Barmen, Asmussen and Heim

All of this reading starts to get overwhelming. There's so much of it, and then when it's time to journal there's so much to say, and so much I'm thinking that I'm never really sure what exactly to put down.

So some positive thoughts first.
Reading about the German Evangelical Church was so baffling that I have to say, reading about the Confessional Church seems refreshing. It is good to know that there were Christians in the 30s that refused to go along with the charades of the German Church...throwing out the Old Testament, calling Jesus aryan, it was all so absurd and I'm glad there were those willing to see it as such. I am pleased they saw the "German Christians" as a threat, as the Barmen constiution says under Article 2. "This threat consists in the fact that the theological basis in which the German Evangelical church is united, has been continually and systematically thwarted and rendered ineffective by alien principles, on the part of the leaders and spokesmen of the 'German Christians' as well as on the part of the Church Administration." AMEN.

I also find Heim's argument against the German Faith movement interesting. It's kind of hard to follow, but essentially he's saying Hauer (on the Side of the German Faith movement) is essentially giving no liability to mankind in regards to moral responsibility. So I'm pleased that there was willingness to both speak against the German Faith Movement and the German Christians. Especially becuase it could enable others to see the German Evangelicals as traitors or anti German. I'm sure that was a huge risk and I find it somewhat encouraging there were those willing to make the risk.

So I also like Heim's article because it seems to speak against what I do not like about Asumssen. Yes, Asmussen speaks against the German Christians and is in support of the German Evangicals (bravo for that) but he seems to say that man can not be expected to make proper moral judgement and therefore all should be left to the judgement of God on the day of judgement (p. 263). It's like an anti-call. It's a call to do nothing. What's that famous quote?..." all that evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing"..something to that effect. Asmussen's quote seems so...anti church? anti-gospel? not of Jesus? I'm not sure what but definitely not correct? Perhaps if more people did something in 1934 less would have died later?

Which leads me to the negative aspects of what I read in these three articles...and that is that there is no objection to the anti-semitic actions of both State and the Church. So, I'll bite. 100s of years of German tradition and 1000 plus years of Christian tradition cultivates anti-semitic attitudes in both state and church populace. I've now read the history, I know the delicate emotional state World War I had on Germany. So I understand, in a sense the anti-semitism. At least I understand where it comes from. But there is a difference between understanding and justifying something. The anti-semitism of the 1930s in the church is not in anyway permissable. Sure I have hindesight and I live in another culture blah blah blah. But in no way does tradition justify hateful prejudice against jews (or any group of people for that matter). I am disappointed that the Confessional Church did not more verbally speak to that. The Bible is there. Jesus is there. Consciences are there. There are no excuses for hatred.