Mordechay Lewy on Pius XII

The big news this week are the comments made by the Israeli ambassador to the Holy See, Mordechay Lewy.  The ambassador's comments have, according to several news agencies, "added to the controversy" over Pius XII and his actions or inactions during World War II.  I took this copy of the text from Speroforum.  The article also includes a link to YouTube clip from Rome Reports.  Some of Lewy's comments are recorded there.  Curiously, Lewy makes no mention of Pius XII.

So, what does the ambassador say?

Apparently breaking with a taboo among critics of the Catholic Church and of Pope Pius XII – who reigned during the Second World War and the Holocaust – Israel’s ambassador to the Vatican has recognized that the pontiff did actually save thousands of Jews during the years of Nazi predation.  An opening paragraph such as this one sets up what has become the classic "straw man" in populist Pius XII circles - the presumption that history is black and white, and that the Pope did nothing.  It is too easy, simplistic and makes a nonsense of what historians do.  It does, however, "hook" the reader.


Ambassador Mordechai Lewy affirmed on June 23 that “as of the raid of 16 October 1943 and the days following in the ghetto of Rome, the monasteries and orphanages of the religious orders opened their doors to Jews, and we have reason to believe that this occurred under the supervision of the highest authorities of the Vatican, who were aware of these measures.” The diplomat spoke at a ceremony in which a Catholic priest, Gaetano Piccinini of the order founded by Don Orione, was post-humously.

The language is important.  Lewy is an ambassador, not an historian.  While his general sweep of historical understanding is largely accurate, it is, as always, in the details, that the most significant things are found. 

Rome's religious houses had been offering shelter to Jews since the 8 September armistice and the German occupation of Rome in the days following.  Much ink has been spilt on whether this action came as a direct papal intervention or not.  Lewy is careful, as all diplomats are, and hedges his praise of the Vatican in very general language that can be interpreted a number of ways.  Re-read the blue highlighted sentence.  This is a statement that suggests there is more to be realised than what we know at present.  The work of Salesian sister, Grazia Loparco on the rescue of Jews by religious orders and congregations is a major research project that is helping fill in details about the "hows, whens. wheres and whys" of rescue.  She has found no concrete evidence of a papal order.

It is well-known that many religious houses used the presumed authority of the Pope to open doors and give shelter to Jews.  We also know that Pius knew, approved and encouraged such actions.  We know that hundreds of Jews were given shelter at the Papal summer villa at Castel Gandolfo with explicit papal consent. 

Did Pius give an order?  I think it is the wrong question to ask.  More historically accurate is the presumption that when the situation for the Jews of Rome became precarious, Pius quietly endorsed any and all rescue efforts - and most of these were already in progress.  I do not believe any order was given.  Firstly, there was no need.  The evidence is overwhelming, Italian Catholics rescued and sheltered Italian Jews and non-Italian Jews.  Secondly, as Sr Margherita Marchione assured me some years ago, the Pope would not have commited anything to writing lest it put rescuers in danger.  And since a German invasion of the Vatican was considered a real enough threat throughout late 1943 and up to the moment of liberation in June 1944, it would defy sense and everything we know about the diplomatic instincts of Pius to even think he would give such an order. 

There may be material in the Archivo Segreto Vaticano that says otherwise, but, quite frankly, I doubt it.  ADSS has nothing along these lines, and I find it hard to think they would have omitted what would have been a document of major importance.  There is not written papal order and I do not think there was even an explicit verbal order.  There was no need.

Media reports in Italy claim that it was Pope Pius XII, who is largely dismissed as having done little to save the victims of the Holocaust, who transmitted an appeal to religious orders through his Secretary of State, Cardinal Luigi Maglione. The pontiff’s desire that the Jews of Rome be sheltered from the Nazi storm was transmitted in conversations and messages so as to avoid Nazi reprisals. Besides the approximately 5,000 Jews who took refuge in Rome’s convents, schools, and monasteries, several thousands more were sheltered at the papal villa at Castelgandolfo in Rome.

This is a very broad assertion and one that creates difficulties.  ADSS 9.368, records the meetings between Maglione and German ambassador, von Weizsacker.  What ever description may be used to describe the encounter, "protest" at the treatment of the Rome Jews, is not one I would use. 

Pius was determined to avoid any public act that would damage Vatican neutrality.  Without access to the ASV material that could shed more light on this, the best interpretation I can give is the desire of the Pope to remain publically outside all engagement to do with the roundup of Rome's Jews so that the rescue and refuge work going on would not be damaged.  It is true that nearly 5000 Jews were hidden across Rome in religious houses and more at Castel Gandolfo.  I also stress here that these acts of rescue, many done in the name of the pope, should and must be noted.  It is the antidote to the mantra that "he did nothing"; Pius did act.  The questions remain though, how much did he do, and what were the possibilities for greater action?  And it is also important to bear in mind that the focus here is Rome.

Ambassador Lewy said “the fact that the Vatican could not prevent the departure of the train that took the captives from Rome to the extermination camps can only have contributed to reinforcing the desire, on the part of the Vatican, to offer its own premises as a refuge for Jews.” In any event, continued the diplomat, “we must recognize that the train that left on 18 October 1943 was the only convoy that the Nazis managed to organize in Rome for Auschwitz.”

