About the Book
"The New You & The Holy Spirit" by Andrew Wommack explores the role of the Holy Spirit in the lives of Christians, emphasizing the transformation that occurs when believers are filled with the Spirit. Wommack discusses how the Holy Spirit empowers individuals to live a victorious Christian life and helps them grow in their relationship with God. The book offers practical insights and guidance on how to experience the fullness of the Holy Spirit's presence and power in daily life.
Sophie Scholl
Sophia Scholl was a German student, active in the White Rose â a non-violent resistance group to Hitler and the Nazi party. In 1943, she was caught delivering anti-war propaganda and, with her brother Hans Scholl, was executed for high treason. Sophie Scholl has become an important symbol of anti-Nazi resistance in Germany.
Sophie Scholl was born in Forchtenberg, Germany on 9 May 1921. She was the fourth out of six children. Her father Robert was the Burgermeister (Mayor) of Forchtenberg am Kocher, in Baden-WĂźrttemberg.
She was brought up as a Lutheran Christian, and her childhood was relatively happy and carefree. However, in 1933, Hitler came to power and began controlling all aspects of German society. Initially, Sophie was unaffected, but her father and brothers were critical of the Nazi regime and this political criticism filtered through to leave a strong impression on the young Sophie.
At the age of twelve, she joined a pseudo-Nazi organisation, the League of German Girls. Initially, Sophie enjoyed the activities of the group, and she was promoted to Squad Leader. However, after her initial enthusiasm with the activities of the group, Sophie became uneasy about the conflict between her conscience and the creeping Nazi ideology of the organisation. In 1935, Nuremberg Laws were passed which increased the discrimination against Jews, banning them from many public places. Sophie complained when two of her young Jewish friends were barred from joining the League of German Girls. She was also reprimanded for reading from the âBook of Songsâ by the banned Jewish writer Heinrich Heine. Scholl indicated her rebelliousness by replying, that Heine was essential for understanding German literature. These incidents and the bans against Jews led to Sophie taking a much more critical attitude to the Nazi regime. She began choosing friends more carefully â people who were politically sympathetic to her viewpoint.
In 1937, her brothers and some of her friends were arrested for participating in the German Youth Movement. This incident left a strong impression on Sophie and helped to crystallise her opposition to the Nazi regime. In 1942, her father was later sent to prison for making a critical remark about Hitler. He referred to Hitler as âGodâs Scourge.â
Sophie was an avid reader and developed an interest in philosophy and theology. She developed a strong Christian faith which emphasised the underlying dignity of every human being. This religious faith proved an important cornerstone of her opposition to the increasingly all-pervading Nazi ideology of German society. Sophie also developed a talent for art â drawing and painting, and she became acquainted with artistic circles which, in Nazi terms, were labelled degenerate.
In 1940, after the start of the Second World War, she graduated from her Secondary School and became a kindergarten teacher at the Frobel Institute. However, in 1941, she was conscripted into the auxiliary war service working as a nursery teacher in Blumberg. Sophie disliked the military regime of war service and started to become involved in passive resistance to the war effort.
After six months in the National Labour Service, in May 1942, she enrolled in the University of Munich as a student of biology and philosophy. With her brother Hans, she became associated with a group of friends who shared similar artistic and cultural interests but also developed shared political views, which increasingly opposed the Nazi regime they lived in. She came into contact with philosophers such as Theodor Haecker, who posed questions of how individuals should behave under a dictatorship.
The White Rose Movement
The White Rose was an informal group who sought to oppose the war and Nazi regime. It was founded in early 1942 by Hans Scholl, Willia Graf and Christoph Probst. They wrote six anti-Nazi resistance leaflets and distributed them across Munich. Initially, Sophie was not aware of the group, but when she found out her brotherâs activities, she was keen to take part. Sophie participated in distributing leaflets and carrying messages. As a woman, she was less likely to be stopped by the SS.
The leaflets of the White Rose contained messages, such as
âNothing is so unworthy of a nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by a clique that has yielded to base instinctâŚWestern civilization must defend itself against fascism and offer passive resistance, before the nationâs last young man has given his blood on some battlefield.â
However, there was a pervasive police state which kept a high degree of surveillance on any resistance activity. After leaflets had been found at the University of Munich, the local Gestapo stepped up its efforts to catch the resistors. Hans, Willi and Alex also began painting anti-Nazi slogans on buildings in Munich.
