"Non-Aryan Christians"Organize

I: July 1933 to September 1935;Friedrich and Wolff

II: September 1935 to February1937: Spiero

III: February 1937 to August1939: Lesser

Footnotes to Main Text

Appendix I: The Size of thePartially Jewish Population

Notes to Appendix I

Appendix II: Documents (Translations)

Notes to Appendix II

"Non-Aryan Christians"Organize

In Hitler's Germany, as everywhere in the Jewishdiaspora, there were Jews, there were non-Jews, and there thosewho partook a little of each and whom I shall call the partialJews. (1) This latter group was as numerous as the Jews themselves.Since they combined what Nazi theory held to be incombinable --the "Aryan" and the Jewish -- the partial Jews weresomething of an embarrassment in the Nazi state. And from whatI have learned from interviewing some partial Jews who survivedthe Nazi era it would appear that most of them tried to hide theirstatus, to keep it, if not secret, at least as inconspicuous aspossible. (2) But some among them, for a variety of reasons, sawfit to organize as a special interest group.

Six months after Hitler's rise to power, on July 20 1933 to beexact, the otherwise unknown Gustav Friedrich of Berlin organizedthe "Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryanor not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc." (Reichsverband christlich-deutscherStaatsbürger nichtarischer oder nicht rein arischer Abstammunge.V.) The group changed names several times during its six-yearexistence: (3) to Reichsverband der nichtarischen Christen e.V.in December 1934; to Paulus-Bund, Vereinigung nichtarischer Christene.V in September 1936; and finally, after membership became restrictedon "racial" grounds, to Vereinigung 1937 vorläufigerReichsbürger nicht volldeutschblütiger Abstammung e.V.in July 1937. The organization was finally dissolved by governmentaldecree on August 10, 1939. Following the informal custom of someof its former members I shall here use the term Paulus-Bund, asa matter of convenience, to refer to the organization in all itsstages. (4)

From the beginning, the group actively soughtto recruit as members all those Christian Germans who had somediscernible Jewish ancestry. It saw its primary purpose as representingthe interests of its members vis-à-vis the authorities.Together with this practical aim, and undoubtedly as part of it,the organization propounded a point of view concerning the statusof its constituency. This point of view can be summarized as follows:1) We are German and our loyalty is exlusively German; the factthat we had Jewish ancestors, which we do not deny, in no waydetracts from this. 2) We are sincere Christians,(5) whether Catholicor Protestant. The Christian baptism has permanently cut all tiesnot only to Judaism but to the Jewish people. (6) 3) We are absolutelyloyal to the National Socialist government.

There is one term that appears and reappearsfrom the beginning to the end in the voluminous printed and mimeographedmaterials issued by this organization: Schicksalsgenosse, 'fate-comrade.'In time this term became emblematic of the Paulus-Bund and itsliterature; it characterized and identified the organization,and was in many ways comparable to the term Genosse ('comrade')in the left wing press of the Weimar republic and the characteristicParteigenosse ('party comrade') and Volksgenosse (7) ('ethniccomrade') in that of the Nazis.

The German Schicksalsgenosse, a compound noun that combines thenotion of 'fate,' Schicksal, with that of Genosse, 'comrade,'can more generally be translated as "fellow sufferer."It was used by the organization to designate its individual memberswell as all those whom it wished to recruit to membership. UntilFebruary of 1937 at least, these included all Christians who hadidentifiable Jewish ancestors. The term was never used to includeJews; one passage describes Jews as helping "their own fate-comrades"(see document b) in Appendix II).

A word needs to be said about the potential constituency of thegroup. Since the days of Moses Mendelssohn, a hundred and fiftyyears previously, substantial numbers of Jews had married non-Jewsand had become Christian in the process; others had convertedto Christianity without benefit of intermarriage. Insofar as theJewish origins were known, there was always a tendency to regardall such "new Christians" (8)as in some way partiallyJewish.

In defiance of this social reality, formal rules did not (anddo not !) recognize "partially Jewish"; neither thetraditional German civil law, nor the Jewish halakha, nor Christianreligious legislation: a person is formally either Jewish or not.In the fall of 1935, as we shall see, the "Nuremberg laws"sought to divide the whole world of the partially Jewish artificiallyby counting the number of Jewish grandparents. But since the degreeof "racial mixture" could not always be determined withany reliability, and since, moreover, various degrees of such"mixture" could typically be found in the same family(the child of a "half-Jew" would be a "quarter-Jew,"for instance), the world of the partially Jewish continued toform, in fact if not in law, a richly variegated but neverthelessseemless whole.

It was to this world that the new organization sought to appeal.The founding leadership referred to this population as the "non-AryanChristians," reflecting the Nazi tendency in the pre-Nurembergdays to lump together all those who were less than "purelyAryan." Some Christian charitable activities aside (9), thePaulus-Bund was alone, in the whole Hitler period, to take uponitself the task of providing some institutional shelter for thepartially Jewish population.

We shall never be able to know very precisely the size of thispopulation of potential members of the Paulus-Bund. The very boundariesof the category, no matter what scheme of classification one uses,are necessarily imprecise. First, the amount of "Jewish blood"considered for defining Aryan purity varied, not only informally,in the public mind, but even in the formal rules of the governmentand Party. For example, a "quarter Jew" (or "MischlingSecond Degree") was to be considered the equal of a "German-blooded"under the Nuremberg laws (10); but there were all kinds of exceptions:he could not enter the Party, and according to the law of September29, 1933, nobody whose family contained even a single Jewish ancestorat any time after January of 1800 could be a "farmer"(Bauer). (11) Second, the amount of genealogical information thatwas available to the authorities, or even to the individuals affected,naturally varied with circumstances. Third, neither the administrativepolicies of the government, nor the willingness of its constituentagencies to enforce them, were uniform or even predictable. (12)

With these limitations in mind, I have nevertheless arrived atan estimate of approximately half a million partial Jews, aboutthe same number as religiously organized Jews, in the Germanyof 1933. I give the grounds for this estimate in the AppendixI.

Of this half million eligible members, what proportion ever joinedthe Paulus-Bund ? I have nowhere found an accounting of nationalmembership figures, but each issue of the monthly newsletter publishedthe number of copies that had been printed. This number was 3400in January of 1935, then climbed to 5000 in 1936 (reaching a heightof 6000 for the single issue of July-August of 1936), then wentdown to 3500 after the split of mid-1937, and finally stabilizedat 3300 until it ceased publication in 1939. (13)
The publication was sent to family units, so we can multiply thesefigures by three or four to get an idea of how many individualswere reached by it. It would seem that the very maximum that couldhave been reached is less than twenty thousand, or four percentof the partially Jewish population. Comparable figures for theJewish press in Germany at the time show a total circulation ofmore than a million copies of Jewish periodicals; as Philo-Lexikonpoints out, every Jewish adult and child read an average of twoJewish periodical per month. (14) These circulation figures pointto a state of affairs, born out by conversations I have had withnumerous Jewish and partially Jewish survivors of the Nazi erain Germany, in which the Jewish organizations encompassed theirtotal potential constituency, while most of the partial Jews --"Mischlinge," Christian "full Jews," or whatever-- never as much as heard of the Paulus-Bund. (15)

Before recounting the story of the Paulus-Bund and the stagesit traversed in its six year history, I must sketch, as background,the evolution in status of the partial Jews in Nazi Germany.
The doctrinaire Nazis, and other "racist" anti-Semitesbefore them, refused to see any difference whatever between aJew and a Christian who is "tainted" by partial or whollyJewish origin. This doctrine, at least in its strict interpretationby offical Nazi party sources, lumped together all those who hadany Jewish ancestors whatever; in the Nazis' specialized vocabularyof racism, the fight was to be conducted equally against "Judenund Judenstämmlinge," 'Jews and Jew-offspring.' (16)

While the partially Jewish never received as much emphasis asfull Jews, some unfavorable attention was paid to them from thebeginnings of "racist" anti-Semitism in the late nineteenthcentury. Before and after the years of Nazi rule, anti-Semiticagitators would castigate Christians who had Jews among theirancestors: "It is impossible to count as Jew only him whohas a Jewish father or a Jewish mother, i. e. fifty percent Jewishblood. Experience shows that Jewish blood is frequently strongerthan Aryan blood, not only in grandchildren, but also in great-grandchildrenand even further on down the line." (17) Hitler thought thatoffspring of intermarriages would always take on the characteristicsof Jews. (18)

As far as "baptized Jews" -- former Jews who had convertedto Christianity -- were concerned, the Nazis' hatred and contemptknew few bounds. Hitler criticized the religious anti-Semitismof the Austrian Christian Social Party of his youth because itfailed to regard such people as Jews.
The Nazis' specialized vocabulary had a term for such converts:Taufjude, 'baptism-Jew'. (20)

It was under the influence of such doctrines that the first lawsand regulations concerning the partial Jews were promulgated bythe new Nazi government in 1933. In April there was a new civilservice law that contained the first "Aryan paragraph,"a requirement that civil servants from then on were to have noJewish ancestors. (21) Such "Aryan paragraphs" werethen introduced into many new laws and regulations; a great manynon-governmental and voluntary organizations followed suit. (22)
While some discriminatory regulations were specifically directedagainst "Jews," as many were written against "non-Aryans"and therefore included all the "non-Aryan" Christiansof whatever degree of Jewish ancestry. The result is that thefate-comrades found that their legal status, if perhaps not theiractual treatment by the authorities, approximated that of Jews.(23)

For roughly two and a half years this radical approach to racialpurity was essentially the law of the land. Apparently it wasfound sufficiently unwieldy or inconvenient or embarrassing (24)to be profoundly modified by the "Nuremberg Laws" ofSeptember 1935 and subsequent administrative regulations. Theselaws gave considerable relief to many partial Jews by distinguishingsharply among four classes: 1) three or four Jewish grandparentsmade one a "Jew," regardless of one's own religion;2) two Jewish grandparents resulted in a Mischling ('halfbreed')First Grade; 3) a single Jewish grandparent defined the MischlingSecond Class; 4) an individual without any Jewish grandparentwas to be considered "German-blooded." This four-foldclassification was to replace the old dichotomous scheme of "Aryan"vs. "non-Aryan." (25)

It has been claimed that this distinction between "full Jews"and the two classes of "Mischlinge" represented a victoryof non-Nazi officialdom over the zealots of the Party. (26) Butbe that as it may, and despite the difficulties and ambiguitiesof the scheme to which we shall return, there is no doubt thatit resulted in a substantial and unexpected improvement in thelegal position of many of the partial Jews.

If there was a pendular swing in Nazi policy toward partial Jews,from a doctrinaire racism in the early days to concessions to"Mischlinge" by the Nuremberg laws, it seems that towardthe end of the war there was some movement back toward greaterpersecution of "Mischlinge." After the invasion of Russiain June of 1941, the Nazi apparatus began to plan for the holocaust,and it seems that at least some of the planners wished to includethe partial Jews. In the end most of the "non-Aryan Christians"were not killed like Jews but their position deteriorated substantially.(27) But these developments lie outside the period of the Paulus-Bund.

The Paulus-Bund was formed immediately after the first "Aryanparagraphs" were put into place; it existed throughout thepreparation for, and then the amplification of the Nuremberg legislation.These developments must obviously be kept in mind when lookingat the stages which the organization itself traversed. I suggestthat there were three such stages in the history of the Paulus-Bund.

In the first stage -- to September of 1935 -- the organizationwas as young as the Nazi regime itself, and there was room toexperiment with various themes and emphases. On the whole, theperiod was one of emphasizing the theme of German nationalism.The second stage -- to February of 1937 -- took place after theregime had consolidated itself, and, most important for the Paulus-Bund,had enacted the Nuremberg laws. Outwardly the main theme becameone of adaptation to the new legislation. But since this legislationwas directed at introducing "racial" divisions among"non-Aryan Christians," events were building up to thecrisis of February 1937 when the group split.

These first two stages flow into one another and are marked moreby a change in emphasis than by any apparent radical reorientation.They represent the rising action in the drama of the Paulus-Bund.After the crisis came a third period and the action fell.

One way of labelling the stages is by reference to the men whoserved as leaders of the group. The leadership as a whole wasunstable. For example, of the eight men (28) who are shown asCouncil members in November of 1933 (29), only three had appearedon a similar list the previous August. (30) By the following March,only six of the eight are still on Council. (31) The two chairmenof the future -- Spiero and Lesser -- do not make their appearanceon any of these early lists. (31)

The founding chairman of the group was Gustav Friedrich, who diedon October 31, 1933. (33) The Berlin lawyer Günther Alexander-Katzbecame a temporary chairman while a search was instituted forsomeone who would be known "as widely as possible among theGerman people." (34) By March of 1934, Richard Wolff, alreadyon the Council since at least the previous November, was electedthe new chairman. In September of 1935 Heinrich Spiero replacedhim, only to be himself replaced by Karl Friedrich Lesser in Februaryof 1937.

This coming and going of leaders was certainly not in the spiritof the "Führerprinzip" that the group professedto practice, and about which more later. We can now only speculatewhy there was so much turnover. Friedrich died in office, andSpiero was replaced in time because he had too many Jewish grandparents.But why Spiero took over from Wolff and why the Council's membershipexperienced the instability it did must remain matters of conjecture.None of the remaining former members of the group whom I questionedcould give an explanation; they had been too young at the timeand too far from the leadership to have gained insight into thisquestion. Three possible reasons suggest themselves, and in theabsence of more information it seems safest to assume that allthree played a role: 1) some of the leaders no doubt had personalreasons to drop out, for example emigration; 2) there are mutedhints in the documents of occasional internal conflict in thegroup, and this may have resulted in some rotation of leadership;3) the government's secret services may well have insisted onsome of the changes.