All this is true, except for the need to recognise the "behind the scenes" activity undertaken by members of the German embassy and Vatican "go-betweens" including the Pope's nephew, Carlo Pacelli.  What stands out is the fact that the Germans believed Pius would definitely speak out if the Rome Jews were deported.  Weizsacker made that clear to Berlin.  The concern that the Pope would speak was sufficient for Himmler to apply the brakes to the raids in Rome (not elsewhere). 

Could the Jews held in the Collegio Militare have been rescued?  History deals with "what was", not "what ifs".  Based on the available historical records it is difficult to say.  Once in German hands, captured Jews were caught and the reality was that few, if any, were allowed to leave.  The attitude of Rome's Jews remained positive that the Pope would protect them.  All the activity of the Vatican "middle men", the German embassy staffers and others came to naught.  The SS were not about to let their prizes be snatched away.  The ambassador's statement that the 18 October 1943 transport was the only German one to leave Rome is true. I think that Pius knew, based on over two and a half years of reports on the fate of Europe's Jews, that those incarcerated next to the walls of the Vatican, would not be released. 

It is tantalising to wonder what may have happened had the Pope gone and stood outside the gates and demanded their release ... but that is a "what if".  We do know that when Rome was badly bombed in July 1943 Pius acted immediately and went to the worst hit part of the city to offer what comfort he could.  It makes a "what if" about Rome's Jews even harder to resist.

In view of these facts, Ambassador Lewy affirmed that “it would be a mistake to say that the Catholic Church, the Vatican or the Pope himself were opposed to activities to save Jews. It is quite certain that it was to the contrary: they always gave the help that they could.”

I agree.  There was no opposition to help rescue efforts - it is utter nonsense to suggest otherwise.  But, let us keep the perspective.  Rome and Italy were the two places where the Pope had serious "clout" and it is also important to remember that the full force of German brutality only began after September 1943 and lasted in Rome for nine months.  It is a very different reality to those who engaged in rescue in Poland, Ukraine etc where the German terror lasted for years.

Some historians, despite contrary claims made by writers such as John Cornwell, argue that it was the Catholic Church that saved more Jews than any other institution during the Second World War and the Holocaust. Historian Pinchas Lapide, an Israeli consul to Italy in the 1960s, claimed that this number may amount to 750,000. Renowned British historian Sir Martin Gilbert, who has written about righteous Gentiles who gave their lives to save Jews, has also praised the work of Pope Pius XII.

If in doubt, drag out Lapide!  My comments on Lapide's very rubbery figures appear in another entry on this blog.  Suffice to say here, that this paragraph could or should just be erased.

The Jewish Virtual Library, a website dedicated to the history and culture of the Jewish people, wrote however of the wartime pope, “Pope Pius XII's (1876-1958) actions during the Holocaust remain controversial. For much of the war, he maintained a public front of indifference and remained silent while German atrocities were committed. He refused pleas for help on the grounds of neutrality, while making statements condemning injustices in general. Privately, he sheltered a small number of Jews and spoke to a few select officials, encouraging them to help the Jews.”

Quod scriptum est!  What is written, is written.  The JVL is an online encyclopedia with brief articles that, hopefully, lead the reader to explore more deeply.  I tell my students to go beyond encyclopedias in their research.  Go and find the texts and the detailed studies.  In any case, the overall tenor of the JVL article is sound.

Pope Pius XII did receive thanks during his lifetime for his actions to save Jews. At the end of the Second World War, Chief Rabbi Israel Zolli of Rome entered the Catholic Church and took the name Eugenio in homage to the Pope whose baptismal name was Eugenio. In addition, a wealthy Italian senator and member of Italy’s Jewish community presented the pope with a luxurious villa in the center of Rome that still serves as the Vatican’s nunciature in the Italian Republic.

None of this adds to the thurst of the article.  Israel Zolli's history remains very controversial, to use an over used word.  He is still preceived as a renegade by many Italian Jews and others.  The questions about his disappearance just before the German raid on the Rome community remain unanswered to any degree of satisfaction.

Golda Meir, who would go on to become a prime minister, spoke as Israel’s foreign minister in 1958 and praised Pope Pius XII following his death. Speaking on behalf of her government, the US-born Meir said that “during the ten years of Nazi terror, when our people suffered the horrors of martyrdom, the Pope raised his voice in condemnation of the oppressors and to lift up the victims.” While the pope had spoken generally against the extermination of human beings, his critics still maintain that he could have done more.

I find the term "critics" rather harsh in this context.  It is easy to posit those who have questions about the Pope's role as "critics" when placed beside the praises given by Golda Meir.  What is not noted is that serious Holocaust scholarship was barely in its infancy, the study of the Vatican's role/s during the early 20th century and its all too easy cohabitation with the regimes of the right had not begun, and the study of the war years was still only moving past individual countries and generals writing about their glorious achievements.  Meir's words are moving, but the historian must continue to place them into their appropriate context.

But, hang on a minute!  The main point of there being an article at all was to mark the presentation of the honour of Righteous Among the Nations in memory of Father Gaetano Piccinini (1904-1972), a priest in Rome who rescued Jews.  That event should be celebrated for the great moment that it was and is.

