Bearers of a Common Fate ? The "Non-Aryan Christian Fate-Comrades" of the Paulus Bund, 1933-1939

Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook, vol. XXXIII, 1988, pp. 327-366


By Werner Cohn

Copyright Werner Cohn, 1988



"Non-Aryan Christians" Organize

I: July 1933 to September 1935; Friedrich and Wolff

II: September 1935 to February 1937: Spiero

III: February 1937 to August 1939: Lesser

Footnotes to Main Text

Appendix I: The Size of the Partially 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 Jewish diaspora, there were Jews, there were non-Jews, and there those who partook a little of each and whom I shall call the partial Jews. (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 were something of an embarrassment in the Nazi state. And from what I have learned from interviewing some partial Jews who survived the Nazi era it would appear that most of them tried to hide their status, to keep it, if not secret, at least as inconspicuous as possible. (2) But some among them, for a variety of reasons, saw fit to organize as a special interest group.

Six months after Hitler's rise to power, on July 20 1933 to be exact, the otherwise unknown Gustav Friedrich of Berlin organized the "Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc." (Reichsverband christlich-deutscher Staatsbürger nichtarischer oder nicht rein arischer Abstammung e.V.) The group changed names several times during its six-year existence: (3) to Reichsverband der nichtarischen Christen e.V. in December 1934; to Paulus-Bund, Vereinigung nichtarischer Christen e.V in September 1936; and finally, after membership became restricted on "racial" grounds, to Vereinigung 1937 vorläufiger Reichsbürger nicht volldeutschblütiger Abstammung e.V. in July 1937. The organization was finally dissolved by governmental decree on August 10, 1939. Following the informal custom of some of its former members I shall here use the term Paulus-Bund, as a matter of convenience, to refer to the organization in all its stages. (4)

From the beginning, the group actively sought to recruit as members all those Christian Germans who had some discernible Jewish ancestry. It saw its primary purpose as representing the 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 status of its constituency. This point of view can be summarized as follows: 1) We are German and our loyalty is exlusively German; the fact that we had Jewish ancestors, which we do not deny, in no way detracts from this. 2) We are sincere Christians,(5) whether Catholic or Protestant. The Christian baptism has permanently cut all ties not only to Judaism but to the Jewish people. (6) 3) We are absolutely loyal to the National Socialist government.

There is one term that appears and reappears from the beginning to the end in the voluminous printed and mimeographed materials issued by this organization: Schicksalsgenosse, 'fate-comrade.' In time this term became emblematic of the Paulus-Bund and its literature; 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 characteristic Parteigenosse ('party comrade') and Volksgenosse (7) ('ethnic comrade') in that of the Nazis.

The German Schicksalsgenosse, a compound noun that combines the notion 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 members well as all those whom it wished to recruit to membership. Until February of 1937 at least, these included all Christians who had identifiable Jewish ancestors. The term was never used to include Jews; 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 the group. Since the days of Moses Mendelssohn, a hundred and fifty years previously, substantial numbers of Jews had married non-Jews and had become Christian in the process; others had converted to Christianity without benefit of intermarriage. Insofar as the Jewish origins were known, there was always a tendency to regard all such "new Christians" (8)as in some way partially Jewish.

In defiance of this social reality, formal rules did not (and do not !) recognize "partially Jewish"; neither the traditional German civil law, nor the Jewish halakha, nor Christian religious 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 artificially by counting the number of Jewish grandparents. But since the degree of "racial mixture" could not always be determined with any 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 to form, in fact if not in law, a richly variegated but nevertheless seemless whole.

It was to this world that the new organization sought to appeal. The founding leadership referred to this population as the "non-Aryan Christians," reflecting the Nazi tendency in the pre-Nuremberg days to lump together all those who were less than "purely Aryan." Some Christian charitable activities aside (9), the Paulus-Bund was alone, in the whole Hitler period, to take upon itself the task of providing some institutional shelter for the partially Jewish population.

We shall never be able to know very precisely the size of this population of potential members of the Paulus-Bund. The very boundaries of 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 government and Party. For example, a "quarter Jew" (or "Mischling Second 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 September 29, 1933, nobody whose family contained even a single Jewish ancestor at any time after January of 1800 could be a "farmer" (Bauer). (11) Second, the amount of genealogical information that was available to the authorities, or even to the individuals affected, naturally varied with circumstances. Third, neither the administrative policies of the government, nor the willingness of its constituent agencies to enforce them, were uniform or even predictable. (12)

With these limitations in mind, I have nevertheless arrived at an estimate of approximately half a million partial Jews, about the same number as religiously organized Jews, in the Germany of 1933. I give the grounds for this estimate in the Appendix I.

Of this half million eligible members, what proportion ever joined the Paulus-Bund ? I have nowhere found an accounting of national membership figures, but each issue of the monthly newsletter published the number of copies that had been printed. This number was 3400 in January of 1935, then climbed to 5000 in 1936 (reaching a height of 6000 for the single issue of July-August of 1936), then went down to 3500 after the split of mid-1937, and finally stabilized at 3300 until it ceased publication in 1939. (13)
The publication was sent to family units, so we can multiply these figures by three or four to get an idea of how many individuals were reached by it. It would seem that the very maximum that could have been reached is less than twenty thousand, or four percent of the partially Jewish population. Comparable figures for the Jewish press in Germany at the time show a total circulation of more than a million copies of Jewish periodicals; as Philo-Lexikon points out, every Jewish adult and child read an average of two Jewish periodical per month. (14) These circulation figures point to a state of affairs, born out by conversations I have had with numerous Jewish and partially Jewish survivors of the Nazi era in Germany, in which the Jewish organizations encompassed their total 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 stages it 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-Semites before them, refused to see any difference whatever between a Jew and a Christian who is "tainted" by partial or wholly Jewish origin. This doctrine, at least in its strict interpretation by offical Nazi party sources, lumped together all those who had any Jewish ancestors whatever; in the Nazis' specialized vocabulary of racism, the fight was to be conducted equally against "Juden und Judenstämmlinge," 'Jews and Jew-offspring.' (16)

While the partially Jewish never received as much emphasis as full Jews, some unfavorable attention was paid to them from the beginnings of "racist" anti-Semitism in the late nineteenth century. Before and after the years of Nazi rule, anti-Semitic agitators would castigate Christians who had Jews among their ancestors: "It is impossible to count as Jew only him who has a Jewish father or a Jewish mother, i. e. fifty percent Jewish blood. Experience shows that Jewish blood is frequently stronger than Aryan blood, not only in grandchildren, but also in great-grandchildren and even further on down the line." (17) Hitler thought that offspring of intermarriages would always take on the characteristics of Jews. (18)

As far as "baptized Jews" -- former Jews who had converted to Christianity -- were concerned, the Nazis' hatred and contempt knew few bounds. Hitler criticized the religious anti-Semitism of the Austrian Christian Social Party of his youth because it failed 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 laws and regulations concerning the partial Jews were promulgated by the new Nazi government in 1933. In April there was a new civil service law that contained the first "Aryan paragraph," a requirement that civil servants from then on were to have no Jewish ancestors. (21) Such "Aryan paragraphs" were then introduced into many new laws and regulations; a great many non-governmental and voluntary organizations followed suit. (22)
While some discriminatory regulations were specifically directed against "Jews," as many were written against "non-Aryans" and therefore included all the "non-Aryan" Christians of whatever degree of Jewish ancestry. The result is that the fate-comrades found that their legal status, if perhaps not their actual treatment by the authorities, approximated that of Jews. (23)

For roughly two and a half years this radical approach to racial purity was essentially the law of the land. Apparently it was found sufficiently unwieldy or inconvenient or embarrassing (24) to be profoundly modified by the "Nuremberg Laws" of September 1935 and subsequent administrative regulations. These laws gave considerable relief to many partial Jews by distinguishing sharply among four classes: 1) three or four Jewish grandparents made 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 Mischling Second Class; 4) an individual without any Jewish grandparent was to be considered "German-blooded." This four-fold classification 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 victory of non-Nazi officialdom over the zealots of the Party. (26) But be that as it may, and despite the difficulties and ambiguities of the scheme to which we shall return, there is no doubt that it resulted in a substantial and unexpected improvement in the legal 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 toward the end of the war there was some movement back toward greater persecution of "Mischlinge." After the invasion of Russia in June of 1941, the Nazi apparatus began to plan for the holocaust, and it seems that at least some of the planners wished to include the 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 "Aryan paragraphs" were put into place; it existed throughout the preparation for, and then the amplification of the Nuremberg legislation. These developments must obviously be kept in mind when looking at the stages which the organization itself traversed. I suggest that there were three such stages in the history of the Paulus-Bund.

