Between 1939 and 1945 more than 17;000 Catholic German priests and seminarians were conscripted into Hitler’s Wehrmacht. Men who had devoted their lives to God found themselves advancing the cause of an abhorrent regime. Lauren Faulkner Rossi draws on personal correspondence; official military reports; memoirs; and interviews to present a detailed picture of Catholic priests who served faithfully in the German armed forces in the Second World War. Most of them failed to see the bitter irony of their predicament.Wehrmacht Priests plumbs the moral justifications of men who were committed to their religious vocation as well as to the cause of German nationalism. In their wartime and postwar writings; these soldiers often stated frankly that they went to war willingly; because it was their spiritual duty to care for their countrymen in uniform. But while some priests became military chaplains; carrying out work consistent with their religious training; most served in medical roles or; in the case of seminarians; in general infantry. Their convictions about their duty only strengthened as Germany waged an increasingly desperate battle against the Soviet Union; which they believed was an existential threat to the Catholic Church and German civilization.Wehrmacht Priests unpacks the complex relationship between the Catholic Church and the Nazi regime; including the Church’s fierce but futile attempts to preserve its independence under Hitler’s dictatorship; its accommodations with the Nazis regarding spiritual care in the military; and the shortcomings of Catholic doctrine in the face of total war and genocide.
#170354 in Books Breitman Richard 2014-11-24Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.60 x 1.15 x 6.01l; .0 #File Name: 0674416740464 pagesFDR and the Jews
Review
24 of 26 people found the following review helpful. This should put to rest a nagging controversy; but it probably won'tBy R. M. PetersonOver the past two decades or so; there has periodically appeared in my peripheral vision of cultural affairs wrangling over whether FDR; as president; should have done more (some would phrase it; "much more") to save the European Jews who were being persecuted and exterminated by the Nazis and their cohorts. So when FDR AND THE JEWS came out; written by knowledgeable historians and published by a responsible publishing house; I read it to see if there was anything to the controversy.In a nutshell; authors Breitman and Lichtman are mildly critical of FDR on a few issues or regarding a few statements; but in the main; and after painstaking analysis; they conclude that FDR was unusually sympathetic towards the plight of the Jews and that he did more on their behalf than any other world leader did or any other American political leader of the time might reasonably have been expected to do. Although they don't put it in these terms; to me the only possible grounds for criticizing FDR are if you believe that the President of the United States has much more power to act unilaterally than he actually has or if your only yardstick for judging FDR is responsiveness to Jewish concerns - i.e.; if you adhere to a single-issue view of politics (ignoring that FDR was president during first the Depression and then during World War II).The book considers; in exacting detail; five different matters regarding FDR's responsiveness to Jewish interests: 1) easing or lifting quotas on the immigration of Jews to the United States; 2) encouraging and/or implementing the resettlement of Jewish refugees elsewhere in the world (for example; Palestine; Guiana; Angola; Madagascar); 3) denouncing Hitler and the Nazis; 4) support for a Jewish state in Palestine; and 5) bombing of the gas chambers and crematoria at Auschwitz and/or railways and junctions leading to it.Some of these are; to a large extent; red herrings. What good would more strident and frequent denouncements of Hitler and the Nazis have done? "The United States had no leverage with the Nazi regime at all and no military capacity to do more than it was already doing to win the war. It was far easier for the Nazis to kill than for any outside power to intervene against them." And regardless of how one comes out on the debate of whether it made sense from a military perspective of allocation of finite resources to bomb Auschwitz; the proposal to do so never reached FDR; so it is fundamentally unfair to charge him with some sort of failure or insensitivity on that score.To me; one of the more interesting points was FDR's fervent desire to find an alternative homeland for the unwanted and displaced Jews of Europe. In 1939 and 1940; FDR and two of his closest advisors discussed the idea of canceling the World War I debts of Britain; France; and the Netherlands in return for ceding the British; French; and Dutch Guianas to the United States as havens for Jewish refugees. They considered whether some sort of joint protectorate might be established to govern the Guianas "until incoming refugees set up their own government." To me; that is a startling phrase; for it is a telltale indication that the indigenous peoples didn't matter; at least not enough to enter into the calculus. The same could be said about Churchill's proposal to use the former Italian colonies of Eritrea and Tripolitania (part of present-day Libya) as Jewish havens. And; of course; the same can be said about Palestine. But FDR was not really sensitive to any moral claims of any Arab Palestinians; like so many others; he thought they could and should simply relocate somewhere outside Palestine. He