Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
History of the first half of the 20th century is saturated with the cases of fierce political and military confrontation between states and their alliances, as well as those between local communities within the state borders. Genocide became one of the most severe and tragic embodiments of this confrontation. Historical science tends to provide reasons lying in the dimension of political, economic and territorial interest, or in that of nationalism; sometimes it is stated that genocide was caused by certain religious motifs and that religious people had the role of the perpetrators of genocide.
This work is aimed at analyzing the availability of religious implication in genocide and corroborating the following statement: religious people, motivated by religious convictions, were more likely than others to resist genocidal policies and attempt to help the victims. The research is focused on genocide of the Jews in Nazi Germany before and during the World War II and genocide of the Armenians in Ottoman Empire in 1915.
According to the definitions of this term, genocide is a set of intentional measures aimed at extermination of the population belonging to a certain ethnical, national, racial, or religious group; in the first half of the 20th century, genocide turned into an active and legitimate governmental policy in some states. The mentioned criteria of persecution lead to the idea that the reason of genocidal policy also lies in the dimension of the nationality or religion, which would mean that religious people initiated and headed execution of genocidal policy. However, instead of corroborating this statement automatically, we will refer to the works of scientists who have researched genocide through the prism of religious influence.
Genocide of the Jews
Relation between Christianity and Judaism has a long history of a certain confrontation: Judaism has always served as “the other” religion to Christianity, providing a point against which Christianity can position itself. Besides the closed nature of Judaism, the reason for the opposition was the “revolutionary” essence of Christianity which implied alternative interpretation of different matters comparing to Judaism; thus, two religions which opposed to each other so substantially could not always co-exist in harmony. However, it obviously does not mean automatically that the Nazi were inspired by the Christian movement. Thus, we face the necessity to find out whether Christianity assisted or otherwise resisted the genocide of the Jews.
Robert P. Eriksen’s research describes the connection between Christianity and Nazism. The author investigates the course of life of Gerhard Kittel, a German Protestant theologian who was devoted heartily to both Christianity and anti-Semitism, and alludes to the names of other Protestant theologists, such as Paul Althaus and Emanuel Hirsch.
What Ericksen focuses on is the confrontation between the “old” and the “new” order in the German society. He claims that many German Christians “believed that the modern, secularizing world threatened to destroy the traditional, Christian, German culture they loved”.1 They felt themselves in the opposition to the ideals of the French Revolution, industrialization, and other “innovative” social tendencies.
However, we see that the matters they opposed lay in the dimension of political, social and cultural life, and it does not mean that this conservatism is based on Christianity. Besides, it is not clear why Christianity could bear conservatism only in Germany: Christianity was the dominant religion in Western European countries; however, it did not hinder spreading the influence of the French and industrial revolutions throughout Europe. Finally, Ericksen says that Kittel was, first of all, conservative in his political position, which does not correlate necessarily with the religious views: political conservative movements exist in many countries independently from the religion.
At the same time, the question arises: was the Nazi movement devoted so strongly to the anti-modern ideas? First of all, neither Hitler, nor other key figures of the Nazi regime were the religious people, which already makes the statement about religious motif in genocide doubtful; secondly, the Nazi ideology did not use the religious rhetoric and operated with such terms as “race”, “nation”, “blood” (the key term was a German word “Volk”: it cannot be translated directly, but its meaning lies between the terms “ethnos” and “nation”). Besides, Ericksen says that despite Nazism formally opposed to the modern trends, it nevertheless did not reject it completely. Their intent to “return to a soil” co-existed successfully with acceptance of innovative achievements in science, industry and engineering.2
The explanation is evident: what Hitler desired was to obtain power and to fulfill his plans. The role of religion in genocide of the Jews came to intentional manipulation of the German elite: it served as a tool in the hands of governors focused on secular power itself. The title of the German anti-Semitic organization created in 1939, which was Institute for the Study and Eradication of Jewish Influence on German Church Life, is an eloquent argument for this assumption. A new movement of Aryan Christianity appeared in Germany within the borders of institutional Protestantism. Hitler’s mission was positioned as that of the modern Messiah, and Germany staked on Christianity intending to perform Jesus as an Aryan, removing any reference to Jewish culture.
In contrast, let us consider the role of Christianity in resisting genocide. Jessica A. Sheetz-Nguyen has devoted her research to the activity of a community headed by Margit Slachta which helped the Jews to escape from Nazi persecution. The Hungarian woman considered inhumane Nazi ideology opposite to Chirstian religion with its mercy and humanity; as well, Slachta agreed that German National Socialism was oriented at conquering political power and economic resources and thus set the aim to control over the political, economical and cultural fields of life, as well as to destruct and enslave certain minorities.