On 18 February 1943, Sophie and other members of the White Rose were arrested for distributing anti-war leaflets. The leaflets were seen by Jakob Schmidt, a local Nazi party member. Sophie and Hans were interrogated by Nazi officials and, despite trying to protect each other, just four days later were sent to court. The trial was presided over by Roland Freisler, chief justice of the Peopleâs Court of the Greater German Reich. Freisler was an ardent Nazi; with great vigour and a manic intensity, he frequently roared denunciations at the accused.
Despite the hostility and appearing in court with a broken leg after her interrogation. Sophie replied to the court:
âSomebody, after all, had to make a start. What we wrote and said is also believed by many others. They just donât dare express themselves as we did.â
She also said:
âYou know the war is lost. Why donât you have the courage to face it?â
No defence witnesses were called and, after a very short trial, the judge passed a guilty verdict, with a sentence of death. The sentence was to be carried out early the next morning by guillotine.
Walter Roemer, the chief of the Munich district court, supervised the execution, he later described Sophieâs courage in facing her execution. He reports that Sophieâs last words were:
âHow can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause. Such a fine, sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us, thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?â
The guards were impressed with the courage of the resistors and relaxed the rules to allow Hans, Christoph and Sophie to meet before their execution.
After the execution of Sophie, Hans and Christoph, the Gestapo continued their relentless investigation. Other members of the White Rose were caught and executed. Many students from the University of Hamburg were either executed or sent to concentration camps.
Legacy of Sophie Scholl
In a poll to find the greatest German, Sophie and her brother were voted to be fourth. Amongst the young generation, under 40, they were the most popular. On February 22, 2003, a bust of Sophie Scholl was unveiled by the government of Bavaria in the Walhalla temple. In 2005, a movie about Sophie Schollâs last days was made featuring Julia Jentsch (Sophie Scholl: The Final Days)
Motivations of Sophie Scholl
Several factors inspired Sophie Scholl to take part in this highly dangerous resistance. Firstly, her family shared a dislike of the Nazi regime. Both her brothers and father had been arrested for making critical comments. Her father said to the family:
âWhat I want for you is to live in uprightness and freedom of spirit, no matter how difficult that proves to be,â (link)
She lived in a family environment which encouraged opposition to Hitler.
Sophie had a strong Christian faith and was motivated after hearing speeches by anti-Nazi pastors. She read two volumes of Cardinal John Henry Newmanâs sermons which made a strong impression on Sophie, especially his sermon on the âtheology of conscience.â During her interrogation, she referred to this ideology as a defence.
âI am, now as before, of the opinion that I did the best that I could do for my nation. I, therefore, do not regret my conduct and will bear the consequences that result from my conduct.â
Official examination transcripts (February 1943); Bundesarchiv Berlin, ZC 13267, Bd. 3
Her boyfriend Fritz Hartnagel was on the Eastern Front; he reported to Sophie the dreadful conditions of war, the German failure at Stalingrad and also witnessing war crimes undertaken by German and SS forces.
Reports of mass killings of Jews were also widely shared amongst members of the White Rose. This features in the second White Rose pamphlet.
âSince the conquest of Poland 300,000 Jews have been murdered, a crime against human dignityâŚGermans encourage fascist criminals if no chord within them cries out at the sight of such deeds. An end in terror is preferable to terror without end.â
Sophie Scholl and other members of the White Rose remain a potent symbol of how people can take a courageous action to resist, even the most brutal totalitarian regime.
Citation: Pettinger, Tejvan. âBiography of Sophie Schollâ, Oxford, UK â www.biographyonline.net. Published 12th Aug 2014. Last updated 8th March 2017.
