Why Christ In Dachau Is a Myth
Dr. E. Michael Jones relies heavily on Fr. Johann Lenz's memoir, Christ In Dachau, in his attempt to construct a narrative of a Catholic "Holocaust." However, it is vital to approach historical research with accuracy and thoroughness. To ensure this, we reached out to the Dachau Museum and the Arolsen Genocide Archives, which document German "atrocities." The Arolsen archives provided us with the German files on Fr. Johann Lenz.
These records uncover a different side of Fr. Johann Lenz. They reveal his active involvement in political opposition against the Nazis, a violation of the Concordat. Lenz even engaged in distributing atrocity propaganda, effectively aiding the enemy. It is clear that Dr. Jones's historical research was insufficient, and he seems inclined to construct a narrative that portrays Catholics as victims of the Nazis, ignoring the complex nuances and blurred lines between different groups. It is worth noting that there were faithful Catholics who aligned themselves with National Socialism in Germany.
The Austrian Police file from the Arlosen Archives, covering November 17th to the 18th, 1938
According to the reports, Jesuit Priest Johann Lenz, born on April 7, 1902, in Gratz, Austria, resided in Kalksburg near Vienna. He faced accusations of inciting the population with derogatory statements about the leader and state leadership. Lenz allegedly made inflammatory remarks, comparing Hitler to Satan, claiming the removal of crucifixes from schools and hospitals, and expressing dissatisfaction with priests being silenced. He also expressed regret for those who supported Hitler and criticized Austria's annexation. Lenz's activities drew suspicion of disseminating atrocity propaganda abroad, leading to his arrest for insulting the leader and spreading disturbing rumors. Notably, Lenz attempted to contact former Federal Chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg, disguising his intentions as a confession.
Authorities strongly suspected Lenz of maintaining close connections with enemies of the National Socialist state abroad. To discreetly monitor his actions, they initially allowed him to remain at large. During their investigation, Lenz was found in possession of a document from another Jesuit priest, Johann Aschauer, with a position related to the Reichsleiter Rosenberg. Additionally, he copied a report on the raid on the Archbishop's Palace in Vienna, distributing copies to various individuals. Confidential reports revealed Lenz's misuse of the confessional for political atrocity propaganda and his derogatory comments about Gauleiter Josef Brückel.
Based on the provided report, it becomes apparent why Fr. Johann Lenz faced prosecution by the German government, a course of action that was deemed appropriate. Lenz engaged in spreading false rumors, inciting his congregation against the Reich. Moreover, he utilized the Catholic confessionals for seditious political activities, which flagrantly violated the concordat. Catholic priests are subject to their Bishops. To our knowledge, no Bishops in the Reich instructed their priests to engage in seditious activities or misuse confessionals in such a manner, rendering Lenz's actions unauthorized and contrary to the Church's will. It is important to acknowledge that political clerics who actively participated in criminal and treasonous activities faced rightful prosecution. Fr. Johann Lenz serves as just one example of this. Even from the Church's perspective, his actions contradicted the instructions of both civic and ecclesiastical authorities, highlighting the gravity of his offenses.
On Priests imprisoned At Dachau
Throughout Germany, the bishops were largely silent on priests who were detained or sent to Dachau concentration camp for their subversive activities. Why? Because their activities violated the Reichskonkordat signed with the Vatican. The Concordat guaranteed protection of priests so long as they did not agitate politically against the regime or conduct other activities such as holding anti-Nazi meetings. This silence is very prevalent in the OSS interrogation of SD Agent Albert Hartl (also known by the pseudonym Anton Holzner). In this interrogation, it is made clear that at Dachau, the priests received better treatment than other prisoners.
“At the beginning of 1941.. HARTL heard that a number of Polish priests and monks had been brought to DACHAU. He states openly that he was not alarmed by this news, since the German clergy had always manifested a strong antipathy toward the hyper chauvinistic Polish clergy, and since he knew that even Nuncio ORSENIGO had always displayed a strong dislike of the Polish clergy.
In this period, Hartl paid a visit to the clerical wing of the concentration camp in DACHAU, where he was able to convince himself that the priests at least were getting fair treatment. He was told that the majority of the 200 priests at DACHAU were Polish and that their preferential treatment was resented by other inmates of the camp. German priests had even complained, because they were out in the same class with Polish priests.”