As for Slachta, she was considered to have been inspired by the postulates of Christianity, which allowed her to place “contemporary problems within a spiritual framework”.3 The woman said she accepted the humane principles promoted by the Christian movement and was inspired to the social activity by the encyclical of Pope Leo XIII.4 She stated that Christianity taught her to perceive all the people equal and to defend their equality and rights, supporting the ideals of humanity and mercy. Many religious women joined her movement, and the organization headed by Slachta saved many lives of people whom Nazism took aim at, despite the incredible risk their members took.
Besides the example of Slachta and her organization, it is reasonable to consider the reaction of the Church to the actions of genocide. Since the beginning of the 1930s, the Catholic Church criticized National Socialism and opposed to it. Likewise, the Nazi also behaved aggressively towards the Church, decreasing the number of Catholic organizations, schools and press. The position of Church was that the matters of ethnos, nation, race, or blood should not be a subject for idolatry, as this ruins the divine order, even if the community considers that it serves to true ideals and thus has good intents. During the World War II, many priests became the victims of the Nazis; however, Church saved the lives of thousands people, hiding them in the monasteries.
Genocide of the Armenians
In the beginning of his research devoted to genocide of the Armenians, Ronald G. Suny mentions the importance of millet, which “was an important marker of difference”, and correspondence of religion to ethnicity and even to a class.5 However, Suny performs “sense of loss of status” and “encouragement of state authorities” as the main reasons of genocide. In fact, this statement does not contradict to that made by Lewis whom Suny criticizes in his work: Lewis states that the Armenian settlements had formed a dividing line within the Turkish territory and thus had become a kind of a time bomb.6
Suny disagrees to Lewis’s rhetoric which includes such expressions as “nearer [the Turkish] home”, “Turkish homeland” etc.; he mentions that this land belonged to the Armenians centuries before. However, could this historical reference be important for the Turks who considered the rights to this land unquestionable? Suny provides the following quote of the Turks, “Today we lost our sacred national rights which were earned with our ancestors’ blood.”7 Thus, Lewis’s position oriented on representing the Turks’ point of view seems to be quite appropriate in this case: for the Turks who were so confident in their rights, it did not matter who in fact inhabited these lands earlier.
The matter is that the Armenian population began to improve its position in society, participating actively in trade and finance and buying large landholdings, which leads to the idea that the reason of confrontation was pure material interest; it could be any other minority which would claim to the Turks’ territory, but it happened so that the Armenians showed the strongest threat to the resources which the Turks considered belonging to them, as well as to the superior status they had had for centuries. Would genocide happen if the Armenians continued living in their deteriorated position and did not claim to the Turks’ prosperity? Did the Turks desire and put strong effort to convert the Armenians to Islam? The answers are certainly negative.
The confrontations between two separated communities had been taking place for centuries, like in numerous cases from the World history; however, they never reached the extent of genocide: the situation exacerbated when the threat became serious, and the Turkish power’s indifference to the matters of persecuting the “others” inspired the Turks and legitimized their actions.
This research has provided the argumentation to support the following statement: the core of the felony of genocide was the desire for conquering power, obtaining and defending the material resources and status; on contrary, religion equipped people with the peaceful ammunition of humanity and mercy and inspired to resist to genocide by saving peoples’ lives and promoting their humane ideals, and this positive influence is measured in the number of those who survived being saved by the religious people.
Footnotes
- Robert P. Ericksen, “Genocide, Religion, and Gerard Kittel: Protestant Theologians Face the third Reich”, in In God’s Name: Genocide and Religion in the Twentieth Century, ed. Omer Bartov and Phyllis Mack (New York: Berghahn Books, 2001), 64.
- Ericksen, 65.
- Jessica A. Sheetz-Nguyen, “Transcending Boundaries: Hungarian Roman Catholic Religious Women and the “Persecuted Ones”, in In God’s Name: Genocide and Religion in the Twentieth Century, ed. Omer Bartov and Phyllis Mack (New York: Berghahn Books, 2001), 226.
- Sheetz-Nguyen, 224.
- Ronald Grigor Suny, “Religion, Ethnicity, and Nationalism: Armenians, Turks, and the End of the Ottoman Empire,” in In God’s Name: Genocide and Religion in the Twentieth Century, ed. Omer Bartov and Phyllis Mack (New York: Berghahn Books, 2001), 24.
- Bernard Lewis, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968), 365.
- Suny, 38.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.