The Holiness from Below - A Warning Against Self-Righteousness
As he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct. (1 Peter 1:15) My hunch is that you are not a glib and shallow person. You are not the kind of person who would âpervert the grace of God into sensualityâ (Jude 4). You are in earnest with the Lord, and you long to be holy. So do I. Indeed, what we deeply desire is nothing less than â may I come right out and say it? â sainthood. But Christians like us â who care so sincerely about holiness and are reaching so diligently for its high standards â we face our own temptation. Letâs come right out and say that too. If others pervert the grace of God, we can ânullify the grace of Godâ (Galatians 2:21). We can have âa zeal for God, but not according to knowledgeâ (Romans 10:2). We can âgo beyond what is written . . . being puffed up in favor of one against anotherâ (1 Corinthians 4:6). How could it be otherwise? There is always, in this life, more than one way to lose our way! Our very earnestness can become an opening to corruption, rot, and death. The great pastor and saint Robert Murray McCheyne warned his congregation, âStudy sanctification to the utmost, but do not make a Christ of it. God hates this idol more than all others.â We should be serious about that too. So, letâs think about one way we can go so wrong, even while feeling we are so right. Two Kinds of Holiness Here is what we must understand. There are two kinds of holiness. One kind is Jesusâs holiness, and the other is our own self-invented holiness. Or to put it in other ways: There is the holiness of the Spirit, and there is the holiness of the flesh. There is the holiness from above, and the holiness from below. There is real holiness, and false holiness. âReal holiness from Jesus is, of course, like Jesus.â The difference is profound, even stark. But for us, it isnât always easy to see the difference. Both kinds of holiness quote the Bible. Both talk about Jesus. Both go to church. Both are strict and firm and resolute. How then do these two holinesses differ? Real holiness from Jesus is, of course, like Jesus. Look carefully at what our key verse actually says: âAs he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conductâ (1 Peter 1:15). His kind of holiness does not simply insist on a high moral standard. Any sinner can turn over a new leaf, and with enough willpower align externally with biblical norms. But real holiness reflects Jesus, it thinks like Jesus, its instincts resonate with Jesus. Real holiness embodies Jesus. Beauty of True Holiness When our Lord said, âFollow meâ (Mark 1:17), he wasnât recruiting our moral strengths to advance his cause. His call was and is, âI will teach you a new way of perceiving everything, including morality. I myself am how you avoid sin and become holy.â Jesus is why the Bible speaks of âthe beauty of holinessâ (Psalm 96:9, KJV). His holiness is humane, life-giving, and desirable in every worthy way. His holiness is both serious enough to warn and light enough to laugh (1 Peter 5:8; Zechariah 8:5); itâs firm and yet also freeing (Deuteronomy 5:32; Malachi 4:2). When we encounter our Lordâs real holiness in someone today, itâs both dignifying and delightful. But false holiness from us is, well, just us. Itâs us at our worst, because itâs us exalting our smug superiority, us reinforcing our divisive preferences, us absolutizing our narrow rigidity, and so forth. Itâs us asserting ourselves, in the name of the Lord, so that we become more demanding, more grim, more shaming of others. Great Divide Iâll make it still worse. Because false holiness comes so naturally to us, it feels good. Our moral fervor feels moral. But it isnât. Our moral fervor is immoral. In those moments when we have enough self-awareness to see our carnal holiness for what it is, we are peering into a pit of hell. In Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis teaches us, The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. (102â103) If this is so, and it is, then our pursuit of holiness is complicated. We might have expected a choice between two simple categories: sin versus holiness. But in reality, we are facing three categories: (1) sin, (2) our kind of holiness, and, (3) Jesusâs kind of holiness. And the great divide is not between (1) and (2). The great divide is between (2) and (3). Heart of His Holiness If our holiness is no more than that â our wretched rightness â then our holiness is a polished form of evil. The Pharisees proved that. They were morally earnest people and the archvillains of the Gospels. âIf our holiness is no more than our wretched rightness, then our holiness is a polished form of evil.â The Pharisees hated Jesus, even while many sinners gravitated to him. Why? Because his kind of holiness has no pride at all. He isnât pushy and strident and harsh. He really is âgentle and lowlyâ (Matthew 11:29). And that part of him isnât a concession, moderating his holiness. Itâs at the very heart of his holiness, because it is the very heart of Jesus himself. His kind of holiness melts in the mouths of all who humble themselves before him. This distinction explains something that perplexed me for years. The most repulsive people Iâve encountered along the way are not the worldly party boys on their weekend binges; they are harsh âchurch peopleâ with their high standards â and no forgiveness. But the loveliest people Iâve ever known have been sinners of many kinds who are turning from both their coarsened evil and their refined evil, and they are humbly opening up to Jesus and his grace for the undeserving. When I hang out with them, Jesus is present. Sometimes I am moved to tears. But among genuinely holy people, I do not feel cornered, pressured, or shamed by their negative scrutiny. The real saints are too holy for that arrogant foolishness. And I hope you have a ton of friends like that! Not Righteousness of My Own It isnât just our blatant sins that need correction. Our counterfeit holiness needs correction too. It doesnât need intensification. A. W. Tozer wrote of his generation, âA widespread revival of the kind of Christianity we know today in America might prove to be a moral tragedy from which we would not recover in a hundred yearsâ (Keys to the Deeper Life, 18). I believe that applies even more today. What self-righteous holiness needs is not success, power, and prominence, but failure, collapse, and devastation. Then we can humbly receive Jesus, with the empty hands of faith, and enter into the profound experience Philippians 3:8â9 describes: For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith.