Skip to main content

Charity or Complicity?: From Holocaust Memory to Middle Eastern Injustice. A Critical Look at the EKD

 


Introduction and History of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD):

The Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD) is a federation of 20 Lutheran, Reformed, and United Protestant regional churches. It is one of the largest Christian organizations in Germany, representing approximately 19.7 million members as of recent estimates. The EKD serves as an umbrella organization rather than a centralized authority, with each regional church maintaining autonomy in governance and theology.



Historical Background:

1. Formation (1948):

The EKD was founded in 1948 in the aftermath of World War II to unify Germany’s Protestant churches, which were fragmented due to historical denominational divisions and the challenges of the Nazi era.

2. World War II and the Nazi Era:

During the Third Reich, parts of the German Protestant Church aligned with Nazi ideology, forming the "German Christians" movement. However, other groups, such as the Confessing Church, resisted Nazi interference in church affairs.

3. Post-War Reconstruction and Reconciliation:

After the war, the EKD committed itself to rebuilding Germany’s moral and spiritual foundation, addressing its role during the Holocaust, and fostering reconciliation, particularly with Jewish communities.

4. Modern Role:

Today, the EKD is actively involved in social justice, interfaith dialogue, and humanitarian efforts. It frequently addresses contemporary issues such as climate change, migration, and human rights.


Key Points from Riffat Kassis's Article in Mondoweiss:

1. Historical Context and Moral Responsibility:

The German Church, once complicit in the Holocaust, now risks complicity in what is described as Israel's genocide of Palestinians.

The Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD) prioritizes Holocaust memory and responsibility toward Jewish communities but neglects addressing Israel’s systemic injustices against Palestinians.

2. Critique of EKD’s Resolution:

The EKD passed a resolution titled “Humanitarian aid for people in the Middle East”, emphasizing compassion without addressing the root causes of suffering, such as Israel’s occupation, apartheid policies, and structural violence.

The resolution avoids acknowledging the systemic injustices fueling the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and broader Palestinian territories.

3. Risk of Selective Justice:

The EKD’s one-sided approach undermines its credibility, offering uncritical support for Israel under the guise of atonement for historical guilt.

This stance risks sidelining the plight of Palestinians and perpetuating a form of selective justice.

4. Call for Justice Beyond Charity:

Humanitarian aid is insufficient without addressing oppressive structures and advocating for a just peace.

The EKD’s silence on Israel’s violations of international law diminishes its prophetic and moral role.

5. Growing Recognition of Genocide Claims:

International bodies, including genocide scholars, Amnesty International, and religious leaders, increasingly describe Israel’s actions as genocidal.

Calls for investigations into these claims have been echoed by global figures, including the Pope and Western church leaders.

6. Contrasting Political Positions:

Even Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz has joined calls for an immediate ceasefire and peace talks, demonstrating a more critical stance than the EKD.

7. Recommendations for the EKD:

To uphold its theological commitment to justice, the EKD must confront Western governments' complicit you in enabling occupation and oppression.

The church should engage with structural injustices, advocating courageously for the dignity and rights of all people to contribute meaningfully to peace and justice.







Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Rabbi Against the State: When Faith Refuses Power

In a world where identity is weaponized and religion is drafted into political armies, the sight of an ultra-Orthodox rabbi standing beside Palestinian flags unsettles nearly everyone. Yet there stands — black coat, beard, sidelocks — calmly declaring something that scrambles modern assumptions: “ Judaism is not Zionism.” For him, this is not rebellion . It is obedience . Affiliated with , a small and highly controversial Haredi sect, Rabbi Beck represents a theological current that predates modern nationalism. His argument is not secular. It is not progressive. It is not post-modern. It is ancient . And that is precisely the point. The Interview That Disturbs Categories In one widely circulated long-form interview, the exchange unfolds with almost disarming simplicity. Interviewer: Rabbi Beck, how can you oppose Israel as a Jewish rabbi? Rabbi Beck: Judaism and Zionism are two completely different things. Judaism is a religion. Zionism is a political movement founded little more ...

The High Priest of “Serious” Wars Discovers Bibi

  There was a time when rode into every Middle Eastern catastrophe like a TED Talk with a press pass. If there was a war to explain, a regime to modernize, or a “vital message” to send with cruise missiles, Tom was there — sleeves rolled up, metaphors polished. Back when the invasion of was sold as a democratic software update, Friedman wasn’t exactly storming the barricades. He was midwifing “creative destruction.” The region would be shocked into sanity. History would bend toward market reform. Fast forward. Now he’s discovered that might be bending something else entirely. When an Ex–Prime Minister Uses the Words “Ethnic Cleansing” What jolts Friedman’s latest column is not campus rhetoric. Not activist slogans. Not fringe NGOs. It’s — a former Israeli prime minister — using language that once would have detonated diplomatic careers. Olmert wrote in Haaretz that: “A violent and criminal effort is underway to ethnically cleanse territories in the West Bank.” Let...

Sanctions, Selective Morality, and the War That Never Ends

  On Feb. 28, 2026, The Editorial Board of NYTimes  warned that President Trump’s latest strike on Iran was reckless, unconstitutional, and strategically undefined. The board expressed concern for “the many innocent Iranians who have long suffered.” Eleven days earlier, on Feb. 17, 2026, wrote something even more explosive: “ Israel’s far-right government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is spitting in America’s face and telling us it’s raining. It’s not raining. Bibi is playing both President Trump and American Jews for fools.” Friedman was not questioning Israel’s right to defend itself. He was questioning whether American power was being drawn into a strategy shaped less by U.S. national interest and more by Israel’s domestic political calculus. That distinction matters. Iran as the Permanent External Threat For over four decades, Iran has been under American sanctions. Since 1979, layers of financial, oil, trade, and banking restrictions have been impo...

Blood in the Car Park: Islamophobia and the Fear That Follows Us to Prayer

  On a cold February evening in 2026, 18-year-old Zeeshan Afzal was stabbed to death in the parking lot of Oldbury Jamia Masjid, near Birmingham. He had just prayed. He had just stood shoulder to shoulder with other worshippers in Ramadan — the month of mercy, of restraint, of forgiveness. Minutes later, he lay bleeding in the dark. Police have said the investigation is ongoing and that the killing is not currently being treated as religiously motivated. That is an important and responsible clarification. Motive must be established by evidence, not emotion. And yet. Across Muslim communities in Britain and Europe, the question whispers through homes and WhatsApp groups alike: Are we safe? Even at the mosque? The Atmosphere We Cannot Ignore Even when a specific case is not officially labeled a hate crime, it unfolds within a larger social climate. And that climate matters. Across Europe, reports of anti-Muslim hate crimes have surged in recent years. Mosques vandalized....

When a Journalist Becomes a “Hybrid Threat”

  The Administrative Erasure of Hüseyin Doğru Europe prides itself on being the global capital of press freedom. And yet, in 2025, the Council of the European Union placed a German journalist under sanctions using a legal regime originally designed to counter Russian destabilisation. The journalist: The legal instrument used against him: Council Regulation (EU) 2024/2642 Concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s destabilising activities CELEX: 32024R2642 Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/2643 Restrictive measures framework (Common Foreign and Security Policy) CELEX: 32024D2643 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2021 (3 October 2025 – listing amendment including Doğru) CELEX: 32025R2021 These are not criminal statutes. They are foreign-policy instruments. And under them, a journalist inside the European Union was designated as supporting destabilising activities. What the Official Listing Says According to the Official Journal entry (Annex t...