Mormon Nazis: New book uncovers LDS support for the Third Reich

Print More

(Kofford Books)

MoroniDavid Conley Nelson has spent years researching the LDS Church during the Third Reich, resulting in the new book Moroni and the Swastika: Mormons in Nazi Germany.

Though it’s not officially out until February 26, the book will be launched Sam Weller’s in Trolley Square, Salt Lake City, tomorrow evening.

It’s not right to say I “enjoyed” this book, because it was disturbing to discover how deeply some Mormons bought into Nazi ideology. But it’s required reading for anyone interested in Mormon history and the larger question of a religion’s responsibility to procure justice for the oppressed – even when it means putting that religion’s own institutional advancement at risk. — JKR


RNS: You note in the book that Mormons in the 1930s were not just tolerant of Hitler but downright enthusiastic about his policies, including things like getting rid of brothels and passing laws against homosexuality. Why were Mormons such strong supporters of Nazism?

David Conley Nelson: Ordinary Mormons were ordinary Germans. Hitler was very popular, so they supported the government. There’s nothing unusual about that. But also, the LDS mission presidents recognized the vulnerability that an American-led church had under this dictatorship, and they put together a program to formalize the church’s support of the government. By doing so, they resurrected the 12th Article of Faith, which the Mormons had not obeyed before during their history of missions in Germany. Between 1851 and 1918, Mormons had been banned in a lot of the German states, so to get around that they would register as English teachers, students, or commercial developers instead of as missionaries.

So in the 1930s the mission presidents formulated this program to keep the church safe, but then found opportunities that were too good to pass up, especially in genealogy. In the past they had been banned from German archives because pastors did not want their records used to baptize the dead as Mormons. But during the Reich, suddenly all these ordinary Germans had to prove their ancestors were not Jews, so the Church’s genealogy program experienced newfound freedom. By the time Nazi Germany was in full swing, just about every branch had a genealogical president, two counselors, and a secretary.

The shocking thing is that there seemed to be very little sensitivity to the racial reasons for genealogical research. Newspaper articles would appear in the Deseret News, bragging about how much success the Church was having in Germany with the new government. The same newspaper was also running AP articles about the plight of the Jews. So the Church knew what was going on in Germany, but emphasized cooperating with the Third Reich.


RNS: One of the sadder stories in the book is of LDS First Counselor J. Reuben Clark, whose anti-Semitism seems to have been off the charts. Even after the war, he was still handing out copies of the anti-Semitic tract “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

Nelson: Mike Quinn says it best: J. Reuben Clark was an anti-Semite, but it was an anti-Semitism fueled by the xenophobia and nativism of the Progressive Era. Through his legal and business work Clark had the conflicting view that Jews were Communists on the one hand, but that they also embraced capitalism and were cheating in their businesses. I’ve seen no evidence that he changed his mind about Jews after the war.


RNS: In the final portion of the book you lay out the case of teenage activist Helmut Hübener, one of the few Mormons who opposed the Third Reich (and was ultimately executed for it). Was Hübener motivated by a desire to save the Jews?

Nelson: No. I have not found in the writings any evidence of his being philosemitic or ever denouncing what was happening to the Jews. Although Hübener can be considered an idealist, I think he saw the Jewish question as one where he could never persuade people. So many Germans were in agreement with Hitler about the Jews that he would have instantly lost his credibility with his German audience. I don’t think he was anti-Semitic, but he was pragmatic.

Hübener was motivated more by what he saw as Hitler’s influence coming into his own branch, the St. Georg branch in Hamburg, where the branch president and first counselor were Nazi enthusiasts and others were members of the SA and SS.


RNS: It seems plausible that after WWII, Mormon leaders would want to be seen as embracing Hübener’s story, but you note in the book that the Church actually suppressed a play and other writings about Hübener until the 1990s.

Nelson: Hübener is what I call the consummate memory beacon. He was someone whose story could be brightened or dimmed according to what was needed at the time after the war.

When the play originally happened at BYU in the tumultuous 1970s, there were some sensitivities. Some within the LDS hierarchy worried that Hübener’s story would motivate young Mormons in South America to rebel against their own governments.

Also, there was sensitivity at home. Some 4,000 German Mormons had emigrated after the war. Most of those people had suffered in the war, but some of them were perpetrators whose hands were dirty. Many didn’t like the Hübener story, because they embraced the 12th Article of Faith as justification for what they had done in the war: Good Latter-day Saints help the government and trust in God. They saw Hübener as a traitor.


  • Jeremy Mumford

    Great interview, Jana – I learn something every time I read your blog!

  • Thank you for highlighting this book. I am looking forward to reading it.
    To continue the “depression” the reality is, from my perspective (see Mormon Worker articles and my essay in “War & Peace in our Times: Mormon Perspective”), our church has continued to pledge allegiance to state sponsored wars of aggression as well as failed miserably to renounce torture (one of the few churches to not join NRCAT). We have hid behind 12th article of faith while rejecting outright the immutable covenant of peace found in Section 98 and the words of Christ.

  • John

    “Why were Mormons such strong supporters of Nazism?”

    Mormons had a lot in common with the Nazis. Racism, anti-Semitism, etc.

    “Mormons in the 1930s were not just tolerant of Hitler but downright enthusiastic about his policies, including things like getting rid of brothels”

    Mormons and Mormon churches seemingly have had and possibly still have vested interests in brothels. As well as their or connections with alcohol and illicit drugs.

    Many Nazi elite were homosexuals and homosexuality/bisexuality was promoted by the Nazis for the Nazi elite. Yet Nazis used homosexuality to persecute, incarcerate, oppress and exterminate opponents and the lower class.

    The Nazis and the Mormons were at both ends of the extremes. They live hypocritical duel lives.

  • Ben in Oakland

    “A startling new book argues that German Mormons in the 1930s were not just tolerant of Hitler, but often enthusiastic about his policies. Color me depressed.”

    I don’t understand why you are surprised, let alone depressed. Jew-hating has been a staple of a good portion of Christianity for the past 1950 years, starting in the Gospel of John, continuing on in the middle ages. especially in 1492, when the Jews were expelled from Spain. It continued on in the lovely person of Martin Luther, right through to l’affaire Dreyfus, Nazi Germany and WWII. Kaiser Wilhelm was as thoroughly anti-Semitic as Hitler. There was a very revealing scene about protestant Jew hating in both the book and movie of auntie Mame.

