The Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt was a declaration
issued on October 19, 1945 by the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany.
The lesson we can learn from here is that when the Justice System abolishes
capital punishment and go easy on criminals, they should give repeated
apologies to all the victims’ families who want justice. The Justice System
must accept the guilt of failing the good people of the country by putting more
innocent lives at risk. Those churches who work to abolish the death
penalty should also apologize to the victims’ families.
Martin Niemöller |
INTERNET SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_Declaration_of_Guilt
The Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis,
known in English as the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt, was a
declaration issued on October 19, 1945 by the Council of the Evangelical Church
in Germany (Evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland or EKD), in which it
confessed guilt for its inadequacies in opposition to the Nazis and the Third
Reich.
Text
The Declaration states in part:
Through us infinite wrong was brought over many peoples and countries. That which we often testified to in our communities, we express now in the name of the whole church: We did fight for long years in the name of Jesus Christ against the mentality that found its awful expression in the National Socialist regime of violence; but we accuse ourselves for not standing to our beliefs more courageously, for not praying more faithfully, for not believing more joyously, and for not loving more ardently.
The Declaration makes no mention of
any particular atrocities committed during the Third Reich or of the church's
support for Hitler during the early years of the regime.
One of the initiators of the
declaration was pastor Martin Niemöller.
History
After the EKD conference at Treysa
achieved some administrative unity, critics still found a lack of contrition in
the church. Niemoller stated, with some frustration, that "you should have
seen this self-satisfied church at Treysa."
American representatives reporting
from the Treysa conference voiced views similar to Niemoller. Robert Murphy, a
career diplomat in the US State Department, commented:
There is little evidence that the German Protestant church repented German's war of aggression or the cruelties visited upon other peoples and countries.
Other Americans were perhaps more
diplomatic in their statements but the meaning was no doubt the same:
It cannot be said that the attitude of the church toward its political responsibility is as yet satisfactory, let alone clear.
The Declaration was prepared in
response to church representatives from the Netherlands, Switzerland, France,
Britain and the US who came to Stuttgart to reestablish ties with the German
Protestant Church, based on a "relationship of trust." The
representatives believed that any relationship would fall apart in the absence
of a statement by the German churchmen, due to the hatred felt in their home
countries toward Germany in 1945.
But the eleven members of the Council
had differing ideas on the moral responsibility of their churches for Nazi
Germany. One prepared a draft laying blame on "our fellow citizens"
in Germany, thus implicitly denying or diffusing the responsibility of the
church. This language was stricken from the draft, and Niemoller insisted on
the language "Through us infinite wrong was brought over many peoples and
countries."
...Hans Asmussen, Martin Noemoller... and Wilhelm Niesel ... needed no prodding to express lament over their own and the church's failure to speak out loudly and clearly against Nazism. Nevertheless, the Stuttgart Declaration was not simply an act of conscience. Persistent pressure by foreign church leaders for ... recognition of the ... inadequate response to Nazism played a significant role.
Reactions
The
Declaration was viewed by many Germans as a further capitulation to the Allies
and a betrayal of German interests; one signatory asked the foreign churchmen
to refrain from publishing the Declaration, entirely contrary to the purpose of
obtaining it in the first place. Various interpretations and arguments were
raised by some members the EKD Council to try to deflect the criticisms raised
against them by irate parishioners:
·
that the Declaration was merely an internal church
document that did not attempt to address political guilt for the war;
·
that only the German leadership had to be ashamed;
or
·
that it was not traitorous to confess guilt.
Of the
eleven signatories, only Niemoller chose to publicize it: "For the next
two years", he claimed, "I did nothing but preach the Declaration to
people." This bold approach, along with his internment at Dachau, helped
create his controversial reputation.
Effects
Many Germans objected to the
confession of guilt, on the ground that they had also suffered in the war, as a
result of Allied wrongdoing (particularly Soviet).
...the dreadful misery of 1945-1946 held the Germans back from all remorse. Because--most people believed this--the occupation troops were responsible for the misery. "They're just as inhuman as we were", was how it was put. And with that, everything was evened up.
Some Germans quickly drew comparisons
to the "war guilt" clause of the Versailles Treaty, as the
Declaration admitted that there was a "solidarity of guilt" among the
German people for the endless suffering wrought by Germany. They feared that,
once again, the victors would use such logic to impose punishment upon Germany,
as Versailles had widely been viewed after the conclusion of World War I.
Furthermore, was "solidarity of
guilt" a code word for "collective guilt"—the notion, advocated
by some of the more hawkish Allied spokesmen, that all Germans (except the
active resistance) bore all responsibility for the Nazi crimes, whether or not
they had personally pulled triggers or ejected gas pellets on children? The
Declaration did not expressly stipulate collective guilt, but neither did it
expressly adopt the more moderate doctrine that guilt and responsibility, like
all things human, were generally matters of degree.
