Below please find a review of a book of writings by Franz
Jagerstatter, an Austrian Catholic martyr to Nazism. The review is from Amazon
and is by Peter Sean Bradley.
***
Franz Jagerstatter was a Catholic Austrian farmer who
graduated from a one-room school at fourteen. He spent some time working in the
mines before returning to his home-town of St. Radegund. At St. Radegund he
fathered a child out of wedlock and then married Franziska Schaninger and
started farming. The couple had two small children and Franz grew deeper in his
Catholic faith. In 1938, Austria was incorporated into the National Socialist
(NS) German Reich, initially by force and then by a plebiscite.
From 1940 to 1941, Franz was inducted into the Austrian
army, where he was trained as a soldier away from St. Radegund. During that
time, he wrote letters to wife. These letters are beautiful expressions of the love
of a man for his wife and family. Franz also offers the perspective of an
Austrian peasant on his times, his faith and on the NS influence on Austria.
These letters are particularly poignant because we know Franz's destiny.
After he was mustered out of training in 1941, Franz
returned to St. Radegund, where he thought about the NS and what it meant to be
complicit in NS evil. In 1943, Franz was recalled to military service. The NS
was an evil condemned by the Catholic Church. Bishops and priests were arrested
and imprisoned for speaking against the NS. Service in the military was service
to evil, but Franz had a family and not serving was disobedience to the State,
and to God who ordained the State, and was punishable by death. Soldiers were
dying in the East for an evil cause, and while military service was less risky
than a predestined execution by guillotine, death in such service would be a
violation of conscience, which could merit eternal loss.
Franz was impaled on the cruelest dilemma devised by
humanity: be true to his conscience and die, a death that would jeopardize his
family; or be false to his conscience and court damnation.
The uneducated Austrian farmer pondered his moral
situation and made his decision. He would report for military service and
refuse to take the oath to Hitler. Having made this decision, he reported for
military service, refused to take the oath, was interrogated repeatedly, was
advised by priest and family that his death would be loss to his wife and his
two small children, who he dearly loved. But he remained true to his
conscience, and on August 9, 1943, Franz was executed by beheading by
guillotine, an unknown and unremarked martyr.
His memory was recaptured by the publication of a book - In Solitary Witness by Gordon Zahn - in
the 1960s and on October 26, 2007, Franz Jagerstatter was beatified by Pope
Benedict at the Linz Cathedral at a mass attended by his wife and children, who
had been denied a pension after the war because of Blessed Franz's wartime
refusal to serve in the NS army.
The story is quite simply remarkable. I am interested in
the history disclosed by the story in the subtext, but, first, I have to point
out that Blessed Franz's writing is beautiful and his practical theologizing is
simply profound. Pre-postmodern culture did a good job of teaching grammar and
rhetoric and the practical contents of knowledge. One can marvel at the
lucidity of the prose of this man who dropped out at equivalent of the ninth
grade when compared to the poor quality of writing and reflection turned out by
college graduates.
One also notes how much Catholicism played in Bl. Franz's
life and reflections. I had not heard of him until I happened upon him while
reading Robert Krieg's Catholic Theologians in Nazi Germany. I don't think many
have or Bl. Franz's memory would be gracing the pages of anti-Catholic books
who like to showcase "good Catholics" like Deacon Lichtenberg and
Father Maximillian Kolbe. Of course, Bl. Franz's unredeemed Catholicism is a
problem. As stated in the Introduction by Jim Forest: "Franz Jagestatter
remains a challenge, and not only because of his costly refusal to surrender
his conscience to the Nazis. One aspect of that challenge is Franz's deeply
traditional faith, an example far from fashionable today even among Catholics.
While certainly not unaware of the church's human shortcomings and the ways so
many bishops compromise the Gospel in order to be on good terms with political
leaders. Franz Jagerstatter was a grateful Catholic committed to the church and
its sacramental and devotional life." (p. xxvii). Of course, it does not
occur to the introduction to think that perhaps - just perhaps - it was Franz's
sacramental life that assisted him in his decision and his life.
One "counter-intuitive" aspect of Bl. Franz's
letters is how many priests were arrested and imprisoned for anti-NS activities
as part of their pastoral activities. Hence, Bl Franz refers to Father Josef
Lindinger who criticized the NS in 1938, whereupon the NS broke the windows on
his rectory and forced him to resign. (p. 37.) Father Karobath, the priest at
St. Radegund, was arrested and imprisoned for criticizing the NS. (p. 248.)
Father Leopold Arthofer was imprisoned in Dachau from April 4, 1941 to April 4,
1945. (p. 247.) Another pastor after having his sermon reported by a midwife to
a teacher received a rebuke from the NS for preaching that parents should send
their children to Mass on holy Days. (p. 44). Father Gebetsberger was arrested
in February of 1940 and imprisoned for 6 months because of his criticism of NS.