    It didn’t really abate much after WWII, though it was driven underground after that unpleasantness. But it still reared its ugly head in the ’50’s, when I grew up. I was called “dirty Jew” and “Christ killer” more times than I could count, and this was in California. “God doesn’t like the Jews because the Jews killed the Baby Jesus.” Yup! Heard that right from a “good Catholic’s” lovfing mouth.

    In the early 60’s, the catholic Church finally– FINALLY!!!!!!!!!– declared that the Jews weren’t actually Christ killers; their racial/religious prejudice finally caught up to their theology. What a relief! In 1977, F. Bailey Smith, then president of the virulently anti-gay and racist Southern Baptist Convention said, and I quote: “GAWD Almighty does not hear the prayer of a Jew!” Such blatant hate was too much even for the Baptists, at least in 1977.

    So why are you surprised and upset that the Mormon’s supported the Nazis?

  • Ben in Oakland

    “Many Nazi elite were homosexuals and homosexuality/bisexuality was promoted by the Nazis for the Nazi elite.”

    Someone has been reading Scott lively.

    Pay no attention to the 80,000-250,000 gay people murdered by the Nazis.

  • John

    @ Ben
    Historians suspect that Hitler may have so viciously persecuted under class homosexuals and homosexual opponents to try to drive suspicion/attention away from his own homosexuality and other sexual perversions.

    Historians suspect that many of the “homosexuals” that were persecuted by the Nazis, were falsely accused. So the figures you have stated may be wildly exaggerated.

  • Roger

    I was at BYU when the original play on Hubener was presented. It was very well done, and yes, it set a lot of folks’ hair on fire. There were strident debates in the Daily Universe, phenomenal for the era. We have a tough history. So does the human race. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

  • ben in oakland

    So you’re still channeling Scott lively. who’s next? maybe david barton? How about Matt barber and Pat robertson?

    “Historians” not named. Historians “suspect”. No citations. No quotes. No evidence. just another reviler and slanderer.

  • LeftRightCoast

    Based on the interview, I don’t see a lot of new historical discoveries in the book about the Mormon Church. J. Reuben Clark’s prejudices were quite well-known, although they did not reflect the position of the church or church leaders, generally. It goes without saying that Mormons of the 1930s reflected American society at large, including its foremost hero Charles Lindbergh, and generally appeased Hitler and turned a blind eye toward Nazi attacks on Jews. I personally experienced significant tensions between “arrogant” post-war German immigrants in Salt Lake City and their Mormon counterparts.

  • John

    ben in oakland
    “just another reviler and slanderer”

    Describing yourself to a T.

    “No citations. No quotes. No evidence”

    Hypocritically you give no citations quotes or evidence.

    Hypocritically you expect your slander, personal attacks and gossip to be taken as gospel.

    I don’t know Lively or Barton; but they are probably more honest and better informed on the subject than you.

  • Lewis Craig

    I have no objection to a study of this kind of history in relation to the Church. It is very interesting. I hope, however, that anyone who reads this book does not fall into the trap of judging 1930’s German Mormons by today’s standards. If one looks at the history of the Third Reich, its rise was popular because of the the depression Germany had been thrown into after World War I. Hitler was looked upon as a savior by most Germans during the 30’s. I am the opposite of a Hitler apologist. I believe he was a devil incarnate, but given the times, it is easy to see why he would be followed by the masses in Germany at the time, Mormons not excluded. I hope this book makes that fact abundantly clear. If not, then it is just another revisionist history.

  • Erastus

    A few commentators have warned against judging Mormons from the 1930s by today’s standards. I think we should judge them by the standard of many Christians in the 1930s who did not support Hitler.

    Anyone who read the words of Jesus and sought to follow Him should have known better than to follow or appease the Nazi party and all it stood for. Anyone who aided and abetted such a regime have a lot to answer for and are not guiltless (even those who didn’t speak up due to fear). That this bigotry extended all the way up to the First Presidency is inexcusable.

  • Larry

    John, what Ben is trying to tell you is you are full of crap.

    You repeating outright fictions about history put out by Scott Lively and David Barton.

    Any google search on the subject shows your statements to be false.

    If you knew a damn thing about the Nazis, you would know that they sent gays to death camps in huge numbers where they could be found. One of the pretexts for executing Ernst Roehm, head of the SA was his homosexuality.

    Your “Many Nazi elite were homosexuals and homosexuality/bisexuality was promoted by the Nazis for the Nazi elite.” is a blatant lie.

    Even the European Parliment and wikipedia think you are a liar

    So you can take your fact trolling response and shove it.

  • Ben in oakland

    This was your opportunity to present your sources and evidence. You chose not to, just to attack me. But since you ask:

    The United states holocaust museum has a wealth of material on the subject. Here are just some of their citations to be found at the following link:

    Here are some more sources:There are well-researched books for example, John Lauritsen and David Thorstad, The Early Homosexual Rights Movement: 18641935 [New York: Times Change Press, 19741; Heinz Heger, The Men with the Pink Triangle [Boston: Alyson Publications, 19801. Richard Plant’s, The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals is one of the most outstanding, clearly and eloquently written.

    Then there is Heinrich Himmler, who became involved in a stepped-up campaign to work gays to death in the camps. Himmler is quoted as follows: “Just as we today have gone back to the ancient Germanic view of the question of marriage mixing different races, so too in our judgment of homosexuality a symptom of degeneracy that could destroy our race we must return to the guiding Nordic principle: extermination.” Reich Legal Director, Hans Frank, commented on the new penal code: “Particular attention should be addressed to homosexuality, which is clearly expressive of a disposition opposed to the normal national community … Homosexual behavior, in particular, merits no mercy.”

    sounds an awful lot like our current crop of antigay Christianists, doesn’t it?

    these are just the ones I have in my files. Any one interested in the truth can simply google “Nazi Persecution of Homosexuals” to see a wealth of material on the subject.

  • Ben in oakland

    Thanks, Larry. you beat me to it.

  • CHoke

    Most Americans supported Adolf Hitler in the 30s. He was Time Magazine’s “Man of the Year.”

  • John

    Ben in oakland & Larry

    It’s clear from your ignorant personal attacks and disregard for facts and logic; that you are neo-Nazi homosexual advocates.

    (Analogy) You think everyone that was accused of communism under McCarthyism was a communist ? lol You’re thinking is dysfunctional, irrational and bigoted.