 Fr Gaetano Piccinini, Righteous Among the Nations.

"Inside Rome with the Germans" - 1943-1944

The diary of the American-born religious sister, Jessica Lynch, is a valuable source of information on life in Rome between 8 September 1943 and the liberation of the City on 5 June 1944.  It has been used by defenders of Pius XII as evidence for papal rescue efforts of Jews.  Having read references to the book in other books, I decided it was time to get the book, read it and make an assessment.

"Inside Rome with the Germans" was title given to the diary kept by Mother Mary St Luke and published under her nom de plume, "Jane Scrivener".
 
Close friends of Mother Mary, Carlton and Mary Hayes, remained in contact with her throughout the war years.  Her letters to the Hayes' were filled with candid descriptions of life in Rome during the war and, from September 1943, under German occupation.  Carlton J Hayes (1882-1964) was appointed United States Ambassador to Spain in 1942.  At the end of his term in 1944, he asked Mother Mary for a copy of her diary, believing it deserved a wide audience for its vivid portrait of the city in the months before liberation.  Initially reluctant, Mother Mary finally agreed and Hayes organised its publication by Macmillan in 1945 

About Mother Mary St Luke surprisingly little is known.  She had lived in Rome for many years before the war and worked in the Vatican Information Service during the war.  Thus her diary entries reflected a high degree of accuracy in the details she recorded along with observations of daily life under the German occupation.  Always discreet, and with personal names of most people avoided, Mother Mary, penned a frank and clear narrative, that captures a sense of the nine months of a brutal and harsh occupation.  Curiously, she mentions nothing of her religious community and there are only glimpses of her own religious practices.  The entries were written after her return to the convent in which she lived on Via Veneto.

The diary is largely accurate in its description of Vatican relief efforts for the city of Rome which faced the real threat of starvation in the last months of the German occupation.  It is also accurate in the description of hiding Jews and "patriots" (anti-fascists).  She writes of well-known events such as the bombings of Rome from July 1943 onwards, the bombing of the Vatican in November 1943, the raid on St Paul outside the Walls in February 1944, the partisan attack in the Via Rasella in March 1944 and the fate of well known fascists and collaborators, for whom she clearly had little sympathy.  Interestingly, she writes very little about the grande razzia, the "great raid", on the Jews of Rome in October 1943, although she appears to be aware of the grave danger Rome's Jews were in after September 1943.

About Pope Pius XII, Mother Mary writes in a sober manner.  She records papal relief efforts, the opening of Piazza San Pietro and Castel Gandolfo to refugees, the muted expressions of horror at German atrocities through L'Osservatore Romano and Pius' appeals for calm and forbearance in the city until the Liberation.  What she does not make mention of is anything to do with a papal order to open the religious houses to take in Jews.  From the tone of her writing, I doubt she would have thought such an order necessary.  Religious houses were opening their doors to Jews, British and American airmen and escaped POWs, anti-fascists and others sought by the Germans and their Italian fascist collaborators.

I have read through the diary and noted passages that are of relevance to my study of Pius XII.  Below are extracts from "Inside Rome with the Germans" that deal with the Jews. Her comments reflect what was probably common opinion among many Romans, about events that were often not clear.  The perception that the Jews of Rome sought and received papal help with the ransom money is echoed in Mother Mary's diary, and is one example of what we now know to be inaccurate.  (The Rome Jews raised the gold and money for the ransom without papal aid).  Another is the lack of understanding about the inner workings of the Jewish community in Rome and the tensions that existed between the Rabbi, Israel Zolli and the community leadership.

1943

P 15. Tuesday 14.09. “The Jews are in a panic trying to leave the city.  They fear being sent to Germany as hostages.  No one is safe.”

P 31 Tuesday 29.09.  “They’re at the Jews. One wondered when it would come.  Yesterday, the German authorities sent for the Chief Rabbi and told him that unless by midday today the Jews delivered one million lire and fifty kilograms of gold, some of them would be deported and others shot.  It was a terrible moment, but they managed it.  At the very last, they appealed to the Pope, who helped them to complete the amount.  Now they have paid their ransom, the Rabbi ought to destroy his register of Jewish residents in Rome.  Although the Germans said that on condition of this payment they would leave them alone, how can they be trusted?  The Romans are shocked and depressed; now that this sort of Jew-baiting has begun it has come home to them that they are really under the heel of the enemy.”

P 37. Friday 15.10. Notes the arrival of 2000 Gestapo and SS to “carry out the dirty work connected with the Jews

P38. Sunday 17.10. “The SS are doing exactly what one expected, and at 4.30 am began to round up the Jews in their own houses, The Rabbi did not destroy his registers, and they know where every Jew lives. And this, after the promise made when they produced that ransom … Some Jews escaped, others were herded into open lorries in the rain, and we know nothing about their destination. It is a nameless horror. People you know and esteem, brave, kind, upright people, just because they have Jewish blood, treated like this. Some of them are heroic. They came for the father of a family we know. He was out. The Germans said in that case they would take his wife. Whereupon the daughter said: ”Where my mother goes, I go too” – and although they did not want her particularly, she was taken as well.”