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

These first two stages flow into one another and are marked more by 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 who served as leaders of the group. The leadership as a whole was unstable. For example, of the eight men (28) who are shown as Council members in November of 1933 (29), only three had appeared on a similar list the previous August. (30) By the following March, only six of the eight are still on Council. (31) The two chairmen of the future -- Spiero and Lesser -- do not make their appearance on any of these early lists. (31)

The founding chairman of the group was Gustav Friedrich, who died on October 31, 1933. (33) The Berlin lawyer Günther Alexander-Katz became a temporary chairman while a search was instituted for someone who would be known "as widely as possible among the German people." (34) By March of 1934, Richard Wolff, already on the Council since at least the previous November, was elected the new chairman. In September of 1935 Heinrich Spiero replaced him, only to be himself replaced by Karl Friedrich Lesser in February of 1937.

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


I: July 1933 to September 1935; Friedrich and Wolff

Neither Friedrich nor Wolff were people in any way known to the public. As far as Friedrich is concerned, even the organization's literature gives no clue about his background or occupation. His successor Wolff pays him homage after his death: "A courageous, imaginative man, scarcely known in broader circles, 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 the 9th edition ( published in 1928) of Wer ist's ?, the German Who's Who, as a doctor of philosophy and lecturer in Leipzig. On the occasion of his fiftieth birthday, March 9, 1935, the newsletter publishes a biographical sketch of 500 words. (36)
From this we learn that his ancestors can be documented as resident in Germany since the sixteenth century; that his father had been an architect; that he himself had been baptized Protestant; that he had been a business man, historian, and finally an editor in the service of the Weimar government; and finally that he was married and had four children. Wolff survived the Nazi regime and the war. In 1958 he wrote an article on the Reichtags fire; a brief biographical note states that he emigrated from Germany in 1938 and, at the time the article was published, lived in Nairobi as a British citizen. (37)

The first six documents in Appendix II stem from the summer and fall of 1933. The first, labelled a), is a mimeographed circular letter from Gustav Friedrich, from which I present translated excerpts. Next, b), are excerpts from a speech by another leader of the group, Dr. Günter Alexander-Katz, to a press reception in November. Item c) is the translation of a printed sheet of general information. The original bears a logo of the Iron Cross superimposed by the Christian cross (this logo appeared never again in the literature of the organization). The other material consists of d) an appeal to join, directed to "Christian-German non-Aryans"; e) a page containing a "profession of faith"; and f) the twenty-three paragraphs of the organization's statutes with a blank "declaration of membership" form. I translate all of items c), d), and e), and excerpts from f).

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

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

In adapting to what they considered the organizational principles that modern times require -- the Führerprinzip, 'principle of the Leader' of the Nazis (see document a) -- the Paulus-Bund organizers were even more in vogue than they perhaps realized. It is true that Führerprinzip was a Nazi slogan; but it is also true that the German Communist Party, partly under the influence of 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 the new organization. In August 1933, two different circular letters from Friedrich list him on the printed letterhead as "Führer" of the organization, but by October the word is pasted over and replaced by Vorsitzender, 'chairman.' The title "Führer" is never again assumed by any member of the organization. No doubt it appeared unseemly and lèse-majesté at the time; but we do not know whether it was dropped voluntarily or under pressure from the government.

Secondly, there is the persisting theme of distress, "Unsere Not." Much of the writing, some in the form of poetry, expresses a sense of unexpected, sudden, undeserved misfortune. The monthly journal ("newsletter," Mitteilungsblatt) was to become an organ of addressing and consoling the fate-comrades, of describing their great distress and expressing their modest aspirations. Throughout the history of the organization the publication mirrors the 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 featured advice on occupational training for the youth (become manual workers !), on re-training for adults (ditto), and on emigration (don't expect too much ! learn foreign languages !). The publication does not often give precise figures, but one report from Frankfurt in March of 1935 tells us that fully a third of the membership is 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 the regret, let alone the sympathy of the organization's writers. This theme and this way of treating it mark the entire history of the organization.

The theme of mutual aid also makes its appearance at the very beginning and was to become more and more prominent as time went on. The group always seemed to have seen one of its most important reasons for existence in the social services that it could provide to fate-comrades. The files of the monthly journal give evidence of a vigorous promotion of lectures, musical and theatrical performances, exhibitions of paintings, etc., all of which are described as giving opportunities to fate-comrade artists and performers as well as giving edification to the audiences. Much space is taken up by detailing the organization's employment agency, its counselling facilities, its many courses for adults and children, its youth groups, its dances and social get-togethers. While the scale of all this could of course never equal that of the Jewish Kulturbund in the early years of the regime, the spirit is altogether comparable.

These were the items that were to become permanent features of the group, more or less with constancy of emphasis. Other themes proved 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 (document a) and the speech by Alexander-Katz (document b) contain the kind of 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 were not and would never be anti-Semitic. But they apparently could not 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 partially Jewish themselves. Furthermore, unlike so many of their fate-comrades who chose to stay out of the organization, these men would not deny their Jewish ancestors; in fact they often had occasion to polemicize against attempts at hiding one's background. So being partly or fully of "Jewish race" themselves, the Jewishness they attacked was that of the spirit -- the Talmud spirit, or "Bolshevism," as the occasion demanded -- rather than that of "blood." They turned against what they conceived as 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 because the monthly journal would from time to time report that anti-Semitism, unfortunately, persisted in "our circles." But by the time the group issued its only printed pamphlet in November of 1934, explicit anti-Semitism, racial or otherwise, was advisedly rejected. (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 or humane enlightenment. At the end of 1933, made uneasy by rumors of further racist legislation, the group made representations to 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, German nationalism, saw some variation in emphasis over time. Stridently political in the first period, it was to become more muted, and more "cultural" rather than political, as time went by.

In the first period of its history, the group's position was similar to what was left of the non-Nazi German-Nationalist movement that supported the Nazis from a conservative perspective (46): without declaring themselves as National Socialists, they went out of their way to show support to the new government and its Führer.

There was, of course, always one very important point on which the Paulus-Bund leaders differed from the "Aryan" politicians of the right wing. Where the latter usually tended toward some form of racist interpretation of German nationhood, a matter of "blood" rather than culture, the Paulus leaders insisted that German character is determined by German culture -- the German language, German education, participation in Germany's wars. It was those who held to the Jewish religion, according to the the leaders of the group, unlike they themselves who had embraced Christianity as part of their attachment to German culture, who were un-German.

Of course the Paulus people were far from disinterested participants in this kind of discussion; their personal status, welfare, and ultimately their safety was involved.

Some of the organization's pronouncements in this period can only be described as obsequious, not to say sycophantic. The November 1933 newsletter notes with great pride that its press reception had been attended not only by representatives of the domestic and foreign press, but also by dignitaries of the government and the party. (47) The same issue calls upon the fate-comrades to vote Ja in the November 12 plebiscite that was to approve Hitler's withdrawal 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 the Reich League solemnly declared that "it is the obvious duty of each German, upon meeting with like-minded in an organization for the first time after August 2, 1934, to commemorate the painful event ... " (48)

The newletter's issue of January of 1935 carried a front-page editorial by then-chairman Richard Wolff, declaring 1) that fate-comrades are in every way loyal Germans, "neither émigrés nor spiritually emigrated" (but he himself did emigrate in 1938, see above); 2) that fellow Germans in the Saar will soon have 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 now in, the fate-comrades expressed their satisfaction. (50)

On March 16, 1935 Hitler breached the Versailles prohibition against universal 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 honor and the maintenance of peace." At the same time he wrote to the Minister of the Army to urge that fate-comrades, too, be eligible for conscription. (51) (Eventually certain ones were).

While the Paulus-Bund in this period then shows outspoken political support to the Nazi government, it also assumes a surprisingly frank and implicitly anti-Nazi tone when it takes sides in the Protestants' "church struggle" of the times. This conflict inside the Protestant churches, it will be remembered, had as its fulcrum a question of great interest to the fate-comrades, viz. whether the "Aryan paragraph" should be applied to the Protestant clergy. (52)

The organization goes on record, without mincing any words whatever, for the full spiritual equality in the Protestant Church for Christians of Jewish ancestry. The relevant statements -- translated as documents e and f in Appendix II -- are both found in ephemera rather than in 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 customary show of deference to the Nazi government. I have seen no record of how the supervising authorities reacted. We do know that all Paulus-Bund activities were watched by the secret services of the regime (more on this below), and it may well be that the publication of this particular circular was eventually punished in some way.

II: September 1935 to February 1937: Spiero

The succession from Richard Wolff to Heinrich Spiero occurred on September 16, 1935. The October newsletter announced in a front-page box that Wolff had requested a leave of absence until the following January because he had undertaken "a great scholarly task." Heinrich Spiero, "famed historian of German literature," was named acting chairman. In the January issue a similar box announced the election of Spiero as permanent chairman. Wolff, it was said, would devote himself to 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 the causes 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 almost totally obscure, Spiero, if not exactly famous, had gained a reputation in pre-Hitler Germany as a critic and historian of German literature.