(p. 73.) Despite making a big contribution to the NS, the Hofbauer family had
their Gasthaus shut down because their son Pastor Johann ("Pleikner")
Hofbauer had publicly criticized the NS. (p. 92.) In prison, awaiting execution,
Bl. Franz was by a Tyrolean priest, Franz Reinisch, a priest of the Pallotine
order, whom the Reich had executed on August 21, 1942 because of his refusal to
take the military oath, a revelation that gave Franz consolation as he awaited
execution. (p. 125.)
Bl. Franz's experience made him express regret that
priests and bishops were not critical of the NS after the 1938 Anschluss, but
he acknowledged the risk to them in speaking their true minds. He also noted
that they had not been given the same grace he had been given in his
willingness to die for his faith and conscience.
Franz deduced his moral obligation from Catholic
teaching. He notes than when it was free to do so, the Austrian Catholic church
condemned the Nazis. He also knows that the Pope had condemned National
Socialism (in Mit Brennender Sorge), and he knew that teaching had never been
countermanded, so he understood the silence of his priests and bishops as part
of that condemnation.
"If it were only a war about land as so many others have
been and if Germany were actually to end up as the victor, then Catholics at
the end of this war would possess the same rights as every other citizen in the
German Reich. But if this war is in fact a revolution or a conflict about
religious belief, then I could fight for the N.S. Reich as much as I want and
yet I - despite all of the exertions and sacrifice that I as a poor soldier had
offered - would be seen t the war's end to be an enemy of the Reich because I a
Catholic would still not commit myself to National Socialism. In other words, I
would be seen at the war's end as Austrian Christians are seen today, even
though they submitted themselves - not freely - four years ago to the National
Socialist.
These thoughts alone suffice for someone not to fight for
this state or for the NS Volk community. Further, I believe that many people
have forgotten what the Holy Father said bout National Socialism in his
encyclical many years ago, namely that National Socialism is even more
dangerous than Communism. Since Rome has not withdrawn this judgment, I believe
that it is not likely a crime or a sin if someone as a Catholic were to refuse
the current obligation for military service - even though a person who refuses
military service is surely looking at death. Is it not more Christian for
someone to give himself as a sacrifice than to have to murder others who
possess a right to life on earth and who want to live in order to save their
lives for a short while." (p. 190.)
I have read so many books written since Hochhuth's
slanderous "The Deputy" that take it as given that Pius was silent
because of his (irrational) (overstated) fear of Bolshevism. But that is not
what one Austrian farmer understood living in the mix of history with his life
on the line. So, where did Bl. Franz get this insight if it wasn't what was
understood at the time? (Which it was.)
Here is an extended passage on the catechism of silence:
"On one occasion, someone told me that we can belong
to the NS Party or contribute to the Winter Help Work without giving the matter
any further thought. This person said it makes entirely no difference if we
engage in these activities because Rome has canceled its ban [against
membership in the NS Party]. However, I did not believe this answer, and so I inquired
further into this matter with a higher religion authority. He told me that the
first answer was not true because Rome has still not made a decision about
[National Socialism] in general.
I believe that it is pointless to ask priests about this
matter. First, they have no more specific instructions from higher church
officials. Second, if a priest were to say something different from what the
N.S. Party holds and if he himself were betrayed, we know what would happen to
him. Third, it can also be that priests themselves are not clear about the
entire matter.
During a retreat a priest who is a member of a religious
order said that many parents come to him with questions about their children.
He said further that these parents themselves should already know what they
have to do. He acknowledged the difficult situation in which many parents today
find themselves when their consciences tell them something different from what
the party says. Everyone knows that to decide against the party's wishes is
likely to jeopardize one's livelihood.
It would perhaps be better if the church were not to make
a decision in this matter, for many people would not be able to go against the
party despite an ecclesiastical judgment. These people know that with one blow
their entire life would be ruined. Moreover, as long as the church has not made
a definite decision in this matter, accountability before God for many people
will not be so difficult.
All of us who were educated in the Catholic religion know
that we are not allowed to participate in political parties that are enemies of
the church or to contribute to such parties so that they can have a wider
influence. My conscience has much to say about all of this. I believe that if
people have a full recognition that this political party that they are joining
or have joined or to which they have contributed is an opponent of the church
and if these people continue to it so that they obtain earthly advantages, then
they may find themselves facing eternal disadvantages.
We should not, of course, pass judgment on others when
they participate in this or that, make contributions or engage in NS
fund-raising. We do not know whether they have a full recognition that the party
to which they belong is an opponent of the church. Or if they know this, they
may not know that belonging to such a party is not allowed by the Catholic
Church. There are also many people who even believe that to contribute to the
NS Party is a Christian act." (p. 195 - 196.)
