Part 5. Why Christianity Mattered and Still does, examining the benefits of Christianity to America and the West: Turning Points, The Absence of God

Turning Points: The Relationship between Government and Christianity

Charles Colson, made famous for his involvement in the Watergate scandal, wrote one of the premier books on the connected topics of religion and government, God and Government. In that book he tries to accurately define the arenas of religion and government, how they relate to each other, and what a healthy relationship between the two kingdoms should look like. In section one, Need for the Kingdom, Colson explicitly outlines the conflict between religion and the state. His purpose is obvious, describe the tension, and attempt to show the need for religion in the public square. On the one side are those who believe that religion provides the basis for a sound public policy, and on the other are those who believe religion provides the basis for tearing apart cultures and nations. The damage of a culture which removes religion from the public square is evident; the Marxist policies of the Soviet Union left liberties and humans alike dead in its wake, and its effects are still seen today. Colson explains, “Diverse as they may seem, these tensions all arise from one basic cause: confusion and conflict over the respective spheres of the religious and the political”.¹⁵ He is not a proponent of some sort of religious theocracy, but he also is not in favor of the opposite – a situation where government tries to answer questions it is not equipped for.

It is the opinion of Colson that both of these exclusivist theories – religion must dominate politics, and religion should have no place in politics – are both damaging and ultimately fruitless. Colson claims that there is another way, “It’s a path of reason and civility that recognizes the proper and necessary roles of both the political and religious. Each respective role is, as I hope that this book will demonstrate, indispensable to the health of society”.¹⁶ Religion and politics should play an integrative role in shaping political systems and public policy. To disregard one is to bring an undesirable state of affairs, to have a truly flourishing society these kingdoms must not reside in conflict, but have a working relationship. The danger of having these two opposing forces at war is a history unfavorable for both sides.

If these systems are going to work together, is the solution to somehow break down the concept of separation of church and state. Colson nor myself would support a tearing down of the wall that makes Church and State separation possible. Christianity never was about cramming beliefs down the throats of every citizen, rather it was an invitation, “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28). Instead of focusing on fixing people by changing government policies or leaders, the focus should be different for Christians. Human governments have been tasked with bringing change to society by changing people. If the Kingdom is to influence government, to bring real change, it is by changing people (voluntarily) who then go and change government. Power can corrupt and that is never more obvious then when religion wields power usually reserved for the government. Augustine the church father once called upon the government, then interested in religion during the reign of Constantine, to suppress heresy. This initiated a long pattern of religious persecution by the state – a pattern many wish had never begun.

If Christianity is so important, but the separation of church and state is a good thing, how does this strain between the church and government become resolved? This constant tension and strain may cause an undeniable amount of confusion and embitterment. However, what it does accomplish is to maintain a precarious balance of freedom between these two kingdoms; much like the checks/balances and separation of powers that exist between the American branches of government. One only needs to look at many points throughout history to see what happens when one of these kingdoms possesses too much power. When religion reigned out of balance, the inquisitions of the Catholic Church struck terror. When the Soviet Union ruled, devoid of any religion; it moved to a dark place of terror, murder and injustice.

Turning Points: The Absence of God, Hitler and the Nazi’s

Thus far, we have explored some foundational topics within the relationship of Christianity and Government. In this section we will look at some specific turning points in history; exploring the impact of Christianity. Instead of hyper-focusing down onto one very specific topic like Martin Luther; we will instead focus broadly on points throughout history. The impact of Christianity will be analyzed. However, the absence of Christianity will be observed too. Perhaps, the absence or lack of Christianity is even more telling than a vibrant culture and government impacted by Christian belief and thought. When the light of universal morality communicated through the Image of God concept is not present, evil does not lag far behind in pursuit of humanity. Several important points in history will be observed with a focus on Christian impact – or lack of.

The Nazi takeover of Germany and then the ensuing World War initiated by Hitler and Germany is common knowledge.  However, a certain aspect of that takeover is not generally as well-known as it should be. The aspect of which I am speaking is the struggle between the church of Germany and Hitler’s Nazi regime. The battle between the godless Nazi regime and kingdom of God stands as a prime example of what can happen in the absence of God. The evils of the Nazi’s need no detailed introduction; from their views on race, the genocide, and the destruction caused by their war efforts. What stands out perhaps as the core issue of the whole Nazi movement is not the specific evil they perpetrated. Maybe the focus could be instead on the foundational issues or impetus for the evils they committed. I would posit, as a general theme – the replacement of God and morality with the state lead to moral degradation. With the state taking the role of God, the promise of peace and prosperity made by Hitler in the wake of World War 1 appealed to German citizens.