Born on March 24, 1876 to a Jewish family in Königsberg (then East Prussia, now Soviet Union), he had himself baptized Protestant at 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 business and as a university lecturer, and wrote more than thirty book in the course of his life. Most of his publications deal with nineteenth-century German writers. In 1929 he published an autobiographical work, Schicksal und Anteil, in which he recounts his personal acquaintance with many of the literary figures of his time. (55)

There are several indications in these materials that Spiero's relationship to his Jewish background was disturbed. His autobiography does not mention his origins. When relating encounters with Jews he talks like a curious outsider. He mentions his friendship with the preacher Alfred Thaer without letting on that this man had converted him to the Christian faith. There are other oddities of this kind in the book.

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

Whatever Raabe's place in the history of literature, he and Gustav Freytag, 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 hostile portrayal of Jews is often cited as one of the contributing factors in the "racial" anti-Semitism of the late nineteenth century. (56) In Raabe's novel Hungerpastor (1862), which is the one most often mentioned in this connection, the thoroughly repulsive villain is not only a Jew but a Jew who converts to Christianity. One need not have recourse to a psychoanalytic interpretation to suspect that this novel had a personal meaning for Spiero.

George Mosse finds that Raabe's anti-Semitic bias is shown in his portrayal of Heinrich Heine. (57)
Perhaps to counter criticism of this kind, Spiero reports seeing Raabe nine days before the latter's death in 1910. Spiero tells him that the Hamburg Senate has just approved a memorial statue for 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 negative comments concerning Jews that mark the writings of many other "non-Aryan Christians" seem to be completely absent in Spiero's. In Schicksal und Anteil he reports friendships and positive judgements for various political personalities, including some on the left. But there is no doubt that his own commitments were on the right, and in the context of the times this was bound to have some anti-Semitic implication. He carried his monarchist sympathies into the Weimar republic: "The monarchy cannot be restored, but the monarchic principle will become extinguished for the author only with the end of his life." (59) More relevant is his membership (60) on executive committees of the DNVP, the anti-Semitic Deutschnationale Volkspartei, the "German-National" allies of Hitler in 1933. (61) His relationship to Jews and Jewishness was not simple.

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

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

Of course these political proclivities were the leadership's and not necessarily those of the rank and file. I have corresponded about this question with some former members of the group. One such correspondent has pointed out that he himself had had socialist sympathies in those years. He and his friends, all younger members of the rank and file, simply found the organization useful because it provided social fellowship among the afflicted partial Jews and practical help in dealing with the authorities. The politics of the Council and the newsletter, in his opinion, represented the views of the formal leadership and perhaps its older members, but they meant very little to the younger people; the right-wing pronouncements, did, however, provide a convenient cover vis-à-vis the government.

In the period of Spiero's leadership we can discern two major themes in the literature and activities of the Paulus-Bund. One is manifest and explicit: adaptation to the Nuremberg laws. The other theme is not explicitly expressed, but it is foreshadowed in 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 Nuremberg system of classificatory persecution. We have already sketched the basic four-fold taxonomy of this system: 1. Jews defined "racially"; 2. non-Jews; 3. and 4., two in-between groups. The system was initiated on September 15, 1935 with the enactment of a new citizenship law and another one "to protect German blood and German honor." It would appear that the system was difficult to institute all in one swoop; in any case it evolved over time to the accompaniment of a flood of additional regulations, (64) and for almost a year and a half the Paulus-Bund continued to join together that which Nuremberg 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 first of all to understand it, and much of the newsletter in this period was devoted to reporting on the newest developments in the evolving system. The language was often technical. As the writers saw it, the four main areas of concern were suffragium, (65) by which was meant the question of who was a citizen and to what extent; connubium, (66) who could marry whom; and occupation, (67) restrictions on opportunities to earn a living. It must have become very clear to the reader of this material -- and there was no need to read between the lines -- that what were still ritually referred to as fate-comrades in fact were treated very differentially in all these areas.

Under the Nuremberg laws a novel distinction was created between Staatsangehörige ('subjects') and Reichsbürger ('citizens'). Everyone was a "subject" but only those considered racially qualified could become "citizens." (68) It was decided that "Jews" (those with three or more Jewish (69) grandparents) could not be "citizens," but that both kinds of Mischlinge could. While this rule appears simple enough on paper, in practice there were countless complications. The greatest difficulty lay in establishing the "race" of the grandparent. Item i in Appendix II gives something of the flavor of the hair-splitting that the Nuremberg system required.

The Nuremberg regulations concerning connubium of partial Jews were as follows: 1. "Jews" (as legally defined) may marry only "Jews"; 2. Mischlinge of the "first degree" may marry only others of the same status; 3. Mischlinge of the "second degree" ('quarter Jews") are treated as "German-blooded" for this purpose. The regulations also provided that certain other marriages could be authorized under special circumstances, for instance that of a "first-degree" with a "second-degree" Mischling, but such special permission was apparently almost never granted. There were again difficulties in applying this law with any great consistency or logic, again mainly because of the practical problems in defining a "Jewish" grandparent. The Paulus-Bund newsletter faithfully reported on how such complications were treated by the authorities as they arose.

The regulations must have been particularly difficult for "Mischlinge First Degree" of marriageable age since the pool of possible partners could not have been very large. Each issue of the Paulus-Bund newsletter carried numerous personal want ads in which such people looked for partners. I have also been told by a survivor of the Bund 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 "half Jews" than for the "quarter Jews." After the organization was forbidden in 1939, some of the members, according to a number of my informants, continued to see one another in informal Mischling clubs. (70)

Throughout the Spiero period it was the professed position of the leadership, in numerous speeches and articles in the newsletter, that all "non-Aryan Christians" are fate-comrades regardless of "blood," that no distinction among them is thinkable within the organization. The group was still explicitly Christian in religion, and the position was similar to that of the Professing Church which rejected any "Aryan paragraph" within the community of Christian faith. But adjustment to the Nuremberg system of classification was at least as high a priority for the Paulus-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-comradeship and the desire to adjust to Nuremberg is illustrated in the school issue.

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

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

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

III: February 1937 to August 1939: Lesser

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

The next thing we know, through a prominently displayed box on the front page of the newsletter, is that a lecture that Spiero was 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 reader of the newsletter can tell. But then, in April, there is a front-page announcement entitled "Change of Statutes," in which it is explained that, in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Nuremberg laws, the organization has just expelled all those who are of "more than 50% Jewish descent." New statutes have been adopted. It should now be possible to attract personalities who have previously stayed away in view of the Jewish connection of the former organization. Because of all the new organizational work, it is earnestly requested that all members remit an emergency donation of at least three marks. The change in statutes has necessitated a change in leadership, and Dr. Spiero has dropped out; in his place there is now the Attorney-at-Law at the Court of Appeal, Friedrich Karl Lesser. All those leaving, especially those who had been in leading positions, are heartily thanked for what they have done for the organzation in its previous form. (78)

The re-organized leadership of the group went to some lengths to disclaim responsibility for the expulsion of their "fully non-Aryan" fate-comrades: "Already in the beginning of October 1935, that is to say little more than two weeks after the proclamation of the Nuremberg laws ... the government demanded that the organization conform to the new law. ... [Only] in March of 1937 did this reorganization occur.... Now I ask you ... who has the right to claim that one group forced out the other so that it itelf 'would fare better' ?" (79) Two months later the newsletter publishes a curious correction. It is now said that the date of October 1935 for the first demands by the government is in error and that these demands were in fact first voiced in May of 1936. (80) Looking at the record from this distance, it seems strange that the first assertion could have been made with such confidence and accompanied by such convincing supporting detail.

Reutter has examined documents of the Ministry of the Interior, and there is no doubt now that the government made a definitive demand for the change in February of 1937. (81) Whether or not previous demands had been made and resisted, as the Lesser leadership claimed, we do not know. After the war, Spiero writes about the incident 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. Heinrich Spiero) through which he sought to continue some counselling and charitable 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 with a fairly stable membership of over 3000, now all Mischlinge. This last period of its life -- the Lesser period -- began with a fair number of lengthy articles and features in the newsletter which sought to lay down the new orientation. Documents k through o should convey the general tenor. It was said the the group now exists on a racial and no longer on a religious basis, in conformity with the Nuremberg system of racial taxonomy. Religion from now on would be each member's private business. The group would represent the interests of the Mischlinge, and would try to see to it that every Mischling is aware of whatever rights and privileges the law provides for him.

One very striking feature of the early months in the Lesser period is the heavy moralism. To stay out of the organization would be egotistical. Each must help the community of fate-comrades. "Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz," 'the common good comes before the welfare of the individual." (84) (This phrase is also the last sentence of the twenty-fourth point in the program of the Nazi party). But by then, these words coming so soon after the jettison of the Christian "full Jews," it must have been clear to the remaining fate-comrades that "the common good" was fairly narrowly conceived.