Elsewhere he wrote:
"It does not even belong to us to condemn either the
National Socialists as a group or as individuals. But as Catholics we must
condemn and reject the NS convictions and the ideas of those people who believe
that we are not able to become fortunate on this earth through the teachings of
Christ. It is a certain sign that such people know too little about the
Christian faith. Because our faith offers so much, we shall become fortunate
through it not only in eternal life but already her in this world. So We
Catholics have not the least reason to allow our faith to get somehow combined
with other teachings.
The Catholic Church has not yet declared that the NS
Party is an opponent of the church and hence has not said that it forbids,
Catholics, under the pain of sin, from belonging to the party. The church has
remained silent on this matter. Nevertheless we surely know what this party is
and how it stands in relation to the church. Many Austrians will be able to remember
the words of the Holy Father in the encyclical that came to our ears as drastic
changes were occurring in Austria: that the National Socialist danger is as
dangerous for us as the Communist danger. "(p. 202.)
Franz sneered at the NS insistence on being a part of a
"Volk community." (p. 24.) At one point he writes to his wife:
"these are the purest of Volk treks. They are worthless endeavors in which
we simply march down a road." (p. 65.) The Nazis taught their soldiers
that "all of us should help one another" but that the NS would not
insert their mentality into him. (p. 72.)
The enforced silence on the Church was part of Bl.
Franz's suffering. He writes:
"Have the National Socialists now - after more than
two years of bringing about the horrible murder of people - adopted a new
orientation that would allow and even promote the silence of church officials?
Have church officials reached the decision that it is now permissible for
Catholics to belong to a party that opposes the church? Have they given a
positive evaluation of National Socialism?" (p. 174.)
It is clear that he understands that the answer is
"no," but he questions whether it would have been better for the
Austrian Church to have had martyrs as examples. And, yet, he does not mean to
throw stones at our bishops and priests. They are humans of flesh and blood as
we are and they can be weak." (p. 175.) (He also speculates that the
bishops might have expected a quick fall of the Nazi government, which survived
against all expectations.(Id.)
Bl. Franz was also able to make sense out of his own
suffering by his faith. There are some moving passages where he meditates on
the meaning of suffering and the cross he must bear in being faithful to
Christ. This is heady stuff today where the default "heroic" position
is for the hero of a story to inveigh against God for being so cruel. Franz
does not doubt the mercy of God and he recognizes who the enemy is, namely
National Socialism. Franz does not blame the Nazis individually. (P. 199
("while I have surely pounded hard against National Socialism, I am not
permitted to attack National Socialists. To do so would go against the
commandment concerning love of neighbors. We should condemn the NS views or
convictions but not the people who hold these convictions. It belongs to God
alone to judge people and to condemn them. All of us are brothers and sisters
before God.")
Unlike modern commenters who are befuddled by an obvious
truth, Bl. Franz had no doubt that the Reich was the enemy of the Church.
During his interrogation, Bl Franz learned the following:
"This morning a man whose father is a general told
me that someone in a position higher than a general has said: "One must
first fight against our enemies outside and afterward against our enemy inside,
namely the C[hurch]."" (p. 108.)
Franz's meditations on bible verses and the Our Father
are moving for their simplicity and clarity. This is a book that deserves to be
read as both inspirational material and a kind of practical guide for living in
morally compromised times.
Review by Peter Sean Bradley
You can purchase the book at Amazon here
I would like to point out an interesting recent example of attitudes towards Poles in a new article in Times of Israel. The article is generally positive and nice and good, but...Please take a look at the title once it opens - the link is at the bottom of this comment.
ReplyDeleteRegards,
Piotr Sitarek
http://www.timesofisrael.com/christian-polish-heroes-honored-for-rescuing-jews-during-shoah/
Hi, Piotr, I did have a look ... please clarify what you were referring to? Thank you.
DeleteHi, Piotr, I just read this by you under the article:
DeleteI agree with my fellow commentators. Generally a nice, positive and hearwarming article; however, I cannot for the life of me understand the need for inverted commas in the title. Unless it is supposed to mean that they are not heroes in their own eyes; however, I am sure you are not using the same approach in any other case when an obvious hero does not call themselves that. I cannot imagine anybody more deserving of a name "hero" than those people.
Another thing is: are they really all Christian or is it just assumed that every Pole who is not Jewish is Christian? The latter assumption would be definitely wrong.
It might sound like nit-picking, but it is not. Pointing those things out helps to reduce bias, increase the quality of journalism and promote understanding.
I, too have read the article, and the comments underneath it.
DeleteI am less concerned about the "hero", as such, as I am by the predictable comments that belittle Polish suffering under the Nazis.