Niesel, a former student of Karl Barth
and one of the signatories of the Declaration, concluded that there was a
general unwillingness by the German people to accept responsibility for the
Nazi rule. As Hockenos puts it:
The righteous intermingling of self-justification and self-pity was as important a factor in creating a hostile environment for a public confession as were postwar fears of another Versailles or Allied charges of collective guilt.
One German churchman reflected on his
contacts with his Swiss church comrades as those were renewed after the war;
they had remained in contact even during the war, but there were boundaries
still to overcome after the war's end. His reflections are revealing, both for
the revelation and articulation of those boundaries and of his own post-war
attitude of "helplessness" in the face of totalitarianism, his
underlying premise that individual Germans could do nothing because the obstacles
imposed by Nazi totalitarianism were simply too great, so the clergy had no
choice but to collaborate:
The accusation [from the Swiss] was that we [the German churchmen] had survived.... for them that was treachery. They couldn't understand that, under a totalitarian system, one has to make compromises... one has to have a certain flexibility... they couldn't understand any of this.[Eventually there was mutual understanding and]... I was elected by the Swiss delegates to the governing council.... me, as a German!"... That moved me greatly... the bridge was truly there again.
Many Germans raised the practical
objection that the Declaration would be interpreted by the Allies as an
expression of collective guilt, which would in turn justify harsh treatment by
the Allies in the postwar world. Most Protestants were willing to admit some
degree of responsibility, provided that the Allies reciprocated and admitted
their own wrongdoing.
In letter after letter [to the signatories] the same cry of resentment [against the Allies] is heard. To most Germans the suffering [of defeat and postwar conditions] itself was punishment enough for whatever share of guilt Germans bore....since the Allies also committed war crimes, this fact should somehow lessen the gravity of the crimes committed by Germany.
Others, who saw the Declaration more
in theological than in practical or political terms, recognized that confession
is made before God and not before men, and that such "conditional
confessions" were theologically wrong-headed and misunderstood the meaning
of Christian confession. As one Protestant rather wryly noted, neither the
Allies nor the World Council of Churches "are our
father confessor."
Hockenos identifies three basic
reasons that Germans were reluctant to confess wrongdoing:
·
Many
Germans had in fact supported the Nazis and were in fact unrepentant. Their
racist and nationalist mentality was intact, perhaps even heightened by the
defeat which triggered feelings of anger and resentment.
·
The
nature and extent of the Nazi barbarities was difficult to comprehend, even for
some of those who participated in them. Bystanders were reluctant to take
responsibility for a campaign that was, in both quantitative and moral terms,
nearly incomprehensible.
·
Germans
were suffering also and they naturally gave priority to their own suffering.
The Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt
by the Council of the Protestant Church of Germany
October 19, 1945
October 19, 1945
Text from St. Mark's Church, Stuttgart,
translation by Harold Marcuse, Professor of History at UC Santa Barbara,
March 2005
(part of my Martin Niemöller Quotation page)
I've
taken the German text of this important document from the website of the
church where it was formulated, adopted and proclaimed: www.markusgemeinde-stuttgart.de
and made a rough translation. See below for that site's historical background about the document. |
Historical
background (text
from the Markusgemeinde), :
|
Am
Abend des 17. Oktober 1945 gelangte die Markuskirche zu weltweit kirchlicher
Bedeutung. Der Ende 1945 in Treysa gebildete Rat der Evangelischen Kirche in
Deutschland (EKD), ein Gremium von zwölf einflußreichen Kirchenführern und
Laien, war zu seiner ersten ordentlichen Sitzung nach Stuttgart einberufen
worden. Vorsitzender dieses Rates der EKD war der 76-jährige Theophil Wurm,
der wegen seines mutigen Eintretens für das Recht und den Auftrag der Kirche
während des Dritten Reiches weithin hohes Ansehen genoß. Als Beginn der
Sitzung war Donnerstag, der 18. Oktober 1945, 9 Uhr festgesetzt; Tagungsort
war der kleine Sitzungssaal der Württ. Bibelanstalt in der Hauptstätterstraße
51 B. Aus Anlaß dieser ersten Sitzung des Rates der EKD wurden am Vorabend im
Saal des Furtbachhauses und in der Markuskirche um 19.30 Uhr zwei
Parallelversammlungen gottesdienstlicher Art anberaumt. Die Abendfeier in der
Markuskirche wurde von Landesbischof Wurm geleitet, die Feier im Furtbachhaus
von Prälat Dr. Hartenstein. Als Prediger bzw. Redner waren an diesen Feiern
außerdem Dr. Otto Dibelius, der Bischof von Berlin, und der aus dem
Konzentrationslager befreite Pastor Martin Niemöller beteiligt.