In reviewing the newletter after 1937, the reader is struck by a new mood of even greater somberness. In the earlier years, especially under Spiero, the literary and intellectual level of the paper had been high. Spiero had contributed several essays -- in the style of his books on literary history -- recalling the life and work of famous Christian Germans who had been converts from Judaism. The legal essays concerning the Nuremberg laws were closely-reasoned analyses and very well-written. But early in 1938 the newsletter contained an announcement, signed by Lesser, according to which there would be no further long articles. The step was taken not only for reasons of economy but also "in order to follow the suggestions of many members." (85) The remaining issues were almost completely taken up by two types of items: news about the ever-developing legal status of Mischlinge, and the very vigorous want-ad section (employment offered and wanted, search for marriage partners).

The lead item in almost every issue was now entitled "Neues aus Gesetzgebung und Verwaltung," 'News About Legislation and Administration.' And almost always there was both good news and bad news. The good news would consist of a decision by some administrative board that Mischlinge, not being Jews in the sense of the Nuremberg laws, were eligible for some right or privilege. The bad news typically was that a particular function could not be occupied by a Mischling because it was administered by an affiliate of the Party, and the Party had, after all, been specifically empowered in Paragraph 6 of the First Administrative Regulation of the Reich Citizenship Law to demand a greater "purity of blood" than non-Party agencies. One issue carried a communication from the Berlin Real Estate Board to the effect that, yes, Mischlinge are not Jews in the eyes of the law and can therefore practice the profession of real estate broker, Heil Hitler ! The column facing had a letter from the Reich Stenographers Guild saying no, the Stenographers Guild is part of the National Socialist Teachers Guild and therefore is in no position to accept Mischlinge as members, Heil Hitler ! (86)

Only now and then was there some explicit reference to the difference in legal status between "half Jews" and "quarter Jews." It was an issue that spelled potential trouble, for the leadership had not quite stated the facts when it had claimed, right after the split, that the organization now conformed to the Nuremberg taxonomy. The language continued to be one of "fate-comradeship" of all those eligible to membership. But in fact the difference in 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 contradiction between what was said in the official pronouncements of the organization and what must have been painfully obvious to the membership.

When the end came for the organization on August 10, 1939 there was neither bang nor whimper. The government order was issued without any apparent forewarning, just two weeks before the Stalin-Hitler pact, 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 still greater danger and suffering.




There were up to half a million people in Hitler's Germany who had not thought of themselves as Jews, who certainly did not want to be regarded as Jews, but who found themselves, much to their discomfort, stigmatized as partially Jewish. The overwhelming majority had no desire to contribute to this stigma by joining an organization of "non-Aryan Christians." But there was a small minority, perhaps four percent, who did just that.

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

The picture of the group and its leaders which these materials provide is certainly not one that would now, fully fifty years later, inspire great admiration. Aside from the fleeting support given to the Confessing Church in 1933, there is little in these materials that shows any independence from Nazi thinking, much that shows enthusiastic assent. (88) Moreover the main task which the group apparently set itself -- to save what could be saved on behalf of its constituency -- may in retrospect be thought to have been chimerical. But this judgement could not very well have 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 reasonable response to a very frightening situation.




Footnotes to Main Text


1) I have been able to put together an almost complete set of copies of the original documents of this organization through the extraordinary kindness of a number of indidividuals and institutions, to all of whom I owe a debt of gratitude. The two largest sets of documents came from 1) Archiv, Institut für Zeitgeschichte, Munich, Sammlung ED 198 (Rudolf Schiff), Miss Karin Popp, Archivist; and 2) a collection of documents in the private possession of Professor Klaus Herrmann, Concordia University, Montreal. Smaller sets came from Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, Miss Ora 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 received memoirs and other information from Dr. Lutz-Eugen Reutter of Düsseldorf, Mrs. Ursual Gaupp of Havertown, Penna., Mrs. Claire Gysin-Morgenstern of Riehen (Switzerland), Mrs. Lulu Gembicki of Frankfurt, Mrs. Ingeborg Hecht-Studniczka of Freiburg, Mr. Werner A. Zehden of Berlin, Mr. Gerhard Wundermacher of Hamburg, Mr. Rudolf Schiff of Bremerhaven, and others too numerous to mention. Additional archival collections where some of this material may be found are reported in Lutz-Eugen Reutter, Katholische Kirche als Fluchthelfer in Dritten Reich, Hamburg, 1971, pp. 212, f. and 227.

2) Cf. document m, Appendix II.

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

4) The documentation relating to the group consists mainly of its monthly "newsletter," actually more of a monthly journal of opinion and contemplation as well as news, that was originally known as Mitteilungsblatt des Reichsverbandes christlich-deutscher Staatsbürger nichtarischer oder nicht rein arischer Abstammung E.V. Each issue prominently displayed the warning "For Members Only." The complete name of this publication changed a number of times to indicate the changing names of the organization. However the first term, Mitteilungsblatt, remained throughout. I have been able to examine all the monthly issues, from October of 1933 to June of 1939, with the following exceptions: issues 10 and 11 of 1937, and issues 5 and 9 of 1938. Henceforth, I shall cite this publication simply as M, followed by date of publication. The journal appeared in mimeographed form until December of 1934 and was printed beginning with the issue of January, 1935. When I cite from this publication, or from any of the other documents, it is in my translation from originally German texts.

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

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

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

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

9) Regarding the Catholic church, see Lutz-Eugen Reutter, op. cit. For the Protestant effort, see the memoirs of the man who directed them: Propst Heinrich Grüber, Erinnerungen aud sieben Jahrzehnten, Köln, 1968

10) Lösener and Knost, op.cit.; Joseph Walk, ed., Das Sonderrecht für die Juden im NS-Staat, Heidelberg 1981, p. 404

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

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

13) The issues in 1933 and 1934 were mimeographed and 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: Ingeborg Hecht, Invisible Walls, New York, 1985, p. 24; and Elsbeth von Ameln, Köln Appellhofplatz, Köln, 1985, pp. 81-5. But on the other hand, one key document concerning the fate of Christians of Jewish origin (Arthur Goldschmidt, Geschichte der evangelischen Gemeinde Theresienstadt, 1942-1945, Tübingen, 1948) makes no such mention. Another way of looking at this question is to inquire how many of the known "non-Aryan" Protestant clergymen belonged to the group. Eight such names are mentioned by Richard Gutteridge, Open Thy Mouth for the Dumb !, The German Evangelical Church and The Jews, 1879-1950, Oxford, 1976, pp. 122-124. Of these, it would appear that only one had any connection with the Paulus-Bund, judging by Heinrich Spiero's listing of clergymen who were members of the organization (I obtained this list through the kindness of his dauther, Mrs. Christiane Ilisch -- see below for further information on this material). Spiero gives sixteen names, and there are an additional four who were from time to time mentioned in the Paulus-Bund literature.

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

17) Graf E. Reventlow, Judas Kampf und Niederlage in 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, for example, published a lengthy fulmination against Jews in which a special section is devoted to the writings of "Taufjuden." The chapter ends with an exclamation: "Baptismal water indeed does not possess too much power. Yid simply remains yid [Jud bleibt eben doch Jud] !" Richard Wilhelm Stock, Die Judenfrage durch fünf Jahrhunderte, Nürnberg, 1939, pp. 263-299.

21) Exceptions were provided for combat veterans and for those who had already been in office on August 1, 1914. The law of April 7 was amplified by regulations on April 14. The latter 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 Reichsministerium des Innern," VfZ, IX (July), pp. 264-313.

24) Since it would appear that almost one percent of the population had ascertainable Jewish ancestors (see Appendix I), and since, moreover, it is reasonable to assume that these persons were more concentrated in the educated classes, it is not surprising to find a number of such partial Jews among the leaders of Nazi Germany. Cf. H. G. Adler, Der verwaltete Mensch, Tübingen, 1947, pp. 302, 335; Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, Rev. Ed., New York, 1985, p. 79.

25) See Bernhard Lösener and Friedrich A. 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 special attention to the problems of partial Jews.

26) The remarkable story of how this legislation was 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 welfare of the partial Jews, and there is no compelling reason to doubt him. But we now have a more complete and more balanced account: Jeremy Noakes, 'Wohin gehören die "Judenmischlinge" ? Die Entstehung der ersten Durchführungsverordnungen zu den Nürnberger Gesetzen,' in Ursula Büttner (ed.), Das Unrechtsregime. International Forschung über den Nationalsozialismus. Festschrift für Werner Jochmann zum 65. Geburtstag, Band 2, Verfolgung - Exil - Belasteter Neubegin,, Hamburg 1986, pp. 69-89. Noakes shows how the final draft, under Hitler's personal guidance, was influenced both by Party ideologues and by the more pragmatic 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 apparently against all dictates of rational self-interest, the Nazis instituted a frenzied "cleansing" of remaining partial Jews in government ministries. The story is told by Uwe Dietrich Adam, 'Persecution of the Jews, Bureaucracy and Authority in the Totalitarian State', in LBI Year Book XXIII (1978), pp. 139-148. Finally, we have a general discussion of the place accorded to the Mischlinge in 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 in a 1935 document (see h), Appendix Two); we know that she emigrated from Germany in 1937.