I: July 1933 to September1935; Friedrich and Wolff

Neither Friedrich nor Wolff were people inany way known to the public. As far as Friedrich is concerned,even the organization's literature gives no clue about his backgroundor occupation. His successor Wolff pays him homage after his death:"A courageous, imaginative man, scarcely known in broadercircles, Gustav Friedrich founded the organization in stormy times.Today we thank him for this courageous deed ..." (35)

On Wolff there is a little more information. He is listed in the9th edition ( published in 1928) of Wer ist's ?, the German Who'sWho, as a doctor of philosophy and lecturer in Leipzig. On theoccasion of his fiftieth birthday, March 9, 1935, the newsletterpublishes a biographical sketch of 500 words. (36)
From this we learn that his ancestors can be documented as residentin Germany since the sixteenth century; that his father had beenan architect; that he himself had been baptized Protestant; thathe had been a business man, historian, and finally an editor inthe service of the Weimar government; and finally that he wasmarried and had four children. Wolff survived the Nazi regimeand the war. In 1958 he wrote an article on the Reichtags fire;a brief biographical note states that he emigrated from Germanyin 1938 and, at the time the article was published, lived in Nairobias a British citizen. (37)

The first six documents in Appendix II stem from the summer andfall of 1933. The first, labelled a), is a mimeographed circularletter from Gustav Friedrich, from which I present translatedexcerpts. Next, b), are excerpts from a speech by another leaderof the group, Dr. Günter Alexander-Katz, to a press receptionin November. Item c) is the translation of a printed sheet ofgeneral information. The original bears a logo of the Iron Crosssuperimposed by the Christian cross (this logo appeared neveragain in the literature of the organization). The other materialconsists of d) an appeal to join, directed to "Christian-Germannon-Aryans"; e) a page containing a "profession of faith";and f) the twenty-three paragraphs of the organization's statuteswith a blank "declaration of membership" form. I translateall of items c), d), and e), and excerpts from f).

Some of the themes revealed in these materials were to featurein the organization's literature throughout its existence, othersare specific to this period. (38)

The first and most persisting theme, to remain until the veryend, is adaptation. It is repeatedly pointed out that the organizationexists because it has been sanctioned by the government and thatabsolute loyalty and obedience is owed to that government. Dr.Günter Alexander-Katz, member of the Council, boasts thatthe group submits its membership records to the Gestapo "forverification." (document b). The message from the leadershipis that the government's policies on "non-Aryan" Christiansis to be regretted, but that no power on heaven or earth can changeit; that not only must fate-comrades accept their fate with dignitybut, above all else, that they must indeed accept it.

In adapting to what they considered the organizational principlesthat modern times require -- the Führerprinzip, 'principleof the Leader' of the Nazis (see document a) -- the Paulus-Bundorganizers were even more in vogue than they perhaps realized.It is true that Führerprinzip was a Nazi slogan; but it isalso true that the German Communist Party, partly under the influenceof the Nazis and partly under that of the Stalin leadership cult,applied it no less vigorously by about 1929. (39) In any case,the Führer business seems to have been troublesome to thenew organization. In August 1933, two different circular lettersfrom Friedrich list him on the printed letterhead as "Führer"of the organization, but by October the word is pasted over andreplaced by Vorsitzender, 'chairman.' The title "Führer"is never again assumed by any member of the organization. No doubtit appeared unseemly and lèse-majesté at the time;but we do not know whether it was dropped voluntarily or underpressure from the government.

Secondly, there is the persisting theme of distress, "UnsereNot." Much of the writing, some in the form of poetry, expressesa sense of unexpected, sudden, undeserved misfortune. The monthlyjournal ("newsletter," Mitteilungsblatt) was to becomean organ of addressing and consoling the fate-comrades, of describingtheir great distress and expressing their modest aspirations.Throughout the history of the organization the publication mirrorsthe drastic enonomic downward mobility of much of the membership.When members with administrative or academic credentials are mentioned,almost invariably their titles are followed by the tell-tale "i.R."(im Ruhestand, 'in retirement') or "a.D." (ausser Dienst,'Not in Service'). (40) The newsletter also frequently featuredadvice on occupational training for the youth (become manual workers!), on re-training for adults (ditto), and on emigration (don'texpect too much ! learn foreign languages !). The publicationdoes not often give precise figures, but one report from Frankfurtin March of 1935 tells us that fully a third of the membershipis unemployed. (41)

The distress about which we learn in Paulus-Bund publications,perhaps very naturally, is exclusively that of fate-comrades;Jewish distress, while sometimes alluded to, never provokes theregret, let alone the sympathy of the organization's writers.This theme and this way of treating it mark the entire historyof the organization.

The theme of mutual aid also makes its appearance at the verybeginning and was to become more and more prominent as time wenton. The group always seemed to have seen one of its most importantreasons for existence in the social services that it could provideto fate-comrades. The files of the monthly journal give evidenceof a vigorous promotion of lectures, musical and theatrical performances,exhibitions of paintings, etc., all of which are described asgiving opportunities to fate-comrade artists and performers aswell as giving edification to the audiences. Much space is takenup by detailing the organization's employment agency, its counsellingfacilities, its many courses for adults and children, its youthgroups, its dances and social get-togethers. While the scale ofall this could of course never equal that of the Jewish Kulturbundin the early years of the regime, the spirit is altogether comparable.

These were the items that were to become permanent features ofthe group, more or less with constancy of emphasis. Other themesproved to be more problematic and variable.
The very early material shows an attenuated but unmistakable anti-Semitism.Both the original circular letter by Gustav Friedrich (documenta) and the speech by Alexander-Katz (document b) contain the kindof anti-Semitic references that were common among the "German-Nationalists"(i.e. the circles of the right-wing non-Nazis) at the time (42).The leaders of the Paulus-Bund always maintained that they werenot and would never be anti-Semitic. But they apparently couldnot resist the fashionable right-wing formulations of the time;they found a Jewish spirit linked to all that is "Un-Germanly"liberal, pacifist, left-wing, democratic.

This anti-Semitism obviously had to be ambivalent: these men,after all, had Jewish ancestors and were considered partiallyJewish themselves. Furthermore, unlike so many of their fate-comradeswho chose to stay out of the organization, these men would notdeny their Jewish ancestors; in fact they often had occasion topolemicize against attempts at hiding one's background. So beingpartly or fully of "Jewish race" themselves, the Jewishnessthey attacked was that of the spirit -- the Talmud spirit, or"Bolshevism," as the occasion demanded -- rather thanthat of "blood." They turned against what they conceivedas a voluntary Jewishness which they personally had "overcome."

After 1933, there was no further open expression of anti-Semitism.We know that the matter was a problem for the fate-comrades becausethe monthly journal would from time to time report that anti-Semitism,unfortunately, persisted in "our circles." But by thetime the group issued its only printed pamphlet in November of1934, explicit anti-Semitism, racial or otherwise, was advisedlyrejected. (43)
This did not deter writers of the group's publications, however,to continue rejoicing that they had "overcome" Jewishness(44).

In any case, this was not a period for generosity of spirit orhumane enlightenment. At the end of 1933, made uneasy by rumorsof further racist legislation, the group made representationsto the authorities: "Speaking on behalf of our membership,we have protested most sharply against being compared to Negroes"(emphasis in original). (45)

A theme that was in those days related to anti-Semitism, Germannationalism, saw some variation in emphasis over time. Stridentlypolitical in the first period, it was to become more muted, andmore "cultural" rather than political, as time wentby.

In the first period of its history, the group's position was similarto what was left of the non-Nazi German-Nationalist movement thatsupported the Nazis from a conservative perspective (46): withoutdeclaring themselves as National Socialists, they went out oftheir way to show support to the new government and its Führer.

There was, of course, always one very important point on whichthe Paulus-Bund leaders differed from the "Aryan" politiciansof the right wing. Where the latter usually tended toward someform of racist interpretation of German nationhood, a matter of"blood" rather than culture, the Paulus leaders insistedthat German character is determined by German culture -- the Germanlanguage, German education, participation in Germany's wars. Itwas those who held to the Jewish religion, according to the theleaders of the group, unlike they themselves who had embracedChristianity as part of their attachment to German culture, whowere un-German.

Of course the Paulus people were far from disinterested participantsin this kind of discussion; their personal status, welfare, andultimately their safety was involved.

Some of the organization's pronouncements in this period can onlybe described as obsequious, not to say sycophantic. The November1933 newsletter notes with great pride that its press receptionhad been attended not only by representatives of the domesticand foreign press, but also by dignitaries of the government andthe party. (47) The same issue calls upon the fate-comrades tovote Ja in the November 12 plebiscite that was to approve Hitler'swithdrawal from the League of Nations. "Non-Aryans,"even Jews, still had the right to vote.

This style persisted for more than another year.

When Hindenburg died on August 13 of 1934, the chairman of theReich League solemnly declared that "it is the obvious dutyof each German, upon meeting with like-minded in an organizationfor the first time after August 2, 1934, to commemorate the painfulevent ... " (48)

The newletter's issue of January of 1935 carried a front-pageeditorial by then-chairman Richard Wolff, declaring 1) that fate-comradesare in every way loyal Germans, "neither émigrésnor spiritually emigrated" (but he himself did emigrate in1938, see above); 2) that fellow Germans in the Saar will soonhave the opportunity of "returning home to the Reich";and 3) that the fate-comrades, similarly, hope for this chance.(49) Two months later, the returns from the Saar plebiscite nowin, the fate-comrades expressed their satisfaction. (50)

On March 16, 1935 Hitler breached the Versailles prohibition againstuniversal military conscription. Richard Wolff welcomed the step:"Once again the people's best -- fathers, sons, and brothers-- are called on to work for the protection of the country's honorand the maintenance of peace." At the same time he wroteto the Minister of the Army to urge that fate-comrades, too, beeligible for conscription. (51) (Eventually certain ones were).

While the Paulus-Bund in this period then shows outspoken politicalsupport to the Nazi government, it also assumes a surprisinglyfrank and implicitly anti-Nazi tone when it takes sides in theProtestants' "church struggle" of the times. This conflictinside the Protestant churches, it will be remembered, had asits fulcrum a question of great interest to the fate-comrades,viz. whether the "Aryan paragraph" should be appliedto the Protestant clergy. (52)

The organization goes on record, without mincing any words whatever,for the full spiritual equality in the Protestant Church for Christiansof Jewish ancestry. The relevant statements -- translated as documentse and f in Appendix II -- are both found in ephemera rather thanin the newsletter. Such outright defense of the "non-Aryans'"interests was never again to appear in the literature of the organization.Document f, the original of which exists in mimeographed form,is particularly noteworthy since it completely omits the customaryshow of deference to the Nazi government. I have seen no recordof how the supervising authorities reacted. We do know that allPaulus-Bund activities were watched by the secret services ofthe regime (more on this below), and it may well be that the publicationof this particular circular was eventually punished in some way.

II: September 1935 toFebruary 1937: Spiero

The succession from Richard Wolff to HeinrichSpiero occurred on September 16, 1935. The October newsletterannounced in a front-page box that Wolff had requested a leaveof absence until the following January because he had undertaken"a great scholarly task." Heinrich Spiero, "famedhistorian of German literature," was named acting chairman.In the January issue a similar box announced the election of Spieroas permanent chairman. Wolff, it was said, would devote himselfto scholarly work on a permanent basis. He was thanked, perfunctorily,for "what he had done for the construction of the organization."The available materials give no satisfactory explanation for thecauses of this change in leadership.

But a great deal is known of the life and work of Heinrich Spiero.(54) Where the other leaders of the Paulus-Bund had been almosttotally obscure, Spiero, if not exactly famous, had gained a reputationin pre-Hitler Germany as a critic and historian of German literature.

Born on March 24, 1876 to a Jewish family in Königsberg (thenEast Prussia, now Soviet Union), he had himself baptized Protestantat the age of 18 by a well-known preacher of the day, Alfred Thaer.He studied both literature and law, worked in his father's businessand as a university lecturer, and wrote more than thirty bookin the course of his life. Most of his publications deal withnineteenth-century German writers. In 1929 he published an autobiographicalwork, Schicksal und Anteil, in which he recounts his personalacquaintance with many of the literary figures of his time. (55)

There are several indications in these materials that Spiero'srelationship to his Jewish background was disturbed. His autobiographydoes not mention his origins. When relating encounters with Jewshe talks like a curious outsider. He mentions his friendship withthe preacher Alfred Thaer without letting on that this man hadconverted him to the Christian faith. There are other odditiesof this kind in the book.

Spiero became best known for his work on the nineteenth centuryGerman novelist Wilhelm Raabe (1831-1910). Spiero devoted severalbooks to Raabe and is sometimes credited for having brought Raabeto the attention of the German reading public. In 1931, as partof its celebration of Raabe's 100th birthday, the University ofGöttingen awarded Spiero an honorary doctorate in recognitionof his Raabe studies.

Whatever Raabe's place in the history of literature, he and GustavFreytag, with whom his name is ususally linked in this context,merit at least a mention in the history of German anti-Semitism.Both Raabe and Freytag are considered liberals but their hostileportrayal of Jews is often cited as one of the contributing factorsin the "racial" anti-Semitism of the late nineteenthcentury. (56) In Raabe's novel Hungerpastor (1862), which is theone most often mentioned in this connection, the thoroughly repulsivevillain is not only a Jew but a Jew who converts to Christianity.One need not have recourse to a psychoanalytic interpretationto suspect that this novel had a personal meaning for Spiero.

George Mosse finds that Raabe's anti-Semitic bias is shown inhis portrayal of Heinrich Heine. (57)
Perhaps to counter criticism of this kind, Spiero reports seeingRaabe nine days before the latter's death in 1910. Spiero tellshim that the Hamburg Senate has just approved a memorial statuefor Heine, and Raabe is delighted. "He pounded the table,in the old-fashioned manner of swinging the right arm widely:'that really is splendid !'" (58)

Spiero's own writings show considerable open-mindedness. The negativecomments concerning Jews that mark the writings of many other"non-Aryan Christians" seem to be completely absentin Spiero's. In Schicksal und Anteil he reports friendships andpositive judgements for various political personalities, includingsome on the left. But there is no doubt that his own commitmentswere on the right, and in the context of the times this was boundto have some anti-Semitic implication. He carried his monarchistsympathies into the Weimar republic: "The monarchy cannotbe restored, but the monarchic principle will become extinguishedfor the author only with the end of his life." (59) Morerelevant is his membership (60) on executive committees of theDNVP, the anti-Semitic Deutschnationale Volkspartei, the "German-National"allies of Hitler in 1933. (61) His relationship to Jews and Jewishnesswas not simple.

Other leaders of the Paulus-Bund had similar right-wing backgrounds.When Spiero entered the Council in September of 1935, he foundthere, among others, three former board members of the DNVP andone board member of the Deutsche Volkspartei (DVP), 'German PeoplesParty." (62) The latter group, smaller than the DNVP, wasalso on the right and also had anti-Semitic tendencies, but inboth respects was more moderate than the DNVP.