Pastor
Niemöller war erst gegen 18.30 Uhr in Stuttgart eingetroffen. Bei seiner
Ankunft in der Wohnung des Stadtdekans Lempp wurde ihm mitgeteilt, daß er in
der Markuskirche sprechen solle. Seine Frau suchte ihm den Predigttext aus.
Die aus dem Stegreif gehaltene Predigt Niemöllers brachte Herz und Gewissen
der großen Hörerschaft in Bewegung. Sie wirkte so tief, daß am Tage darauf in
der Mitte des Rates der EKD das Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis entstehen
konnte. In diesem Abendgottesdienst am 17. Oktober 1945 in der Markuskirche
trafen zum ersten Mal nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg die Vertreter der
Evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland mit Vertretern der Kirchen der Ökumene
zusammen. Diese Begegnung war deutscherseits weder geplant noch vorbereitet
gewesen. Der Anstoß kam von der Ökumene. Daß deren Schritt nun aber sogleich
zu einem deutlichen Wort der Umkehr, zum Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis,
führte--dies war eine Frucht jenes Abends in der Markuskirche.
Kirchengeschichtlich gesehen war das die größte Stunde in unserer
Markuskirche. Der Leiter der ökumenischen Delegation, Dr. Willem A. Visser’t
Hooft schreibt in seiner Biographie: “Wie sollten wir die Wiederaufnahme
voller ökumenischer Beziehungen erreichen? Die Hindernisse für eine neue
Gemeinschaft ließen sich nur beseitigen, wenn die deutsche Seite ein klares
Wort fand. Pierre Maury riet uns schließlich, den Deutschen zu sagen: ‚Wir
sind gekommen, um Euch zu bitten, daß Ihr uns helft, Euch zu helfen.’ Als wir
in dem großenteils zerstörten Stuttgart ankamen, hörten wir, daß am Abend in
der Markuskirche ein besonderer Gottesdienst stattfinden würde, bei dem
Bischof Wurm, Pastor Niemöller und Bischof Dibelius sprechen sollten. Niemöller
predigte über Jeremia 14, 7-11: ,Ach Herr, unsere Missetaten haben es ja
verdient; aber hilf doch um deines Namens willen!’ Es war eine machtvolle
Predigt. Niemöller sagte, es genüge nicht, den Nazis die Schuld zu geben,
auch die Kirche müsse ihre Schuld bekennen.”
Wie
tief jene Abendpredigt Pastor Niemöllers wirkte, geht auch aus einem Bericht
der Stuttgarter Zeitung vom 20. Oktober 1945 hervor. Darin heißt es
unter anderem: “Das Nichtstun, das Nichtreden, das
Nicht-Verantwortlich-Fühlen, das ist die Schuld des Christentums.”
Als
Frucht dieses Abendgottesdienstes entstand das Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis,
das am Vormittag des 19.Oktober 1945 vor den Vertretern der Ökumene abgelegt
und ihnen übergeben wurde. Schauplatz der Übergabe war (wahrscheinlich) das
Haus Eugenstraße 22, das damals der Stiftskirchengemeinde zur Verfügung
stand. Die Behauptung, das Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis sei in der
Markuskirche, vor den Augen und Ohren der Gemeinde, übergeben worden, ist
eine Legende.
Die
Kirchenleitung hat es versäumt, das Schuldbekenntnis sofort in allen
Gemeinden des Landes, von allen Kanzeln herab, bekannt zu machen. Erst
allmählich und spät kam es ins Bewußtsein der Gemeinden. In der Markuskirche
ist eine Gedenktafel mit dem vollen Wortlaut des Stuttgarter
Schuldbekenntnisses vom 19. Oktober 1945 angebracht.
|
babelfish
mostly raw from the translation engine [corrected July 2014]::
On the
evening of 17 October 1945 St. Mark's Church became important in the
world-wide church. The Council of the Protestant Church in Germany (EKD),
formed at the end of of 1945 in Treysa, a committee of twelve influential
church leaders and laymen was officially convened for the first time in
Stuttgart. Chairman of the Council of the EKD was 76-year-old Theophil Worm,
who enjoyed a high reputation abroad because of his courageous activism for
justice and the duties of the Church during the Third Reich. The meeting was
set to start on Thursday, 18 October 1945, at 9 o'clock; meeting place was
the small meeting room of the Wuerttemberg Institute for the Bible at
Hauptstaetter Street 51 B. On the previous evening, to prepare for this first
meeting of the Council of the EKD, in the hall of Furtbach house and in St.