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

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

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

32) Lesser is listed, in what appears to have been a supplement to M, February 9, 1934, as one of the many lawyers who 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 Reichstagsbrand 1933, Ein Forschungsbericht," Aus Politik and Zeitgeschichte, (Beilage zu "Das Parlament"), Jan. 18, 1956, pp. 25-52.

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

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

40) This is not true of the Protestant or Catholic clergy who seemed to have by and large continued in service in some capacity. The teaching profession seems to have been particularly hard 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 deutsche Rechte und die Juden," in Werner E. Mosse, ed., Entscheidungsjahr 1932, Tübingen, 1966, pp. 183-248. One of the most striking exemplars of the pervasive anti-Semitism of the non-Nazi right wing is a man whose record is nowadays often whitewashed. Pastor Martin Niemöller, later himself to be persecuted by the Nazis, never made a secret of his strong, racial anti-Semitism. In his Sätze zur Arierfrage in der Kirche ('Theses on the Aryan Question in the Church') of November 1933, he opposes the introduction of the "Aryan paragraph" in the Protestant church on doctrinal grounds, but takes care, nevertheless, to opine that Jews had done great harm to Germany; he also indicates that the baptized Christians of Jewish origins are personally distasteful to him (text in Günther van Norden, Der Deutsche Protestantismus im Jahr der nationalsozialistischen Machtergreifung, Gütersloh, 1979, pp. 361-363). As late as 1935, Niemöller goes out of his way to preach hatred against the Jews: "What is the reason for [their] obvious punishment, which has lasted for thousands of years ? Dear brethren, the reason is easily given: the Jews brought the Christ of God to the cross !" The text of this sermon, in English, is found in Martin Niemöller, First Commandment, London, 1937, pp. 243-250. Pastor Paul Leo, a member of the Paulus-Bund and, like Niemöller, engaged with the Confessing Church in the fight against the "Aryan Paragraph," also expresses anti-Semitic sentiments in his 1933 memorandum on "Church and Judaism." Like Niemöller's "Theses," Leo's memorandum maintains that Germany had suffered from the Jews. The memorandum is reported (and described as "a remarkably original, thoughtful and objective composition") by Richard Gutteridge, op.cit., pp. 118-119. Pastor Leo, born in 1893 in Göttingen and related to Moses Mendelssohn through Wilhelm Hensel, emigrated from Germany in 1939 and taught at the Lutheran Seminary in Dubuque, Iowa, where he died in 1958. According to his widow, he and his family had been Christian for several generations but was considered more than 75% Jewish under the Nazis' race laws. (Interview on July 26, 1986). See also Rudolf Elvers and Hans-Günter Klein, eds., Die Mendelssohns in Berlin, Berlin 1983, p. 55. On the attitude of the Bekennende Kirche to the Jews see also the revealing essay by Uriel Tal, 'On Modern Lutheranism and the Jews,' in LBI Yearbook XXX (1985), pp. 203-213.

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

44) These views were frequently expressed by Protestant clergymen who were members of the group, or as religious devotions written by apparent laymen. One such essay, signed by Ernst 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 religious form is basically still the Judaism of our time." M, Feburay 1937, p. 11.

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

46) The most important of the these groups had been the Deutschnationale Volkspartei (DNVP), concerning which see John A. Leopold, Alfred Hugenberg, The Radical Nationalist Campaign against the Weimar Republic, New Haven, 1977. As we shall see, many if not most of the Paulus-Bund leaders had either been members 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 interest here to note that in welcoming Hitler's withdrawal from the League of Nations in 1934 and his introduction of conscription in 1935, the Paulus-Bund was in full accord with leaders of the non-Nazi Confessing Church. Pastor Martin Niemöller, for example, gave enthusiastic support to Hitler on both of these issues. See Jürgen 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 "church struggle" 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's collection of Paulus-Bund materials. In its appearance it conforms to that of the other ephemera issued at the time. It would seem to have been circulated to the whole of the Protestant membership but there is no absolute guarantee that it was actually was.

54) One of Spiero's daughters, Mrs. Christiane Ilisch of Berlin, has kindly furnished me with information about her father; she has also sent me some recent published and unpublished commemorative materials; in addition, she has provided me with unpublished autobiographical notes which her father compiled after the war.

55) Radio program devoted to Spiero by Radio Free Berlin, October 20, 1961, script by Gert Dimmer, p. 2. In 1958, 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 and Jews, New York, 1970, pp. 34-60. The Nazi propaganda volume by Theodor Fritsch, Handbuch der Judenfrage, 21st edition, Leipzig 1937, lists Spiero as a "Jew" but gives him credit for his work on Raabe (p. 379). Raabe and Freytag, in turn, are praised for 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, "Deutschlands Schicksal und Schuld," published in 1920, cited in an unpublished biographical study Dr. Sabine Gova, Toulouse, daughter of Spiero's.

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

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

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

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

64) Walk, Das Sonderrecht..., part II, lists the regulations. See also Bernhard Lösener and Friedrich A. Knost, op.cit.

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

66) M, February 1936.

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

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

69) Since the Nuremberg system required information about the religion of a grandparent, it is sometimes said that the Nazis here deliberately violated their oft-repeated principle that "race" rather than religion defines a "Jew." But both the letter and the administration of the law make it clear that a grandparent's religion was looked upon only as a manifestation of his "race." It was thought possible to ascertain religion, and this was thought to be a good though not perfect indicator of race. But what is true without a doubt is that the use of this indicator involved the Nazi authorities in many incongruities. (Cf. item i, Appendix II). On the other hand, since the categories of the "race" theory are probably by their very nature not determinable with any precision, it is hard to see how the framers of the Nuremberg system could have devised a more perfect procedure.

70) Some of my informants from Berlin have told me that it was the custom to refer to one another, informally and ironically, as Mampes. Apparently there is a Berlin-made "half and half" alcoholic beverage that consists of a mixture of two different alcoholic ingredients. Other informants have not encountered this term.

71) M, October 1935.

72) M, December 1935.

73) M, February, 1936. In view of the fact that Mischlinge from this time on -- the Nuremberg system had evolved for their benefit ! -- apparently could attend public schools, one wonders abut the report by Selma Schiratzki, The Rykestrasse 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 school that she describes. But her report is valuable in any case for the light it throws on the anti-Semitic attitudes of these children from "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 Yourselves Bear the Responsibility," M, July 1937. See also documents m 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 possession of Mrs. Chrstiane Ilisch. An additional insight into the incident is afforded by Elsbeth von Ameln, op.cit., pp. 83-84. The author, a "half-Jew," had been a member of the local group in Köln and was asked to represent her group at a national meeting in Berlin in March of 1937. The new statutes were explained to this gathering; the "full Jews" had already been excluded. The author states that she declared her inability to belong to any organziation to which her father could not belong, and she therefore announced her resignation. She also reports that a Herr Mendelssohn, a "quarter-Jew," rose to associate himself with her remarks and similarly left the organization.

83) I have been able to collect the following mimeographed and typed circular letters that were issued by Büro Spiero: the founding announcement, dated March 12, 1937, one page; a follow-up to this, dated April 7, 1937, one page; a three-page report to supporters, dated October 3, 1937; a four-page report, dated April 1938. All these are very modest productions compared to the Paulus-Bund literature. Propst Heinrich Grüber, op.cit., who was in charge of the Protestant charitable work with "non-Aryan Christians," 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. Some additional evidence on this point may be found in the want ad section of the newsletter; for Berlin, the addresses given by the advertisers are almost always in the middle-class sections of 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 doubt also spied upon by the Gestapo. Elsbeth von Ameln, op.cit., p. 84, tells how she discovered one incident of such espionage; and the Reverend Ernest Gordon, a veteran of the group, recalls in correspondence with me (March 17, 1986) the appearance of two mysterious strangers when he led a study group on the Ten Commandments.



Appendix I: The Size of the Partially Jewish Population

The number of partially Jewish people in Germany during the Hitler period continues to be a matter of controversy and speculation. (1) I intend to discuss here three ways of estimating their number: 1) an estimate based on known intermarriage rates since 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 for every two "full Jews," or about 228,000 in 1933; the other methods yield a substantially higher number, viz. about 500,000 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 beginning point of a period of intermarriage; b) the proportion of Jews who marry non-Jews during this period; and c) the length of time of 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 everyone was either "purely" Jewish or "purely" non-Jewish; that the Jews constituted 1% of the population; and that one percent of the Jews married non-Jews. At the end of the first generation, then, making certain simplifying assumptions about equality of fertility, etc., we could say the new "purely" Jewish population would no longer be 1% of the total population because one percent of it had been lost to become "Mischling." It would, in fact, now only constitute 99% of 1%. Similarly, the non-Jewish population (to a much smaller degree) would also have lost a certain proportion to the "Mischlinge." It can be 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 the period between 1750 and 1933 -- we have substantially higher reported values both for Jewish percentage in the population and outmarriage rates. (3) The proportion of Jews went up and down during this period, but averaged approximately 3.5% of the population; the out-marriage rate averaged approximately 13% of all marrying Jews. Applying these parameters to the procedure outlined in the previous paragraph, we find that just under five percent of the Berlin population of 1933 was of Jewish-Christian mixed origins. Since the official census of that year (4) shows that the 160,500 Berlin Jews made up just under 4% of the population, we can estimate the number of partial Jews as roughly 200,500. (5) (6)

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

b) The 1939 census.

