The author examines the relationship between the Bibelforscher (the German name for the Jehovah’s Witnesses at the beginning of the Third Reich), the Nazis and the Jews, with particular reference to the 1933 Berlin-Wilmersdorf Convention, which approved the controversial ‘Declaration of Facts’. After outlining the development of the Witnesses under Rutherford’s leadership, it is argued that his statements about Jews may not have been ‘politically correct’ by present-day standards, but constituted an attempt to place them within the Watch Tower organisation’s views of salvation-history. His position is not wholly negative, and accords the Jews a place in the after-life. The Declaration was an unsuccessful attempt to gain sympathy from the Nazi regime; it did not confront Nazism, as some apologists have claimed, but it did not condemn the persecution of the Jews. The Declaration must be seen within the context of the period, which was before the Holocaust had begun, and hence it was more plausible to regard the Jews’ plight as part of the ‘fiery trial’ to which they were presumed to be subjected. While Rutherford made derogatory comments about some Jews, one has to be extremely cautious of applying the term ‘antisemitic’ to his ideas.
The purpose of this presentation is to examine some issues surrounding the imminent conflict between the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Nazis when Hitler came to power in 1933. The Witnesses come under a variety of criticisms, not always mutually compatible, regarding their relationship with the Nazis and with the Jews. They have been variously criticised for initially ingratiating themselves to the Third Reich by expressions of support for Hitler, and for allegedly antisemitic statements to dissociate themselves from the much-hated German Jews. Conversely, their leader Joseph Franklin Rutherford has been criticised for needlessly provoking Nazi persecution by making inflammatory statements, and the Bibelforscher (as they were called in Germany at the time) have been alleged to bear apparent similarities with the Jews, thus inviting and aggravating the persecution that followed. I want to focus on the year 1933, being the year in which Hitler assumed office as Chancellor of Germany. It is also the year of the Bibelforscher’s much-criticised Berlin-Wilmersdorf Convention, which included Rutherford’s Wilmersdorf Declaration, more commonly referred to as the ‘Declaration of Facts’, allegedly compromising the Watchtower organisation with Hitler’s regime.
It seems difficult to achieve rational discussion on the issues surrounding the Bibelforscher in 1933. In all, there are three standpoints that can be identified: (1) Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (WBTS) sources and the testimony of members who lived through the period, particularly Simone Liebster; (2) ex-member testimony, especially that of M. James Penton; and (3) neutral academic writers such as Holocaust historian Christine King and John Conway. Critics of the WBTS repeatedly accuse them of rewriting history to suit their own ends, while the WBTS refuses to address Penton’s arguments, claiming that since he is an ex-member he must have an axe to grind, and that his views cannot be of interest to them. Penton charges the Witnesses with wilfully falsifying evidence, and accuses King of naivety for her large measure of support for their account of events. I do not wish to comment further on the largely ad hominem arguments that beset the issues, but rather aim to unravel the events that occurred, and to evaluate the Witnesses’ stance on the Third Reich and the Jews.
Some background information on the Jehovah’s Witnesses may be useful at this point. The Watchtower organisation had commenced a globalisation process at the turn of the twentieth century. Founder-leader Charles Taze Russell had toured Europe in the last decade of the nineteenth century, and a German office of the WBTS was opened in 1902. Russell’s organisation was known as the International Bible Students’ Association, and it grew steadily in Germany, where it claimed a total membership of 25,000 by the 1930s. Joseph Franklin (‘Judge’) Rutherford assumed office in 1916, and began to introduce the more distinctive and revolutionary features that are now associated with the Witnesses. These included door-to-door work (commenced in 1927), the dissociation with mainstream Christianity, the refusal to celebrate festivals such as Christmas and Easter, and the notion that earthly governments belonged to Satan, hence the prohibition on saluting national flags and singing national anthems. Rutherford and a number of other leaders were imprisoned in the USA in 1918 for subversive activities. These consisted largely on Rutherford’s attacks on mainstream clergy, whom he regarded as the Antichrist (
Kingdom News, no.3, 1 May 1918), and for encouraging refusal of conscription in the war. Matters were brought to a head by the publication of Russell’s posthumous
The Finished Mystery in 1917, which mercilessly attacked the clergy. Whether this volume faithfully reflected Russell’s ideas is debateable: it was compiled by Clayton J. Woodworth and George H. Fisher, with Rutherford’s oversight.
In 1931, Rutherford announced at the IBSA convention at Columbus, Ohio, that the Bible Students were to be given a new name, ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’. The WBTS organisation had not yet completed the globalisation process for which it is renowned today, and hence the German members continued to use their old name, Bibelforscher (Bible Students). It is in this context that the Bibelsforscher’s controversies within the Third Reich occur. I want to comment to two issues, one specific and one general: first, the 1933 Berlin Convention; and second, the allegedly antisemitic statements of Rutherford and the Bibelforscher.
The details surrounding the Berlin Convention continue to be debated. The event is noteworthy not only for its Declaration, but because it is alleged that, when attendees arrived, they found the stadium ‘bedecked’ with swastika symbols, and the Bibelforscher continued with their proceedings without removing them. Further, it is claimed, the Convention began with the singing of the German national anthem.