The Treaty of Versailles signed into effect after World War 1, meant to ensure peace, was a main factor that led to the strong brand of nationalism presented by Hitler and his regime. The economic sanctions and limitations placed on the German nation by the Treaty of Versailles were crushing. The burden of reparations placed upon the German nation topped 132 billion gold Reichsmarks – roughly the equivalent of 33 billion dollars today. This amount was so large it seemed impossible that the amount could ever be repaid by Germany. Post-war, many German citizens felt betrayed by the leaders who had signed and agreed to the Treaty of Versailles. This left an environment and atmosphere ripe for the taking – that is where Hitler and the Nazi party stepped in to fill the void.

This left a desire for stability from the German people. Hitler offered a way out of the economic collapse and general malaise the Weimar Republic had fallen into between the two World Wars. Hitler’s Leadership Principle (Fuhrer Principle) was a radically different approach to governance than the concept of democracy, generally held by the West. This concept ultimately was the idolizing idea that was so represented in the reign of Hitler. Rudolf Hess gave a clear and concise statement on the Fuhrer Principle in a speech: “Adolf Hitler is Germany and Germany is Adolf Hitler. He who takes an oath to Hitler takes and oath to Germany”.¹⁷ Rudolf Hess, a part of Hitler’s inner circle explains that Hitler and Germany are interchangeable – thereby stating him to have the authority of all Germany. This principle can be described as the Fuhrer’s word being superior to all written law. Also, that government, policies and agencies all work together to bring his wishes to fulfillment.

In the midst of the economic collapse and the Fuhrer principle being solidly presented as part of governance, an issue arose. That issue was idolization and replacement of God as the centerpiece of society. That centerpiece was replaced by the state and the leader of that new state – Adolf Hitler. Romans 1 gives an account of idolatry and the logical conclusion it follows, but the idolatry of the German state fits well with this passage: “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served something created instead of the Creator, who is praised forever. Amen…And because they did did not think it worthwhile to acknowledge God, God delivered them over to a worthless mind to do what is morally wrong” (Romans 1:25, 28). The escalation of the state and the burying of God’s role in society stand as obvious reasons for German failure. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, famous for his opposition to the Nazi party, was sounding the alarm before the world knew who Hitler really was. In a radio broadcast only two days after Hitler was elected as Chancellor of Germany, Bonhoeffer opposed the vigor with which many were supporting Hitler: “if the leader tries to become the idol that the led are looking for – something the led always hope from their leaders – then the image of the leader shifts to one of a misleader, then the leader is acting improperly both toward the led as well as toward himself”.¹⁸ Bonhoeffer succinctly describes exactly what I was speaking of in the beginning of the last paragraph – the problem of idolization. Poetic and prophetic in nature, Bonhoeffer’s speech stands as a testament to his mental acumen and ability to dissect a situation. In their attempt to create an idol out of Hitler and the state, they were all going to be led amiss.

The German People were misguided in their desire for a savior to lead them out of their economic and cultural malaise. Instead of finding a leader to bring them into prosperity, in the words of Bonhoeffer, they found a mis-leader who would lead them not into prosperity but a path of madness and destruction. The ultimate thesis – that in the absence of God’s presence – being that when God is rejected, especially in the manner Hitler rejected him, the conclusion is often not pleasant. Was this idolization that Bonhoeffer warned of sure to come to a destructive end? Obviously, we know the answer as to the conclusion of the Nazi Regime and Germany in World War 2. Despite that, a look into the events encircling the church and the Nazi government will give some insight into why the absence of God is such a negative happening.

Hitler, at first, seemed to welcome the idea of both religion and the Christian church. Hitler, according to his writings in Mein Kampf, believed in a God and the concept of providence. Besides that, Hitler seemed to generally be irreligious. Especially in the early portion of his regime, he believed Christianity to be at the very least a tool he could use. However, by the end of his reign the Church in Germany and Hitler were no longer allies. Early on, a certain brand of German Christianity supported the anti-Jewish rhetoric that became a hallmark of Nazi rule. The German Christians began to generally support the Nazification of the German Protestant Church. They wished for the Aryan laws excluding Jews within the German state to also become rules for the church. Generally, Hitler and the Nazi regime supported this German Christian movement and its attempt to bring Nazi views of Aryan superiority to bear not only in the realm of the state but also within the church.¹⁹ Hitler appeared at this point willing to support a church that supported his ideologies.