Mark's Church two parallel services were held at 9:30pm. The evening
celebration of mass in St. Mark's Church was led by national bishop Wurm, the
celebration in the Furtbach house by Prelate Dr. Hartenstein. Additional
sermons and/or speaches at these celebrations were held in addition by Dr.
Otto Dibelius, Bishop of Berlin, and pastor Martin Niemoeller freed from a
concentration camp.
Pastor
Niemoeller only
arrived in Stuttgart at about 6pm. When he arrived at the apartment of City
Dean Lempp he was informed that he was to speak in St. Mark's Church. His
wife selected the sermon text [Bible passage] for him. Niemoeller held the
sermon extemporaneously, moving hearts and consciences in the large audience.
His sermon affected them so deeply that on the next day the Stuttgart
Declaration of Guilt could emerge in the center of the Council of the EKD. At
the evening service on 17 October 1945 in St. Mark's Church the
representatives of the Protestant Church in Germany met for the first time
after the Second World War with representatives of the churches of the
Oekumene. On the German side this meeting had neither been planned nor
prepared. The impulse came from the Oekumene. That their step now, however,
led immediately to a clear word of the reversal, to the Stuttgart Declaration
of Guilt--this was a fruit of that evening in St. Mark's Church. That was,
church-historically seen, the greatest hour in our St. Mark's Church. The
director of the ecumenical delegation, Dr. Willem A. Visser't Hooft writes in
his autobiography: "How should we achieve the resumption of full
oekumenischer relations? The obstacles for a new community could only be
eliminated if the German side found a clear word. Pierre Maury finally
advised us to say to the Germans: 'we came to to ask you that you help us to
help you.' When we arrived in heavily destroyed Stuttgart, we heard that in
the evening a special service would take place in St. Mark's, in which Bishop
Wurm, Pastor Niemoeller and Bishop Dibelius would speak. Niemoeller
preached about Jeremiah
14, 7-11: 'Although our sins testify against us o Lord, do something for
the sake of your name!' It was a powerful sermon. Niemoeller said, it is not
enough to give the Nazis responsibility, it is also necessary for the Church
to admit its responsibility."
How
effective that evening sermon by pastor Niemoeller was, is also evident in a
report of the Stuttgart Newspaper on 20 October 1945. Therein it says
among other things: "doing nothing, saying nothing, not feeling
responsible, that is the guilt/fault of the Christianity."
As a
result of this evening service the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt emerged. It
was given to the representatives of the Oekumene on the morning of the
19.Oktober 1945. Scene of the delivery was (probably) the house Eugen Street
22, which at that time served as the Stift Church community. The claim that
the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt was handed over to the comunity in the
Markuskirche, before the eyes and ears of the pastorage, is a legend.
The
church leadership did not immediately disseminate the Declaration of Guilt to
all communities in the country, to read it from all pulpits. Only gradually
and late did it enter into the consciousness of the communities. In St.
Mark's Church there is a memorial plaque with the full wording of Stuttgart
Confession of Guilt of 19 October 1945.
|
Prepared for the web March 14, 2005 by H. Marcuse, updated 10/2/06,
7/12/14
Return to H. Marcuse's Niemöller Quotation page
Return to H. Marcuse's Niemöller Quotation page
ugh, a religion of wimpy losers and nothing else.
ReplyDeleteIf these "Christian" churches (including the Catholic Church) had shown enough Christian faith, they would have never supported Adolf Hitler to any degree nor made any agreements with him.
In fact Hitler would have been unable to start any major war if his home front had actually followed the Christian religion and thus been against his demands.
Catholic Church leaders gave such unqualified support to Hitler’s wars that the Roman Catholic professor Gordon Zahn wrote: “The German Catholic who looked to his religious superiors for spiritual guidance and direction regarding service in Hitler’s wars received virtually the same answers he would have received from the Nazi ruler himself.”
And Friedrich Heer, Roman Catholic professor of history at Vienna University, wrote: “In the cold facts of German history, the Cross and the swastika came ever closer together, until the swastika proclaimed the message of victory from the towers of German cathedrals, swastika flags appeared round altars and Catholic and Protestant theologians, pastors, churchmen and statesmen welcomed the alliance with Hitler.”
That Catholics obediently followed the direction of their church leaders was documented by Professor Heer who noted: “Of about thirty-two million German Catholics—fifteen and a half million of whom were men—only seven [individuals] openly refused military service. Six of these were Austrians.”
There were a handful of Catholics, as well as some Protestants, who stood up against the Nazi State because of religious convictions. Some even paid with their lives, while at the same time their spiritual leaders were selling out to the Third Reich.