home and am therefore not unacquainted with the conditions and problems which arise in this connection. It Naturally, everybody who sees such pitiful men, thinks over and over again "Would it not be better to put an end to such an existence? It has no value for itself and means a heavy burden on the relatives." When the consequences of the blockade made themselves felt during the Great War and many patients died of tuberculosis and other illnesses fostered by malnutrition—the number of funerals which I had to hold amounted normally to about 20, but increased to 50 in 1917—everybody accepted this as a natural consequence of the war and as a divine ordinance, and one could be thankful in many cases that the end had come. is, however, quite a different matter to take steps to bring about this end through human intervention. Many patients are conscious of their existence and position to a much greater extent than healthy people assume; in many cases, when one believes that they have not heard or have not understood, words addressed to them, it transpires afterwards that they have in fact done so, but were not able to react as a healthy person would have reacted. Many are distinctly sensitive as to whether they are treated lovingly or roughly by their doctor and nurse. Now put yourself into the mental position of a patient who draws the conclusion from all sorts of signs that something is to happen to him, who, maybe, is even subjected to force in order to make him board the transport-and you will be convinced that this is wrong, as God's will is interfered with and human dignity violated thereby. The decision as to when the life of a human sufferer should be terminated rests with Almighty God, according to whose inscrutable decision a completely healthy and valuable man is taken away before his time in one case, and an incapacitated man languishes on for decades in another. I can well understand that, in view of these and of many other facts which cannot be explained rationally, many people reject belief in God and adopt a creed of blind fate in its place; but I cannot understand that a party which implicitly rejects atheism and which has selected and introduced the term "believers in God" for those outside the Christian faith, should approve of and carry out a violation of God's sovereign right, as is the case in the treatment of the patients of the institutions. The Fuehrer has only recently called for prayer for the fighting troops and for humble thanksgiving for the glorious victory over France; can we not also entrust the lives of our suffering compatriots to this God, and is it not his will that we look after them while he lets them live? Here I come to the second reason why the sensibilities of our 1 people take offence at these measures. Pre-Christian Antiquity already laid down the principle: res sacra miser, the unfortunate person is a holy thing. Christianity has always made it its duty to look after the sick and suffering, because of Him, of whom it is said: He bore our sickness and took our pains upon Himself. As opposed to the roughness of primitive paganism, man was treated as a human being and not as an animal. The progresses in the field of medicine were utilised for mental patients as well in the institutions of the Christian labour of love. And it is actually specialists in institutions of the Inner Mission and in state institutions who have made considerable progress. I have often admired the conscientiousness and patience of institution psychiatrists who, while showing a much smaller percentage of successful cures as compared to other doctors, nevertheless treat every patient as something of value entrusted to them. How hard it must be for these men to allow and to defend measures contrary to the whole tradition of their profession, that are directed towards the opposite of the humane attitude which, in addition to scientific accuracy, forms the honour and dignity of the medical profession! Perhaps, however, I shall receive the reply: the hundreds of thousands of physically and mentally incapacitated persons are too heavy a burden economically and financially for the German people who have now undertaken such big tasks; the relatives must make their sacrifices, as the families of those killed at the front have made much heavier sacrifices! Against this one must say that a people fights for its existence, and that no one is too good to risk his life in this battle for existence that we may accept as God's will and commandment, that, however, the weak and defenseless should be destroyed, not because they represent a danger to us, but because we are tired of feeding them and caring for them-that is contrary to God's commandment. Do we not praise our soldiers because, when they have done their duty against the armed enemy, they mercifully look after the unarmed, especially women, children, wounded and sick, and do not consider them burdens which they thus impose on themselves and the nation. It would indeed be possible to entertain the thought: we have no reason to spare an inimical nation which has done us as much harm as the French. But this thought would be worty of a Clemenceau, not of a German. It is no doubt very painful for the parents if among their children there is one who is mentally deficient; but they will let this child feel their whole love as long as God allows it to live; contrary treatment, which of course does occur also, is condemned by public sentiment. Why? Because our people are guided by the Christian way of thought in all these questions. And as the Party stands implicitly on the basis of a "positive Christianity" and as, again, it implicitly and especially wishes the ethical attitude of the Christian, above all the love of one's neighbor, to be understood under this "positive Christianity," it really cannot approve the measures directed to destroy life. We therefore find it quite understandable that those circles of the Party whose