The only official census which yielded figures of partial Jews was done in 1939, after the Nuremberg laws defined Jews "racially" (i.e. included the converts to Christianity) and also defined two degrees of "Mischlinge". The new census tabulated separately the categories of "Jew" (three or four Jewish grandparents), "Mischling First Degree" (two Jewish grandparents), and "Mischling Second Degree" (one Jewish grandparent), and for each showed the number of "Glaubensjuden," i.e. members of Jewish communities. (The 1939 census uses this term for what had traditionally been known as "Mosaic" persons, i.e. believers in the Jewish religion. I use the two terms here interchangeably). The total number of "non-Aryan Christians" reported by the 1939 census, for the enlarged Reich of that date, was 138,500.

By 1939 German Jewry had already lost fifty-six percent of its members to emigration (7), and we must assume that the partial Jews as well had emigrated to a substantial extent. In my analysis of the census, I have focused my interest on the numerical relationship between those registered as Jews in a religious sense, and all others whom the government regarded as fully or partially Jewish in the "racial" sense.



Table I

Some Analyses of 1939 Census:
The Ten Largest Jewish Centers

                                                   (1)                                 (2)                                          (3)
                                              % Mosaic*                          Mischling II/Full **                              Jewish Population***

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 communities among all "Jews" and "Mischlinge". The official 1939 term for these "Mosaic" believers was "Glaubensjuden."

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

*** Population of "full Jews", using a "racial" criterion

Source: all figures computed from official census statistics in Statististisches Reichsamt: Statistisches Jahrbuch für das Deutsche Reich, vol. 59 (1942), p. 27


In all interpretations of this 1939 census, it must be kept in mind that while there were penalities for misreporting one's status, there were also very obvious and powerful incentives for failing to report oneself as partially "non-Aryan" if it appeared likely that the truth could not easily be determined from official records. Moreover, in the absence of such complete records, many individuals 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, Table I), which, taken at face value, would lead us to the conclusion that the number of "full Jews" was substantially higher than that of partial Jews. However, it is obvious that it was far more difficult to hide the fact that one was a "Glaubenjude" from the census taker, since "Glaubensjuden" were officially registered as such; no comparably thorough and reliable registers ever existed for "non-Aryans" of Christian religion. While it can be taken as virtually certain that the census' counting of "Glaubensjuden" was well-nigh complete, there is considerable 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 -- than in 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 a reasonable surmise that there may have been as many such people in the larger cities and that, due to the anonymity of large city life, the "non-Aryan Christians" were more often able to escape detection.

The great exception for the country as a whole, and especially for the larger cities, was Hamburg. The "non-Aryan Christians" here actually outnumbered the "Mosaic" Jews (see column 1, Table I); morevoer, the proportionate number of "Mischlinge, Second Degree" (i.e. the "quarter Jews" who would be particularly difficult to trace in official records) was more than twice as high in Hamburg as in the rest of the country, three times as high as in Berlin, and almost five times as high as in Vienna, Frankfurt, and Breslau. (See column 2, same table). While Hamburg may indeed have had a larger proportionate number of such partial Jews, it seems more likely that the reporting for the old 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 in Bremen (9) and especially in Hamburg, unlike the rest of Germany, that records of civil status had been reliably kept since the nineteenth century. It may well be that the Hamburg statistics for partial Jews, far from pointing to an atypical population there, should actually be used as an indicator for the true numbers in all of Germany. If we were to make such an extrapolation from the Hamburg results to the rest of Germany, we would arrive at an estimate of "non-Aryan Christians" very similar to that of our estimate based on intermarriage rates: a number roughly equal to the number of religious-registered Jews, or about 305,000 in 1939.

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



Notes to Appendix I


1) Various authors and institutions have offered varying estimates, usually in accordance with the particular axe they had to grind. Joseph Walk, "Jüdische Schüler an deutschen Schulen in Nazideutschland," Bulletin des Leo Baeck Instituts, vol. 19, no. 56-7 (1980), pp. 101-109, gives a useful compilation of these various estimates. They differ wildly among 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 wirtschaftliche Struktur der Juden," in Werner E. Mosse, ed., Entscheidungsjahr 1932, Tübingen 1966; Arthur Ruppin, The Jews in the Modern World, London, 1934, p. 319; Encyclopædia Judaica, Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 4, pp. 639, ff.

4) There were two censuses during the Nazi years, one in 1933 and the other in 1939. I use the official figures here of the Statististisches Reichsamt: Statistisches Jahrbuch für das Deutsche 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, Aussondern im Nationalsozialismus. Berlin, 1984

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

6) Technical note: to calculate the proportion of people of "mixed blood" in the population at any one time, given information on 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 the initial 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 proportion of marrying Jews who marry non-Jews for the period beginning with Tn. Similarly, cn is the proportion of non-Jews who marry other than full non-Jews in that period; it is here assumed to be jnJn/C n.  t{n} is the time period between focal years, measured in generations, with a generation assumed to be 29 years. If we assume Mo = 0 (and thus   Co = 1 - Jo), we may recursively calculate the M's and C's by formulas (1) and (2) above.

7) This figure is the result of some calculation because both the definition of "Jew" and the territority of the German Reich had changed between the two censuses. The number of Jews in 1933 was 499,682. For 1939, I have here counted only the "Glaubensjuden" (see above) from among both "racial Jews" and "Mischlinge," and I have excluded 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 small size of the Jewish community (722), were even more extreme than those of Hamburg: 46.9% "Mosaic," a ration of "Mischlinge II to "Full Jews" of 0.38.



Appendix II: Documents (Translations)


Note: Emphases and parentheses are as in original. Material in brackets and in footnotes is supplied here; it consists of either items from the original German text which are shown to carify the translation, or some other explanation.

a) Circular letter (excerpts), Aug. 1933, from Gustav Friedrich, Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens 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 newspapers about the formation of the Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc. The main purpose of this organization arises out of the pressing necessity to bind together, without exception, all fate-comrades [Schicksalsgenossen] into one benevolent community.

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

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

The Reich League has been recognized for its positive disposition toward the new Germany, as well as for its principle of the Leader [Führerprinzip]. We have freed ourselves in every way from the 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 us must seek, to the best of his abilities, to contribute to the well-being of today's Germany. Our distress in hard times can only be overcome by deeds, not with phrases or ideologies....

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

Whoever believes that modifications can be made in the strong foundations of the new Reich, or even that the well established present form of government can in any way be changed in the foreseeable future, is stupid and foolish...

The [Weimar republic's] Marxist government has given ample cause for strong measures [by the new government]. Let us not be surprised that the injustices that were done to today's leading ethnic comrades (Volksgenossen) have caused resentment and justified anger to play a dominant role in the regulations that so harshly affect us German Christians of non-Aryan or not purely Aryan origin. We, especially the especially hard-hit nationalist German 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 have issued an SOS when they felt themselves harmed, and the Jews of the whole world immediately came to their aid. We German Christians cannot 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 profess here openly; equally openly I declare myself as the strongest opponent of the Jewish, wrecking, dissension- and poison-sowing elements and pledge to fight them with all means at our disposal.

With respectfully loyal German greeting [Mit verehrungsvollem treu deutschen Gruss]


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

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

.... The authorities realize that we recognize the nationalist government as such without reservation. For there is nobody among us who would not welcome this government's struggle against the over-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, to hold to that. I can also reveal to you that nobody is admitted to our ranks about whose political activities and convictions there could be even the slightest doubt. A further guarantee for the soundness of our membership lies in the fact that membership lists are being submitted to the Gestapo for verification [dass die Mitgliederlisten zwecks Prüfung der Geheimen Staatspolizei eingereicht werden].

Ladies and Gentlemen, as you know yourselves, the Jews, both in Germany and abroad, have numerous facilities that help their own fate-comrades with great energy and substantial funds. But who helps the Christian non-Aryan, him whose mother or grandmother was a Jewess and whose father or grandfather had already become a Christian ? ...

We do not wish to contradict anyone concerning the matter of race, but we maintain, with deepest conviction, that in addition to the 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 express this even more clearly. Un-German is he who, from childhood, has accepted the Talmud as guide to his action and thinking; German is he who has been told German fairy tales as a child, who, in school, has imbibed the spirit of Schiller and Bismarck and Frederick the Great, who, as adult, has experienced the works of the great Germans 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, registration no. 7278

Orientation: German nationalist and patriotic. [Deutschbewusst und heimattreu]. Standing firm in German and Christian belief and culture.