    You bash logic, science, truth, facts, opinions and witnesses that goes against your agenda.

    You and your “sources” are dishonestly trying to rewrite history.

  • Danny S

    “Mormons and Mormon churches seemingly have had and possibly still have vested interests in brothels. As well as their or connections with alcohol and illicit drugs.”

    John, this I have not heard before. Can you elaborate and provide sources?

  • Ben in oakland

    Still no sources, no citations. just this:

    “It’s clear from your ignorant personal attacks and disregard for facts and logic; that you are neo-Nazi homosexual advocates.”

    Well, that certainly explains everything you have to say.

  • LeftRightCoast

    Erastus offers the kind of revisionist history/hand-wringing that Lewis Craig warned against. Let us not forget that the “devil incarnate” Hitler was very popular fellow in the “Christian” United States of America. It was the USA and President Roosevelt that refused to allow the USS St. Louis, filled with Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany, to land in the U.S. Instead it was forced to return to Europe, Antwerp. Of the 900 or so refugees on board, more than 250 were eventually killed by the Nazis. Erastus implies that Mormon support came from the First Presidency, when, in fact, friendship was offered by only one man, a counselor in the presidency,a counselor well-known for his arch political views.

  • Sure the reality is that the world was deceived to varying degrees. So remind the role of “prophets, seers and revelators”?

  • Erastus

    Popularity is no judge of goodness or rightness. Truth or righteousness are not decided by popular vote.

    The Quakers opposed slavery long before it was popular, as did many other committed religious (and non-religious) people. It seems that they were more in line with good principles and more in touch with the Spirit than most of their contemporaries (including sadly many Latter-day Saints).

    I didn’t mean to imply the whole First Presidency was behind the views of J. Reuben Clark, but I am very disappointed in them not distancing themselves from such views or making statements against such views or some of the egregious acts of Nazism that were evident even early on, thus lending weight to Clark’s views and stance – whether that was intended or not.

  • I think I may read this book. Interesting stuff. I also heard David interviewed on the Mormon Expositor Podcast. Here’s a link for anyone interested:

  • Erastus

    In the words of Stephen Fry in a debate on Catholicism: “They – for example – thought that slavery was perfectly fine. Absolutely Okay, and then they didn’t, and what is the point of the Catholic [or Mormon] church if it says ‘well we couldn’t know better because nobody else did.’ Then what are you for?”

    Mormonism was behind on civil rights, women’s rights and now gay rights. Where is the prophet voice, the revelatory counsel, the words from heaven? Instead we may be left to wonder if we have seers who do not see, prophets who do not prophesy and revelators who do not reveal.

  • ben in oakland

    @ Erastus:

    “Instead we may be left to wonder if we have seers who do not see, prophets who do not prophesy and revelators who do not reveal.”

    Well, they are revealing that they can’t see their own biases. Surely, that ought to count for something.

  • Jim

    The biggest failing of L-d$,inc in and before WWII was the failure of the so-called “Prophets, seers and revelators” to warn anyone about the abject evil that was Adolf Hitler. Instead they actively supported him and his programs. Even told german and other members in the area to support him.

    They were wrong then and always will be.

  • Larry

    John, if you bothered to look at a single link I referenced you would not have made such a ridiculous response.

    You are a liar. Pure and simple.

    You indirectly referenced the work of liars. Made assertions of alleged fact that don’t hold up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny. The defamatory garbage you referenced is so well known people can tell where you got it from without even bothering to reference it directly.

    The obvious source of your assertions are from blatantly bigoted religious figures who have a vested interest in spreading such fictions. Scott Lively actively campaigned to have gays executed. David Barton’s writings support attacks on constitutionally guaranteed religious freedoms in service of Christian theocracy.

    Obviously John, you are a person of low character who feels the need to spread defamatory untruths about history.

    Btw The US Holocaust Memorial Museum and Wikipedia still think you are full of crap.

  • Larry

    The Mormons simply acted as every other major organized church in occupied Europe did. They openly collaborated with the Nazis and aided in the efforts of mass murder. They have plenty of company in this regard. This behavior was not even acceptable IN THEIR OWN ERA.

    That is why the term “Crimes Against Humanity” was coined right after the war. That is why the Nuremberg Trials were so important to the world. The world could not excuse such behavior back then. It still doesn’t.

    The only church in Occupied Europe which did not act with such alacrity was the Danish Lutheran Church. They aided the nation’s resistance forces in rescuing virtually their entire Jewish population from the Nazis. The Danes are the only nation referenced in their entirety by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum as “Righteous Gentiles”.

  • Larry

    Except for the ones who didn’t. They were legion.

    Many Americans opposed Fascism in the 30’s as well. Some even fought it directly as volunteers in Spain, and eventually the UK. The RAF and Canadian military had plenty of Americans who saw the writing on the wall and deeply opposed the Nazis. Hollywood was depicting the Nazis as villains years before America was at war with them.

    Time Magazine makes “Man of the Year” people who are important in the news. It is not usually an endorsement of them. Stalin was also Time Magazine’s Man of the Year a number of times.

  • Red

    My grandparents were those Mormons German emigrants. Their brothers died on the Russian front. My grandmother was an SS Secretary. My grandfather was a part of Hitler youth. This book sounds consistent with the oral history they shared with me. Both were extremely uncomfortable (angry) with the portrayal of Hubener as a hero: during the war he was disavowed and the members felt they were acting in obedience to instructions from the church to cooperate with Hitler’s regime. The broader influences of anti-Semitism and self-serving genealogy work are new to me. Interesting that we’re beginning to get more of the story now that the “greatest generation” is passing on.

  • Früderuch Pffaffel

    I always thought it odd that Christians would call Jews “Christ killers” — the catch 22 being that without Christ’s crucifixion there would be no Christianity. Grog no use brain much.

  • ben in oakland

    Grog– It’s one of the many things that I questioned in my brief flirtation with Christianity. How could the Jews be condemned as Christ killers when it was kinda the idea for the whole thing? How could judas betray Jesus? He wasn’t a traitor, he was a patsy.

  • Pingback: The Cultural Hall (A Mormon Show in podcast form) – Mormon News Report, 20-February-2015()

  • hoffbegon

    Alternate spelling of HISTORY is HEARSAY.

