at times a political and military genius, at other times obviously mentally ill. You probably don’t know this, but there are many kinds of mental illness and many different degrees of each type. Unless your are familiar with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, I wouldn’t diagnose your friend on the bus with any particular mental illness. hitler, on the other hand, was some kind of stone cold lunatic.
 
You’d know yourself best, of course, but I’m not a lunatic.

I don’t mind being alienated from hitler, I welcome each opportunity. As many have pointed out, he was at times a political and military genius, at other times obviously mentally ill. You probably don’t know this, but there are many kinds of mental illness and many different degrees of each type. Unless your are familiar with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, I wouldn’t diagnose your friend on the bus with any particular mental illness. hitler, on the other hand, was some kind of stone cold lunatic.
LOL! I probably don’t know that? You don’t get out much, do you? Everybody knows that!

My friend on the bus had moments where he seemed to be talking sensibly and he told me he had schizophrenia and I believed him. I didn’t make the diagnosis myself!

Anyway, you completely ignored my point: yeah, obviously you welcome the opportunity to alienate yourself from Hitler. But Hitler was a human being, just like you, so it’s not always a good idea to only emphasize that he was a freakish monster with whom we have nothing in common. A film about him came out a few years ago in Germany and people were angry because he was portrayed as a real human being - *not *because the portrayal was inaccurate. I think we miss something when we take a discussion of Hitler only as an opportunity to say “I’m glad I’m not a lunatic, I’m glad I’m not like that.”

On the other hand, if there are also real indications of ‘clinical’ insanity, then these are worth discussing in a responsible way. The general assertion, “yeah, he was nuts,” is not so interesting.
 
… But Hitler was a human being, just like you, so it’s not always a good idea to only emphasize that he was a freakish monster with whom we have nothing in common…
As I said, you’d know yourself best to make that comparison.
 
In what sense was he a lunatic or nuts?
In the sense of the everyday hyperbole people use when they speak.

No one is proposing to be making a clinical diagnosis, nor is anyone claiming that Hitler was a severe schizophrenic incapable of rational thought. When we say he’s “nuts,” it’s a colloquial way of expressing the point that his actions were extreme and that his justifications for them were based on a racist ideology seriously disconnected from reality.
 
Maybe the task of “knowing thyself” is not as simple as you imagine it to be…
You are of course correct. This is one of those area where many people prefer caricature to realism. Yet if they saw a play or film portraying Hitler as they seem to want, they would not be pleased.
Most people don’t want to admit that in each of us is at least a small portion of Saint and monster. And of many things between the two.
 
Hitler might have thought he was a catholic…
Not likely. In private conversation Adolf Hitler expressed a low opinion of Christianity:

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941:

National Socialism and religion cannot exist together… The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity… Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things. (source: Hugh Trevor-Roper, Hitler’s Table Talk: 1941-1944, pp 6-7)

10th October, 1941, midday:

Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure. (ibid, p 43)

14th October, 1941, midday:

So it’s not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that’s left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.

Originally, religion was merely a prop for human communities. It was a means, not an end in itself. It’s only gradually that it became transformed in this direction, with the object of maintaining the rule of the priests, who can live only to the detriment of society collectively.

… Christianity, of course, has reached the peak of absurdity in this respect. And that’s why one day its structure will collapse. Science has already impregnated humanity. Consequently, the more Christianity clings to its dogmas, the quicker it will decline…
the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little…

It’s Christianity that’s the liar…

The man who lives in communion with nature necessarily finds himself in opposition to the Churches. And that’s why they’re heading for ruin – for science is bound to win…

As for the men close to me, who, like me, have escaped from the clutches of dogma, I’ve no reason to fear that the Church will get its hooks on them. We’ll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (ibid, pp 49-52)

19th October, 1941, night:

The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity. Christianity is a prototype of Bolshevism: the mobilisation by the Jew of the masses of slaves with the object of undermining society.

21st October, 1941, midday:

Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer… The decisive falsification of Jesus’ doctrine was the work of St. Paul. He gave himself to this work… for the purposes of personal exploitation… Didn’t the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it’s in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St. Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea. (ibid, pp 63-65)

13th December, 1941, midnight:

Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery… When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let’s be the only people who are immunised against the disease. (ibid, pp 118-119)

14th December, 1941, midday:

Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don’t believe the thing’s possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself… Pure Christianity-- the Christianity of the catacombs-- is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism, under a tinsel of metaphysics. (ibid, 119-120)

9th April, 1942, dinner:

There is something very unhealthy about Christianity (ibid, p 339)

27th February, 1942, midday:

It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity. It will last another hundred years, two hundred years perhaps. My regret will have been that I couldn’t, like whoever the prophet was, behold the promised land from afar." (ibid, p 278)

You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?
(source: Albert Speer, Inside the Third Reich, p 115)
 
Some more Hitler quotes from Table Talk:

“The war will be over one day. I shall then consider that my life’s final task will be to solve the religious problem. Only then will the life of the German native be guaranteed once and for all. I don’t interfere in matters of belief. Therefore I can’t allow churchmen to interfere with temporal affairs. The organized lie must be smashed. The State must remain the absolute master.”