Organization: Constructed according to the principle of individual leadership [Führergrundsatz] in harmony with the regulations of the government (see statutes). Division into district and local groups. Full responsibility to the chairman, who is advised by a Council.

Purpose: Organization of all Christian-German state citizens of non-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 members and their children; f) welfare assistance in collaboration with existing agencies; g) contact with existing sports organizations. Organization of the members for social purposes through lectures, theatrical presentations and similar events; mutual exchange of views, and thereby spiritual support. Maintenance of the German-thinking, German-feeling Christian non-Aryans in the community of German ethnic comrades [Volsgenossen] (2)

d) Appeal to join, Fall 1933

Christian-German Non-Aryans ! Do not allow current difficulties to discourage you ! Do not forget that you were German, are German, and remain German ! Reflect upon yourselves ! Consider that nobody can rob you of your German nature, your German feeling, your German sensitivities; you have inherited all this from your fathers and have cultivated it since childhood ! Organize yourselves in the organization that has been designed for you and is authorized by the government, the Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan 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 family members. The individual is nothing, in closed ranks we are strong. All together we are a communion of millions !


e) Profession of Faith, Fall 1933 (printed sheet)

We believe:

We are Germans.

Therefore we love Germany as our only home.

Therefore we profess our faith, like all Germans, in that government that the German people have created for themselves. But we also know that Germany's future demands the willing respect and utilization of personalities and values that have contributed to a unified German 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 government that has power over us." (3)

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

Therefore we must, like all those of true Christian faith, reject all 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 the Jewish people and proclaimed the Gospel first to the Jews.

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

Therefore we feel with joyful pride that our steadfast engagement for nation and fatherland shows our true German and Christian nature.



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

...§ 5. Membership may be requested by all those over 18 years of age who are male or female German subjects of non-Aryan or not purely Aryan descent and who belong to a Christian religious community 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 period of one year....

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

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

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

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

§ 19. Decisions of the general meeting are to be reduced to writing and must be signed by the chairman and one member of the Council....

§ 21. A member may be expelled from the organization by the chairman with the agreement of the majority of the Council; a) if he acts contrary to the interests or aspirations of the organization; b) if he has been convicted of a crime by a 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 the general meeting or by the chairman in agreement with the majority of the Council.

§ 23. In case of dissolution, remaining funds after payment of debts are to be given to the German Red Cross.

Berlin, August 23, 1933



g) Circular to Protestant members, December 1, 1933; source: mimeographed version.

To our Evangelical Members !

A struggle has erupted in the German Evangelical Church in which the overwhelming number of "evangelical Christians," joined also by a part of the "German Christians," regard the introduction of any racial distinctions in the church as incompatible with the teachings of Christ and the principles of the Gospel. More and more the thought establishes itself that evangelic Christianity is incompatible with a folkic philosophy [mit völkischer Weltanschauung]. This holds for the congregation as well as for the teaching office. In the view of the current overwhelming majority of the Evangelical Church, neither the formation of "Jewish Christian" congregations nor the application of the Aryan paragraph to the clergy is scriptural.

It goes without saying that the Reich League, encompassing as it does the non-Aryan Christians, is thoroughly and completely of the same opinion; and this out of the deepest religious conviction of its members. In our membership, some of which has professed Christianity for generations, there is and will never be a thought other than that the holy baptism has dissolved any worldly racial distinctions in the new communion of Christian faith. (Cf. Gal. 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.") (4) This alone is Christian according to our deepest conviction, and this alone will persist as Christian doctrine. In this battle of faith we are of good cheer. We know, on the basis of several conversations we have had, that we are at one with influential men in the Evangelical Church, and we have not hesitated to communicate our Christian convictions 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 Reich League of non-Aryan Christians, June 1, 1935, published as printed supplement to circular letter number 3 of the Leipzig branch, dated June 10, 1935 (excerpts)

The Leipzig branch was founded in September 1934. ...

In general, the difficulties that faced us were similar to those of other branches. But perhaps the territory of the Leipzig district, which includes Halle, was actually more difficult. Relatively few non-Aryans and non-Aryan Christians live 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 our district to declaring themselves as such. Objections, both of principle and imagination, were voiced. We non-Aryan Christians and our Reich League were suspect: to some as anti-Semites, to others as a club of "baptized Jews." Some demanded a close relationship to Jewish organizations, others a conspicuous distance from them. Some demanded a profession of Judaism, others a clear profession of the opposite. ... But if one looked behind what was said, one discovered very soon that these were rationalizations for a refusal to come to us. Actually it was occupational and social motives that made the difference. We have understanding for the occupational considerations, but not for the behavior of those non-Aryans who simply do not wish to recognize their own origins and who will do everything to avoid recognizing us and our fate-comrades in public [... alles daran setzen, uns und unsere Schicksalsgenossen nicht, wie man zu sagen pflegt, "unter den Linden grüssen" zu müssen]....

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

We can say thankfully that in addition to the membership there are persons of note who, with a laudable sense of solidarity, stand with us spiritually and give us valuable help with both advice and deeds....

As is well known, our members come predominantly from intellectual circles and the business class. Members of the intellectual professions are, after all, hardest hit. But in no way does this mean that we value only members of such professions or of the professional or social "elite." On the contrary, we see it as an important task to include non-Aryan Chritians from among the so-called simple people; we know that in those circles, too, there are numerous non-Aryans. Such people are already members of the Reich League and our branch. We are particularly happy to have them. In get-togethers with us, they surely will not feel disadvantaged, let alone lonesome. We are all fate-comrades and know no differences among us. We only know the common aim, to be helpful to one another and to give one another spiritual strength....

It goes without saying that conditions are more difficult for our group than for the Jewish organizations. The Jewish non-Aryans are easily reached; the religious congregations themselves provide contact. The characteristic trait, yes, the typical trait of non-Aryan Christians is that they cannot easily be reached and -- as already described above -- that they do not like to reached and that in fact they can be contacted only with great difficulty. The non-Aryan Christian is being excluded from a communion to which he has heretofore belonged. It must and will appear to Jews as more natural to be designated as such than to non-Aryan Christians who, as is predominantly the case in our membership, have been without social or spiritual contact with Judaism for two to three generations. Many -- and unfortunately this is often sarcastically put into question -- many did not know about their origins until they constructed their family trees and examined the documents. So we realize very well that we shall never equal the Jewish organziations in strength, but strength alone does not guarantee impact and success. ... We are particularly happy to report that, especially in this last period, more and more well-known personalities have come to us; heretofore a certain hesitation kept them away. No less than Alice Salomon and Herr Senate President Caspary, Berlin, have joined our Council. The famous educator, Susanne Engelmann, has also joined our Reich League ... (5)

... The question of our military service has now been essentially clarified. (6) I use this opportunity to stress that we non-Aryan Christians, in our unshakingly proud commitment to Germany and Christianity, and despite bitter disappointments, wish to and indeed will meet our finest obligation, that of serving Germany weapon in hand ....

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


...Question: What can be said about the marriage of a half-Aryan with a girl who also has one Aryan parent, but whose Aryan mother converted to Judaism so that the girl was also raised as a Jew ? What can be said, further, about the children of this marriage ?

Answer: The girl, actually half-Aryan, is not a Mischling but is without any doubt regarded as Jewish in the sense of the law because she belonged to the Jewish religious community on the deadline date, i.e. September 15, 1935; belated conversion does not alter this status in any way. The husband -- a Mischling First Degree -- is likewise regarded as a Jew since he married a statutory Jew.
The children of this marriage are in any case regarded as Jews since they have three Jewish grandparents (two by race, one by religion). This would not have been different if the mother had left the Jewsih community before the deadline. She herself would then have been a Mischling, but the children would still have had three Jewish grandparents. In other words, it is quite possible that children who are regarded as Jews may result from a marriage in which both patners are half-Aryan.

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

Answer: The man is a Jew according to the Nuremberg Laws because of the one grandparent who was of the Jewish religion; this grandparent is assumed to have been a full Jew and this assumption cannot be contested. So this 62% Jew has three full Jewish grandparents. On the other hand, if the half-Aryan grandfather had been Christian by birth, he would then have been a non-full-Jew and would not have counted at all for this calculation; his grandson would have been a Mischling First Degree....

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

Answer: The application would have to be directed to the Reich Chancellor, but there is hardly a chance of success. Lösener's Commentary states explicitly: "The decision of parents to introduce their child to this (i.e. Jewish) religious community must be regarded as decisive also for the racial status of the child." (page 22). By the way, it is not true that a change of religion without the parents' permission can only be effected after the twenty-first birthday. Paragraph 5 of the Law of Religious Instruction for Children, dated July 15, 1921, provides expressly that, upon completion of the fourteenth year of life, the decision concerning religious faith belongs to the child....


j) "Work of the organization around the country. District East Prussia." By Professor (retired) Dr. Paul Stettiner. (Excerpts). Source: as h, vol. 3, no. 9, September 1936, pp. 72-73.