  • Hunter

    Wyoming and Utah were the first states to authorize voting by women, at a time when the population of the two states was predominately Mormon.
    One of the main objectives of the platform of Joseph Smith’s presidency was the abolition of slavery in 1844, at a time when it was not the popular view, and the Church was persecuted for its stance.
    The Mormon Church has also supported non-discrimination in housing and employment. The prohibition of same sex marriage is consistent with all scripture that is considered Christian scripture and consistent with civil law for over 5,000 years of written history.

  • Danny S

    hoffbegon, meaning what, exactly? You disagree with the discipline of history, generally, or this proposition, specifically? If the latter, have you read the book to determine if the author’s sources are credible?

  • Joseph M

    This looks like a very interesting book, i would like to know if it addreses the stories of the two Senators from Utah during this period both of whom were leadesrs in getting the US government to start helping to rescue Jews from the Third Reich.


    Here are a couple of other pieces on the Church in Germany during the war.
    I think this comment from the above is telling. As the war went on more and more Leaders were drafted for military service “The loss of leadership at all levels severely disrupted the Mormon community, and resulted in the elevation of individuals with relatively little experience in Mormon administration to positions of great responsibility.”

    This one is specifically on losses and casualties

    and gives an Idea of the demographic realities of the church
    (13,402 Saints in 78 Million Germans or 1:5820)

  • Erastus

    Hunter, you may want to check some of your ‘facts’.

    New Jersey was the first state to allow women to vote in 1790 – although it was later rescinded. Utah was not a state when it first allowed women to vote in 1870 – it was a territory. Arguably the major reason it was allowed was because of the US government seeking to stop the votes of men who practiced polygamy. When the nationwide movement to allow women to vote happened a few decades later many LDS Senators and Congressmen were publicly against women getting the vote (notably B.H. Roberts).

    Joseph Smith did indeed propose the abolition of slavery – after having supported it several years earlier. However, he also believed (and made such views known in official LDS publications) that blacks were naturally morally inferior, and in segregation between blacks and whites. Slavery existed in early Utah. The LDS Church even owned a black slave in the 1850s – as far as I’m aware it is the only time in US history when a slave was owned by a church.

    The LDS Church has indeed supported some non-discrimination in housing and employment, it also continues to support some discrimination in housing and employment towards Gays, as well as other forms of discrimination against homosexual people. It seems that it wants it’s cake and to eat it too, but not let Gays have anything but the crumbs.

    From what I’ve seen gay marriage was not much of an issue for Christianity in the first 200-400 years, as there seems to be some definite cases of either tolerance or respect from the days of Jesus up until a couple hundred years later (Paul and some others withstanding). I think we ought to be careful looking at the Bible for standards of marriage though, as it supports polygamy, sex slavery, and women as property.

  • cwandrews

    I’m seeing a big trend in American LDS culture that seems to focus on placing historical Mormon leaders, members and affiliates under a judgmental light based on the knowledge and political correctness of our day and time.

    I’m not saying that Mormons who ‘bought into’ Nazi theology were morally correct, however we must concede that we do not have even a base understanding of day-to-day life in 1930’s Germany. Post World War I Germany was a horrible place to be; rather than lean back in our chairs and tut-tut our Mormon forbears, perhaps we should take a moment and reflect on our dedication to God versus state when livelihood, families and survival are on the line.

  • LRC- Thank you for sharing the bit about Charles Lindbergh. I have been a member of the LDS Church for 48 years, and had never heard of this affinity. Can you elaborate?

  • Pingback: Signature Books » Mormon News, February 16–20()


    from “The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich”
    by William L. Shirer

    The Road To Power

    After considerable difficulties the S.A. was reorganized into an armed band of several hundred thousand men to protect Nazi meetings, to break up the meetings of others and to generally terrorize those who opposed Hitler. Some of its leaders also hoped to see the S.A. supplant the Regular Army when Hitler came to power. To prepare for this a special office under General Franz Ritter von Epp was set up, called the Wehr-politische Amt. Its five divisions concerned themselves with such problems as external and internal defense policy, defense forces, popular defense potential, and so on. But the brown-shirted S.A. never became much more than a motley mob of brawlers. Many of its top leaders, beginning with its chief, Roehm, were notorious homosexual perverts. Lieutenant Edmund Heines, who led the Munich S.A., was not only a homosexual but a convicted murderer. These two and dozens of others quarreled and feuded as only men of unnatural sexual inclinations, with their peculiar jealousies, can.

    An organization, however streamlined and efficient, is made up of erring human beings, and in those years when Hitler was shaping his party to take over Germany’s destiny he had his fill of troubles with his chief lieutenants, who constantly quarreled not only among themselves but with him. He, who was so monumentally intolerant by his very nature, was strangely tolerant of one human condition — a man’s morals. No other party in Germany came near to attracting so many shady characters. As we have seen, a conglomeration of pimps, murderers, homosexuals, alcoholics and blackmailers flocked to the party as if to a natural haven. Hitler did not care, as long as they were useful to him. When he emerged from prison he found not only that they were at each other’s throats but that there was a demand from the more prim and respectable leaders such as Rosenberg and Ludendorff that the criminals and especially the perverts be expelled from the movement. This Hitler frankly refused to do. “I do not consider it to be the task of a political leader,” he wrote in his editorial, “A New Beginning,” in the Voelkischer Beobachter of February 26, 1925, “to attempt to improve upon, or even to fuse together, the human material lying ready to his hand.”

    The Blood Purge Of June 30, 1934

    The whole tradition of the military caste would be destroyed if the roughneck Roehm and his brawling Brownshirts should get control of the Army. Moreover, the generals were shocked by the tales, now beginning to receive wide circulation, of the corruption and debauchery of the homosexual clique around the S.A. chief. As General von Brauchitsch would later testify, “rearmament was too serious and difficult a business to permit the participation of peculators, drunkards and homosexuals.”

    The Army, then, was pressing for the purge, but it did not want to soil its own hands. That must be done by Hitler, Goering and Himmler, with their black-coated S.S. and Goering’s special police.

    Many were killed out of pure vengeance for having opposed Hitler in the past, others were murdered apparently because they knew too much, and at least one because of mistaken identity.

    In the first communiques, especially in a blood-curdling eyewitness account given the public by Otto Dietrich, the Fuehrer’s press chief, and even in Hitler’s Reichstag speech, much was made of the depraved morals of Roehm and the other S.A. leaders who were shot. Dietrich asserted that the scene of the arrest of Heines, who was caught in bed at Wiessee with a young man, “defied description,” and Hitler in addressing the surviving storm troop leaders in Munich at noon on June 30, just after the first executions, declared that for their corrupt morals alone these men deserved to die.