“The evil that’s gnawing our vitals is our priests, of both creeds. I can’t at present give them the answer they’ve been asking for, but it will cost them nothing to wait. It’s all written down in my big book. The time will come when I’ll settle my account with them, and I’ll go straight to the point.”

“I don’t know which should be considered the more dangerous: the minister of religion who play-acts at patriotism, or the man who openly opposes the State. The fact remains that it’s their maneuvers that have led me to my decision. They’ve only got to keep at it, they’ll hear from me, all right. I shan’t let myself be hampered by juridical scruples. Only necessity has legal force. In less than ten years from now, things will have quite another look, I can promise them.”

“We shan’t be able to go on evading the religious problem much longer. If anyone thinks it’s really essential to build the life of human society on a foundation of lies, well, in my estimation, such a society is not worth preserving. If’ on the other hand, one believes that truth is the indispensable foundation, then conscience bids one intervene in the name of truth, and exterminate the lie.”

“Once the war is over we will put a swift end to the Concordat. It will give me the greatest personal pleasure to point out to the Church all those occasions on which it has broken the terms of it. One need only recall the close cooperation between the Church and the murderers of Heydrich. Catholic priests not only allowed them to hide in a church on the outskirts of Prague, but even allowed them to entrench themselves in the sanctuary of the altar.”

“The fact that I remain silent in public over Church affairs is not in the least misunderstood by the sly foxes of the Catholic Church, and I am quite sure that a man like the Bishop von Galen knows full well that after the war I shall extract retribution to the last farthing. And, if he does not succeed in getting himself transferred in the meanwhile to the Collegium Germanium in Rome, he may rest assured that in the balancing of our accounts, no “T” will remain uncrossed, no “I” undotted!”
 
Mike,

All your 1941 quotes from Table Talk show Hitler to have been consistent. In 1933 Hitler was reported by an underling, Hermann Rauschning, to have remarked:

“The religions are all alike, no matter what they call themselves. They have no future – certainly none for the Germans. Fascism, if it likes, may come to terms with the Church. So shall I. Why not? That will not prevent me from tearing up Christianity root and branch and annihilating it in Germany.”

His hatred of Christianity was chronic, to say the least.
 
His hatred of Christianity was chronic, to say the least.
He was a devil.

Here’s an interesting pair of maps. The first is colored in where the percentage of Catholics was highest in 1932. The second is colored in where the Nazi vote was highest in 1932, when Hitler maneuvered his way to power.

The German Catholic population:
3.bp.blogspot.com/_pMyWJ–g7Oc/RqsoMrxnrmI/AAAAAAAABTA/3UacTwSzJPI/s320/map.JPG

And then, almost a negative image of the first map, the Nazi vote:
4.bp.blogspot.com/_pMyWJ–g7Oc/RqsoM7xnrnI/AAAAAAAABTI/ws6ojFTdMaY/s320/map1.JPG

source]
 
The statistics are from '32 and the map is misleading. At that time, the Church still barred Catholics from membership in the NSDAP, the Catholic vote was with the Catholic Centre Party.

The Centre Party was part of the coalition that made hitler chancellor and did vote in the first of the Enabling Acts that made him dictator.
 
*Here’s an interesting pair of maps. *

Very helpful. Thank you! 👍
 
Reservoir Dog

*The Centre Party was part of the coalition that made hitler chancellor and did vote in the first of the Enabling Acts that made him dictator. *

Again, you are deliberately deceitful. You phrase your sentence so as to make it appear that the Catholics were all for Hitler. Just the opposite. The Centre Party was the last to join the coalition, and then only because the handwriting was all over the wall. Hindenburg, the only really plausible halt to Hitler’s advance, was old and dying. The Nazis were inevitably going to assume absolute power with or without the Centre vote. When this was realized, everybody made the best deal they could with Hitler, including the Centre Party. Hitler promised the Centre all kinds of considerations to get their vote. Then, as soon as he got in power, he repudiated all his promises and the Centre party, along with all the other parties, crashed into oblivion.

I guess you’re never going to see these facts of history, so it’s the last time I’m going to bother correcting your revisionist history of Nazi Germany. 🤷

*Completely misleading, but helpful for any apologist. *

Not the least bit misleading. It’s a fact of history that the Nazi party pulled many more votes from the Protestant sector of Germany than from the Catholic. That is why Hitler began to persecute the Catholic Church as soon as he got in power.

Again, you are hopelessly uneducated on this subject.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top