P39. Tuesday 19.10. “It is understood that the Pope has asked the German Ambassador to make an effort to help the Jews. It is difficult for von Weiszacker, of course, as the SS are independent of him. However, he did have some measure of success, for we hear that the women and children will be released.” (Probably a reference to non-Jews who were caught in the raid who were released.)

P44. Friday 29.10.  “The difficulty of hiding patriots and Jews is becoming more and more acute.”  SS-led raid on the Oriental Institute, an extraterratorial papal property protected under the Lateran Agreements of 1929.

P56. Tuesday 16.11. “A few Jews have been allowed to return to their homes, largely on account of action taken by the Pope. Is it possible to hope that the man-hunting is over?” (This reference is unclear. I do not know of any arrested Jews returning to their homes.  I suspect this was repeatnig a rumour she may have heard.)


P61. Friday 26.11. “Once more the Jews: all objects of art belonging to them are declared to be sequestered by the nation.”

P65. Friday 03.12. “Today the Vatican daily, the Osservatore Romano, publishes a strong protest against the treatment of Jews; it is called forth by the new directions issued by the “Republic” to the heads of the Provinces, to the effect that all Jews must be sent to concentration camps. The order was issued obviously at the instigation of the Germans. The Osservatore points out that it is unreasonable, unchristian and unhuman. Times are bad enough, it says, without our creating fresh sources of suffering and anxiety; we are sorely in need of God’s help, which we can gain by exercising charity towards his creatures, and all of us, nations aw well as individuals, are in need of that today … It was a bold protest, courageously made.”

P66. Saturday 04.12. “The Rome German-controlled press answered the Osservatore by asserting that Jews were considered foreigners, and as such they were potential enemies and therefore might with perfect justice be sent to concentration camps. This evening’s Osservatore replies firmly that no decree issued by any political party can change the status of an Italian-born citizen, possessing his nationality by the existing laws of the land; and that, even if enemy aliens were to be sent to concentration camps, the old and infirm, women and children are exempt.”

P74.  Wednesday 22.12.  “Unpleasant news this morning.  The patriots and Jews who have been sheltered in religious houses all over Rome will probably not be safe any more.  The Fascists – not the Germans this time – are raiding them.”  Raids on the Oriental Institute, Lombard College and the Russicum.

1944

P141.  Tuesday 21.03.  “And now Hungary.  Another unfortunate country occupied.  Jew-baiting and man-hunting will follow.  We can sympathise.  Poor Hungarians.”

P176.  Monday 22.05.  “The enemy obviously realises that he is on the point of being beaten, and is showing signs of it here.  Within the last few days they have renewed the intensive search for Jews; SS men arrived at the house of a Swedish Jewess, married to an Italian, and said: ‘Tomorrow we shall come for you’.  The Swedish minister could do nothing.  Another, merely of Jewish descent, came to us this afternoon begging to be told where to hide; happily we were able to find a place for her.  In the course of these months of German occupation, persecution of the Jews followed a course parallel to the persecution in Germany.  Brutally rounded up without warning, men, women and children were deported wholesale, many of them to unknown destinations such as Poland; numbers were killed outright, and others were left to starve,  The following few statistics are trustworthy.  Of the 10,000 Jews who remained in Rome after the Fascist ‘Racial Laws’ were passed, about 6,000 were victims of Nazi brutality.  Among these, roughly 1,000 are known to have been killed, that is, either executed or left to die of hunger and want.  Of the remaining 5,000 there is no trace at present.  How many of these will return when the war is over?  It is a terrible question to ask, for the answer many be a terrible one.  But more terrible still is the responsibility weighing on the authors and instigators of this appalling ‘race war’.  No one will ever know, except a few Vaticanenjoyed the personal protection of the Pope in their darkest days.  Food, lodging, clothing and occupation were found for them in the Vatican itself, by special directions of the Sovereign Pontiff.  Warm and generous sympathy went out to them from Catholics throughout the city, regardless of race or creed, often at great personal risk.”

P184. Saturday 27.05.  “Two of the informers mentioned yesterday by the Anzio wireless are the porter of a house which we know, and his wife.  They have specialised in reporting the whereabouts of Jews.  This morning they are sitting in their lodge shedding tears; and well they may.”

Pius XII's name day - St Eugenio

It would be remiss of me not to post something on Pius XII's name day.  It is the feast of St Eugenio, pope from 654 to 657. 

Our Sunday Visitor has just published a commentary on the recent "discovery" of a 1944 letter that is being used by some groups to prove papal activity in the rescue of the Jews.  I have already commented on it.

Here is the article:

Uncovered World War II-era cable adds to Pius XII debate



Some say the 1944 document supports the wartime pope’s legacy as a defender of the Jewish people


By Brian Fraga - OSV Newsweekly, 6/12/2011

Does a recently unearthed 1944 diplomatic cable shed a favorable light upon Pope Pius XII’s response to Nazi atrocities?


Gary Krupp, founder and president of Pave the Way Foundation, believes so.

“Anyone with even the lowest understanding of this issue can only come up with one conclusion after they review what we have discovered,” said Krupp, 63, a Jewish supporter of Pope Pius. Krupp founded his New York-based nonprofit organization in 2002 to defend and promote the wartime pope’s legacy as a champion of European Jews during the Holocaust.

“This is a man who saved Jewish lives when many people did not, and he’s attacked. It’s a shame,” he told Our Sunday Visitor.