discussed the matter with Ibn Saud shortly after Yalta. FDR requested the Saudi king's assistance in addressing the plight of the Jews of Central Europe. In response; Ibn Saud suggested giving them the choicest lands and homes of the Germans. FDR continued to press Ibn Saud; rhetorically asking how relatively few Jews (at least compared to the number of Arabs in the Middle East); confined to Palestine; would cause any trouble for the Arabs. That elicited this response from Ibn Saud: "What injury have the Arabs done to the Jews of Europe? It is the `Christian' Germans who stole their homes and lives. Let the Germans pay." That this view had moral legitimacy is something that neither FDR nor his successor appeared to recognize.And; in roundabout fashion this leads me to the point that FDR AND THE JEWS; in addition to addressing the historical brouhaha posed by the title; is also worthwhile as enriching our understanding of FDR himself. He truly was a confident; complex; chameleon-like person. One small anecdote: "Roosevelt had innate confidence that he could personally solve problems that eluded others. After attending a presidential session on the Middle East [shortly before FDR's meeting with Ibn Saud]; Herbert Feis said; `I've read of men who thought they might be King of the Jews and other men who thought they might be King of the Arabs; but this is the first time I've listened to a man who dreamt of being King of both the Jews and the Arabs.'" Was it just FDR or was it American hubris; American exceptionalism even?My problem with the book is that it is too detailed for what I needed - and that obviously is MY problem; it is not really a fault in a responsible work of history. For those who want just an abstract or summary; read the Introduction and the final chapter (some twenty-two pages total). The details are in the 300 pages between them. For scholars and sceptics; those details are appropriately footnoted and indexed. The authors cover a mass of detailed information as expeditiously as reasonably possible; and the writing is as lucid as one could want.In many respects; FDR AND THE JEWS deserves five stars. But because I had to keep pushing myself to get through the mass of detail; I am settling for four.6 of 7 people found the following review helpful. It's About Time Historians Set the Record StraightBy Reader 47I'm delighted that some respected historians are finally setting the record straight and showing how FDR was not an apathetic anti-Semite and did his best to save many Jews in a hostile American and world climate. This book dovetails with William Rubinstein's "The Myth of Rescue;" and Robert Rosen's "Saving the Jews;" which Alan Dershowitz himself praised. Too many people distorted the "St. Louis" situation as well as the fact that bombing Auschwitz would not have helped. FDR's sending the British tanks against the wishes of many in this country turned the tide at El Alamein; and really saved the population of Jewish Palestine from the Final Solution; something Breitman and Lichtman discuss and that the Jewish Daily Forward also agreed with. By getting the U.S. into WWII and winning the war as fast as possible; FDR saved the remaining world's 12 million Jews. Rosen also mentions this and the El Alamein key to saving then Jewish Palestine; later Israel. And FDR did his level best to try to get a homeland in then Palestine for the Jews and was shocked at Ibn Saud's hatred. And he kept Jewish immigration to that area open by pressuring the British from 1936-1939. What really galls me is that short of the NY Times giving its fine analysis of this book; I have not seen any reviews of it in other major papers such as the LA Times. In fact; all the LA Times did was give rabid FDR opponent Raphael Medoff a forum to attack FDR for making anti-Jewish jokes; and not looking at his real record. Isolationist Charles Lindbergh never told anti-Semitic jokes and would not allow such talk in his house; but his 9/11/1941 speak about "Jewish warmongers" said it all (Olson; "Those Angry Days") Get real! The view of FDR as hostile to the Jews should not be engraved in stone. It is all wrong. Blame the Nazis and those who collaborated with them. Not every one else. And Nazi Germany was a police state. It would kill or imprison anyone who opposed their exterminating Jews. Public protest on this was not allowed. Only military intervention could stop it. In short; read this book!3 of 4 people found the following review helpful. Another superb historical study by Prof. BreitmanBy JoanRichard Breitman has tackled yet another controversial and misunderstood aspect of America's response to the Nazi extermination of the Jews. The loud chorus of accusations and criticism that blame FDR for not doing all he supposedly could have done to save the Jews of Europe is hereby silenced. Breitman's meticulously researched; highly nuanced analysis shows the unsubstantiated nature of the accusations and the unrealistic presuppositions of critics such as David Wyman; Raphael Medoff; and the widely seen PBS documentary "America and the Holocaust: Deceit and Indifference." As he did in Official Secrets; Breitman amasses huge amounts of details from every possible relevant archive or published source; and then synthesizes them brilliantly to create the fullest possible narrative. His own judgments are careful; balanced; and sound.This book is not easy reading; the mass of details can be overwhelming. But Breitman sums up each chapter's significant points quite clearly; so that the reader can grasp the trends of his argument.