He was even quoted during a radio broadcast in 1933 presenting a very positive view of Christianity: “Today Christians… stand at the head of [Germany]. I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity…We want to fill our culture again with the Christian Spirit….We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre and in the press”.²⁰ A very positive and glowing review of Christianity and its perceived significance. The actions of Hitler would not follow the theme of his speech by being “the head of Germany”. Instead, Christianity would be required to submit to the Nazi ideology. Ultimately it would be the state who would be the head of Germany, not Christianity or Christian moral ideas.

Early in Hitler’s reign he had brought many groups to heel. It was the Protestant Church of Germany, primarily Lutherans, that would be perhaps his biggest project yet. Nearly 2/3^rd of Germans were Protestant. In keeping with the Fuhrer Principle, Hitler could allow no source of authority outside of himself. If it was not already obvious, Hitler was quickly establishing himself as sole dictator of Germany. His claim to absolute power was sure to clash with the Kingdom of God. While his earlier statements appeared to mesh with Christianity – he ultimately attempted to bring the Protestant Church under his authority as well.

Ludwig Muller, a follower of Hitler and military chaplain, became Hitler’s attack dog to bring the Protestant Church in Germany to heel. The twenty-eight autonomous Protestant Churches were specifically the target of Hitler and he wanted them brought under the rule of the Reich Church (A state sponsored church). Muller was originally defeated in a May election for leadership of this new state church. In July another election was called for by Hitler, this was after Nazi officials had already discredited the previous election and seized certain administrative positions. Muller obviously won the July election, especially after explicit support was given to him by the Nazi Regime. Next, Martin Niemoller steps into the spotlight as the chief opposition to the Reich Church and Muller. Niemoller originally had believed in Hitler and the Nazi principles but when the election for the state church was stolen, he was moved to act. He formed what became known as the Confessional Church which stood in opposition to the state church.  An uneasy war had begun between the two Kingdoms – represented by the state church and the oppositional Confessional Church.

A battle ensued between the German Christians and the Confessional Church under the authority and leadership of Martin Niemoller. Eventually, Hitler unimpressed by the leadership of Muller, intervened and met with several leading bishops – Niemoller among them. Perhaps the chief points of contention between the two groups laid in the approach to Jewish matters. The state church had already moved for the purging of Jews from church offices along with a strong anti-Jewish mindset – much in line with the Nazi government. Niemoller and the Confessing Church held that no matter racial or ethnic identity – only authentic Christian experience was required for membership or leadership in the church. When Niemoller and the two other bishops met with Hitler, they generally reaffirmed their belief in Hitler and his political moves. They did not however look fondly on the approach Hitler had taken to religious matters. Their wish was to maintain a certain level of distinction on how religious decisions were made – to maintain their religious autonomy apart from state influence. Hitler refused to budge. After the meeting, the two bishops signed a statement of loyalty to Hitler, Niemoller did not. A decision that would ultimately cost him suffering in a concentration camp. Nevertheless, it was a statement of rebellion and denial that Hitler and the state could intrude into the sacred matter of religion/Christianity.

Niemoller was arrested on multiple occasions for the sermons that he preached. In 1937 he was arrested by the Gestapo and was in prison for seven months, all in solitary confinement. In 1938 he was charged and convicted under and stayed confined in a concentration camp for the next seven years. Niemoller was a complicated figure and his story, and life, contain a complicated picture. He was very pro-German and nationalist – he even served  in the German Navy on a U-Boat during World War 1. He originally supported Hitler but after Hitler’s intrusion into religious matters, that favor soured. He and his story are a word picture of what the absence of God looks like. After the war he felt immense guilt for his inability to stand up to the Nazi regime. The evil of the concentration camps, the killing of Jews and other minorities, along with all the well-known war crimes of the Nazi’s had come to light. While the Confessing Church had stood up to Hitler when they interfered in religious matters, a blind eye had been turned to the evil Hitler was undertaking. They had not been able to overturn the absence of God left by Hitler’s policies.  Niemoller expressed that in a speech, and the statements in that speech were turned into a well-recognized poem, “First they came for the Socialists and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me”. The Church in some respects did stand up to the Nazi regime, Bonhoeffer especially is well-recognized for his actions. However, Niemoller and many aspects of the German Church, did not do what was necessary to challenge the idolization of Hitler and the Nazi state.