However, some scholars criticize Krupp and his organization for waging a “campaign of misinformation” by using unsophisticated historical analysis and presenting individual documents out of context.

“Pave the Way are masters at creating a media flurry. They are not trained historians. They believe that by creating a deluge of paper with information that is favorable to their perception of Pius XII, they can create a new reality about the wartime pope,” said Paul O’Shea of the Australian Institute of Holocaust and Genocide Studies and author of “A Cross Too Heavy: Pope Pius XII and the Jews of Europe” (Palgrave Macmillan, $28).

The new flash point in the ongoing debate over Pope Pius centers on wartime correspondence between Myron Taylor, President Franklin Roosevelt’s representative to the Holy See, and his British counterpart, Sir D’Arcy Osborne.

In the note, dated Nov. 7, 1944, Taylor’s assistant, Franklin C. Owen, wrote that Osborne had called to say he feared that Pope Pius XII would make a radio appeal on behalf of Hungarian Jews and that he would also criticize the Russians for their actions in occupied territories.

“Sir D’Arcy said something should be done to prevail upon the Pope not to do this,” wrote Owen, adding that Osborne feared that it would have “very serious political repercussions.”


On its face, the document seems to support Pope Pius’ defenders, who counter critics’ arguments that he failed to condemn Adolf Hitler’s genocide of the Jewish people by saying that he had to balance any public statements and denunciations with deadly political repercussions that could include Nazi reprisals against Jews.

Pope Pius XII’s defenders say he, in fact, saved hundreds of thousands of Jews by giving them shelter in convents and monasteries, as well as the pope’s summer residence at Castel Gandolfo.

“The document is confirmation of a position I’ve articulated for some time,” said Ronald J. Rychlak, a law professor and associate dean for academic affairs at the University of Mississippi School of Law. He has written two books on Pope Pius, including “Hitler, the War, and the Pope” (OSV, $29.95).

Rychlak told OSV that he found the wartime correspondence in Archives Unbound, an online digitized collection of primary source material, and passed it along to Pave the Way, which has on its website about 46,000 pages of documents pertaining to Pope Pius’ papacy.

“The letter is mere confirmation of something those of us who study Pius XII have known about for a long time,” Rychlak said. “The pope was not blind to the Nazi or Soviet atrocities, and he was trying to walk a very delicate tightrope, to make certain that what he did could alleviate pain, suffering and help bring an end to hostilities.”

William Doino Jr., a contributor to Inside the Vatican who published an 80,000-word annotated bibliography on Pius XII in “The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII” (Lexington Books, $26.95), told OSV that the correspondence “reverses the usual accusation of (Pius XII) being silent.”


“What this shows is that the Allies themselves didn’t want him to speak out, and you can argue whether it would have been prudent to do so,” Doino said. “The Allies, in fact, wanted him to speak out in a certain way, but when he said that he would speak out completely and honestly, they didn’t want it, and they moved very quickly to beg and plead with him not to do so.”

“The information is incontrovertible,” Krupp said. “Pius XII was probably one of the greatest heroes of World War II.”


Opening the archives


But reaching such a conclusion is premature, said Rabbi Eric J. Greenberg, director of interfaith affairs for the Anti-Defamation League, an organization dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism and bigotry.

He told OSV that the 1944 cable is an old, well-known document, and by itself does not make the case for Pope Pius.

“You can’t distribute or release an out-of-context letter or document and make a global claim for it. This is an example of Pave the Way’s campaign of misinformation that makes a disservice to Catholic and Jewish scholars,” said Rabbi Greenberg, whose organization has called for the expeditious opening of the Vatican Secret Archives’ documents dating from 1939-46.

“A conclusion on Pius XII shouldn’t be reached by either side until responsible scholars can study the archives and come to a reasonable historical conclusion,” he said.

Several prominent Catholics, including New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, have called for the expeditious opening of the Vatican Secret Archives.

Father John T. Pawlikowski, professor of social ethics at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago and founding member of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council, has called for Pope Pius XII’s beatification to be put on hold until scholars can review all the documentation from his papacy. He advised taking a cautious approach to the diplomatic cable.

“You don’t build a case or a picture from a single document,” Father Pawlikowski said. “For example, there are other documents that include a Polish ambassador in exile urging Pius XII to speak out. We also have evidence that the pope opposed some of the instrumental activities of his papal nuncios during the war.

“If you want to disprove the argument that Pius XII was completely silent, then yes, this document does something, but it’s not necessarily the most relevant,” he said. “The real relevant question is: ‘What is expected of papal leadership in times of such crisis?’”

John Cornwell, the British journalist and author whose controversial 1999 book, “Hitler’s Pope” (Penguin, $17), criticized Pope Pius XII for not speaking out against the Nazis and for being manipulated by Hitler, told OSV in an email that Allied requests for the pope not to protest the deportations of Jews in 1944 “should be contrasted and compared with Allied requests to the absolute contrary in the fall of 1942, when the deportations were first under way.


“Through the services of the Church’s diplomatic corps, Pius could have done much to forewarn the Jews of the true aim of the deportations throughout occupied Europe, not least in France. It is difficult to understand — still less, defend — his failure in this,” he told OSV.