voices can be heard chiefly on the "Schwarze Korps" wish to do away not only with church Christianity but with all Christianity because it represents an obstacle to such measures. They thus confirm the old and frequent experience that a break with the Christian faith also carries with it a break with Christian ethics. But anyhow, the Fuehrer and the Party have so far stood on the platform of positive Christianity which regards charity towards suffering compatriots and their humane treatment as a matter of course. If, however, a serious matter like the care of hundreds of thousands of suffering compatriots in need of care is dealt with solely from the point of view of momentary advantage and if a brutal extermination of these compatriots is decided on, then the final stroke is added to a fateful development and Christanity is given its final conge as a vital power determining the individual and communal life of the German people. But paragraph 24 of the Party program is then also untenable. The claim that only confessional Christianity, not Christianity in itself, is being fought against, is inoperative here; for all confessions are agreed that man and nation have to bear as a burden imposed by God the burden imposed on them by the presence of people who are in need of care and may not eliminate these people by killing them. It is only with honour that I can think that things will continue as they have begun. The possible advantage of these measures will be more and more outweighed, the longer they go on, by the damage they will cause. What conclusion will the young generation draw for private life, when it realizes that human life is no longer sacred to the State? Cannot every outrage be excused on the grounds that the elimination of another was of advantage to the person concerned? There can be no stopping once one starts down this slope. God does not permit people to mock Him; he can turn what we believe we have gained on one side to harm and a curse on the other. Either the National Socialist State also must recognise the limits which God has laid down for it, or it will favour a moral decline which will also carry with it the decline of the State. I can imagine, Mr. Minister, that this protest will be regarded 1 as embarrassing. Hardly dare I express the hope, either, that my voice will be heard. If, nevertheless, I have made this declaration, I have done so primarily because the relations of the compatriots affected expect such action from the leaders of a church. I am also, however, moved by the thought that this action may perhaps give rise to a serious examination and to the abandonment of this path. Dixi et salvari animam meam! Heil Hitler! Yours faithfully, [Signed] Dr. WURM. Wuerttemberg Evangelical Provincial Church. Stuttgart, 23rd August 1940. To Reich Minister of Justice, Gr. Guertner, Dear Reich Minister of Justice, Much comment has been aroused by the measures-directed at the elimination of lives of no value to the community-which are being carried out at the moment on a large scale in certain state institutions, especially in Wuerttemberg, in Castle Grafeneck, village of Dapfen, Muensingen district. I have therefore directed the letter of which I enclose a copy to the Reich Minister of the Interior. I request you, Mr. Reich Minister of Justice, to interest yourself, from your sphere of work, in this matter, which, if continued in the present manner contrary to the legal measures for the protection of the eugenic health of the German people, must shatter the people's confidence in justice as much as their trust in the doctor as a helper of men. Heil Hitler! Yours sincerely, [signed] D. Wurm. Stuttgart, the town of the Germans abroad Wuerttemberg Evangelical Provincial Church COPY To the Reich Minister of the Interior Dr. Frick Dear Reich Minister, On the 19th July I sent you a letter about the systematic extermination of lunatics, feeble-minded and epileptic persons. Since then this practice has reached tremendous proportions: recently the inmates of old-age homes have also been included. The basis for this practice seems to be the opinion that in an efficient nation there should be no room for weak and frail people. It is evident from the many reports which we are receiving that the people's feelings are being badly hurt by the measures ordered and that a feeling of legal insecurity is spreading which is regrettable from the point of view of national and state interests. If the leadership of the state is convinced that it is a question of an inevitable war measure, why does it not issue a decree with legal force, which would at least have this good point that official quarters would not have to seek refuge in lies? But if-as can be assumed with certainty-Germany is in a position to feed these members of the nation as well, why then these rigorous steps? Is it necessary that the German nation should be the first civilised nation to return, in the treatment of weak people, to the habits of primitive races? Does the Fuehrer know about this matter? Has he approved it? I beg you not to leave me without a reply in this tremendously serious matter. Heil Hitler Yours faithfully [signed] Dr. Wurm Wuerttemberg Evangelical Provincial Church Stuttgart, the town of the Germans abroad, To the Reich Minister of Justice Dr. Guertner Wilhelmstr. 65 Dear Reich Minister, Permit me to inform you of a second letter which I have sent to the Reich Minister of the Interior about the systematic extermination of lunatics, weak and frail compatriots. This matter is reaching the proportions of a great danger and a scandal. Dear Reich Minister, I would be very grateful if you would give me the opportunity to give you a more detailed account and to show you documents concerning this matter, next Wednesday the 11th September. Please inform Dean Keppler, Berlin, N.W.87, Holsteiner Ufer 16, Tel. 392950, if and when the reception is possible. Heil Hitler Yours faithfully, [signed] Dr. Wurm |