The collapse of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government in November and subsequent vote of no confidence is the latest twist in a country that was once a pillar of political stability. The three major parties of the republic, the Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU), the Social Democratic Party (SPD), and the Free Democratic Party (FDP), whose legacies stretch back to the German Empire, have all lost ground to rising parties of the left and right.  

In what has been called a “political earthquake” the “far-right” Alternatives for Germany (AfD) won first place in the state elections for Thuringia and second place in Saxony and Brandenburg, averaging around 30% of the vote. For the first time since the 1930s, a party of the far right has won the most votes in an election. Earlier in the 2024 European Union elections, the AfD won second place in elections for the European Parliament. In polls for the upcoming federal election, scheduled for February, the AFD has been polling in second place since July 2023. While the AfD has insisted on its democratic character, the party has repeatedly been mired in controversy. Björn Höcke, leader of the party’s far-right faction and its Thuringian branch, called the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin a “memorial of shame” and was fined for encouraging the Nazi slogan “Everything for Germany!” Birgit Malsack-Winkemann, a former member of the Bundestag, has been arrested for her role in the outlandish plot to overthrow the republic and return to the imperial system. The leader of this “coup” was to be Heinrich Prinz Reuss — self-styled Prince Heinrich XIII, whose family had ruled two tiny principalities until the 1918 revolution. The party’s youth wing has been officially labeled an extremist organization by the country’s domestic intelligence agency. 

With the growing specter of the AfD, the Catholic Church in Germany has taken an increasingly active role in condemning the party. On Feb. 22, the German Bishops’ Conference released a statement declaring that the party was now dominated by “völkisch-nationalism” and could not be voted for. In the aftermath of the Thuringian elections, the local bishops said that while they are ready to seek dialogue with AfD voters, the party remained incompatible with Christianity. In January, the head of the German Bishops’ Conference, Bishop Georg Bätzing, participated in a protest against the party. This was followed by a crackdown on certain members, with politician Christoph Schaufert being dismissed from his position on his parish council. This staunch opposition to a political party would not be the first time the German hierarchy has taken an active role in electoral politics. 

During the final elections of the Weimar Republic, the Catholic hierarchy took an unambiguously anti-Nazi stance, with one historian, Ernst Deuerlein, saying no one of public standing opposed the National Socialists more than the Catholic clergy. With an intriguing parallel to today, party members and/or voters of the party were denied or threatened with denial of Communion, along with the other sacraments. (One cannot help but wonder what the signers of the “Statement of Principles” think about this “weaponization” of the Eucharist.) The Diocese of Mainz formally forbade membership in the party. One priest declared, “There is no bigger sin than voting for Hitler!” It would be in the most Catholic regions of the country, Bavaria and the Rhineland, that the Nazis would have their worst showings. 

The same pattern is repeating itself. The AfD’s strongest showings have been in the former East Germany, which is the least Catholic party of the country. Within these regions the sections with a higher Catholic population returned less votes for the AfD. Preliminary studies indicate that Catholics who attend Mass regularly are less likely to vote for the AfD. 

The AfD has fired back on these charges by asserting that they are the only party in Germany that will defend marriage, life and the family (co-leader and party pick for chancellor, Alice Weidel, is a lesbian but opposes same-sex civil marriage). The reference to life marks the overhanging concern that the issue of abortion could raise its head again.

Officially, abortion is governed by Article 218 of the old imperial penal code, which outlaws abortion unless done to save the life of the mother. During the SPD government of Willy Brandt, a legalization bill was passed but ruled unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, which found it in contradiction to the basic laws of the republic’s guarantee of the right to life, which it declared also applied to the unborn. After reunification, the court once again upheld the right to life, but hinted punishment was at the discretion of the government. The result was a compromise that abortion would be unpunished if it occurred during the first 12 weeks and the woman received prior consultations.

The Scholz government, which has already loosened some restrictions, appointed a commission to reinvestigate the issue and came back with the recommendation of abortion legalization up to 12 weeks. The announcement was met with immediate condemnation by the CDU/CSU and AfD. AfD deputy leader Beatrix von Storch thundered, “If you want to wage a culture war, then wage it with us!” Given the unpopularity of the government, it seems unlikely they wish to add to their woes with a divisive fight over abortion.  

It is hard to have sympathy for the mainstream parties of Germany. Just like their counterparts in Britain and France, they ignored the growing issue of immigration, Islam and assimilation. Despite repeated concerns from the public, they kicked the proverbial can down the road under the guise of a vapid multiculturalism. In 2010, Thilo Sarrazin, then an SPD politician, published Germany Abolishes Itself which warned that if dramatic steps were not taken to restriction Islamic immigration, Germany would become a Muslim country. The book and Sarrazin’s sequel works have all been bestsellers; and while many aspects of these works have been disputed, public sentiment has been increasingly sympathetic. The same concerns over Muslim immigration were expressed by the left-liberal historian Hans-Ulrich Wehler and the Dalai Lama, yet the country’s political elites did nothing. 

Attempting to blunt criticism over the issue CDU leader Friedrich Merz introduced legislation that would include permeant border controls (which polls show 67% of Germans support) and rejecting at the border all people without valid entry documents. A non-binding resolution, supporting the bill, passed 348-345, with the support of the AfD, a first for the party, to the outrage of the SPD and other left-wing parties. The legislation ultimately failed to pass, further highlighting the awkward position of the mainstream parties, who feel obligated to oppose legislation, as a majority want to avoid being on the same side as the AfD. The legislation also highlighted growing division in Catholic circles on the issue. In Berlin, the local Catholic office published a statement condemning the bill, which the German Bishops’ Conference declined to do. Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer of Regensburg completely disavowed the statement. 

Faced with growing extremism on the left and the right, Germany’s mainstream parties must find ways to address their citizen’s grievances. The danger of failing to do so is known all too well. The Church, for its part, should remember its history as the country prepares for its most polarizing election in decades.

Paul J. Macrae is a writer in the Washington, D.C., area.