The only other leading member of the Paulus-Bund about whom wehave party-political information is Rudolf Schiff who was chairmanfor Leipzig in the final period of the Paulus-Bund. Before 1933he had been a member of the student group of the DVP. (63)

Of course these political proclivities were the leadership's andnot necessarily those of the rank and file. I have correspondedabout this question with some former members of the group. Onesuch correspondent has pointed out that he himself had had socialistsympathies in those years. He and his friends, all younger membersof the rank and file, simply found the organization useful becauseit provided social fellowship among the afflicted partial Jewsand practical help in dealing with the authorities. The politicsof the Council and the newsletter, in his opinion, representedthe views of the formal leadership and perhaps its older members,but they meant very little to the younger people; the right-wingpronouncements, did, however, provide a convenient cover vis-à-visthe government.

In the period of Spiero's leadership we can discern two majorthemes in the literature and activities of the Paulus-Bund. Oneis manifest and explicit: adaptation to the Nuremberg laws. Theother theme is not explicitly expressed, but it is foreshadowedin the very insistence by the group of adapting to Nuremberg ;this is the theme of the coming split of the organization along"racial" lines.

Spiero took office at the very start of what we may call the Nurembergsystem of classificatory persecution. We have already sketchedthe basic four-fold taxonomy of this system: 1. Jews defined "racially";2. non-Jews; 3. and 4., two in-between groups. The system wasinitiated on September 15, 1935 with the enactment of a new citizenshiplaw and another one "to protect German blood and German honor."It would appear that the system was difficult to institute allin one swoop; in any case it evolved over time to the accompanimentof a flood of additional regulations, (64) and for almost a yearand a half the Paulus-Bund continued to join together that whichNuremberg would put asunder: "racial" (but baptized)"full" Jews on the one hand, Mischlinge on the other.

Adapting to the Nuremberg system, for the Paulus-Bund, meant firstof all to understand it, and much of the newsletter in this periodwas devoted to reporting on the newest developments in the evolvingsystem. The language was often technical. As the writers saw it,the four main areas of concern were suffragium, (65) by whichwas meant the question of who was a citizen and to what extent;connubium, (66) who could marry whom; and occupation, (67) restrictionson opportunities to earn a living. It must have become very clearto the reader of this material -- and there was no need to readbetween the lines -- that what were still ritually referred toas fate-comrades in fact were treated very differentially in allthese areas.

Under the Nuremberg laws a novel distinction was created betweenStaatsangehörige ('subjects') and Reichsbürger ('citizens').Everyone was a "subject" but only those considered raciallyqualified could become "citizens." (68) It was decidedthat "Jews" (those with three or more Jewish (69) grandparents)could not be "citizens," but that both kinds of Mischlingecould. While this rule appears simple enough on paper, in practicethere were countless complications. The greatest difficulty layin establishing the "race" of the grandparent. Itemi in Appendix II gives something of the flavor of the hair-splittingthat the Nuremberg system required.

The Nuremberg regulations concerning connubium of partial Jewswere as follows: 1. "Jews" (as legally defined) maymarry only "Jews"; 2. Mischlinge of the "firstdegree" may marry only others of the same status; 3. Mischlingeof the "second degree" ('quarter Jews") are treatedas "German-blooded" for this purpose. The regulationsalso provided that certain other marriages could be authorizedunder special circumstances, for instance that of a "first-degree"with a "second-degree" Mischling, but such special permissionwas apparently almost never granted. There were again difficultiesin applying this law with any great consistency or logic, againmainly because of the practical problems in defining a "Jewish"grandparent. The Paulus-Bund newsletter faithfully reported onhow such complications were treated by the authorities as theyarose.

The regulations must have been particularly difficult for "MischlingeFirst Degree" of marriageable age since the pool of possiblepartners could not have been very large. Each issue of the Paulus-Bundnewsletter carried numerous personal want ads in which such peoplelooked for partners. I have also been told by a survivor of theBund that it was the social aspect -- the many dances, hikes,and other get-togethers -- which he remembers most about the group.Obviously such activities were more urgent for the "halfJews" than for the "quarter Jews." After the organizationwas forbidden in 1939, some of the members, according to a numberof my informants, continued to see one another in informal Mischlingclubs. (70)

Throughout the Spiero period it was the professed position ofthe leadership, in numerous speeches and articles in the newsletter,that all "non-Aryan Christians" are fate-comrades regardlessof "blood," that no distinction among them is thinkablewithin the organization. The group was still explicitly Christianin religion, and the position was similar to that of the ProfessingChurch which rejected any "Aryan paragraph" within thecommunity of Christian faith. But adjustment to the Nurembergsystem of classification was at least as high a priority for thePaulus-Bund, and, at least in hindsight, a separation on "racial"grounds was always in the wings.

The dilemma created by this interplay between professed fate-comradeshipand the desire to adjust to Nuremberg is illustrated in the schoolissue.

In September 1935 the government announced that Jewish childrenwould no longer be able to go to public schools, and it appearedto an (anonymous) Paulus-Bund writer that all "non-Aryans,"i.e. "Mischlinge" included, might be consigned to "Jewschools" [Judenschulen]. This was seen as a terrible threat:"The education of our Christian non-Aryan children in Jewschools must provoke the most serious objections on both religiousand racial grounds. ... We see a solution in separate classesand schools for Christian non-Aryan children." The articlecertainly had anti-Semitic overtones but did not explicitly violatethe principle of the faith-comradeship of all "non-AryanChristians." But it was immediately followed by a news item,presented without further comment, according to which the Berlinschool authorities had tentatively agreed to a private schoolwhich would be open only to those with at least two non-Jewishgrandparents. (71)

December 1935 brings the cheerful news that the organization itselfhas decided to establish a school, and that all non-Aryan Christianwould be able to attend the lower grades; only in the higher gradeswould there be restrictions in accordance with the number of Jewishgrandparents. (72) Two months later there is still talk of preparationsfor this school, but we also learn that new government regulationsallow not only "25% non-Aryans" but also "50% non-Aryans"to attend public schools. (73) Three months after that we aretold that any school for "full non-Aryans" -- by nowthese are the only fate-comrade children who would require one-- is being postponed. (74)

There is no more mention of organization-sponsored schooling afterthis, but there is an epilogue: more than a year later, the Bund-- having rid itself of the "full non-Aryans" in themeantime -- is able to publish the good news that Herr Reich Ministerfor Education has definitively established that Mischlinge ofboth grades are to be treated just like the "German-blooded"in the entire school system. It is also specified that Mischlingeof the "first grade" can attend Jewish schools instead,but that those exercising this option would lose German citizenship.(75)

III: February 1937 toAugust 1939: Lesser

To greet the New Year in 1937, Spiero writesa front-page editorial of good wishes to the memberhip; he alsoreveals that there had been some dissension on the Council whichhas now been resolved by agreement on the tasks ahead: "weseek, on the basis of our German fatherland, in Christian dedication,to obtain for ourselves and our families whatever it is possibleto obtain within the framework of the laws of the Reich."Finally, chairman Spiero announces that the Council has regretfullyaccepted the resignation of vice-chairman Dr. med. Wilhelm Caroand has unanimously voted to make the Captain of Cavalry (In Retirement),Attorney-at-Law Karl Friedrich Lesser the new vice-chairman ofthe organization. "All of us are convinced that he will bethe right man in the right place." (76)

The next thing we know, through a prominently displayed box onthe front page of the newsletter, is that a lecture that Spierowas to have delivered on January 26, 1937 is abruptly concelled.No reasons are given. (77)

Now there is a month in which nothing happens, as far as the readerof the newsletter can tell. But then, in April, there is a front-pageannouncement entitled "Change of Statutes," in whichit is explained that, in accordance with the letter and spiritof the Nuremberg laws, the organization has just expelled allthose who are of "more than 50% Jewish descent." Newstatutes have been adopted. It should now be possible to attractpersonalities who have previously stayed away in view of the Jewishconnection of the former organization. Because of all the neworganizational work, it is earnestly requested that all membersremit an emergency donation of at least three marks. The changein statutes has necessitated a change in leadership, and Dr. Spierohas dropped out; in his place there is now the Attorney-at-Lawat the Court of Appeal, Friedrich Karl Lesser. All those leaving,especially those who had been in leading positions, are heartilythanked for what they have done for the organzation in its previousform. (78)

The re-organized leadership of the group went to some lengthsto disclaim responsibility for the expulsion of their "fullynon-Aryan" fate-comrades: "Already in the beginningof October 1935, that is to say little more than two weeks afterthe proclamation of the Nuremberg laws ... the government demandedthat the organization conform to the new law. ... [Only] in Marchof 1937 did this reorganization occur.... Now I ask you ... whohas the right to claim that one group forced out the other sothat it itelf 'would fare better' ?" (79) Two months laterthe newsletter publishes a curious correction. It is now saidthat the date of October 1935 for the first demands by the governmentis in error and that these demands were in fact first voiced inMay of 1936. (80) Looking at the record from this distance, itseems strange that the first assertion could have been made withsuch confidence and accompanied by such convincing supportingdetail.

Reutter has examined documents of the Ministry of the Interior,and there is no doubt now that the government made a definitivedemand for the change in February of 1937. (81) Whether or notprevious demands had been made and resisted, as the Lesser leadershipclaimed, we do not know. After the war, Spiero writes about theincident as follows:

"The Nuremberg laws put an end to my work [in the organization] after a year and a half. Following the tenor of these laws, which distinguished between Mischlinge and full Jews, some of the Mischlinge were in a great hurry to rid the organization of the so-called full Jews. In this they were successful with the aid of the government. But I must add for the sake of justice that when first faced with the government's demand for a split, Herr Mendelsohn [of the Paulus Bund leadership -- W.C.] had a long conversation with Hinkel [of the Reich Ministry for People's Enlightenment and Propaganda -- W.C.] in order to obtain permission to keep the group undivided, and at that time he was still successful. [But] in January of 1937 the government ordered the split." (82)

Spiero thereupon started a "Bureau" (Büro Dr. HeinrichSpiero) through which he sought to continue some counselling andcharitable work with those who had been exluded from the Paulus-Bund.In 1939 he closed this work and, according to his post-war memoirs,transmitted his records to Probst Grüber. (83)

The old organization, meanwhile, was able to maintain itself witha fairly stable membership of over 3000, now all Mischlinge. Thislast period of its life -- the Lesser period -- began with a fairnumber of lengthy articles and features in the newsletter whichsought to lay down the new orientation. Documents k through oshould convey the general tenor. It was said the the group nowexists on a racial and no longer on a religious basis, in conformitywith the Nuremberg system of racial taxonomy. Religion from nowon would be each member's private business. The group would representthe interests of the Mischlinge, and would try to see to it thatevery Mischling is aware of whatever rights and privileges thelaw provides for him.

One very striking feature of the early months in the Lesser periodis the heavy moralism. To stay out of the organization would beegotistical. Each must help the community of fate-comrades. "Gemeinnutzgeht vor Eigennutz," 'the common good comes before the welfareof the individual." (84) (This phrase is also the last sentenceof the twenty-fourth point in the program of the Nazi party).But by then, these words coming so soon after the jettison ofthe Christian "full Jews," it must have been clear tothe remaining fate-comrades that "the common good" wasfairly narrowly conceived.

In reviewing the newletter after 1937, the reader is struck bya new mood of even greater somberness. In the earlier years, especiallyunder Spiero, the literary and intellectual level of the paperhad been high. Spiero had contributed several essays -- in thestyle of his books on literary history -- recalling the life andwork of famous Christian Germans who had been converts from Judaism.The legal essays concerning the Nuremberg laws were closely-reasonedanalyses and very well-written. But early in 1938 the newslettercontained an announcement, signed by Lesser, according to whichthere would be no further long articles. The step was taken notonly for reasons of economy but also "in order to followthe suggestions of many members." (85) The remaining issueswere almost completely taken up by two types of items: news aboutthe ever-developing legal status of Mischlinge, and the very vigorouswant-ad section (employment offered and wanted, search for marriagepartners).

The lead item in almost every issue was now entitled "Neuesaus Gesetzgebung und Verwaltung," 'News About Legislationand Administration.' And almost always there was both good newsand bad news. The good news would consist of a decision by someadministrative board that Mischlinge, not being Jews in the senseof the Nuremberg laws, were eligible for some right or privilege.The bad news typically was that a particular function could notbe occupied by a Mischling because it was administered by an affiliateof the Party, and the Party had, after all, been specificallyempowered in Paragraph 6 of the First Administrative Regulationof the Reich Citizenship Law to demand a greater "purityof blood" than non-Party agencies. One issue carried a communicationfrom the Berlin Real Estate Board to the effect that, yes, Mischlingeare not Jews in the eyes of the law and can therefore practicethe profession of real estate broker, Heil Hitler ! The columnfacing had a letter from the Reich Stenographers Guild sayingno, the Stenographers Guild is part of the National SocialistTeachers Guild and therefore is in no position to accept Mischlingeas members, Heil Hitler ! (86)

Only now and then was there some explicit reference to the differencein legal status between "half Jews" and "quarterJews." It was an issue that spelled potential trouble, forthe leadership had not quite stated the facts when it had claimed,right after the split, that the organization now conformed tothe Nuremberg taxonomy. The language continued to be one of "fate-comradeship"of all those eligible to membership. But in fact the differencein legal status between the two types of Mischlinge was substantial,especially with regard to connubium: "quarter-Jews"could marry non-Jews (with minor exceptions) while "half-Jews"could generally only marry one another. So here there was a contradictionbetween what was said in the official pronouncements of the organizationand what must have been painfully obvious to the membership.

When the end came for the organization on August 10, 1939 therewas neither bang nor whimper. The government order was issuedwithout any apparent forewarning, just two weeks before the Stalin-Hitlerpact, three weeks before the beginning of the Second World War.The travail of the Paulus-Bund, in its various guises and stages,was at an end; but that of the Christian "Jews" and"Mischlinge" was entering its war-time period of stillgreater danger and suffering.

***

There were up to half a million people in Hitler'sGermany who had not thought of themselves as Jews, who certainlydid not want to be regarded as Jews, but who found themselves,much to their discomfort, stigmatized as partially Jewish. Theoverwhelming majority had no desire to contribute to this stigmaby joining an organization of "non-Aryan Christians."But there was a small minority, perhaps four percent, who didjust that.

Just how these joiners differed from the majority we do not know.There is some evidence that the group consisted predominantlyof middle-class people and professional people (87), but thatmay have been just as true for those who did not join. There isone characteristic of the membership, however, that emerges froma study of the printed materials: there seems to have been a determinationon the part of these people to face their status as partial Jewswith openness; there was a constant polemic, sometimes explicit,sometimes merely implicit, against those who would hide theirstatus or deny their ancestors.

The picture of the group and its leaders which these materialsprovide is certainly not one that would now, fully fifty yearslater, inspire great admiration. Aside from the fleeting supportgiven to the Confessing Church in 1933, there is little in thesematerials that shows any independence from Nazi thinking, muchthat shows enthusiastic assent. (88) Moreover the main task whichthe group apparently set itself -- to save what could be savedon behalf of its constituency -- may in retrospect be thoughtto have been chimerical. But this judgement could not very wellhave been made at the time. The student of the Paulus-Bund record,especially if he does not expect heroism from very ordinary people,may well conclude that the group's enterprise was a reasonableresponse to a very frightening situation.

Footnotes to Main Text

1) I have been able to put together an almostcomplete set of copies of the original documents of this organizationthrough the extraordinary kindness of a number of indidividualsand institutions, to all of whom I owe a debt of gratitude. Thetwo largest sets of documents came from 1) Archiv, Institut fürZeitgeschichte, Munich, Sammlung ED 198 (Rudolf Schiff), MissKarin Popp, Archivist; and 2) a collection of documents in theprivate possession of Professor Klaus Herrmann, Concordia University,Montreal. Smaller sets came from Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, MissOra Alcalay, Head Librarian; Professor Werner Jochmann, Hamburg;The Reverend Ernest Gordon, Bungay, England; Mr. Werner Goldberg,Berlin; and Mrs. Christiane Ilisch, Berlin. I have also receivedmemoirs and other information from Dr. Lutz-Eugen Reutter of Düsseldorf,Mrs. Ursual Gaupp of Havertown, Penna., Mrs. Claire Gysin-Morgensternof Riehen (Switzerland), Mrs. Lulu Gembicki of Frankfurt, Mrs.Ingeborg Hecht-Studniczka of Freiburg, Mr. Werner A. Zehden ofBerlin, Mr. Gerhard Wundermacher of Hamburg, Mr. Rudolf Schiffof Bremerhaven, and others too numerous to mention. Additionalarchival collections where some of this material may be foundare reported in Lutz-Eugen Reutter, Katholische Kirche als Fluchthelferin Dritten Reich, Hamburg, 1971, pp. 212, f. and 227.

2) Cf. document m, Appendix II.

3) The name changes seem to have been effectedunder pressure from the government. See Lutz-Eugen Reutter, op.cit.,pp. 212-213.

4) The documentation relating to the groupconsists mainly of its monthly "newsletter," actuallymore of a monthly journal of opinion and contemplation as wellas news, that was originally known as Mitteilungsblatt des Reichsverbandeschristlich-deutscher Staatsbürger nichtarischer oder nichtrein arischer Abstammung E.V. Each issue prominently displayedthe warning "For Members Only." The complete name ofthis publication changed a number of times to indicate the changingnames of the organization. However the first term, Mitteilungsblatt,remained throughout. I have been able to examine all the monthlyissues, from October of 1933 to June of 1939, with the followingexceptions: issues 10 and 11 of 1937, and issues 5 and 9 of 1938.Henceforth, I shall cite this publication simply as M, followedby date of publication. The journal appeared in mimeographed formuntil December of 1934 and was printed beginning with the issueof January, 1935. When I cite from this publication, or from anyof the other documents, it is in my translation from originallyGerman texts.

5) "We are not just holders of a baptismalcertificate [Wir sind keine Taufscheinchristen] ... but believingChristians, deeply rooted in Christian education and Weltanschauung." Richard Wolff, M, July 20, 1934, p. 1. The term Taufscheinchristen-- literally 'baptismal-certificate-Christians' -- became oneof the shibboleths of the organization.

6) "For all of us, the religious and ethnic[volksmässige] ties to Judaism have been broken preciselyby this baptism .... we state with emphasis that we baptized non-Aryans,whether of mixed or unmixed blood, continue to feel ourselvesas Germans." Pastor Paul Leo, M, October 1935, p. 55. Thisis one of several such pronouncements. The view is contrary tothe "racial" anti-Semitism that the Nazis took overfrom nineteenth century thinkers, according to which no baptismcan diminish the Jewish qualities of the new Christian. See AdolfHitler, Mein Kampf (English translation), Sentry Edition, Boston,1962, pp. 120, 311, 307, and passim. Also cf. Jacob Katz, FromPrejudice to Destruction, Cambridge, 1980, pp. 207 and passim.

7) On Volksgenosse, see footnote to document a, Appendix II. OnGenosse and its compounds, see also Herbert Bartholmes, Bruder,Bürger, Freund, Genosse, Göteborg, 1970, pp. 175, ff.

8) Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi has shown similaritiesto the situation in the Portugal and Spain of the fifteenth andsixteenth centuries: Assimilation and Racial Anti-Semitism: TheIberian and the German Models, Leo Baech Memorial Lecture 26,New York, 1982.

9) Regarding the Catholic church, see Lutz-EugenReutter, op. cit. For the Protestant effort, see the memoirs ofthe man who directed them: Propst Heinrich Grüber, Erinnerungenaud sieben Jahrzehnten, Köln, 1968

10) Lösener and Knost, op.cit.; JosephWalk, ed., Das Sonderrecht für die Juden im NS-Staat, Heidelberg1981, p. 404

11) Ibid., p. 53. The law concerning farmingremained in force even after the Nuremberg laws despite the factthat it seemed to contradict the principles enunciated at Nuremberg.

12) Uwe Dietrich Adam, Judenpolitik in DrittenReich, Düsseldorf, 1972, pp. 330 - 3.
The issues in 1933 and 1934 were mimeographed and did not carrythis information.

13) The issues in 1933 and 1934 were mimeographedand did not carry this information.

14) Philo-Lexikon, Berlin, 1935, p. 558.

15) At least two recent books of memoirs by "Mischling"survivors of the Third Reich do mention the Paulus-Bund: IngeborgHecht, Invisible Walls, New York, 1985, p. 24; and Elsbeth vonAmeln, Köln Appellhofplatz, Köln, 1985, pp. 81-5. Buton the other hand, one key document concerning the fate of Christiansof Jewish origin (Arthur Goldschmidt, Geschichte der evangelischenGemeinde Theresienstadt, 1942-1945, Tübingen, 1948) makesno such mention. Another way of looking at this question is toinquire how many of the known "non-Aryan" Protestantclergymen belonged to the group. Eight such names are mentionedby Richard Gutteridge, Open Thy Mouth for the Dumb !, The GermanEvangelical Church and The Jews, 1879-1950, Oxford, 1976, pp.122-124. Of these, it would appear that only one had any connectionwith the Paulus-Bund, judging by Heinrich Spiero's listing ofclergymen who were members of the organization (I obtained thislist through the kindness of his dauther, Mrs. Christiane Ilisch-- see below for further information on this material). Spierogives sixteen names, and there are an additional four who werefrom time to time mentioned in the Paulus-Bund literature.

16) Cf. Christoph Cobet, Der Wortschatz desAntisemitismus in der Bismarckzeit, München, 1973, p. 229.

17) Graf E. Reventlow, Judas Kampf und Niederlagein Deutschland, Berlin, 1937, p. 69. See also F. Roderich-Stoltheim,Das Rätsel des jüdischen Erfolges, Leipzig, 1919, p.238-9.
Adolf Hitler, op. cit., pp. 315-316.

18) Hitler, op.cit., p. 120

19) Hitler, op. cit. p. 120

20) Julius Streicher's publishing house, forexample, published a lengthy fulmination against Jews in whicha special section is devoted to the writings of "Taufjuden."The chapter ends with an exclamation: "Baptismal water indeeddoes not possess too much power. Yid simply remains yid [Jud bleibteben doch Jud] !" Richard Wilhelm Stock, Die Judenfrage durchfünf Jahrhunderte, Nürnberg, 1939, pp. 263-299.

21) Exceptions were provided for combat veteransand for those who had already been in office on August 1, 1914.The law of April 7 was amplified by regulations on April 14. Thelatter specified that all grandparents must be "Aryan."See Walk, op.cit., pp 12-13.

22) Joseph Walk, op.cit., Part I (pp. 1-128)gives a comprehensive account of this body of law and regulation.

23) Regarding this first period, see Adam,op.cit., p. 69,ff.; Lösener and Knost, op.cit., pp. 26, ff.,and Bernhard Lösener, "Als Rassereferent im Reichsministeriumdes Innern," VfZ, IX (July), pp. 264-313.

24) Since it would appear that almost one percentof the population had ascertainable Jewish ancestors (see AppendixI), and since, moreover, it is reasonable to assume that thesepersons were more concentrated in the educated classes, it isnot surprising to find a number of such partial Jews among theleaders of Nazi Germany. Cf. H. G. Adler, Der verwaltete Mensch,Tübingen, 1947, pp. 302, 335; Raul Hilberg, The Destructionof the European Jews, Rev. Ed., New York, 1985, p. 79.

25) See Bernhard Lösener and FriedrichA. Knost, Die Nürnberger Gesetze, Berlin, 1942, pp. 32-4.This publication by Nazi officials is the most thorough, detailed,and precise legal commentary on the Nuremberg laws, with specialattention to the problems of partial Jews.

26) The remarkable story of how this legislationwas drafted is told, undoubtedly with some self-exculpatory motive,by Lösener, op.cit., one of the key legal experts involved.Lösener professes to have had great concern for the welfareof the partial Jews, and there is no compelling reason to doubthim. But we now have a more complete and more balanced account:Jeremy Noakes, 'Wohin gehören die "Judenmischlinge"? Die Entstehung der ersten Durchführungsverordnungen zuden Nürnberger Gesetzen,' in Ursula Büttner (ed.), DasUnrechtsregime. International Forschung über den Nationalsozialismus.Festschrift für Werner Jochmann zum 65. Geburtstag, Band2, Verfolgung - Exil - Belasteter Neubegin,, Hamburg 1986, pp.69-89. Noakes shows how the final draft, under Hitler's personalguidance, was influenced both by Party ideologues and by the morepragmatic bureaucrats of the government ministries.

27) See Adam, op cit., pp. 316 - 333; Walk,loc. cit. During the very last days of the Nazi regime, and apparentlyagainst all dictates of rational self-interest, the Nazis instituteda frenzied "cleansing" of remaining partial Jews ingovernment ministries. The story is told by Uwe Dietrich Adam,'Persecution of the Jews, Bureaucracy and Authority in the TotalitarianState', in LBI Year Book XXIII (1978), pp. 139-148. Finally, wehave a general discussion of the place accorded to the Mischlingein the planning of the Holocaust: John A. S. Grenville, 'Die "Endlösung"und die "Judenmischlinge" im Dritten Reich', in Büttner(ed), Das Unrechtsregime, op. cit., pp. 91-121.

28) The leadership was overwhelmingly male.My materials show only one woman Council member, Alice Solomon,and that apparently for only a short time. Her name appears ina 1935 document (see h), Appendix Two); we know that she emigratedfrom Germany in 1937.

29) M, Nov. 10, 1933, p. 1

30) First circular letter, signed by GustavFriedrich, dated August 1933.

31) M, March 20, 1934, p. 2.

32) Lesser is listed, in what appears to havebeen a supplement to M, February 9, 1934, as one of the many lawyerswho belonged to the organization.

33) M, Nov. 10, 1933, p. 1.

34) Ibid.

35) M, July 20, 1934, p. 1

36) M, March 1935, p. 10.

37) Richard Wolff, "Der Reichstagsbrand1933, Ein Forschungsbericht," Aus Politik and Zeitgeschichte,(Beilage zu "Das Parlament"), Jan. 18, 1956, pp. 25-52.

38) Any discussion of materials published inGermany during the Nazi period necessarily raises the questionof the extent to which the government had a direct influence onwhat was published. There is no question that on certain issuesthere was direct pressure, but we must assume, both from the internalevidence and from what we know about the Jewish press in the sameperiod, that the Mitteilungsblätter, too, "by and large... functioned independently." Cf. Jacob Boas, "German-JewishInternal Politics under Hitler, 1933-1939," LBI Year BookXXIX (1984), pp. 6-7.

39) Since at least the twelfth party congressof the German Communist Party (KPD) in June of 1929 -- the lastof the legal pre-war congresses -- the KPD celebrated Ernst Thälmannas the Führer of the German proletariat. See Ossip K. Flechtheim,Die KPD in der Weimarer Republik, Frankfurt, 1976, p. 256; alsoHerbert Bartholmes,op.cit., pp. 151-154.

40) This is not true of the Protestant or Catholicclergy who seemed to have by and large continued in service insome capacity. The teaching profession seems to have been particularlyhard hit; one symptom is the profusion of "i.R."'s and"a.D."'s in the announcement for the lecture series.See, for example, the Berlin supplement to M, April 1936.

41) M, March, 1935.