    And yet Hitler had known all along, from the earliest days of the party, that a large number of his closest and most important followers were sexual perverts and convicted murderers. It was common talk, for instance, that Heines used to send S.A. men scouring all over Germany to find him suitable male lovers. These things Hitler had not only tolerated but defended; more than once he had warned his party comrades against being too squeamish about a man’s personal morals if he were a fanatical fighter for the movement. Now, on June 30, 1934, he professed to be shocked by the moral degeneration of some of his oldest lieutenants.

  • Kudzu Guru

    It should surprise no one that even devout people of any faith can be persuaded to follow an evil plan. It has happened before and resulted in the expulsion of 1/3 of our brothers and sisters from heaven and left them without access to the plan of redemption. Even the very elite among us are vulnerable to the continued efforts to present another plan.
    I have a LDS friend in Venezuela who is frustrated and discouraged that many of the stake and ward leadership there are pro-government and have embraced the rhetoric and politics of the current socialist regime.

  • LeftRightCoast

    Kelly, not sure about your question. J. Reuben Clark’s arch conservatism was quite well known. Like many other political leaders in the U.S. he was supportive of Hitler’s rise in Germany and was known to be an anti-Semite. I refer you to Michael Quinn’s excellent and approved (by Howard W. Hunter and Thomas Monson) biography of Clark. Was that your question?

  • LeftRightCoast

    On second thought, I sense your question may have been about Charles Lindbergh. So far as I know, he had not connection to the church. However, he was a noted Nazi sympathizer. A Google of “Lindbergh Nazi” yields a huge batch of written documents, pictures and cartoons of the era.

  • Dave

    Yes, the German word is Zeitgeist: the spirit of the times. An accurate review of the history of any era should include a hard study of what was going on at all levels–social, political, financial, environmental, secular, and religious. It’s easy to take pot shots at dead men and women, who can’t respond to their accusers. I’m tempted to think that our present President has a socialistic bent and that Harry Reid, an active Mormon, supports him. I guess years from now we will read an article titled “When Mormons loved Socialism”.

  • LeftRightCoast

    Erastus, Regards slavery, the record shows that Joseph Smith was opposed to it in the 1830s.

  • trytoseeitmyway

    “One of the few churches to not [sic] join NRCAT.”

    That’s nonsense. The religious institutional membership of that organization is a tiny minority of churches in the U.S. “Torture” to these people includes solitary confinement.

    But you raise a good issue. It has troubled me that Jana Riess has STILL not apologized to Judge Jay Bybee for saying that he “authorized the use of torture” while serving as an Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice. As Jana knew or should have known – and as she surely knows now – AAG Bybee (as then) did no such thing, and it is a malicious calumny to say that he did. In response to a question from his client (the United States of America) AAG Bybee was required to consider legal precedents and principles in order to distinguish lawful interrogation methods from unlawful and immoral torture. Good examples of torture, by the way, include, oh, I don’t know, locking a prisoner in a cage and setting him on fire. Or lining up prisoners and beheading them on account of their religious beliefs. Things like that. Jana Riess has never gotten around to condemning those things as far as I can read here. But my point is that the definition of torture can be difficult to pin down in gray areas – solitary confinement as torture? really? – and is ultimately a legal question in terms of government policies and procedures. So there is AAG Bybee, being asked a question, and then he gives his answer in perfect good faith and the exercise of legal judgment as he is bound to do in the exercise of his office … only to have Jana Riess (and others – you too, perhaps) SINGLE HIM OUT on the utterly false charge that he “authorized the use of torture,” merely because he was and is LDS which lets him become a hook for an utterly unfair and manufactured criticism of Mormon beliefs and culture. That was shameful and Reiss really ought to have apologized for it before now. She should still apologize.

    Thanks for bringing up the whole torture thing.

  • trytoseeitmyway

    Yes, that’s true of Lindbergh. Also Joseph Kennedy. The entire Communist Party in the US was sympathetic to the Nazis, and opposed to US entry into the war, right up until the Nazi invasion of the USSR when CPUSA did a 180. Of course they still apologized for Stalin and his genocidal policies. There is a long list of famous leftists (“progressives,” don’t’cha know) who thought that Uncle Joe Stalin was a pretty good guy.

    Somehow this doesn’t so often get brought up with passing around blame for being pro-genocide and pro-torture in that era. Some folks are more inclined to think that Alger Hiss and the Goldbergs got a bad deal.

  • Pingback: That Was The Week That Was | The Pietist Schoolman()

  • trytoseeitmyway

    I’m sorry. You’re claiming that there were no Mormons in any resistance movements in occupied countries? On what basis do you claim that?

    The Danes have condemned their own collaborationist history, somehow you omit that from your summary. You’re right, of course, that many or most Danish Jews were saved from the Holocaust when ordered deported in 1943 by the Danish resistance, but that was not until late in the war, after the collaborationist government had been dissolved and Gemany’s eventual loss was already foreshadowed by losses at Stalingrad and U.S. entry into the war.

    The book concerns responses to Hitler’s dictatorship – aided by the Gestapo – in Germany itself, and all religious organizations were required by Hitler to bend the knee.

  • Erastus

    “Are the Mormons abolitionists? No
    … we do not believe in setting the Negroes free.”
    (Joseph Smith, 1838, Teachings, p. 120 / History of the Church, vol. 3, p. 29)

    “Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, …” (History of the Church, vol. 5, p. 218)

    “What is the position of your church with respect to slavery?
    Brigham Young – We consider it of divine institution, and not to be abolished until the curse pronounced on Ham shall have been removed from his descendants.” (A. L. Neff, History of Utah, p. 618)

  • LeftRightCoast

    I suggest Erastus that you read and comprehend the history of the Mormons in Clay and Jackson counties (Missouri) circa 1836 They were forced out because of their abolitionist views. What happened under Brigham Young is a separate story, I referenced only Joseph Smith’s approach.,

  • Erastus

    “I referenced only Joseph Smith’s approach.”

    And I quoted Joseph Smith directly. Do you have a more authoritative source than that?

    Perceived association with abolitionism may have been one factor in the Saints persecution in Clay and other Missouri counties, but the primary one was the increasing immigration, political and economic power that caused resentment amongst existing residents.