Rychlak said he agrees that the 1944 document by itself “does not prove a whole lot,” but argued that it is wrong to suggest that anyone has to wait until the whole Vatican archives are available before reaching some conclusions on Pope Pius.

“The evidence from the documentation that is already available, the sworn testimonies given by witnesses around the world, show that Pius XII did more than anyone else in setting the example for rescuers, comforting victims, standing strong against Nazi perpetrators,” Rychlak said.

Brian Fraga writes from Massachusetts.

Another "discovery" ... another Pius XII story ...

I have been spurred to action after reading the posts related to the latest “latest discovery on Pius XII” news.

One of the reasons you don’t find too many historians engaged in comment on these “news breaking events” is because it takes time to verify the claims, sort through the distortions, get timelines right and then go looking for the evidence.

I’ll work my way through this latest story. My comments appear in red.

Allies pressed pope to be silent on Nazis


May. 20, 2011


By Simon Caldwell, Catholic News Service

Simon Caldwell is well known in Pius XII circles. He has published a number of article on Pius related matters. I have had to cause to comment on Mr Caldwell’s journalism before.  In three posts in 2011 I criticised Caldwell for some pretty sloppy journalism. Facts did not seem to matter too much when reporting on Pope Pius XII. And some of the things that were published were simply wrong. Caldwell does not do his homework. In particular his reporting on the sensationalist piece of “faction” that Pius XII probably saved about 200,000 converted Jews was risible.
MANCHESTER, England -- U.S. and British diplomats discussed exerting pressure on Pope Pius XII to be silent about the Nazi deportations of Hungarian Jews, according to newly discovered documentation.

This phrase should set the alarm bells ringing. It has to be one of the most over-used clichés in journalism. Curiously we are never given the details of the archival repository or any indication of where this document can be accessed by historians.


The British feared that the wartime pope might make a "radio appeal on behalf of the Jews in Hungary" and that in the course of his broadcast would "also criticize what the Russians are doing in occupied territory."


Sir Francis D'Arcy Osborne, the British ambassador to the Vatican, told an American diplomat that "something should be done to prevail upon the pope not to do this as it will have very serious political repercussions."


Osborne's comments were made to Franklin C. Gowen, an assistant to Myron Taylor, the U.S. special representative to the Vatican.


Gowen recorded the conversation in a letter to Taylor, saying he had promised Osborne that he would bring his concerns to the "immediate attention" of the U.S. ambassador.


"It was understood that, pending your reaction, he would not take any steps vis-a-vis the Holy See," Gowen told Taylor.


In the letter, Gowen also said that Msgr. Domenico Tardini, the Vatican assistant secretary of state, had told him 10 days earlier that Pope Pius would not "make any radio appeal because if he did so he would, in fairness, to all have to criticise the Russians," a member of the Allies.


He said he withheld this information from Osborne in the belief that it would be best for Taylor to impart it himself following a meeting with Pope Pius scheduled the day after the letter was written.


There is nothing of great note here. It was well known among the Allies that the Pope’s fear of Bolshevism was greater than his loathing for National Socialism. Pius had remained publicly neutral throughout the war, refusing to condemn particular atrocities committed by either side. He knew of the mass murder of Jews “in the East”; he had first hand description of individual “actions” from Italian military chaplains; he had letters from bishops in occupied Poland, Ukraine and the Baltic States; he knew of the deportations from Germany; he received the complaints of Vichy French government officials who decried bishops who spoke out against the deportation of French Jews at French hands and the fate that awaited them. He knew. He chose to remain publicly silent on the individual crimes, speaking in generalities on the suffering inflicted on so many innocent people. He refused to be drawn into an Allied sponsored condemnation of Nazi crimes because he would then have to condemn crimes committed by members of the Allies, in particular the Soviet slaughter of Polish officers at Katyn in 1940.

As an Allied victory seemed more certain from late-1943 onwards, Pius grew increasingly concerned at the prospect of a Soviet dominated Eastern and Central Europe. The letter seems to be strange in its fear that Pius might speak outside of his customary generalities and actually name atrocities. He had not done so before, and there was no evidence he would do so, even after the liberation of Rome in June 1944. We know now that he did not speak in condemnation in any particular form until well-after the war.


The letter was dated Nov. 7, 1944, as the Nazis were organizing mass deportations of Jews from Budapest, the Hungarian capital, to death camps in Poland, Austria and Germany.


Let’s put some history in at this point.


The deportation of the Hungarian Jews commenced on 29 April 1944 and continued through until 7 July 1944 by which time an estimated 440,400 Jews had been transported. Most died in KL Auschwitz II (Birkenau). It was the most efficient act of mass murder in human history. The surviving Jews of Budapest lived in constant fear of the tottering Hungarian government. A German led coup in October 1944 gave the green light for the resumption of persecution. About 70,000 Jews were forced into a ghetto in Budapest. It was too late to send them to Auschwitz, the gas chambers had been cold since late October on Himmler’s orders, and with the Red Army now in the east of the country the only remaining option were the death marches west. These took place in November 1944 through to January 1945. Hungary surrendered in January 1945, but the Germans and their Hungarian collaborators continued fighting until the end of the war. About 225,000 Hungarian Jews survived the war. (The pre-war population was about 825,000)


The letter mentioned above may have believed the camps in Poland were still operating, but they were not.