42) Cf. George L. Mosse, "Die deutscheRechte und die Juden," in Werner E. Mosse, ed., Entscheidungsjahr1932, Tübingen, 1966, pp. 183-248. One of the most strikingexemplars of the pervasive anti-Semitism of the non-Nazi rightwing is a man whose record is nowadays often whitewashed. PastorMartin Niemöller, later himself to be persecuted by the Nazis,never made a secret of his strong, racial anti-Semitism. In hisSätze zur Arierfrage in der Kirche ('Theses on the AryanQuestion in the Church') of November 1933, he opposes the introductionof the "Aryan paragraph" in the Protestant church ondoctrinal grounds, but takes care, nevertheless, to opine thatJews had done great harm to Germany; he also indicates that thebaptized Christians of Jewish origins are personally distastefulto him (text in Günther van Norden, Der Deutsche Protestantismusim Jahr der nationalsozialistischen Machtergreifung, Gütersloh,1979, pp. 361-363). As late as 1935, Niemöller goes out ofhis way to preach hatred against the Jews: "What is the reasonfor [their] obvious punishment, which has lasted for thousandsof years ? Dear brethren, the reason is easily given: the Jewsbrought the Christ of God to the cross !" The text of thissermon, in English, is found in Martin Niemöller, First Commandment,London, 1937, pp. 243-250. Pastor Paul Leo, a member of the Paulus-Bundand, like Niemöller, engaged with the Confessing Church inthe fight against the "Aryan Paragraph," also expressesanti-Semitic sentiments in his 1933 memorandum on "Churchand Judaism." Like Niemöller's "Theses," Leo'smemorandum maintains that Germany had suffered from the Jews.The memorandum is reported (and described as "a remarkablyoriginal, thoughtful and objective composition") by RichardGutteridge, op.cit., pp. 118-119. Pastor Leo, born in 1893 inGöttingen and related to Moses Mendelssohn through WilhelmHensel, emigrated from Germany in 1939 and taught at the LutheranSeminary in Dubuque, Iowa, where he died in 1958. According tohis widow, he and his family had been Christian for several generationsbut was considered more than 75% Jewish under the Nazis' racelaws. (Interview on July 26, 1986). See also Rudolf Elvers andHans-Günter Klein, eds., Die Mendelssohns in Berlin, Berlin1983, p. 55. On the attitude of the Bekennende Kirche to the Jewssee also the revealing essay by Uriel Tal, 'On Modern Lutheranismand the Jews,' in LBI Yearbook XXX (1985), pp. 203-213.

43) Richard Wolff, Wir nichtarische Christen,Frankfurt (Oder), 1934. Like the newletter, this publication ismarked "not intended for the general public." Copiesof this booklet are now found in the collections of several ofthe world's larger libraries. This is unfortunately not true eitherof the files of the Mitteilungsblatt nor of the ephemera thatwere produced by the central office in Berlin and the branchesin other cities.

44) These views were frequently expressed byProtestant clergymen who were members of the group, or as religiousdevotions written by apparent laymen. One such essay, signed byErnst Cahn and entitled "Paulus," celebrates St. Paul,the eponym of the organization, as "the actual vanquisher[Überwinder] of the Judaism of his time, which in its religiousform is basically still the Judaism of our time." M, Feburay1937, p. 11.

45) M, December 23, 1933, p. 24.

46) The most important of the these groupshad been the Deutschnationale Volkspartei (DNVP), concerning whichsee John A. Leopold, Alfred Hugenberg, The Radical NationalistCampaign against the Weimar Republic, New Haven, 1977. As we shallsee, many if not most of the Paulus-Bund leaders had either beenmembers of the DNVP or had belonged to the right-of-centre DVP.

47) M, November 10, 1933, p. 2.

48) M, Sept. 1, 1934, p. 1

49) M, Jan. 1935, p. 1.

50) M, March 1935, p. 12

51) M, April 1935, p. 15. It is of some interesthere to note that in welcoming Hitler's withdrawal from the Leagueof Nations in 1934 and his introduction of conscription in 1935,the Paulus-Bund was in full accord with leaders of the non-NaziConfessing Church. Pastor Martin Niemöller, for example,gave enthusiastic support to Hitler on both of these issues. SeeJürgen Schmidt, Martin Niemöller im Kirchenkampf, Hamburg,1971, pp. 40, ff.; 277-278; 317, f.; and passim; also James Bentley,Martin Niemöller, Oxford, 1984, pp. 78-79 and passim.

52) The two standard works on the "churchstruggle" are by German scholars, East and West respectively:1) Kurt Meier, Der Evangelische Kirchenkampf, 3 vols., Göttingen,1976, 1984; 2) Klaus Scholder, Die Kirchen und das Dritte Reich,2 vols., Berlin, 1977, 1984.

53) The copy I have comes from Professor Herrmann'scollection of Paulus-Bund materials. In its appearance it conformsto that of the other ephemera issued at the time. It would seemto have been circulated to the whole of the Protestant membershipbut there is no absolute guarantee that it was actually was.

54) One of Spiero's daughters, Mrs. ChristianeIlisch of Berlin, has kindly furnished me with information abouther father; she has also sent me some recent published and unpublishedcommemorative materials; in addition, she has provided me withunpublished autobiographical notes which her father compiled afterthe war.

55) Radio program devoted to Spiero by RadioFree Berlin, October 20, 1961, script by Gert Dimmer, p. 2. In1958, the West Berlin government named a small street after him:Spieroweg, in a new section of Spandau.

56) See Jacob Katz, From Prejudice to Destruction,Cambridge, 1980, pp. 203-209; and George L. Mosse, Germans andJews, New York, 1970, pp. 34-60. The Nazi propaganda volume byTheodor Fritsch, Handbuch der Judenfrage, 21st edition, Leipzig1937, lists Spiero as a "Jew" but gives him credit forhis work on Raabe (p. 379). Raabe and Freytag, in turn, are praisedfor their "serious" contributions to anti-Semitism.( p. 522).

57) Mosse, op.cit., pp. 51-2

58) Heinrich Spiero, Schicksal und Anteil,Berlin, 1929, p. 164.

59) From Heinrich Spiero, "DeutschlandsSchicksal und Schuld," published in 1920, cited in an unpublishedbiographical study Dr. Sabine Gova, Toulouse, daughter of Spiero's.

60) After the war, Spiero compiled a numberof lists to cover various aspects of his past activities. Onesuch list is headed "Meine Ehrenamtliche Tätigkeit,"'Offices I have held in Voluntary Organizations, ' and shows membershipon two different executive committees of the DNVP.

61) Concerning the anti-Semitic nature of thisgroup, see George L. Mosse, "Die Deutsche Rechte ...".

62) Heinrich Spiero, unpublished notes on thePaulus-Bund, post-War.

63) Information sheet to accompany the RudolfSchiff collection, Inst. f¨r Zeitgeschichte, Munich. Afterthe war, Schiff lived in the DDR where he was a member of theSPD and then SED. Later he moved to Bremerhave in West Germany,where he lives today.

64) Walk, Das Sonderrecht..., part II, liststhe regulations. See also Bernhard Lösener and FriedrichA. Knost, op.cit.

65) M, December 1935, and many other issuesof the publication.

66) M, February 1936.

67) This matter is discussed in just aboutevery issue. M, December 1937 gives a good recapitulation of thethe occupational disabilities of Mischlinge at that time.

68) There was the additional complication thatthe Nuremberg laws conferred no more than a provisional citizenshipon anyone; we need not concern ourselves with this matter here.

69) Since the Nuremberg system required informationabout the religion of a grandparent, it is sometimes said thatthe Nazis here deliberately violated their oft-repeated principlethat "race" rather than religion defines a "Jew."But both the letter and the administration of the law make itclear that a grandparent's religion was looked upon only as amanifestation of his "race." It was thought possibleto ascertain religion, and this was thought to be a good thoughnot perfect indicator of race. But what is true without a doubtis that the use of this indicator involved the Nazi authoritiesin many incongruities. (Cf. item i, Appendix II). On the otherhand, since the categories of the "race" theory areprobably by their very nature not determinable with any precision,it is hard to see how the framers of the Nuremberg system couldhave devised a more perfect procedure.

70) Some of my informants from Berlin havetold me that it was the custom to refer to one another, informallyand ironically, as Mampes. Apparently there is a Berlin-made "halfand half" alcoholic beverage that consists of a mixture oftwo different alcoholic ingredients. Other informants have notencountered this term.

71) M, October 1935.

72) M, December 1935.

73) M, February, 1936. In view of the factthat Mischlinge from this time on -- the Nuremberg system hadevolved for their benefit ! -- apparently could attend publicschools, one wonders abut the report by Selma Schiratzki, TheRykestrasse School in Berlin, LBIY, vol. V, 1960, pp. 299-307,according to which both Mischlinge and "fully Jewish"Christian children were found as late as 1939 in the Jewish schoolthat she describes. But her report is valuable in any case forthe light it throws on the anti-Semitic attitudes of these childrenfrom "non-Aryan Christian" homes.

74) M, May 1936.

75) M, July 1937.

76) M, January 1937.

77) M, February 1937.

78) M, April 1937.

79) Bernhard Bennedik, "You YourselvesBear the Responsibility," M, July 1937. See also documentsm and o, Appendix II, for explanations along the same vein.

80) M, September 1937.

81) Lutz-Eugen Reutter, op. cit., pp. 212-213.

82) Unpublished manuscript in the possessionof Mrs. Chrstiane Ilisch. An additional insight into the incidentis afforded by Elsbeth von Ameln, op.cit., pp. 83-84. The author,a "half-Jew," had been a member of the local group inKöln and was asked to represent her group at a national meetingin Berlin in March of 1937. The new statutes were explained tothis gathering; the "full Jews" had already been excluded.The author states that she declared her inability to belong toany organziation to which her father could not belong, and shetherefore announced her resignation. She also reports that a HerrMendelssohn, a "quarter-Jew," rose to associate himselfwith her remarks and similarly left the organization.

83) I have been able to collect the followingmimeographed and typed circular letters that were issued by BüroSpiero: the founding announcement, dated March 12, 1937, one page;a follow-up to this, dated April 7, 1937, one page; a three-pagereport to supporters, dated October 3, 1937; a four-page report,dated April 1938. All these are very modest productions comparedto the Paulus-Bund literature. Propst Heinrich Grüber, op.cit.,who was in charge of the Protestant charitable work with "non-AryanChristians," does not mention Spiero.

84) M, July 1937.

85) M, March 1938.

86) M, April 1938.

87) See documents j and o in Appendix II. Someadditional evidence on this point may be found in the want adsection of the newsletter; for Berlin, the addresses given bythe advertisers are almost always in the middle-class sectionsof West Berlin.

88) There is ample evidence, on the other hand,that the group was thoroughly supervised by the Nazi authorities;the newsletter makes no secret of that. Moreover, it was no doubtalso spied upon by the Gestapo. Elsbeth von Ameln, op.cit., p.84, tells how she discovered one incident of such espionage; andthe Reverend Ernest Gordon, a veteran of the group, recalls incorrespondence with me (March 17, 1986) the appearance of twomysterious strangers when he led a study group on the Ten Commandments.

Appendix I: The Sizeof the Partially Jewish Population

The number of partially Jewish people in Germanyduring the Hitler period continues to be a matter of controversyand speculation. (1) I intend to discuss here three ways of estimatingtheir number: 1) an estimate based on known intermarriage ratessince the emancipation; 2) the official government census of 1939;and 3) an estimate based on certain corrections to this census.The official census yields an estimate of one partial Jew forevery two "full Jews," or about 228,000 in 1933; theother methods yield a substantially higher number, viz. about500,000 in 1933. I consider the latter figure more closely correct.

a) Estimate based on intermarriage rates. (2)

One can make an estimate of people of "mixed blood"based on what is known about the following three parameters: a)the proportion of Jews in the whole population at some beginningpoint of a period of intermarriage; b) the proportion of Jewswho marry non-Jews during this period; and c) the length of timeof such period, expressed in number of generations.

Let us say, simply now for purposes of illustrating this approach,that at some early state of Jewish assimilation in Germany everyonewas either "purely" Jewish or "purely" non-Jewish;that the Jews constituted 1% of the population; and that one percentof the Jews married non-Jews. At the end of the first generation,then, making certain simplifying assumptions about equality offertility, etc., we could say the new "purely" Jewishpopulation would no longer be 1% of the total population becauseone percent of it had been lost to become "Mischling."It would, in fact, now only constitute 99% of 1%. Similarly, thenon-Jewish population (to a much smaller degree) would also havelost a certain proportion to the "Mischlinge." It canbe shown, under these assumptions, that the "Mischlinge"would then amount to .02 of one percent of the total population.(For details of such calculations, see footnote # 6, below).

For Berlin, for the period of Jewish assimilation -- roughly theperiod between 1750 and 1933 -- we have substantially higher reportedvalues both for Jewish percentage in the population and outmarriagerates. (3) The proportion of Jews went up and down during thisperiod, but averaged approximately 3.5% of the population; theout-marriage rate averaged approximately 13% of all marrying Jews.Applying these parameters to the procedure outlined in the previousparagraph, we find that just under five percent of the Berlinpopulation of 1933 was of Jewish-Christian mixed origins. Sincethe official census of that year (4) shows that the 160,500 BerlinJews made up just under 4% of the population, we can estimatethe number of partial Jews as roughly 200,500. (5) (6)

The situation in the rest of Germany was somewhat different. Theproportion of Jews in the population was much lower, and thiswould depress the proportion of partial Jews in the population.Moreover, there are fewer available outmarriage estimates. Butwhile probably somewhat lower, the overall proportion of partialJews to "full Jews" can be assumed to be similar toBerlin; so it would seem reasonable to assume that there wereperhaps as many partial Jews of various types -- baptized "fullJews" and "Mischlinge" of varying degrees -- asthere were full Jews. In sum, using this method of estimation,we come to the conclusion that in 1933 the number of partial Jewsin Germany roughly equalled or slightly exceeded that of the half-millionregistered members of Jewish communities.

b) The 1939 census.

The only official census which yielded figures of partial Jewswas done in 1939, after the Nuremberg laws defined Jews "racially"(i.e. included the converts to Christianity) and also definedtwo degrees of "Mischlinge". The new census tabulatedseparately the categories of "Jew" (three or four Jewishgrandparents), "Mischling First Degree" (two Jewishgrandparents), and "Mischling Second Degree" (one Jewishgrandparent), and for each showed the number of "Glaubensjuden,"i.e. members of Jewish communities. (The 1939 census uses thisterm for what had traditionally been known as "Mosaic"persons, i.e. believers in the Jewish religion. I use the twoterms here interchangeably). The total number of "non-AryanChristians" reported by the 1939 census, for the enlargedReich of that date, was 138,500.

By 1939 German Jewry had already lost fifty-six percent of itsmembers to emigration (7), and we must assume that the partialJews as well had emigrated to a substantial extent. In my analysisof the census, I have focused my interest on the numerical relationshipbetween those registered as Jews in a religious sense, and allothers whom the government regarded as fully or partially Jewishin the "racial" sense.