  • EG

    In 1933 anti Semitism was widespread in Europe. Anti Semitisim has its roots in Christianity.
    The Baptists in the U.S. also gave praises to Hitler, thought highly of Hitler.
    The Christian German citizens embraced Hitler.
    cwandrews is right. It is easy for us to judge the past because of hindsight. How will we be judged after we are all dead, and can’t explain or defend ourselves?
    Kudzu Guru is right. Even the best people can be persuaded to follow something bad.

    How quickly people forget the home grown terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan, made up of white Christians. I know the Klan did nothing on the scale of Hitler. But everyone is quick to judge and call Mormons racists , to this day, yet mainstream Christians have amnesia in regards to their history.

  • Joel Campbell

    To speak of Mormons or any faith monolithically and stereotypically always does a disservice. To suggest that all Mormons were embracing the Nazis is inaccurate. Major institutions of the day — including the New York Times and the Chamberlin — often turned a blind eye to the Nazis. Also to suggest that a history of anti-Semitism is endemic among Mormons is also inaccurate. There certainly is a history of tolerance between Jews and Mormons in Utah. Salt Lake did have an early Jewish mayor and Utah a Jewish governor. That said, individual Mormons are going to have varied points of view.

    Historically, the institutional church has tried to work with governments in power to allow greater access to missionaries and congregations. Sometimes, in hindsight, such overtures turn out on the wrong side of history.

    There are some bright spots in the history of Jewish-Mormon relations. Here’s one. A Mormon senator tried to help get Jews out of Europe.

  • Erastus

    The question is: what were the policies of the LDS Church? I think that is what this book largely covers, and the results that came from that.

    If members were acting in line with what they were told to do by their leaders (or were reasonable to think that their leaders commended or even tolerated their actions) then it is appropriate to speak generally and broadly, and to hold Mormonism as an organization to some account.

    If members were acting without counsel and a large number of them were acting similarly, then it is appropriate to question what part of their actions may have come from culture or religious background.

    If even only a significant minority of members who acted in certain similar ways, it is still of interest how some people of faith acted in such divisive times.

    “Historically, the institutional church has tried to work with governments in power to allow greater access to missionaries and congregations.”

    This is a policy stance worth questioning. Is it always right to try to co-operate with evil? Is it possible to do so without being tainted by it? Doesn’t it give the impression of approval or at least appeasement? What impression would it give to members of the Church living under such regimes?

    I agree that there were thankfully positive examples of LDS members who defied the Nazi regime or at least circumvented it – some of whom may have been even rightly opposing their Church leaders to oppose Hitler or save Jews. This is an important story to tell too.

    Ultimately this book will be judged on it’s scholarship, but it is important for such books to be written that gather evidence, ask difficult questions, raise awareness, and which we can learn from, even if the truth proves to be uncomfortable.

  • Erastus

    I’m confused as to how we can judge the racism of Mormonism or any other religion based on how much other churches or organizations were racist.

    Mormonism is not a congregationalist religion, it is an a hierarchal and authoritarian one, in which it’s beliefs come from the top down and are usually claimed to be from divine sources.

    If Mormonism was not acting by revelation (especially in some of the most important matters of the last couple centuries) then it is good to question when – if ever – it is led by God, and how much it is led by fallible men who make wrong decision which others suffer because of.

  • Erastus

    However, the question is whether Mormons in Germany were following the plans of their Mormon leaders or just of their civil ones.

    As for Venezuela – Although the LDS Church seemed to have a semi-official stance against Socialism in the 1950s and 60s (or at least the extreme Russian version of it at the time), as far as I’m aware it does not have any current policy on favoring either capitalism or socialism in other countries. In Europe there have been faithful members who have represented democratic Socialist political parties, and have even been held up as good examples in Church publications such as the Ensign.

  • Erastus

    There were Mormon supports of the American Socialist movement in the early 20th century, even to the point of an official LDS Church pamphlet calling Mormonism “true Socialism.”

    To Europeans Barak Obama doesn’t seem much more Socialist than George W. Bush was. Obamacare – which was invented by the Republican Heritage foundation and first promoted by Mitt Romney – is far from Socialist.

  • LeftRightCoast

    Erastus suggests that the governing structure of Mormonism is hierarchical, not congregational. While that may be true, more or less (finer points of sustaining votes to be debated at some future time) it hasn’t always been thus, and it certainly is not the case in remote areas of world, or ones cut-off from Temple Square by virtue of various political constructs. While Mormons generally honor, obey and sustain the law, they are only bound by commandment to do so when opportunities exist for redress and repeal of unjust laws. Obviously, this presented many dilemmas for some Mormons in Nazi Germany. In such dire conditions , and depending on one’s particular circumstances, the choice to keep one’s head down is understandable. That some chose a riskier and more valiant approach course is, of course, praiseworthy. Nothing prevents a Mormon in such circumstances from acting in accordance with his conscience. Even allies of the of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the fiercely courageous minister who opposed Hitler and was murdered in in Flossenberg Concentration Camp as the war neared its end, chose different methods for dealing with Hitler and the Holocaust.

  • Erastus

    LeftRightCoast – you make a fair and reasonable point and I appreciate the clarification.

    People are never exempt from personal accountability, no matter what anyone in any position tells them to do, and will have to answer as individuals. “Honoring and obeying the law” has limits, especially when it comes into moral and ethical principles. Likewise with obeying your leaders, whether local or even up to the Presidency, because we and they remain mortal, fallible and subject to preconceptions and misunderstandings.

    I look forward to the release of this book and learning what policies came from who, what awareness they had of certain issues, to what extent they expected others to follow, and how they treated those who followed their conscience instead.

    I hope it’s contents will be well documented and fairly represented (and from what I have seen so far they seem to be). We could all use more thoughtful reflection on the limits of loyalty and the need for accountability – personal and at every level of an organization, even the Church.

  • Larry

    Its telling you have to use unreliable and obsolete sources for what has been shown to be utter fiction.

    Shirer’s own account is laced with epithetical terms and slurs for gays. Homosexuality was a crime among “allied nations” well into the late 60’s early 70’s.

    He was full of it.

    To be honest, ANY account of WWII written before 1974 will be chock full of wild inaccuracies. Ultra (reading German radio traffic) was not revealed until that period. Plus a good chunk of Germany and its former capital laid behind Soviet control. Until the 1990’s when Soviet archives were opened to the public, much of what the West knew about the nitty-gritty of the Nazi government was spotty at best.