Nazi policies to Christianity grew more and more abusive. Property was stolen and Nazi policies were elevated above Christianity – the idolization we spoke of in the beginning had come to fruition. Remember the warning of Romans 1 from earlier in this section? It says, “because they did not think it worthwhile to acknowledge God, God delivered them over to a worthless mind to do what is morally wrong.” (Romans 1:28). The warning of this passage rings true, in a truly textbook nation-wide example, Hitler and the Nazi’s excluded God. The implications of that action were swift, violent, and cruel. The horrors of the holocaust and other moral wrongs clearly represent this. This happens in the absence of God and why the foundational principles of Christianity were needed in this situation. Christianity brings with it certain moral principles. Perhaps chief among those is fair treatment to other humans – no sign of fairness was seen in Nazi policies. Christianity is needed to balance out government, when it is not there, evils like those perpetrated by the Nazi’s can occur.

Turning Points: The Absence of God, Marxism and Christianity

The absence of God under the umbrella of Marxism is no surprise to most, especially surrounding the USSR in the 20^th century. If Hitler seemed a strong oppositional power to Christianity, Marxism in the 20^th century dwarfs and shadows any of the evils perpetrated towards Christianity by Hitler. Religion, specifically Christianity had been the answer to the transcendental and spiritual questions posed by much of humanity. With all the advances in the 20^th century in the fields of science and medicine – one bright red glow casts a shadow. The death proliferated under the watch of Marxism is staggering. Religion/Christianity are often targets of claims that they are responsible for all sorts of unnecessary death. Marxism thrives on the suppression of the individual – and unnecessary death. This lies in stark contrast to Western thought which highly focuses upon the rights and autonomy of the individual. In the 20^th century – the individual was violently suppressed by communism in Europe. The Black Book of Communism estimates the death toll of to be roughly 100 million in the 20^th century. Stalin’s ‘Great Purge” was responsible for roughly 20 million deaths.²¹ That IS suppression of the individual – but why all this bloodshed by these totalitarian communist regimes?

The divide between the capitalist Western world and the communist of the 20th century lied in the individual’s relation to the state. In communism, there was the focus of collectivism, teaching that the individuals existed to serve the state for the greater good of all citizens. The opposite was true in the West, where the individual was prized before the state. This may seem not to be too terribly an important distinction, but it is. When the state is the end-all, it becomes the idol of the collective. The USSR specifically idolized the state to such a level that it was considered acceptable to sacrifice the individual. This idolization of the state flies in the face of God. God prizes the individual and the totality of much Christian thought through the centuries prizes the individual. The ultimate story of Scripture, the story of redemption, involves God’s sacrifice to retain and make eternal relationships with Individuals. The proof is in the pudding or rather in the death tolls– Marxism in all its iterations runs contrary to the individualism prized by the West and Christianity. Marxism is not just a decent idea that was badly implemented. At its core it is rotten, evil, collectivist drivel with a long track record of death and terror.

As if prior knowledge is not enough to understand that Marxism finds no friend in Christianity; several concrete examples of anti-religious policies will shed a slightly brighter light. At the time of the Bolshevik revolution in 1917, the Russian Orthodox Church was intertwined deeply within Russian culture. It was such a part of Russian life that it even found recognition as the official state religion. Marx produced the slogan, later propagated by Lenin, that religion was: “The opium of the people”. A longer quote fleshes out Lenin’s view of religion: “Religion is the opium of the people: this saying of Marx is the cornerstone of the entire ideology of Marxism about religion. All modern religions and churches, all and of every kind of religious organizations are always considered by Marxism as the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class”.²² Religion was a speedbump that had to be overcome to reach class equality.

From 1921-1928 a period of persecution towards Christian Churches began. This persecution was often accompanied by a militant form of evangelism – into atheism or agnostic beliefs. Lenin proposed his New Economic Policy, which included concessions that allowed for a more capitalist or free market approach to economic policy. This was deemed necessary considering how poorly the economy had performed during the revolution. Ultimately, the Congress of the All-Russian Communist party pushed Lenin’s New Economic Policy into place.While this was happening, a concerted effort was taking place to push anti-religious sentiment by the government. The 10^th Party Congress issued in 1921 the Agitation: Propaganda Problems of the Party. Found inside of this resolution were calls for, “widescale organization, leadership, and cooperation in the task of anti-religious agitation and propaganda among the broad masses of the workers, using the mass media, films, books, lectures, and other devices”.²³ The period under Lenin included a general attitude of suspicion and propaganda driven attacks on religion. Under Stalin, the attack on Christianity would grow violent and the absence of God within the USSR grew dramatically.

