Information icon.svg Nominations and campaigning for the RationalWiki 2021 Moderator Election are completed. Voting is live now, until 17:00 UTC, 30 November!

Talk:Positive Christianity

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Positive Christianity and immaculate conception[edit]

I see that we have a fact tag against the statement: "In Hitler's view, however, Jesus was immaculately conceived by God as an Aryan". The only thing I have been able to find quickly is here, were we are told:

  • "Hitler was not the kind of person who would have accepted the precepts of the immaculate conception or the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ, in all probability. Indeed, his own comments suggest this much; however, his non-dogmatic, transcendental approach to the faith, as well as his belief that Christ was resurrected through His followers via ‘resurrection’ of His teachings after His death, does not make him any less Christian than any other type of non-traditional, unorthodox Christian."

So I'd say it should be re-worded, unless we can find another ref.--Bobbing up 06:12, 26 November 2008 (EST)

Bob, you might want to, uh, look that site over a little more carefully first. ;-) --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 06:28, 26 November 2008 (EST)
You mean their somewhat disguised mission statement: We present positive scholarship on the subjects of, and related to: Adolf Hitler, National Socialism, the Third Reich, “fascist” socio-political movements and culture, and all persons and movements affiliated with Hitler or the Third Reich—including Allied partners and sympathizers. We do not offer negative scholarship on these subjects because there are already tens-of-thousands of negatively biased web sites dealing with these subjects available to the public. We feel that it is in the best interest of the public to convey the positive aspects of Adolf Hitler and his National Socialism.
So I take your point. I suppose you could argue it two ways though: a) Because they are Hitler sympathisers, nothing they say is to be trusted. b) Because they are Hitler sympathisers, they should have a good idea about what his opinions were.
But, I agree - it's really not the sort of place we would want to be getting our information about Hitler from. We need to look elsewhere.--Bobbing up 07:15, 26 November 2008 (EST)
Let be that they're Nazis. That's one thing. But referring to "...Steigmann-Gall’s (2003) succinct and compelling assessment of Adolf Hitler’s attitude towards Christianity and the churches..." - that is inexcusable. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 09:08, 26 November 2008 (EST)

I added both that statement and the fact tag. I remember hearing that somewhere, but I've no idea where to look for a citation. I remember quite clearly that Hitler thought Jesus was Aryan, even though his mother was Jewish. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 09:34, 26 November 2008 (EST) No, his mother wasn't Jewish but Alois Hitler was half-Jew. --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 17:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I've started searching through Mein Kampf & Table Talk & found a few mentions of Hitler believing that Jesus was Aryan - descended from Gallic Legionaries stationed in Gallillee - & was opposed to the Jews. I can't find any mention of him believing that Christ was divine. In fact, in the Table Talk, there are a lot of negative comments Hitler (allegedly) made about Christianity - linking it with Bolshevism, stating Christianity is incompatible with National Socialism, & that it would die out because it can't stand up to science & nature. Based on this, it's sounding like Positive Christianity was more of a propaganda tool than something Hitler believed in sincerely. I will add all this in, here or on the Hitler article, but it will take me a while & it'll probably be a few days before I get round to it. If anybody wants to go ahead, the sources are Mein Kampf and Hitler's Table Talk. I've just been using the search function to search for words (e.g. Christ). Don't access them if you're in Austria. Check the legal position if you're in another central European country as some have laws against reading Nazi literature. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 11:12, 26 November 2008 (EST)
"'s sounding like Positive Christianity was more of a propaganda tool than something Hitler believed in sincerely." I think that is very close to the truth, and we can go even further than that. One has to remember that despite being a totalitarian and autocratic ideology, the Nazi movement can't just be reduced to what Hitler did or thought. It was a complex organization with many different branches and factions, which were often in competition with or even direct opposition to one another.
That is particularly obvious in the case of their stance towards religion, which ranged from the idea of e.g. the Deutsche Christen faction that Nazism and Christianity could be unified in Positive Christianity, over the various pagan and esoteric beliefs which were prevalent especially in the SS, to the idea that religion should be dismantled altogether and perhaps even replaced with Nazism (something that I believe was widespread in the early days of the party but later downplayed because it didn't have public support.
And of course, the Nazi leadership were divided among similar lines, with various top figures found everywhere along this spectrum. However, the fact that the Positive Christianity project of the Deutsche Christen never got anywhere at least strongly suggests that this is not really something that the top levels of the Nazi movement cared a great deal about. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 11:42, 26 November 2008 (EST)

This article tells me little about the subject...[edit]

..and instead gives a detailed history of the relationship between Nazism and the Catholic Church. There's like one sentence on positive Christianity today. Does anyone know anything about this stuff--or should I pull an Andy and write a book about it instead of reading one? DeadHead 10:47, 26 November 2008 (EST)

Basically, if you know its past, you can figure out its present... Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 10:49, 26 November 2008 (EST)
No seriously--I'm interested in this shit. Are they US-Americans? Euros? Are they explicitly anti-semitic and call for extermination of unwanted groups--or are they more subtle about these things? Do they run with other white-supremacist groups? What are their ties with the nation-state, seeing as nazism was imbricated in nationalist discourse--or are they trying for some sort of trans-national racial appeal? DeadHead 11:23, 26 November 2008 (EST)
Good point. What I think we should do is take all this stuff about "Hitler/Nazism and religion" that has been accumulating across various articles and just put it in one big, consolidated article by itself. Then we can deal with that there and leave these other articles to focus on their specific topics. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 11:58, 26 November 2008 (EST)
Well there is a link to a modern-day Positive Christianity group on the article. It certainly looks like it follows the "Hitler was right" idea.--Bobbing up 12:46, 26 November 2008 (EST)
National Socialism came to power not in spite of Christianity, but because of Christianity" and a load of similar racist stuff. What would Ken make of all that?  Lily Ta, wack! 13:14, 26 November 2008 (EST)