The fair treatment of the priests imprisoned at Dachau is further supported by an article from the Committee for Open Debate On the Holocaust (CODOH) titled Lessons From Dachau. Referencing the book Dachau: 1933-45, The Official History by Paul Berben, this article provides specific details on the clergy's treatment.
"The treatment of the clergy warrants some special attention. Under general German policy most clergymen who came under arrest were transferred to Dachau, the total number reaching 2,720. According to Berben:
On 15th March 1941 the clergy were withdrawn from work Kommandos on orders from Berlin, and their conditions improved. They were supplied with bedding of the kind issued to the S.S., and Russian and Polish prisoners were assigned to look after their quarters. They could get up an hour later than the over prisoners and rest on their beds for two hours in the morning and afternoon. Free from work, Hey could give themselves to study and to meditation. They were given newspapers and allowed to use the library. Their food was adequate; they sometimes received up to a third of a loaf of bread a day; there was even a period when they were given half a litre of cocoa in the morning and a third of a bottle of wine daily. (p. 147)
While work was not required from clergymen, some of them did volunteer as nurses in the hospital beginning in 1943. This proved fatal, since typhus was ravaging the camp at that time. Berben notes that "several of them fell victim to their devotion, as this was the time when typhus was raging in the camp." (p. 151)
The clergy also persuaded the camp officials to build a chapel for religious services. Prior to this, services were held in the camp's prisoner barracks. "The patient work by clergy and lay people alike had in the end achieved a miracle. The chapel was 20 metres long by 9 wide and could hold about 800 people, but often more than a thousand crowded in." (p. 153) Services were held all day long on Sundays, with one service immediately following another. (p. 154) In the last days in the camp the chapel became somewhat controversial. As prisoners from the camps near the front were evacuated to the interior, the camp became increasingly overcrowded. When health care broke down, typhus began to take an incredible toll. Relieving overcrowding was one way of helping stem the disease. Camp officials asked the clergy for permission to convert the chapel into housing in an attempt to improve living conditions. " … the suggestion was put to the clergy that they should give it [the chapel] up in order to combat the shortage of accommodation, which was becoming disastrous." (p. 154) The clergy were adamant that they would not surrender the chapel even to save lives. They argued that not all the buildings in the camp were being used to house prisoners and suggested that instead of the large chapel the smaller cobbler's shop and the brothel be converted into housing. They also argued that the chapel could only house 250, "which was nothing compared with the continuous intake of prisoners." The clergy had the final word. The camp officials acceded to their wishes "and the chapel was retained to the last." (p. 154)"
— John Cobden, Lessons From Dachau
Out of the approximately 2,720 priests imprisoned at Dachau, it is important to clarify that this figure represents the total number of priests ever interned there, not the simultaneous count at the end of the war. According to the OSS document from 1941, only 200 priests were present when Hartl visited Dachau. These 2,720 priests accounted for just 0.017% of the overall camp population of 160,000 individuals who were ever interned at Dachau, not all at once. Additionally, it is worth noting that out of the 2,720 priests, approximately 400 were German, with the remainder being Polish or from other countries. Considering that there were 20,000 clergy members in Germany, the presence of 400 priests at Dachau amounts to a mere 1-2% of the total clergy in Germany. It is difficult to characterize this as a deliberate persecution given the low percentage of priests from Germany who ended up at Dachau.
Father Pfanzelt with the SS Garrison conducting a Catholic Burial
Another noteworthy aspect is that the SS Garrison at Dachau allowed Priest Father Friedrich Pfanzelt to officiate Mass and conduct other Catholic religious services for both SS-Men and inmates. This demonstrates that not only were the priests at Dachau granted the freedom to worship and engage in religious studies with considerable flexibility, but the SS Garrison also practiced their Catholic faith. Similarly, at Auschwitz, the SS Garrison was predominantly Roman Catholic, as indicated on an official website:
“Religious denomination
The religious affiliation of 556 garrison members is known; Catholics accounted for the highest number, followed by Lutherans. Atheists (the Gottgläubig category) made up the third largest group. Among the SS men who belonged to the NSDAP, the Nazi party, the greatest number were Lutherans.”