Another matter. There were no “death camps” outside of Poland. The only non-Polish camps with gas chambers were at KL Dachau, near Munich, and Natzweiler, in Alsace. These facilities were never used. The gas chambers at Dachau were used as temporary morgues; a gruesome fact the liberating Americans were to discover in April 1945.


Rome had been liberated by the U.S. Fifth Army the previous June and, with the Vatican behind Allied lines, the pope had more freedom to speak out.


But as the head of a neutral state, he understood that he could not condemn the war crimes of one side without condemning those of the other.


However, on Nov. 19 -- less than two weeks after Gowen wrote his letter -- the Vatican joined the neutral states of Spain, Portugal, Switzerland and Sweden to appeal to the Hungarian government to end the deportations.


The British Jewish historian Sir Martin Gilbert, an internationally recognized expert on the Holocaust, said in his 2002 book, "The Righteous: The Unsung Heroes of the Holocaust," that at that time the Catholic Church in Budapest was hiding 25,000 Jews in homes and religious institutions.


There is nothing new here. All this is well known.


Simultaneously, the Red Army of the Soviet Union was advancing westward across Europe and killing and raping many innocent people as it was driving Adolf Hitler's armies into retreat.


This is somewhat hysterical. The sweep west by the Red Army was dramatic, but until the Soviets reached the borders of the Reich in late 1944 the behavior of the Russians was not particularly brutal or savage. Yes, there were atrocities committed, but the focus of Soviet rage was reserved for Germany. Once over the borders, the restraint of the Red Army was lifted and the horrific rape, looting and pillaging of the Reich began. And while it easy for us to gasp, the fact that over 20 million Russians had died between 1941-1945, should give us pause to at least acknowledge in realistic terms that the Russians had suffered terribly. Of course this is not to justify what was a crime; but let the knowledge of that crime be tempered with context and the truth that after the initial outburst calmer heads prevailed.


Gowen's letter was made public for the first time by the New York-based Pave the Way Foundation, which is conducting research into the actions of Pope Pius, assisted by a U.S. Catholic lawyer, Ronald Rychlak; German historian Michael Hesemann; and a journalist, Dimitri Cavalli. These three men have no formal historical qualifications. Hesemann’s specialty is the study of UFOs.


Gary Krupp, president of the foundation, told Catholic News Service in a May 18 email that the Allies feared any condemnation of Josef Stalin's armies "would work against the unified war effort of the Allies."


He said the letter is significant because it showed the pressures that confronted Pope Pius, who has been criticized for his alleged silence in the face of the Holocaust.


"The simple reality, which seems to be ignored by many critics, is that the Vatican was a neutral government that used its neutrality to save thousands of lives," said Krupp, a U.S. Jew from New York.


Gowen's letter was found by Rychlak among Taylor's documents and has been posted on the Pave the Way Foundation website.


This is a very common media response by Pave The Way. Much declaration about a text, but little to no contextual analysis and no detail on the source of the document, where it was found, its provenance etc.


The other fact remains that all the detail discussed above is well known in historical circles. Yes, it is an interesting piece of material, but does it add to the body of knowledge that already exists? The answer is, I fear, no.


Another letter made public by the foundation discusses help for Jewish fugitives, with Osborne telling Harold Tittman, another of Taylor's aides, that it must be destroyed because it might endanger the life an Italian priest who was rescuing Jews if it fell into enemy hands.


This strikes me as a tad too convenient. Again, where is this document, who learned of its existence and how, and what is its context?


It was dated May 20, 1944, barely three weeks before Rome fell to the Allies and, according to the Pave the Way Foundation, shows how the work of rescuing Jews was conducted in secrecy, with most documentary evidence of such activities destroyed almost instantly.


No serious historian disputes the fact that the Vatican was engaged in rescue and hiding operations throughout Rome between 9 September 1943 (when Italy signed the armistice) and 5 June 1944. However, the role of the Pope remains unclear because the relevant documents are still under embargo.


At the end of this, the known position accepted by historians “of the middle” remains unchanged. Pius XII did do something to help the Jews of Europe, limited as it was. A survey of the Brazilian visa episode demonstrates this. He was not immune to the suffering he saw and learned of. However, the question remains whether he did all he could, based on what we know of the limited documentation. It is my opinion based on what I have studied over the last 12 years or so, that Pius was a good man who did what he believed he could, but was limited in his vision of the world and the Church to such an extent that opportunities for visible and clear leadership were often passed over. When faced with the tragedy that befell the Jews of Rome in October 1943, he failed.

New Light on Pius XII Cause? Not from this article ...

The National Catholic Register, not to be confused with the National Catholic Reporter, is a conservative Catholic media formerly owned by the Legion of Christ, but now operated by the Eternal Word Television Network founded by the famous, cloistered, Franciscan nun, Mother Angelica.  It enjoys considerable popular support among more traditionalist Catholics.  Its style is unapologetically "pro-Pope Benedict XVI" and a more defensive approach to Catholicism under the guise of apologetics. 