============================================================================

Vienna                                          72.4                            0.06                                         91,530
Berlin                                            71.0                            0.11                                         82,457
Frankfurt a/M                                 81.5                           0.06                                         14,191
Breslau                                          79.8                            0.07                                        10,848
Hamburg                                       48.4                             0.31                                         9,943

German Reich                                68.7                             0.13                                     330,539

* Percentage of members of Jewish communitiesamong all "Jews" and "Mischlinge". The official1939 term for these "Mosaic" believers was "Glaubensjuden."

** Proportion of "Mischlinge, Second degree"(i.e. "one-quarter Jews") to "full Jews" (usinga "racial" criterion).

*** Population of "full Jews", usinga "racial" criterion

Source: all figures computed from officialcensus statistics in Statististisches Reichsamt: StatistischesJahrbuch für das Deutsche Reich, vol. 59 (1942), p. 27

============================================================================

In all interpretations of this 1939 census, it must be kept inmind that while there were penalities for misreporting one's status,there were also very obvious and powerful incentives for failingto report oneself as partially "non-Aryan" if it appearedlikely that the truth could not easily be determined from officialrecords. Moreover, in the absence of such complete records, manyindividuals might simply not have known about a Jewish ancestor.So any errors in self-reporting of "non-Aryan Christians",clerical mistakes aside, must be assumed to tend toward under-rather than over-reporting.

According to the official figures, there were almost 70 "Glaubensjuden"for every 30 "non-Aryan Christians" (column 1, TableI), which, taken at face value, would lead us to the conclusionthat the number of "full Jews" was substantially higherthan that of partial Jews. However, it is obvious that it wasfar more difficult to hide the fact that one was a "Glaubenjude"from the census taker, since "Glaubensjuden" were officiallyregistered as such; no comparably thorough and reliable registersever existed for "non-Aryans" of Christian religion.While it can be taken as virtually certain that the census' countingof "Glaubensjuden" was well-nigh complete, there isconsiderable doubt about the other "non-Aryan" categories.

Table I shows the five cities with the highest Jewish populations.We note that, except for Hamburg, the proportion of "Mosaic"Jews is higher in these cities -- about 75% on average -- thanin the country as a whole, where it is under seventy percent.In other words, there are fewer reported "non-Aryan Christians"per Jew in the smaller than in the larger centers. It seems areasonable surmise that there may have been as many such peoplein the larger cities and that, due to the anonymity of large citylife, the "non-Aryan Christians" were more often ableto escape detection.

The great exception for the country as a whole, and especiallyfor the larger cities, was Hamburg. The "non-Aryan Christians"here actually outnumbered the "Mosaic" Jews (see column1, Table I); morevoer, the proportionate number of "Mischlinge,Second Degree" (i.e. the "quarter Jews" who wouldbe particularly difficult to trace in official records) was morethan twice as high in Hamburg as in the rest of the country, threetimes as high as in Berlin, and almost five times as high as inVienna, Frankfurt, and Breslau. (See column 2, same table). WhileHamburg may indeed have had a larger proportionate number of suchpartial Jews, it seems more likely that the reporting for theold Hanseatic cities was more complete:

"Perfekt war das Meldewesen in Bremen entwickelt; vor allem aber in Hamburg, das es schon 1891 'in zweckmäßiger Weise gesetzlich geregelt' und 1929 das letzte Mal verschärft hatte. ... Die Hamburger Verhältnisse wurden Vorbild für das ganze Reich." (8)

According to Aly and Roth, then, it was inBremen (9) and especially in Hamburg, unlike the rest of Germany,that records of civil status had been reliably kept since thenineteenth century. It may well be that the Hamburg statisticsfor partial Jews, far from pointing to an atypical populationthere, should actually be used as an indicator for the true numbersin all of Germany. If we were to make such an extrapolation fromthe Hamburg results to the rest of Germany, we would arrive atan estimate of "non-Aryan Christians" very similar tothat of our estimate based on intermarriage rates: a number roughlyequal to the number of religious-registered Jews, or about 305,000in 1939.

In conclusion, we are led to regard the officially-reported numberof "non-Aryan Christians" of 1939 (i.e. 138,500) asthe lower limit for reasonable estimates, and 300,000 as a morerealistic figure. Extrapolating from the proportions on whichthese estimates are based to the 1933 census, before the "racial"definition of Jews and also before the large-scale emigrationmovement, we would estimate the number of "non-Aryan Christians"in the smaller territory of the then-Germany to have numberedat the very least 228,000, and much more likely about 500,000.

Notes to Appendix I

1) Various authors and institutions have offeredvarying estimates, usually in accordance with the particular axethey had to grind. Joseph Walk, "Jüdische Schüleran deutschen Schulen in Nazideutschland," Bulletin des LeoBaeck Instituts, vol. 19, no. 56-7 (1980), pp. 101-109, givesa useful compilation of these various estimates. They differ wildlyamong themselves.

2) I wish to thank Dr. Malcolm Greig of the Computing Centre,University of British Columbia, for help with these computations.

3) Esra Bennathan, "Die demographische und wirtschaftlicheStruktur der Juden," in Werner E. Mosse, ed., Entscheidungsjahr1932, Tübingen 1966; Arthur Ruppin, The Jews in the ModernWorld, London, 1934, p. 319; Encyclopædia Judaica, Jerusalem,1971, vol. 4, pp. 639, ff.

4) There were two censuses during the Nazi years, one in 1933and the other in 1939. I use the official figures here of theStatististisches Reichsamt: Statistisches Jahrbuch für dasDeutsche Reich, vol. 53 (1934) and vol. 59 (1942) respectively.For a discussion of the Nazi censuses as they relate to Jews and"Mischlinge," see Götz Aly and Karl Heinz Roth,Die restlose Erfassung. Volskzählen, Identifizieren, Aussondernim Nationalsozialismus. Berlin, 1984

5) I have done a more detailed calculation, using the variousreported Jewish population and outmarriage rates for Berlin (seeprevious footnote) for all the sub-periods from 1670 to 1933.This resulted in an estimate for the year 1933 as follows: Jewsin population: 3.8%; partial Jews: 4.8%; non-Jews: 91.4%. (Seethe next footnote for the mechanics of the calculation). Theseestimates must obviously be looked upon with considerable caution.Figures for "partial Jews" here are estimates of peopleof "mixed blood" and leave out the baptized "fullJews." On the other hand, they count people whose Jewishancestors are so far in the past that there may be no trace ofthem left in the consciousness or in the records of anyone inthe 20th century. I assume here that these two factors roughlycancel one another.

6) Technical note: to calculate the proportion of people of "mixedblood" in the population at any one time, given informationon intermarriage rates and proportion of Jews in the population,I have used the following:
(1) Mn+1 = 1 - Jn(1 - jn)**t{n} - Cn(1 - cn)**t{n}
(2) Cn+1 = 1 - Jn+1 - Mn+1
Let Tn be the nth focal year for which we have data, with To theinitial year considered. For my Berlin calculation, this was 1670.Then Jn is the proportion of full Jews in the population at Tn,and Cn the proportion of non-Jews at that time. jn is the proportionof marrying Jews who marry non-Jews for the period beginning withTn. Similarly, cn is the proportion of non-Jews who marry otherthan full non-Jews in that period; it is here assumed to be jnJn/Cn.  t{n} is the time period between focal years, measuredin generations, with a generation assumed to be 29 years. If weassume Mo = 0 (and thus   Co = 1 - Jo), we may recursivelycalculate the M's and C's by formulas (1) and (2) above.

7) This figure is the result of some calculationbecause both the definition of "Jew" and the territorityof the German Reich had changed between the two censuses. Thenumber of Jews in 1933 was 499,682. For 1939, I have here countedonly the "Glaubensjuden" (see above) from among both"racial Jews" and "Mischlinge," and I haveexcluded the new territories of the Saar, Austria, and the Sudetenland.This total came to 219,050.

8) Aly and Roth, op. cit., p. 41

9) The Bremen results, not given in the table because of the smallsize of the Jewish community (722), were even more extreme thanthose of Hamburg: 46.9% "Mosaic," a ration of "MischlingeII to "Full Jews" of 0.38.

Appendix II: Documents(Translations)

a) Circular letter (excerpts), Aug. 1933,from Gustav Friedrich, Reich League of Christian-German StateCitizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc.

[Letterhead of the organization; Gustav Friedrich:"Führer" of the group]

You have undoubtedly been informed by items in the German newspapersabout the formation of the Reich League of Christian-German StateCitizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc. Themain purpose of this organization arises out of the pressing necessityto bind together, without exception, all fate-comrades[Schicksalsgenossen] into one benevolent community.

It is for patriotic motives that I requested permission from therelevant governmental agencies to found the Reich League of Christian-GermanState Citizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins. Iwas able to obtain this permission after much effort.

The reason for this step lay in the fact that as a result of theso-called Aryan paragraphs many valuable Germans are excludedfrom participating in the construction of the new state. Thisexclusion affects the non-Aryans and the not fully-Aryans withparticular painfulness because they feel themselves German andChristian and stand, by inner conviction, with today's government...

The Reich League has been recognized for its positive dispositiontoward the new Germany, as well as for its principle of the Leader[Führerprinzip]. We have freed ourselves in every way fromthe old, never-to-live-again democratic parliamentarianism....

Let admission to our ranks be barred to all wreckers [Umstürzler]whether of the left or the right. Whoever wishes to come to usmust seek, to the best of his abilities, to contribute to thewell-being of today's Germany. Our distress in hard times canonly be overcome by deeds, not with phrases or ideologies....

Let us show our Aryan ethnic comrades [Volksgenossen],(1) to whom we are bound inextricablyby culture and nature [Art], how we act; they will then recognizethat we, like they, fulfill loyally our holiest duty to the rebirthof the German people and to the construction of the new GermanReich. ...

Whoever believes that modifications can be made in the strongfoundations of the new Reich, or even that the well establishedpresent form of government can in any way be changed in the foreseeablefuture, is stupid and foolish...

The [Weimar republic's] Marxist government has given amplecause for strong measures [by the new government]. Letus not be surprised that the injustices that were done to today'sleading ethnic comrades (Volksgenossen) have caused resentmentand justified anger to play a dominant role in the regulationsthat so harshly affect us German Christians of non-Aryan or notpurely Aryan origin. We, especially the especially hard-hit nationalistGerman Christians, must stand firm and, truly German, must continue,undeterred, to do our duty, despite spiritual and economic distress....

The affected ethnic comrades of Jewish religion and race haveissued an SOS when they felt themselves harmed, and the Jews ofthe whole world immediately came to their aid. We German Christianscannot and do not wish to do anything like that.

That our Reich League will never serve general anti-Semitic purposes,as long as I have the honor to be its leader, that I wish to professhere openly; equally openly I declare myself as the strongestopponent of the Jewish, wrecking, dissension- and poison-sowingelements and pledge to fight them with all means at our disposal.

With respectfully loyal German greeting [Mit verehrungsvollemtreu deutschen Gruss]

b) Speech by Dr. Günter Alexander-Katzat press reception of new organization, Summer 1933 (excerpts);source: mimeographed version.

...The government, ladies and gentlemen, needsthe League, so that those non-Aryans who always were Germans,who have always proved themselves German and who wish to remainso, can have the opportunity again to proclaim their German nature...

.... The authorities realize that we recognize the nationalistgovernment as such without reservation. For there is nobody amongus who would not welcome this government's struggle against theover-refined intellectualism, pacifism, communism, and so forth,that has gathered together in Germany in previous years. ...

A person is not accepted as member just because he is non-Aryan.Only those can come to us who are German, who wish to be German,and who find themselves obligated, under all circumstances, tohold to that. I can also reveal to you that nobody is admittedto our ranks about whose political activities and convictionsthere could be even the slightest doubt. A further guarantee forthe soundness of our membership lies in the fact that membershiplists are being submitted to the Gestapo for verification [dassdie Mitgliederlisten zwecks Prüfung der Geheimen Staatspolizeieingereicht werden].

Ladies and Gentlemen, as you know yourselves, the Jews, both inGermany and abroad, have numerous facilities that help their ownfate-comrades with great energy and substantial funds. But whohelps the Christian non-Aryan, him whose mother or grandmotherwas a Jewess and whose father or grandfather had already becomea Christian ? ...

We do not wish to contradict anyone concerning the matter of race,but we maintain, with deepest conviction, that in addition tothe communion of blood there is also another German national communion,which consists of common fate, common experience, common feeling:of German fate, German experience, German feeling. I can expressthis even more clearly. Un-German is he who, from childhood, hasaccepted the Talmud as guide to his action and thinking; Germanis he who has been told German fairy tales as a child, who, inschool, has imbibed the spirit of Schiller and Bismarck and Frederickthe Great, who, as adult, has experienced the works of the greatGermans Goethe, Dürer, Beethoven, or Richard Wagner....

c) Information sheet, Fall 1933

[heading: logo, name and address of organization]

Founded: July 20, 1933

Registered: October 13, 1933, Register of Societies Berlin, registrationno. 7278

Orientation: German nationalist and patriotic. [Deutschbewusstund heimattreu]. Standing firm in German and Christian beliefand culture.

Organization: Constructed according to the principle of individualleadership [Führergrundsatz] in harmony with the regulationsof the government (see statutes). Division into district and localgroups. Full responsibility to the chairman, who is advised bya Council.

Purpose: Organization of all Christian-German state citizens ofnon-Aryan or not purely Aryan origin, and their Aryan family members.Representation of their common interests, such as: a) legal advice;b) help in obtaining employment, insofar as permitted by law;c) educational counselling; d) solution to problems of youth;e) concern for new occupational opportunities for our membersand their children; f) welfare assistance in collaboration withexisting agencies; g) contact with existing sports organizations.Organization of the members for social purposes through lectures,theatrical presentations and similar events; mutual exchange ofviews, and thereby spiritual support. Maintenance of the German-thinking,German-feeling Christian non-Aryans in the community of Germanethnic comrades [Volsgenossen] (2)

d) Appeal to join, Fall 1933

Christian-German Non-Aryans ! Do not allowcurrent difficulties to discourage you ! Do not forget that youwere German, are German, and remain German ! Reflect upon yourselves! Consider that nobody can rob you of your German nature, yourGerman feeling, your German sensitivities; you have inheritedall this from your fathers and have cultivated it since childhood! Organize yourselves in the organization that has been designedfor you and is authorized by the government, the Reich Leagueof Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryan or not CompletelyAryan Origins, Inc. Beware of all splintering and close ranks! Donate beyond the small dues payments, as much as you can !(Postal checking account 4025 Berlin). Enlist friends and familymembers. The individual is nothing, in closed ranks we are strong.All together we are a communion of millions !

e) Profession of Faith, Fall 1933 (printedsheet)

We believe:

We are Germans.

