Christianity and the Nazi Movement: A Response

Abstract

To varying degrees the contributors to this symposium on The Holy Reich challenge both its arguments and its findings. Taking issue with its methodology, pointing to what they believe are fundamental mistakes, errors, and other shortcomings, they argue the work reflects tendentiousness and a lack of originality; a refusal to explore countervailing evidence or to acknowledge prior work. The author analyses these critiques comparatively and from multiple perspectives, and offers rejoinders point by point. What appear to be comprehensive and authoritative critiques are, upon closer inspection, a series of misinterpretations, and too often (as is demonstrated through close scrutiny of their arguments and evidence) distortions and fabrications. As is demonstrated, some of the respondents do not actually address the evidence provided in the book, while others extrapolate from minor points of evidence and analysis to cast unfounded doubts upon the soundness of the author's scholarship. Most problematically, their attempts to provide their own countervailing empiricism are frequently sloppy or simply wrong. The author compares the respondents and finds revealing patterns that help the reader understand the nature of their frequently groundless criticisms.