The Excommunication of Goebbels and the NNDB[edit]

Is NNDB considered a reliable source for the purpose of RationalWiki? And if not, is NNDB admissible for RationalWiki anyway? There is this article on "Positive Christianity", and I am pretty sure that Goebbels could not have been excommunicated in the year 1932 simply for marrying a Protestant. There were one French (Henrietta Maria of France), one Portuguese (Catherine of Braganza) and one Italian (Mary of Modena) Roman Catholic Princess, as well as one English Catholic lady and Royal mistress (Maria FitzHerbert), and they were all ruled and declared by Popes of Rome to have been lawfully and validly married to Protestant Princes of England (King Charles I, King Charles II, King James II and VII all of England, Scotland and Ireland, as well as Prince George of Hanover, Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay, &c.). There has always been only ONE uniform and unified set of rules for the whole of the "Latin" part (Latin Church) of Roman Catholic Church in the Protestant and Catholic parts of Western Europe, and called the Roman Catholic Canon law, and the Catholic Canon law in Germany is and has always been almost identical to the one in England, so how could the marriage by Goebbels to a Protestant (and in the 20th. century) be somehow suddenly the cause of his excommunication as an invalid and unlawful marriage? It is simply nonsensical. I thank you. --- (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Goebbels could have been excommunicated if he partook of a protestant mass at the wedding although marrying a protestant would not automatically bring the penalty. I rootled round the web and believe that the dogmatic assertion is due largely to the influence of David Irving and as such is open to question Couldn't find any other party apart from NNDB or Irving as a source of the excommunication "fact". Consequently I believe that the BoN may be right …
However note that excommunication is not necessarily the total sanction that non-catholics possibly believe:
In Roman Catholic canon law, excommunication is a censure and thus a "medicinal penalty" intended to invite the person to change behavior or attitude, repent, and return to full communion.[1] It is not an "expiatory penalty" designed to make satisfaction for the wrong done, much less a "vindictive penalty" designed solely to punish.
Excommunication can be either latae sententiae (automatic, incurred at the moment of committing the offense for which canon law imposes that penalty) or ferendae sententiae (incurred only when imposed by a legitimate superior or declared as the sentence of an ecclesiastical court).
Excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics and remain bound by obligations such as attending Mass, even though they are barred from receiving the Eucharist and from taking an active part in the liturgy (reading, bringing the offerings, etc.). However, their communion with the Church is considered gravely impaired.[4] In spite of that, they are urged to retain a relationship with the Church, as the goal is to encourage them to repent and return to active participation in its life.
Scream!! (talk) 21:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Short of the Photostat copy or a photograph of a signed and dated letter—even a forgery (irony intended)—supposedly from the Pope and Roman Pontiff or any other (the Pope is also the Bishop of Rome) Catholic bishop to Goebbels, confirming his excommunication latae sententiae, I am personally not inclined to believe that any claim from any historian or pseudo-historian with a book to sell or peddle, can ever be considered trustworthy or reliable and safe in this regard, bearing in mind that, since probably just short of the last one thousand years, as in the cases of Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa and his grandson being Emperor Frederick II both of the Holy Roman Empire, an excommunication by the Pope or any other Catholic bishop to a Catholic king, prince, duke, head of Government or other member of the Government was (and probably still is) nothing but literally a declaration made openly of War by the Catholic Church as an order from the Church to the Princes of other Countries to invade with a view to depose the excommunicate as well as a declaration that the subjects of the excommunicate are released from their allegiance (i.e., an invitation to rebel), and is never to be taken lightly. The Catholic Church could not possibly at one hand excommunicate a prominent member of the ruling political party of Nazi Germany, whilst at the other hand sign a Reichskonkordat (1933) with the Nazi Government of the same Country; the sternest act that the Catholic Church ever got round to do was the promulgation of the extraordinary German (presumably with a Latin translation, instead of Latin with a German translation) Bull "Mit brennender Sorge" in the year 1937 by Pope Pius XI but without any mass excommunications by name (or even references to the Nazis), and any excommunication would also had been lifted by the then next Pope being Pope Pius XII, known for his anti-Communist and pro-German (if not also Nazi) sympathies. I can however believe that Goebbels could have been posthumously declared after the War an excommunicate, which would merely be a purely symbolic act. The NNDB is certainly NOT considered a trustworthy source for the purpose of Wikipedia. ([1], et al.) --- (talk) 14:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
The German Catholic bishop conference excommunicated all members of the Nazi Party in 1931. Gary L. Krupp provided the direct quotations in Pope Pius XII and World War II: The Documented Truth. (talk) 23:39, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Michael Heseman has confirmed this excommunication decree and tat it was lifted in March 1933. Other sources have confirmed that the Fulda conference and the Freising conference punished Nazi Party membership the same way they did with Communist Party membership.
JohnLogan (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Hitler's Table Talks[edit]

The source the quotes come from is disputed by some, but it is an interesting look into the political views of Hitler and the SS. The SS itself had many within it that pushed for an ancestral focus with Germanic paganism. Said quotes aren't very informative of Hitler's opinion on the paganism, but is quite critical of Christianity and the servile, un-Machiavellan doctrine it promotes.Userius (talk) 20:36, 1 October 2017 (UTC)


I joined this site mainly to strengthen its historical accuracy. This debate regarding excommunication seems to be the new let them eat cake controversy. Hopefully the inclusion of historians who referenced excommunication will finally please everyone and we can leave it at this. Montesquieu (talk) 09:45, 19 February 2021 (UTC)