Therefore we love Germany as our only home.

Therefore we profess our faith, like all Germans, in that governmentthat the German people have created for themselves. But we alsoknow that Germany's future demands the willing respect and utilizationof personalities and values that have contributed to a unifiedGerman fatherland and to Germany's greatness in war and peace.

Therefore, our German nature to us is a matter of spiritual, common,historical process and thereby one of inner posture, loyalty,and heart.

We are Christians.

Therefore we are, with all our hearts, "subject to the governmentthat has power over us." (3)

Therefore we must, in matters of faith, "be more obedientto God than to man."

Therefore we must, like all those of true Christian faith, rejectall falsifications of the true teaching of Christ and His apostles.

We are of complete or partially non-Aryan origins.

Therefore we are proudly conscious that Jesus belonged to theJewish people and proclaimed the Gospel first to the Jews.

Therefore we know that our families consciously accepted the Christianteachings in depth.

Therefore we feel with joyful pride that our steadfast engagementfor nation and fatherland shows our true German and Christiannature.

f) Statutes (excerpts), August 1933; source:printed sheet

...§ 5. Membership may be requested by all those over 18years of age who are male or female German subjects of non-Aryanor not purely Aryan descent and who belong to a Christian religiouscommunity and who profess adherence to the nationalist Germany[... auf dem Boden des nationalen Deutschland stehen ...]

§ 8. The chairman is elected by the Council for the periodof one year....

§ 11. In addition to the chairman andhis deputy, there will be a Council consisting of at least fourand at most twelve members of the organization. The members ofthe Council are named by the chairman.

§ 12. Any member of the Council may bedismissed by the chairman, but only with the consent of the majorityof Council members, with the affected member not voting....

§ 15. The Council has the right to dismissthe chairman by a three-quarter vote of all Council members.
...

§ 18. The chairman calls the general meetingof members by announcing its date and the agenda, which he determines,at least two weeks in advance ...

§ 19. Decisions of the general meetingare to be reduced to writing and must be signed by the chairmanand one member of the Council....

§ 21. A member may be expelled from theorganization by the chairman with the agreement of the majorityof the Council; a) if he acts contrary to the interests or aspirationsof the organization; b) if he has been convicted of a crime bya German court; c) if he has made false statements upon joining;d) if his dues payments are more than three months in arrears....

§ 22. The statutes may be changed by thegeneral meeting or by the chairman in agreement with the majorityof the Council.

§ 23. In case of dissolution, remainingfunds after payment of debts are to be given to the German RedCross.

Berlin, August 23, 1933

g) Circular to Protestant members, December1, 1933; source: mimeographed version.

To our Evangelical Members !

A struggle has erupted in the German EvangelicalChurch in which the overwhelming number of "evangelical Christians,"joined also by a part of the "German Christians," regardthe introduction of any racial distinctions in the church as incompatiblewith the teachings of Christ and the principles of the Gospel.More and more the thought establishes itself that evangelic Christianityis incompatible with a folkic philosophy [mit völkischerWeltanschauung]. This holds for the congregation as well as forthe teaching office. In the view of the current overwhelming majorityof the Evangelical Church, neither the formation of "JewishChristian" congregations nor the application of the Aryanparagraph to the clergy is scriptural.

It goes without saying that the Reich League,encompassing as it does the non-Aryan Christians, is thoroughlyand completely of the same opinion; and this out of the deepestreligious conviction of its members. In our membership, some ofwhich has professed Christianity for generations, there is andwill never be a thought other than that the holy baptism has dissolvedany worldly racial distinctions in the new communion of Christianfaith. (Cf. Gal. 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, thereis neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: forye are all one in Christ Jesus.") (4) This alone is Christianaccording to our deepest conviction, and this alone will persistas Christian doctrine. In this battle of faith we are of goodcheer. We know, on the basis of several conversations we havehad, that we are at one with influential men in the EvangelicalChurch, and we have not hesitated to communicate our Christianconvictions firmly to the leadership of the Evangelical Church.

Let our Evangelical members, on their part,participate in this battle of faith and be of good courage.

h) "Our Tasks and Aims," by Dr.jur. Johannes Fuchs, lecture to District Leipzig of the ReichLeague of non-Aryan Christians, June 1, 1935, published as printedsupplement to circular letter number 3 of the Leipzig branch,dated June 10, 1935 (excerpts)

The Leipzig branch was founded in September1934. ...

In general, the difficulties that faced uswere similar to those of other branches. But perhaps the territoryof the Leipzig district, which includes Halle, was actually moredifficult. Relatively few non-Aryans and non-Aryan Christianslive in the areas that belong to the Leipzig district, such as,for instance, the former Free State of Anhalt and parts of Thuringia.Added to that was the aversion [Scheu] of many non-Aryans in ourdistrict to declaring themselves as such. Objections, both ofprinciple and imagination, were voiced. We non-Aryan Christiansand our Reich League were suspect: to some as anti-Semites, toothers as a club of "baptized Jews." Some demanded aclose relationship to Jewish organizations, others a conspicuousdistance from them. Some demanded a profession of Judaism, othersa clear profession of the opposite. ... But if one looked behindwhat was said, one discovered very soon that these were rationalizationsfor a refusal to come to us. Actually it was occupational andsocial motives that made the difference. We have understandingfor the occupational considerations, but not for the behaviorof those non-Aryans who simply do not wish to recognize theirown origins and who will do everything to avoid recognizing usand our fate-comrades in public [... alles daran setzen, uns undunsere Schicksalsgenossen nicht, wie man zu sagen pflegt, "unterden Linden grüssen" zu müssen]....

The membership has doubled since the foundingof the organization, and today consists of approximately 150 people.It would be better to speak of member-families here since in generala family of several people is represented by only one person.

We can say thankfully that in addition to themembership there are persons of note who, with a laudable senseof solidarity, stand with us spiritually and give us valuablehelp with both advice and deeds....

As is well known, our members come predominantlyfrom intellectual circles and the business class. Members of theintellectual professions are, after all, hardest hit. But in noway does this mean that we value only members of such professionsor of the professional or social "elite." On the contrary,we see it as an important task to include non-Aryan Chritiansfrom among the so-called simple people; we know that in thosecircles, too, there are numerous non-Aryans. Such people are alreadymembers of the Reich League and our branch. We are particularlyhappy to have them. In get-togethers with us, they surely willnot feel disadvantaged, let alone lonesome. We are all fate-comradesand know no differences among us. We only know the common aim,to be helpful to one another and to give one another spiritualstrength....

It goes without saying that conditions aremore difficult for our group than for the Jewish organizations.The Jewish non-Aryans are easily reached; the religious congregationsthemselves provide contact. The characteristic trait, yes, thetypical trait of non-Aryan Christians is that they cannot easilybe reached and -- as already described above -- that they do notlike to reached and that in fact they can be contacted only withgreat difficulty. The non-Aryan Christian is being excluded froma communion to which he has heretofore belonged. It must and willappear to Jews as more natural to be designated as such than tonon-Aryan Christians who, as is predominantly the case in ourmembership, have been without social or spiritual contact withJudaism for two to three generations. Many -- and unfortunatelythis is often sarcastically put into question -- many did notknow about their origins until they constructed their family treesand examined the documents. So we realize very well that we shallnever equal the Jewish organziations in strength, but strengthalone does not guarantee impact and success. ... We are particularlyhappy to report that, especially in this last period, more andmore well-known personalities have come to us; heretofore a certainhesitation kept them away. No less than Alice Salomon and HerrSenate President Caspary, Berlin, have joined our Council. Thefamous educator, Susanne Engelmann, has also joined our ReichLeague ... (5)

... The question of our military service has now been essentiallyclarified. (6) I use this opportunity to stress that we non-AryanChristians, in our unshakingly proud commitment to Germany andChristianity, and despite bitter disappointments, wish to andindeed will meet our finest obligation, that of serving Germanyweapon in hand ....

i) "Question and Answer" (excerpts);source: Mitteilungsblatt des Reichverbandes der nichtarischenChristen e.V., vol. 3, no. 3, March 1936, pp. 21-22.

...Question: What can be said about the marriageof a half-Aryan with a girl who also has one Aryan parent, butwhose Aryan mother converted to Judaism so that the girl was alsoraised as a Jew ? What can be said, further, about the childrenof this marriage ?

Answer: The girl, actually half-Aryan, is nota Mischling but is without any doubt regarded as Jewish in thesense of the law because she belonged to the Jewish religiouscommunity on the deadline date, i.e. September 15, 1935; belatedconversion does not alter this status in any way. The husband-- a Mischling First Degree -- is likewise regarded as a Jew sincehe married a statutory Jew.
The children of this marriage are in any case regarded as Jewssince they have three Jewish grandparents (two by race, one byreligion). This would not have been different if the mother hadleft the Jewsih community before the deadline. She herself wouldthen have been a Mischling, but the children would still havehad three Jewish grandparents. In other words, it is quite possiblethat children who are regarded as Jews may result from a marriagein which both patners are half-Aryan.

Question: A man has two Jewish grandparents, one Aryan grandmotherand a half-Aryan grandfather; the latter was born Jewish and becameChristian only later. Is this 62% Jewish person a Mischling ora Jew ?

Answer: The man is a Jew according to the Nuremberg Laws becauseof the one grandparent who was of the Jewish religion; this grandparentis assumed to have been a full Jew and this assumption cannotbe contested. So this 62% Jew has three full Jewish grandparents.On the other hand, if the half-Aryan grandfather had been Christianby birth, he would then have been a non-full-Jew and would nothave counted at all for this calculation; his grandson would havebeen a Mischling First Degree....

Question: A young, half-Aryan girl, half-orphan,was raised by her Jewish father in the Jewish faith. Her frequentlyvoiced desire to convert to the Protestant religion was decisivelyrejected by the father. The girl could realize her desire forconversion only upon maturity, i.e. on her twenty-first birthday,i.e. on December 1, 1935, and she was therefore still Jewish onSeptember 15. Would an application by her to be nevertheless regardedas a Mischling be granted, and to whom should it be directed ?

Answer: The application would have to be directed to the ReichChancellor, but there is hardly a chance of success. Lösener'sCommentary states explicitly: "The decision of parents tointroduce their child to this (i.e. Jewish) religious communitymust be regarded as decisive also for the racial status of thechild." (page 22). By the way, it is not true that a changeof religion without the parents' permission can only be effectedafter the twenty-first birthday. Paragraph 5 of the Law of ReligiousInstruction for Children, dated July 15, 1921, provides expresslythat, upon completion of the fourteenth year of life, the decisionconcerning religious faith belongs to the child....

j) "Work of the organization aroundthe country. District East Prussia." By Professor (retired)Dr. Paul Stettiner. (Excerpts). Source: as h, vol. 3, no. 9, September1936, pp. 72-73.

Dr. Wolff founded the East Prussia branch inKönigsberg in September 1934 by speaking and writing andcontacting those circles among our fellow citizens whom it concerned.The formal organization of the branch followed in November. Itwould seem that Köningsberg should have provided particularlyfertile soil for this purpose.

While all of Prussia saw 1800 conversions from 1812 to the beginningof the thirties of the nineteenth century, 160 of these came fromKönigsberg. The reason that so many Jewish parents had theirchildren baptized are explained by Frau Julie von Adelson in aletter that was reprinted in Historische Zeitschrift in 1930 ...

... a great number of families took this decisive step ... oftenthey were severely reproached by their relatives. One need onlymention the names Oppenheim, Friedländer, Friedberg, Simson,Hirschfeld, Borchard, Lewald, and Lehrs....

[But] within the Christian non-Aryan circles here there are verystriking differences regarding the acceptance of religious, moral,and social standards. The wish and the hope which we voiced inour first appeal in October 1934 were not fulfilled. Let nobody,we said then, use the excuse that a legal loophole protects himor that he himself is not affected. If someone believes himselffree of worry in this regard, he has an even greater moral obligationto support, through his membership, those in dire need.
...

We tried in our appeal to reach 200 Christiannon-Aryans in East Prussia. About 35 already belonged to the organization.In the course of the years this figure rose to about 80, so thatwe have responsibility for about 200 path-comrades (Weggenossen),including family members. Of these there are 58 male and 23 femalemembers. 40 are Mischlinge, 5 are pure Aryans who are tied tous by marriage; most of the rest are tied to us [Mischlinge] mostlythrough marriage to Aryans or through children who are Mischlinge.By profession, we are 3 university professors in retirement, 6physicians, 5 lawyers, 1 apothecary, 12 independent business men,10 employed persons. Only one adult (academic) is unemployed....

All our Mischlinge have become members of theArbeitsfront (7) ... On our advice, all our younger people haveregistered for the year of military service before this becameobligatory; they have in fact been called up. The work of thedistrict consists mainly of counselling...

There are English and French lessons, taught by an English anda French woman ... An excellent gymnastics teacher gives lessonsfor the ladies without fee .. . Every month until the end of May,musical evenings provided proven means for bringing our circletogether. Musicians and above-average amateurs performed in song,string music and piano; the works were mostly classical, by Beethoven,Brahms, Bach, Händel, Mozart, and Wagner...

k) Statutes, March 1937 (excerpts; shownhere are the changes from the 1933 document (f). Source: printedsheet.

§ 1. The organization bears the name "Vereinigung1937" ('League 1937')....

§ 5. All those may become members whoare over 16 years of age, either sex, of German nationality [DeutscheStaatsangehörige], who, as Mischlinge fulfill the blood-requirements[blutmässige Voraussetzungen] for provisional Reich citizenship(8) and who profess adherence to the nationalist Germany; alsotheir next of kin who are of German or related blood. (9)

Children under 16 years of age who fulfill the other requirementsmay have membership acquired on their behalf by next of kin ofGerman or related blood.

The chairman makes decisions on admissions to membership.

§5 a. The chairman is empowered to effect, on his own, anyfurther changes of the statutes that may be required by the authorities....