    Plenty of historians have been calling him out on this for a while. Shirer was not a professional historian and did not have access to materials which substantiate many of his claims.

  • Larry

    Not what I said, but I can see your need to reframe the argument in a more apologetic light. I am saying their church leadership in Occupied Europe collaborated. In many cases willingly. As did every major church at the time.

    1943 was not “late in the war” but it did mark the beginning of the practical implementation of the Holocaust. Germany still occupied Europe without challenge and was deep into Soviet territory. It would not be until late the following year they would begin to be rolled back.

    The Danes (with the help of their government and national church) rescued virtually their entire Jewish population from the Nazis. No other nation in Occupied Europe did anything close to that.

    Although all religious organizations had to defer to Hitler, as I stated before, only one national church openly defied him. Some religious groups were willing and enthusiastic collaborators. For example, the Catholic Church has a lot to answer for in that regard. (The Ustasha and Rexists are prime examples).

  • Larry

    Plenty of people opposed both Hitler and Stalin back then as well. Some even volunteered to fight them as volunteers in Canada or the UK.

    Even Hollywood got in on the act. Warner Brothers started making anti-Hitler content as early as 1934.

  • tritoma

    Jana, make an honest woman of yourself and leave the church you despise.

  • Erastus

    This is a cruel and un-Christian comment.

    Joseph Smith once said the word Mormon means “More Good” – Well there is nothing good in what you just said. It is mean-spirited and you should be embarrassed.

    I imagine many people do leave the Church because of people who make such remarks like you.

  • LeftRightCoast

    So far as I can tell, Jana is an honest woman. The Mormon Church needs more like her and fewer like Tritoma, although I daresay Jana will likely be a lot more tolerant of Tritoma than Tritoma is of Jana.

  • LeftRightCoast

    Solid observation, Erastus.

  • Larry

    Sorry, but its a load of crap.

    Plenty of people opposed the Nazis early on and continued to do so throughout the war. Criticism for its police state and various persecutions were there from the outset.

    The stream of people fleeing them was pretty heavy and pretty varied prior to the outset of war. Nazi persecution caused a wave of talent to reach British and American shores. Including the cream of the German film industry. It didn’t take a shift in zeitgeist to realize what the Nazis were doing was an immorality. But lets be honest, many people benefited from Nazi oppression until it became a liability.

    After the war, nobody was going to be giving the Nazis and their collaborators the benefit of the doubt or the excuse of following orders. Anyone familiar with the Nuremberg Trials know how well that defense worked. It didn’t wash in 1945, it doesn’t in 2015.

  • The 12th Article of Faith is a stumbling-block. The Articles of Faith are taken as the Word of God instead of as a nice piece of public relations, and we hear Obedience, Obedience, Obedience – along with Stand For What You Believe. My perception of Mormon culture is that it is distrustful and disdainful of individual conscience. When the only righteous way you can Stand For What You Believe besides blowing hot air is to vote for the right person, and when you believe that the most important political issues are about sex instead of economic justice, then you’re easily manipulated into being complicit in atrocity.

    Also, Mormon culture has always been white supremacist. I’m not talking about the clear denunciations of racism and bigotry that have come from the Church: those are conscious expressions of an ideal. Cultural attitudes, collective consciousness and most especially unconsciousness, are changed as effectively by such expressions as bindweed is killed by cutting off its tendrils at the ground.

    When police officers kill black people, white Mormons justify the police violence and condemn any violence on the part of protesters. They say that the victims of police violence deserved what they got. They do this without any risk of their Temple worthiness or Church standing being called into the slightest question. Of course they’re not racist, you understand. Of course the skin color of all those illegal immigrants isn’t the problem, you know, it’s just that they Broke The Law, and that simply cannot be tolerated nor excused. A very convenient law, to allow for targeting people because of their skin color. But if you talk about changing immigration law, then these people (not racist, of course) shift the goal posts.

    If, 30 years ago, inner cities all over the country started turning into tranquil and beautiful shopping districts, then the president would have been supported and praised by the Mormon mainstream, even if some troublemakers started asking where all the black people had gone. In fact, Mormons would probably say “the black people are turning white, like the scriptures say! It’s a miracle!”

    That’s not going to happen so easily in America now. Attitudes are changing in the Church, but it’s slow going, and it is made slower by the 12th Article of Faith.

  • In both cases, the racist eugenic manipulation was aimed to the reproduction of the Germanic people under claimed ideological assumptions that were not supported by any true scientific method, but rather based on sadistic, self-fulfilling prophecies and an intentional effort to use religion and mysticism to proceed with the eugenic discrimination of other ethnicities. The dehumanizing definitions may have been apparently different on both sides, with the Mormons calling their scapegoats “uncough, unkept, low habits, etc.” and the Nazis way more shamelessly defining the Jews as “Parasitic Vermin”, both modes of public dehumanization worked out to create the climate of Anti-Semitism among the Europeans on the one hand and the intensive climate of Racism that is present until today among White Mormons in North America.

    The pseudo-science ideated by Mormons and Nazis created a parallel set of discriminatory practices on both sides of the pond. While in Europe the Jews were not allowed to access equality and opportunity based on negative qualities invented by their oppressors, in the United States, the Mormons scapegoated Blacks as dirty, filthy and deserving their suffering, on Earth, because they allegedly had sinned before they were born, because the Mormon Leaders said so in their “revelations”. Different scapegoats, same mystical racism.

    Both in the Lebensborn Program of Nazi Germany, as in the Eternal Marriage ideology of the Mormons, polyandry was imposed on the women and minor girls without having their informed consent. In both cases, Mormon Polyandry and the Lebensborn Program, women had to choose between offering their sexuality to the Reich (in Germany and Europe), or to the Prophets (in Mormon Utah).

  • TomW

    This interview begins: “RNS: You note in the book that Mormons in the 1930s were not just tolerant of Hitler but downright enthusiastic about his policies, including things like getting rid of brothels and passing laws against homosexuality. Why were Mormons such strong supporters of Nazism?”

    Didn’t the question just get answered by what came before it? What part of getting rid of brothels and passing laws against homosexuality would have been contrary to prevailing church belief and practices in the 1930’s?

    John writes, “Mormons and Mormon churches seemingly have had and possibly still have vested interests in brothels. As well as their or connections with alcohol and illicit drugs.”

