What role did Luther's writings play in Nazi propaganda and which Nazi figures cited him?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Martin Luther’s virulent anti-Jewish tracts and towering cultural status were actively seized by Nazi propagandists who recycled his language and image to lend historical and theological cover to racial persecution, and key Nazi figures and organs—most notably Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf and propaganda outlets like Der Stürmer—invoked Luther directly or echoed his rhetoric [1] [2] [3]. Historians disagree on whether Luther “caused” Nazi antisemitism or was simply a convenient precedent; scholarship and museum exhibits emphasize both deliberate exploitation by the Third Reich and the broader cultural presence of long-term Christian antisemitism in Germany [4] [2] [5].
1. How Nazi propaganda used Luther’s writings as a resource
Nazi cultural messaging repeatedly repurposed Luther’s writings and image to naturalize antisemitic policies: pamphlets, children’s books and posters borrowed phrases and themes from Luther’s 1543 tract On the Jews and Their Lies, while museums and scholarship document reproductions of Luther under captions calling him a “fighter against the Jewish spirit in the Christian Church” in Nazi periodicals such as Der Stürmer [4] [2] [6]. Propaganda celebrated Luther anniversaries as national holidays and staged Luthertag events to fuse Protestant heritage with National Socialist nationalism, converting theological polemic into civic ritual [4] [7].
2. Concrete examples in Nazi media and education
The Third Reich reissued and referenced Luther in school and popular media: an antisemitic children’s picture book published by Elvira Bauer and issued by Der Stürmer’s Julius Streicher lifted its title from Luther’s work, and Nazi postcards and Winter Relief imagery placed Luther alongside swastikas to imply continuity between Reformation identity and the Nazi state [4] [8]. Museums and contemporary reporting highlight that propagandists touted the coincidence of Kristallnacht with Luther’s birthday and used that symbolism to suggest historical sanction for violent measures [4] [1].
3. Which Nazi figures cited or compared themselves to Luther
Adolf Hitler praised Luther in Mein Kampf, naming him among Germany’s great reformers and influencers; that textual admiration was amplified by party leaders and regional Nazi officials who publicly compared Hitler to Luther or claimed Hitler acted in Luther’s spirit—examples include speeches by Gauleiter Erich Koch and public statements like Pastor Wilhelm Rehm’s assertion that “Hitler would not have been possible without Martin Luther” [3] [7]. Der Stürmer and Julius Streicher echoed Luther’s language in their mass circulation propaganda, showing institutional use beyond isolated citations [2] [4].
4. Scholarly debate: continuity of influence vs opportunistic appropriation
Scholars remain divided: some argue Luther’s anti-Jewish rhetoric created a theological and cultural climate that made Nazi antisemitism plausible, while others insist the Nazis’ racial program was a distinct modern ideology and that Luther’s treatises were opportunistically republished to legitimize policies rather than serving as a direct intellectual blueprint [9] [5]. Curators and historians stress both points: the Nazis “exploited” Luther for propaganda even as long-term Christian antisemitism formed part of the preexisting cultural soil from which Nazi policies could grow [2] [4].
5. Churches, collaborators and dissenters inside Germany
The German Christian movement and certain Protestant leaders embraced a fusion of Nazi racial thinking with a reinterpreted Lutheranism—campaigns urged voters to back pro‑Nazi lists in church elections and to merge cross and swastika—while other confessing theologians (and later museum curators) documented resistance and condemned the manipulation of Luther’s words [2] [10] [6]. This mixed institutional record complicates any simple causal story: some church actors amplified the appropriation; others resisted and later explicitly repudiated Luther’s antisemitic passages [10] [8].
Conclusion: appropriation, citation, and contested legacy
The archival and museum record shows clear, intentional Nazi use of Luther’s writings and image—cited by Adolf Hitler and amplified by figures and organs like Erich Koch, Wilhelm Rehm, Julius Streicher and Der Stürmer—to legitimize antisemitic policy and to sacralize the regime’s national rituals [3] [7] [2] [4]. At the same time, reputable historians caution against reducing Nazi racial genocide to a single religious source, arguing the relationship was one of exploitation and cultural continuity rather than simple doctrinal cause-and-effect, a debate reflected across scholarship and public exhibitions [5] [9] [6].