§ 21. In case of dissolution, two thirdsof remaining funds after payment of debts go to the BrandenburgProvincial League for Home Missions in Berlin-Lichterfelde (10),one third to the Caritas organization. (11)

Signed: Friedrich Karl Lesser

l) "A hopeful Beginning," reportof speech by Frierich Karl Lesser that was delivered June 3, 1937.Source: Mitteilungsblatt für den Paulus-Bund, vol. 4 no.6, June 1937, pp. 56-58.

... Our organization has now become strictlyan interest group. Whereas the members of the old Paulus-Bundwere held together by ties of religion and the religious factorwas therefore by far the most important, the present members ofthe organization are bound to one another because they have achieveda special status through the Nuremberg laws. A special statusnot only vis-à-vis the purely German-blooded German nationals,but above all also vis-à-vis those who, though Christianthrough baptism, have been characterized as racially Jews by thelegislation. It is obvious that because of this reorganizationthe religious emphasis of our group must recede. If members nolonger come to us only because of religious ties, but becauseof other reasons, well, then the consideration of these otherreasons must take precedence. The religion of each member is hispersonal business. The religious needs of the members is primarilythe responsibility of the churches while our work concerns moretheir political and economic needs.

From this it obviously does not follow that we would in any wayutilize the law to play politics. That would be completely outsidethe task that has been assigned to us or that we could allow ourselves.We have to hold ourselves strictly to the laws of the German Reich,and if I have used the word "politics" I wish to sayonly that we must seek to see to it that the racial legislationof the Reich, insofar as it is favorable to us, becomes generallyrecognized and applied, and that we are everywhere accorded theplace to which we have a right under the Nuremberg laws and thevarious regulations; and I can say to my great joy that this ishappening more and more....

It must surely be clear to everyone that anorganization which includes only a fraction of those who, accordingto its statutes, should belong, characterizes itself by that factas weak... Therefore it is the duty of each member to recruiton behalf of the organization, above all those who still keepaway for reasons that I deliberately don't mention here but thatyou well understand....

m) "Conversation with a Mother."(excerpts); source: as for l, pp. 59-60.

Editor: So, dear Madam, you do not wish tojoin our organization ?

Lady: No, I see no possibility of joining with you. As you know,my husband is a Jew according to the Nuremberg laws, and I myselfam pure Aryan -- so a Mischling organization surely has nothingfor us.

Ed.: I believe you have children....

Ed.: You should enroll in our organization as a proxy for yourtwo children...

Lady: I don't know why I, an Aryan, would want to be in a Jewishorganization.

Ed.: Nor do I. But the competent authoritieshave made it very clear that we are not a Jewish organization...

Lady: But one does not wish to stand out, especiallyin our case ...

Ed.: You would be justified in your worry aboutself-exposure if I were to ask you from now on to wear a broochwith a logo of the organization. But surely you are not goingto use the membership card as a wall painting ?

Lady: You are right. I don't want to rejectmy children for what they are.

Ed.: And you don't want to raise your childrenwith illusions about their status. Such illusions can cause areal crisis in a young person if they were to be destroyed violentlyby a third party. So then, why are you hesitating ?

Lady: You won't mind my being frank ? ... It'sbecause of my husband, he might misunderstand the fact that thelaw regards him as a Jew ... he would think that I am joiningan organization that rejects him ... why can't my "Jewish"husband be a member in your group ?

Ed.: ... Our current laws are based on the basic concept of race,and the government has therefore decreed that, insofar as membershipin the Paulus-Bund is concerned, this basic concept be applied.

Lady: But I find that for me and for many in my position, theapplication of this basic concept involves harshness.

Ed.: The creation of new rights, as always in periods of transition,is connected with harshness for all our fate-comrades. But canwe regard consequences that arise from the general course of nationaldevelopment as if they were some personal wickedness ?

Lady: Just how do you mean that ?

Ed.: Now I may be quite frank. It is sometimes said that the presentleadership of our organization has introduced a change in membershiprequirements just for the sake of its personal amusement. Thetruth is that the governmental authorities, applying the existinglaws quite logically, have decreed the change ...

n) "Fall In !" [Einordnung !]by Bernhard Bennedik, (excerpts); source: Mitteilungsblatt derVereinigung 1937 e.V., vo. 4 no. 9, September 1937, pp. 85-86.

The Nuremberg laws have designated the Mischlingeas a special group among German nationals. It has been often andclearly enough explained that they constitute a special groupand that they must learn to adjust to the status to which theyhave been assigned. But this does not yet suffice. We still mustlearn more. The ongoing work in our organization brings us intocontact with the most varied set of individuals and charactertypes from among the circles that belong with us. Many still liketo misunderstand the basic facts. Reference here is made to thosewho believe that they can occupy a special status all for themselvesand who therefore decline to join with us as members. The numberof people who think this is larger than one would assume, giventhe clarity of the situation. But if one seeks the cause of thistype of thinking and its resulting rejecting behavior, it is alwaysthe same: an egotistical thinking which either cannot or willnot look further than the tip of one's own nose.

The truth is that nobody can deny the fact that we are now allin the same boat. We did not place ourselves there, we were placed.The authority of the state is in the nature of all government-regulatedlife; nothing can alter that. Nothing can alter the necessityfor accepting the discipline of obeying the laws that have beenpromulgated by the authority of the state. In the same way, nothingcan alter the necessity of having everyone of us recognize thathe has been placed with us. Yes, to be consistent one must goeven further and say that it would actually be a sign of faultystate-political discipline if one of us were to attempt to assumea special status on his own, or if he tried in any way whateverto keep himself aloof from the status which the state has assignedto him together with us all. How can one overlook the fact thatthis discipline is the first and one of the most important signsof a positive disposition to any ordered, government-regulatedlife ? It is therefore amazing almost to the point of disbeliefthat it is precisely those who pretend to a particularly positivedisposition toward the state who desire a special status for themselvesand who thereby violate the discipline of a state citizen.

They practice exactly the opposite of what should be the firstconsequence of this professed positive disposition. The firstsuch consequence, naturally, should be a declaration on theirpart that they will proceed to where the law of the state placesthem, and right now that is with us....

As soon as the most elementary duty of a state citizen has ledthe individual to proceed to that place to which he has been assigned,he must realize that he is not alone there. Beyond the forcednature of the communion in this assigned status, a closer unityis necessary. But there is no such realization if the individualconcerns himself only with himself instead of seeing himself aspart of the community to which in fact he does belong. ... Thestate itself, which has established this community in its presentform, is interested in seeing that this community receives thatto which it is entitled, and the state itself therefore providesthe opportunity to create [our] organization, one of whose tasks,and not the least, is the preservation of [our] rights.

The person who is doing well thinks otherwise. He feels himselfin possession of his rights, but he does not see the necessityto join an organization that would preserve these rights. Buthere he thinks egotistically. And that is wrong for two reasons.... In fact nobody stands by himself.... The optimism which leadshim to stand aloof from us is, so to speak, directed backward,it is based on too few bad experiences, it is grounded in thepast, it overlooks the possibilities of the future in which decisionscan be made about him, any day, not as an individual but as partof our community.

He overlooks that he carries within himself, so to speak, thesymptoms of a disease, and he fails to effect the only possiblepreventive action that could at least attempt to keep this diseaseone day from becoming acute. And secondly he completely forgetsthat he has responsibilities not only for himself. No person isresponsible only for himself or has duties only toward himself.All people have responsibilities toward the community to whichthey belong. First of all, this is the community of his nationwhich is represented by the state. Now the state to which we belongand to which we want to belong has united us, inside its general,overall community, into a specialized separate community ....

o) "Report of the meeting of Districtgroup Rhein-Rhur of the League 1937, Inc., held November 13, 1937in Köln/Rhein," by Klaus Stern-Eilers (excerpts); source:as for n above, vo. 4, no. 12, December 1937, pp. 102-103.

District leader of district Rhein-Ruhr, HerrBernhard Bennedik (12), had invited the members and friends ofthe organization for Saturday, November 13 ...

We have often had the pleasure to hear our district leader inlarger or smaller groups. This time we were offered a lecturethat was, both oratorically and from the point of view of contents,unexcelled ...

First we were given a purely statistical overview of our organizationin the whole Reich since the reorganization that took place inMarch. Here we mention only figures for Rhein-Ruhr:

On March 1, 1937, i.e. before reorganization, 390 members. OnMarch 15, 1937, i.e. after reorganization, 160 members. On September30, 1937, 329 members. This means a gain, which one should notunderestimate, of 169 members, i.e. a strengthening of 117 percent....

The district leader then spoke about our relationshipto Judaism, and pointed to the difficulties of this problem. Hesummarized his comments in two main points:

1) Those who lean in their nature [Art] to Judaism move away fromthe German nature [Deutschtum].

2) Those who tend toward German nature move away from Judaism.

After a loyal profession to the German ethnic community, HerrBennedik said ... [that] the most difficult problem perhaps isthat of mixed marriages in which there are minor children, inwhich the German-blooded parent is to exercise a proxy [i.e. jointhe organization in his name on behalf of his minor Mischlingchild -- W.C.]. This proxy is then easily interpreted -- understandablybut wrongly -- to the effect that the marriage partner [i.e. theJewish partner -- W.C.] is somehow deserted. ... But one can onlyspeak of desertion if because of one's action or failure to actthe other side is directly or indirectly harmed. But this is notat all the case in taking out membership in our organization..... The position of those who are Jews in the eyes of the lawis clear and unequivocal. Nothing is altered in this status, fromthe point of view of the state, if the father or the mother joinsus. The position of the child, however, is not so clear. We hopeand we wish that it will be posible to influence the child's lifechances in a positive direction. It is our organization, aloneand exclusively, that is in a position to do this. ... You cansee from all this how important it is for us to make our relationshipto Judaism very clear, and that this clarity can only be achievedby a clear-cut distinction between family and state. When a motherjoins our organization, she makes a declaration of what she wishesand aspires for her child in the framework of the state, and herrelationship within the family has nothing whatever to do withthis....

p) "News Concerning Legislation andAdministration !"; source: as for n above, vol. 6, no. 3,March 1939, p. 9.

... Concerning the marriage of Mischlinge SecondGrade with civil servants, Herr Reich Minister of the Interiorhas issued the following regulation by means of a Bulletin datedDecember 8, 1938 -- Pol O-Kdo P I (1a) Nr. 268/38:

"(1) According to § 25, Part 2 of the German Civil ServiceLaw of January 26, 1937 (RGBl. I Page 39), marriage of MischlingeSecond Grade with civil servants may be authorized. However, therequired authorization procedure by three Higher Reich Authorities-- § 25 Part 3 -- indicates that such cases would have tobe very exceptional. (2) Because of the special position of thepolice in the civil service, especially in consideration of theclose connection between police and SS, I decline to grant suchauthorization, even in exceptional cases, to police officers."

q) Circular letter from Friedrich Karl Lesser,August 11, 1939; source: printed sheet.

[Letterhead of Vereinigung 1937 i.L. (League1937, In Liquidation)]

In accordance with an edict of the supervisingauthority dated August 10, 1939, the League 1937 has been dissolvedand thereby placed in a state of liquidation. The former chairmanis the liquidator of the organization and therefore must transactall business related to the liquidation.

The organization is no longer in a position to exercise any counsellingor charitable function for the members. It is therefore requestedto avoid inquiries of whatever nature except those directly relatedto the liquidation. Other inquiries should from now on be directlyaddressed to the competent agencies, i.e. to a German lawyer orlegal counselling agency, to the authorities or other groups (GermanLabor Front, National Socialist People's Welfare, Employment Office,etc.).

In order to effect the liquidation as smoothly as possible, itis urgently essential that members remit any dues that may bein arrears for the period inclusive of August. The dues obligationceases beginning September.

I thank all members for the confidence they have shown me as chairmanand for their loyalty to the organization. I wish them all thebest for the future.

Friedrich Karl Lesser
Attorney-at-Law, Court of Appeal [Kammergericht]
Captain of Cavalry, Not In Service [Rittmeister a.D.]
Chairman as Liquidator

Notes to Appendix II

(1) In the context of the times, , Volksgenosseis a Nazi, anti-Semitic term that suggests that while Jews maybe citizens of the state, they cannot be German "ethnic comrades."For a discussion of the term, see Christoph Cobet, Der Wortschatzdes Antisemitismus in der Bismarckzeit, München, 1973, p.155-156. Friedrich does use the term "Volksgenossen"to refer to Jews a few paragraphs further on, but that would seemto be a piece of elegant irony.

(2) Re. Volksgenosse, see the note above.

(3) The reference is to Romans 13:1 in Luther'stranslation; the endorsement of the powers that be is even strongerhere than in the Authorized Version.

(4) I am using the King James translation here.The original German is close to but not quite that of Luther.I have corrected the obvious mistake in the original which makesreference to "Gal. 2:28."

(5) The Encyclopædia Judaica lists the two women. AliceSalomon, 1872-1948, converted to Protestantism during the FirstWorld War. She was known as a social worker and feminist and emigratedfrom Germany in 1937. Susanne Engelmann, born in 1886 and knownas an educator, emigrated to the United States in 1940. WilhelmCaspary died on November 1, 1936; a brief obituary is devotedto him in M, December 1936, p. 101.

(6) Army service became obligatory for Mischlinge after the Nuremberglaws, but they could not become either commissioned or non-commissionedofficers. At the time the present speech was given, the matterhad not, as a matter of fact, been clarified.

(7) Arbeitsfront: the Nazi obligatory labor organization, closedto Jews but open to Mischlinge after the Nuremberg laws.

(8) The Nuremberg laws provided for provisional Reich citizenshipto both non-Jews and Mischlinge. It seems that that "provisional"nature was emphasized only among the fate-comrades.

(9) This formula replaced the notion of "Aryan"after the Nuremberg laws. The paragraph of the statutes here allowsfor membership of the non-Jewish but not the Jewish close relativeof the Mischlinge.

(10) A Protestant Church agency.

(11) The Catholic relief agency.

(12) Herr Bennedik can be identified by a smalldisplay advertisement which he frequently placed in the newsletter:"3B -- Bernhard Bennedik Bürobedarf, Köln, Moltkestrasse57"; i.e. he seems to have owned a stationery business. See,for example, M, June 1938.

Click here to go to homepage of Werner Cohn

Sendan e-mail to Werner Cohn This e-mail link maynot work for you if you use a web-based e-mail service. If so,please use my direct e-mail address as follows: wernercohn@mac.com

 Haveyou heard about my Early Companions ?