The bulk of the extreme persecution existed during a period of 1928-1941. New legislation was drafted that allowed for a more violent approach to silencing Christianity and religion. The main target of this persecution was the Russian Orthodox Church. Estimates over 100,000 Orthodox priests were either killed or sent to labor camps during this period of persecution.  By 1941 only about a twelfth of Russian Orthodox Priests were left functioning.²⁴ From 1927-1940 the amount of Russian orthodox Churches fell dramatically. From roughly 30,000 to a new number less than 500 churches.²⁵ Stalin in 1932 began his new 5-year plan. In that plan he called for the completion of the liquidation of the clergy and religion. Liquidation included basically appropriating property/resources and using it however the state saw fit.

To some in the West, this clash between Marxism and Christianity may not seem too terribly important. The harsh tone taken by Marxism/Communism may seem as if it is only a group of social reformers who have grown a little too excited in their reforming. This decades long clash of the 20^th century really is a picture of the reality left by an absence of God. The Communist USSR rotted itself from the inside out. The morality and ethical precepts deemed to be transcendental and universal by centuries of Christian and European thought had been trod upon. The results were about what one would expect. The USSR as a whole had to put up walls to keep their citizens in – surely the walls were just for decoration. Several obvious examples enlighten the curious as to why the approach to religion taken by the USSR served to assist in its downfall.

It is very telling that the church assisted in bringing down perhaps the strongest handed and anti-Christian government in history. It turns out that stripping individuals of their rights and dehumanizing them is an activity that yields few results. The death tolls of the 20^th century created by Communism in a vacuum do not mean very much. However, when those deaths are seen in light of the radical war against Christianity and other dissenting thought, it takes on a different meaning. That meaning: when you leave behind the foundational principles established in Europe with the light of Christianity – the results are evident. First, the death tolls are obvious. A total and obvious disrespect for humanity. Secondly, the gulag and labor camps that political prisoners were placed in. The dehumanizing nature of these situations are well-recognized, but a quick google search can relay the evil to you if in need of a reminder. Third, the destruction of personal autonomy and individual liberties. There is certainly a long list of reasons why the USSR and communism failed: a poor economy, social unrest, etc. The absence of God forced by Marxist policies seems to certainly be a part of that downfall.

Marxism, just like Hitler, learned that idolization of the state ultimately fails. Religion, specifically Christianity has inextricably linked itself into the flourishing of government. Not because Christianity has sprung up like a weed and become resistant to attempts to remove it. It is because Christianity is transcendental and universal in nature. The values of Christianity make us human – they are values God has stamped on our hearts. Without them, government turns into a perverted shell of what it could have been – the Marxists and the Nazis show that.

1. Colson, Charles W., and Charles W. Colson. God & Government: An Insider’s View on the Boundaries between Faith & Politics. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2007. 48.
2. Ibid, 51.
3. Der Eid auf Adolf Hitler. Rudolf Hess, Reden (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP, 1938) P. 10-14.
4. Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, English Edition, Volume 12: Berlin: 1932-1933. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2009). Page 266-268.
5. Doris L. Bergen, Twisted Cross: The German Christian Movement in the Third Reich (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1996). P. 4.
6. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939. Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), P. 871-872.
7. Courtois Stephane, and Mark Kramer. The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression. Harvard University Press, 2004.
8. Lenin, Vladimir. About the Attitude of the Working Party toward the Religion. Collected works, v. 17. P. 41.
9. Powell, David. Antireligious Propaganda in the Soviet Union: A Study of Mass Persuasion. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press, 1975. P. 34.
10. Dimitry V. Pospielovsky. A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 1: A History of Marxist-Leninist Atheism and Soviet Anti-Religious Policies, St Martin’s Press, New York (1987) p. 42
11. Dimitry V. Pospielovsky. A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 2: Soviet Antireligious Campaigns and Persecutions, St Martin’s Press, New York (1988). P. 54