— https://www.auschwitz.org/en/history/the-ss-garrison/
Considering all of these points, Dr. Jones is inadvertently providing inaccurate information to his audience regarding the circumstances of imprisoned priests for political agitation at Dachau.
Monastery “Confiscations”
Another common argument leveled against the Reich is the "persecution of Monasteries," but it is evident that this is not the case in The Big Lie of Political Catholicism.
“In the period from 1932 to 1935, 864 new monasteries were built in Germany. This means that every one and a half (exactly 1.26) days there is a new religious establishment in Germany.”
— The Big Lie of Political Catholicism.
An article from a German magazine from 1934 describing monastic life
During the interwar period in Germany, there was indeed a growth in monastic life. However, during the war, several monasteries were taken over by the Reich government in a process known as the "Klostersturm." These monasteries were repurposed as hospitals or refugee centers, rather than as part of an anti-Catholic agenda. In response to protests in 1941, Hitler issued an order halting the seizure of monasteries for these purposes by the Reich, clarifying that there was no malicious intent behind their use. The monasteries taken over by the Reich were not officially disbanded or their monks expelled. Instead, they continued their monastic activities while providing shelter for refugees and caring for wounded soldiers using their facilities.
Monks and Soldiers at a Monastery that was requisitioned by the Reich for use as a Hospital
The Catholic Church In Occupied Poland
German troops pray at a Polish Catholic Church
One commonly discussed aspect of the "persecution" of Catholicism in the Third Reich is the alleged mistreatment of Polish Catholics during the occupation. However, the complete narrative of what transpired in occupied Poland regarding the Church is not being fully disclosed.
Hans Frank with Polish Catholic Bishops
Reichsleiter Hans Frank was in charge of the "General Government" in occupied Poland and Ukrainian Galicia, offering valuable perspectives on the situation of the Catholic Church in occupied Poland and addressing claims of persecution against Polish Catholics during the Reich's administration. During the post-war Nuremberg trials where Frank stood as one of the defendants accused of involvement in the "Holocaust," his testimony shed light on the issue of Church persecution in the General Government, leading to some intriguing statements from Frank.
“DR. SEIDL: Witness, in your capacity as Governor General did you persecute churches and religion in the areas which you had under your administration?
FRANK: I was in constant personal contact with the Archbishop, now Cardinal, Sapieha in Krakow. He told me of all his sufferings and worries, and they were not few. I myself had to rescue the Bishop of Lublin from the hands of Herr Globocznik in order to save his life.
DR.SEIDL: You mean the SS Gruppenfáhrer Globocznik?
FRANK: Yes, that is the one I mean.
But I may summarize the situation by quoting the letter which Archbishop Sapieha sent to me in 1942, in which, to use his own words, he thanked me for my tireless efforts to protect the life of the church. We reconstructed seminaries for priests; and we investigated every case of arrest of a priest, as far as that was humanly possible. The tragic incident when two assistants of the Archbishop Sapieha were shot, which has been mentioned here by the Prosecution, stirred my own emotions very deeply. I cannot say any more. The churches were open; the seminaries were educating priests; the priests were in no way prevented from carrying out their functions. The monastery at Czestochowa was under my personal protection. The Krakow monastery of the Camaldulians, which is a religious order, was also under my personal protection. There were large posters around the monastery indicating that these monasteries were protected by me personally.”
Hans Frank maintains that during his governance of the General Government, the Catholic Church was safeguarded, with Churches, Seminaries, and specific Monasteries granted protection to practice their faith without hindrance.
Photographs from the Jasna Gora Monastery under German Protection
Through a combination of photographs, and Hans Frank's account, it is evident that Polish Catholicism did not face persecution under German occupation, thus questioning the existence of a purported "Catholic Holocaust." Despite the prevalent belief in the oppression of the Church in occupied Poland by the Germans, the available evidence presents a different perspective.
For further exploration on related topics, consider the following:
Behind The Dictators: A Factual Analysis of The Relationship of Nazi-Fascism and Roman Catholicism by Leo H. Lehmann
E Michael Jones Exposed by Australian Christian Fascists
Christianity and Fascism
Six Chapters on Christianity and National Socialism by Wilhelm Stapel