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

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

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

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

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

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

There are English and French lessons, taught by an English and a French woman ... An excellent gymnastics teacher gives lessons for the ladies without fee .. . Every month until the end of May, musical evenings provided proven means for bringing our circle together. 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; shown here are the changes from the 1933 document (f). Source: printed sheet.

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

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

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

The chairman makes decisions on admissions to membership.

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

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

Signed: Friedrich Karl Lesser


l) "A hopeful Beginning," report of 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 strictly an interest group. Whereas the members of the old Paulus-Bund were held together by ties of religion and the religious factor was therefore by far the most important, the present members of the organization are bound to one another because they have achieved a special status through the Nuremberg laws. A special status not only vis-à-vis the purely German-blooded German nationals, but above all also vis-à-vis those who, though Christian through baptism, have been characterized as racially Jews by the legislation. It is obvious that because of this reorganization the religious emphasis of our group must recede. If members no longer come to us only because of religious ties, but because of other reasons, well, then the consideration of these other reasons must take precedence. The religion of each member is his personal business. The religious needs of the members is primarily the responsibility of the churches while our work concerns more their political and economic needs.

From this it obviously does not follow that we would in any way utilize the law to play politics. That would be completely outside the 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 say only that we must seek to see to it that the racial legislation of the Reich, insofar as it is favorable to us, becomes generally recognized and applied, and that we are everywhere accorded the place to which we have a right under the Nuremberg laws and the various regulations; and I can say to my great joy that this is happening more and more....

It must surely be clear to everyone that an organization which includes only a fraction of those who, according to its statutes, should belong, characterizes itself by that fact as weak... Therefore it is the duty of each member to recruit on behalf of the organization, above all those who still keep away for reasons that I deliberately don't mention here but that you well understand....


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


Editor: So, dear Madam, you do not wish to join 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 myself am pure Aryan -- so a Mischling organization surely has nothing for us.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lady: You won't mind my being frank ? ... It's because of my husband, he might misunderstand the fact that the law regards him as a Jew ... he would think that I am joining an 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 membership in the Paulus-Bund is concerned, this basic concept be applied.

Lady: But I find that for me and for many in my position, the application 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 can we regard consequences that arise from the general course of national development 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 present leadership of our organization has introduced a change in membership requirements just for the sake of its personal amusement. The truth is that the governmental authorities, applying the existing laws quite logically, have decreed the change ...

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


The Nuremberg laws have designated the Mischlinge as a special group among German nationals. It has been often and clearly enough explained that they constitute a special group and that they must learn to adjust to the status to which they have been assigned. But this does not yet suffice. We still must learn more. The ongoing work in our organization brings us into contact with the most varied set of individuals and character types from among the circles that belong with us. Many still like to misunderstand the basic facts. Reference here is made to those who believe that they can occupy a special status all for themselves and who therefore decline to join with us as members. The number of people who think this is larger than one would assume, given the clarity of the situation. But if one seeks the cause of this type of thinking and its resulting rejecting behavior, it is always the same: an egotistical thinking which either cannot or will not look further than the tip of one's own nose.

The truth is that nobody can deny the fact that we are now all in the same boat. We did not place ourselves there, we were placed. The authority of the state is in the nature of all government-regulated life; nothing can alter that. Nothing can alter the necessity for accepting the discipline of obeying the laws that have been promulgated by the authority of the state. In the same way, nothing can alter the necessity of having everyone of us recognize that he has been placed with us. Yes, to be consistent one must go even further and say that it would actually be a sign of faulty state-political discipline if one of us were to attempt to assume a special status on his own, or if he tried in any way whatever to keep himself aloof from the status which the state has assigned to him together with us all. How can one overlook the fact that this discipline is the first and one of the most important signs of a positive disposition to any ordered, government-regulated life ? It is therefore amazing almost to the point of disbelief that it is precisely those who pretend to a particularly positive disposition toward the state who desire a special status for themselves and who thereby violate the discipline of a state citizen.

They practice exactly the opposite of what should be the first consequence of this professed positive disposition. The first such consequence, naturally, should be a declaration on their part that they will proceed to where the law of the state places them, and right now that is with us....

As soon as the most elementary duty of a state citizen has led the individual to proceed to that place to which he has been assigned, he must realize that he is not alone there. Beyond the forced nature of the communion in this assigned status, a closer unity is necessary. But there is no such realization if the individual concerns himself only with himself instead of seeing himself as part of the community to which in fact he does belong. ... The state itself, which has established this community in its present form, is interested in seeing that this community receives that to which it is entitled, and the state itself therefore provides the 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 himself in possession of his rights, but he does not see the necessity to join an organization that would preserve these rights. But here he thinks egotistically. And that is wrong for two reasons. ... In fact nobody stands by himself.... The optimism which leads him to stand aloof from us is, so to speak, directed backward, it is based on too few bad experiences, it is grounded in the past, it overlooks the possibilities of the future in which decisions can be made about him, any day, not as an individual but as part of our community.

He overlooks that he carries within himself, so to speak, the symptoms of a disease, and he fails to effect the only possible preventive action that could at least attempt to keep this disease one day from becoming acute. And secondly he completely forgets that he has responsibilities not only for himself. No person is responsible only for himself or has duties only toward himself. All people have responsibilities toward the community to which they belong. First of all, this is the community of his nation which is represented by the state. Now the state to which we belong and 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 District group Rhein-Rhur of the League 1937, Inc., held November 13, 1937 in 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, Herr Bernhard Bennedik (12), had invited the members and friends of the organization for Saturday, November 13 ...

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

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

On March 1, 1937, i.e. before reorganization, 390 members. On March 15, 1937, i.e. after reorganization, 160 members. On September 30, 1937, 329 members. This means a gain, which one should not underestimate, of 169 members, i.e. a strengthening of 117 percent....

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

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

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

After a loyal profession to the German ethnic community, Herr Bennedik said ... [that] the most difficult problem perhaps is that of mixed marriages in which there are minor children, in which the German-blooded parent is to exercise a proxy [i.e. join the organization in his name on behalf of his minor Mischling child -- W.C.]. This proxy is then easily interpreted -- understandably but wrongly -- to the effect that the marriage partner [i.e. the Jewish partner -- W.C.] is somehow deserted. ... But one can only speak of desertion if because of one's action or failure to act the other side is directly or indirectly harmed. But this is not at all the case in taking out membership in our organization. .... The position of those who are Jews in the eyes of the law is clear and unequivocal. Nothing is altered in this status, from the point of view of the state, if the father or the mother joins us. The position of the child, however, is not so clear. We hope and we wish that it will be posible to influence the child's life chances in a positive direction. It is our organization, alone and exclusively, that is in a position to do this. ... You can see from all this how important it is for us to make our relationship to Judaism very clear, and that this clarity can only be achieved by a clear-cut distinction between family and state. When a mother joins our organization, she makes a declaration of what she wishes and aspires for her child in the framework of the state, and her relationship within the family has nothing whatever to do with this....


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

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

"(1) According to § 25, Part 2 of the German Civil Service Law of January 26, 1937 (RGBl. I Page 39), marriage of Mischlinge Second Grade with civil servants may be authorized. However, the required authorization procedure by three Higher Reich Authorities -- § 25 Part 3 -- indicates that such cases would have to be very exceptional. (2) Because of the special position of the police in the civil service, especially in consideration of the close connection between police and SS, I decline to grant such authorization, 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. (League 1937, In Liquidation)]


In accordance with an edict of the supervising authority dated August 10, 1939, the League 1937 has been dissolved and thereby placed in a state of liquidation. The former chairman is the liquidator of the organization and therefore must transact all business related to the liquidation.

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

In order to effect the liquidation as smoothly as possible, it is urgently essential that members remit any dues that may be in arrears for the period inclusive of August. The dues obligation ceases beginning September.

I thank all members for the confidence they have shown me as chairman and for their loyalty to the organization. I wish them all the best 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, , Volksgenosse is a Nazi, anti-Semitic term that suggests that while Jews may be citizens of the state, they cannot be German "ethnic comrades." For a discussion of the term, see Christoph Cobet, Der Wortschatz des 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 seem to be a piece of elegant irony.

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

(3) The reference is to Romans 13:1 in Luther's translation; the endorsement of the powers that be is even stronger here 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 makes reference to "Gal. 2:28."

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

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

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

(8) The Nuremberg laws provided for provisional Reich citizenship to 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 allows for membership of the non-Jewish but not the Jewish close relative of the Mischlinge.

(10) A Protestant Church agency.

(11) The Catholic relief agency.

(12) Herr Bennedik can be identified by a small display advertisement which he frequently placed in the newsletter: "3B -- Bernhard Bennedik Bürobedarf, Köln, Moltkestrasse 57"; i.e. he seems to have owned a stationery business. See, for example, M, June 1938.



Click here to go to home page of Werner Cohn



Send an e-mail to Werner Cohn This e-mail link may not work for you if you use a web-based e-mail service. If so, please use my direct e-mail address as follows:


 Have you heard about my Early Companions ?