    You, of course, have airtight evidence to back these sensational charges, right John?

    ben in Oakland cites Heinrich Himmler, “Just as we today have gone back to the ancient Germanic view of the question of marriage mixing different races, so too in our judgment of homosexuality a symptom of degeneracy that could destroy our race we must return to the guiding Nordic principle: extermination,” and then follows up with, “sounds an awful lot like our current crop of antigay Christianists, doesn’t it?”

    Um, no, ben, it does not. Not even close. And ever rational human being following along knows that this is insane extremist rhetoric at its most vile.

    Erastus writes, “Mormonism was behind on civil rights, women’s rights and now gay rights. Where is the prophet voice, the revelatory counsel, the words from heaven?”

    I would counter that the church and its prophet-leaders were not then, and are not now, behind on any of those things. Too bad, when the inevitable repsonse to this claim is made, I’ll only have one post left to tackle it, and might put it off for awhile lest I close the door on further commentary when I would still like to participate in the discussion. Hunter did a fine job of addressing the issue, however, so I’ll simply adopt his view pre-emptively.

    Erastus writes, “Popularity is no judge of goodness or rightness. Truth or righteousness are not decided by popular vote.”

    This is exactly why I yawn at the periodic claims that certain people of faith are on the wrong side of history. The final history is written by God, so it’s best to remain on His side regardless of the shifting tides of mortal perceptions.

    cwandrews brilliantly writes, “I’m seeing a big trend in American LDS culture that seems to focus on placing historical Mormon leaders, members and affiliates under a judgmental light based on the knowledge and political correctness of our day and time. I’m not saying that Mormons who ‘bought into’ Nazi theology were morally correct, however we must concede that we do not have even a base understanding of day-to-day life in 1930’s Germany. Post World War I Germany was a horrible place to be; rather than lean back in our chairs and tut-tut our Mormon forbears, perhaps we should take a moment and reflect on our dedication to God versus state when livelihood, families and survival are on the line.”

    We should also be mindful of the differences between Germany in 1930, 1932, 1934, all the way through the end of the war. Germany wouldn’t be the first time a population was sold a bill of goods on hope and change which turned disasterous after several years of governance…

    EG writes, “How quickly people forget the home grown terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan, made up of white Christians.”

    And how quickly they forget that the KKK was an arm of the Democrat Party, and the targets of their lynchings were black and white Republicans. They weren’t big fans of the Party of Lincoln.

    CStanford writes, “When police officers kill black people, white Mormons justify the police violence and condemn any violence on the part of protesters. They say that the victims of police violence deserved what they got. They do this without any risk of their Temple worthiness or Church standing being called into the slightest question.”

    I don’t know where CStanford gets off making such broad brushed comments, but the best position for Latter-day Saints and everyone else is to want to know the full truth behind any given altercation. Sometimes the police officer may indeed be guilty of murder. Sometimes the deceased may have truly brought death upon himself. What matters is what is true, not what inflames racial animosity regardless of evidence.

    Both of my parents grew up in Germany during World War II. They were born in 1925 and 1929 for those who care to figure out how old they might have been at any given moment of the war. My father was a Hitler Youth. My uncles were taken by the Russians and British as prisoners of war. I can assure one and all that the things people knew about Hitler and his evil regime were not exactly all known in the beginning. They didn’t have Google, they didn’t have Twitter, they didn’t have cell phones – hell, they didn’t even have rotary phones and indoor toilets! One should be VERY cautious about judging people without a detailed understanding of their precise circumstances at any given point. Not one finger pointer is likely to stand before the judgment seat of God completely guiltless for their actions under every manner of circumstances. I certainly will not.

    I’m a firm believer of Matthew 7:1-2, “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

    Personally I desire full access to the grace of Christ on my behalf, and strive to be as forgiving as possible to all whom I may feel have ever wronged me or done things I don’t like. I’m pretty sure I need His forgiveness far more than anyone will ever need mine.

  • Ben in oakland

    Sorry, buddy. It still sounds like an awful lot of the antigay Christianists to me. when someone calls my life, my marriage, and my family a threat to everything good and holy, to civilization itself, when they call for my imprisonment and/or my execution, then yes, they do indeed sound a great deal like Himmler.

    Every Christian? No. I never said that, nor would I. Every antigay Christianist? Absolutely.

  • Debbie Snowcroft

    From Wiki: “The Torture Memos is a term originally applying to a set of legal memoranda drafted by John Yoo as Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the United States and signed in August 2002 by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee, head of the Office of Legal Counsel of the United States Department of Justice. They advised the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Defense, and the president on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques: mental and physical torment and coercion such as prolonged sleep deprivation, binding in stress positions, and waterboarding, and stated that such acts, widely regarded as torture, might be legally permissible under an expansive interpretation of presidential authority during the “War on Terror”.

    Bybee signed it. He owns it. You need to stop making excuses for it.

  • Heidi Hooper

    “Anti-Semitism.” January 12, 1931.
    Reply to an Inquiry of the Jewish News Agency in the United States.

    “In answer to your inquiry :
    National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism.

    Anti-semitism is of advantage to the exploiters as a lightning conductor that deflects the blows aimed by the working people at capitalism. Anti-semitism is dangerous for the working people as being a false path that leads them off the right road and lands them in the jungle. Hence Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but be irreconcilable, sworn enemies of anti-semitism.

    In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.

    J. Stalin
    January 12,…

  • Heidi

    You should probably read the New Testament. There is a reason that rabbis claim the entire ‘book’ is ‘antisemitic’. Because it is. Christ is very clear on how he feels about those who call themselves Jews but do not live up to the name, nor to the teachings of Moses.

    John 8:44 He calls them children of the Devil.
    John 10:26 He says that they are not his sheep
    Matthew 23:1-2 He says they sit in Moses seat
    Matthew 23:15 He says they make converts twice the child of hell then themselves.
    Matthew 23:29-35 He says that all the blood of the righteous shall fall upon them.
    Titus 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables

    And on and on it goes.

    You should learn your scriptures, as should most ‘Christians’ who support a blood thirsty people who justify their murder and oppression of the Palestinian people by claiming they are ‘gods chosen’. Christians should understand that their savior said no such thing.

  • Pingback: Dear Mormon militiamen: Stop the insanity - Flunking Sainthood()

  • Pingback: ‘Dear Mormon militiamen: Stop the insanity’ | Bloggernacle Blog | LDS Church, institutionally()