This article by news editor, John Burger, is interesting.  The title suggests that there is new evidence about Pius XII and the advancement of his cause for canonisation as a saint of the Catholic Church. What piqued my interest was the reference to Enrico Galeazzi about whom I in October 2010.   Reading Burger's article I ws surprised that there is nothing new, which is why, I suppose, he put a question mark in the heading. 

Overall, it is an interview which really adds nothing to what is already known, except for what I think is a bit of "spin" from  Agostino Corbanese from the Vatican Secretariat of State.  As far as I could tell from the entries for the Diocese of Rome, Corbanese is not involved in archival work.  If he is, it would be useful to know which one, and what his qualifications are.  Corbanese mentions opened archives.  It would be helpful to know exactly which archives he is referring to.  Certainly they are not the archives for Pius XII. 

I found his references to Jewish opposition to the proposed canonisation process of Pius XII to be irksome.  He conveniently ignores the considerable Catholic opposition to the process.

This article is, sadly, typical of the unreflective and ahistorical approach of a small segment of Catholic apologists who argue for Pius XII without solid historical and contextual approaches.  The Galeazzi aspect is interesting, but as I observed last October, it was ultimately fruitless.  It did raise the vexing "what if" question, that if Pius could send a layman to Washington to appeal for Rome, could he have not done so for the Jews of his own city?

Pius XII and Enrico Galeazzi, Rome, post-1945

This is Burger's article:

I will be posting an interview this weekend with the archeologist at St. Peter’s Basilica necropolis, Pietro Zander. He was at the Knights of Columbus Museum in New Haven, Conn., last week for the opening of an exhibit of Marian images from the Vatican.


Zander graciously gave me a personal tour through the exhibit and explained the significance of some of the paintings. He also talked a bit about his role in the beatification ceremonies for Blessed John Paul II a few days earlier.

Translating for us was Count Enrico Demajo, who heads the Knights of Columbus office in Rome. Count Demajo’s uncle was Count Enrico Galeazzi, an architect who was both the Knights’ representative in Rome and acting governor of Vatican City during World War II. Galeazzi was a friend of Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, who became Pope Pius XII and whose cause for canonization has been hampered by continuing controversy over his alleged inaction in protecting European Jews during the Nazi Holocaust.

Accompanying Zander and Demajo to New Haven was Salesian Father Agostino Corbanese, who oversees an archive of the Vatican Secretariat of State. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See’s Secretary of State, asked Father Corbanese to inspect the Knights’ New Haven archives of Count Galeazzi’s papers.

I sat down for a few minutes with Father Corbanese, and we discussed what the Galeazzi papers might reveal about Pius XII and the controversy over his cause.

What brings you to New Haven?

The superiors in the Secretariat of State, Cardinal Bertone and the sostituto [assistant Secretary of State] … asked me to come and see, especially from the point of view if, due to the closeness of Count Galeazzi with, at the time, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, who later became Pope Pius XII, and they had close links of friendship, just to see whether there were documents, hand-written documents, or documents of any kind, coming from the desk of Cardinal Pacelli, or Pope Pius XII. And I went through all this material.

What did you find?

I found, interestingly enough, due to the difficulties of the time…Count Galeazzi was asked to bring with him a letter signed by Pope Pius XII addressed to President [Franklin D.] Roosevelt. We were more or less at the end of the war, and diplomatic channels were difficult to follow, and so on. And since Count Galeazzi was a man to whom Pope Pius XII gave much relevance and attention, he was asked to do that. ...

[The letter, which asked for a halt to the Allied bombing of Rome, was not delivered because the Italian government signed an agreement with the Allies while Galeazzi was on his way to Washington.]

Count Galeazzi died [in 1986], and the heirs — Enrico Demajo and, I suppose, the family — gave all this material to the Knights of Columbus, and they went through a tremendous amount of work in ordering all this material. Let’s say that 90%, 80% of the material there are plans, reports on what Count Galeazzi did. He was the engineer, he was the man responsible for building and restoration of the papal palace. He was in charge of a special commission created by the newly-elected Pope Pius XII to look after the maintenance and restoration of the buildings. The buildings are so old that they need continuous care. So, many of his papers are requests for restoration, how restoration was carried on, what the expenses were, what colleagues were involved in these works of the restoration, and this has nothing to do with the life of the Pope himself.

One letter carried the signature of Pope Pius XII, and it was a permit, an invitation to authorities of one country in Europe, to let Count Galeazzi go through, deliver what he had to deliver, and come back with something he was supposed to collect and bring it to Rome. So, it was a visa — let’s call it that.

What was it that he had to deliver?


The little card, bearing the autographed signature of Pope Pius XII, the size of an ordinary postcard, carried no indication whatsoever about the identification of what the envoy was supposed to carry with him through the boundaries of the neighbouring country, in the terrible and frightening wartime in Europe.

Was there anything that you discovered here that might have some bearing on the cause of beatification of Pope Pius XII?

Yes. I know that the archives have been opened and will continue to be opened. The material may be of this kind: reports sent to Count Galeazzi from various people — articles, commentaries — not many — picking up criticisms, explaining situations, backgrounds, problems. They may be useful. There are a few hints to what the Pope did to help the Jews in Rome and in Europe, but, as I said, the purpose of the archives and the purpose of the collection of these papers by Count Galeazzi was not to make a study of that particular…he received letters to bring them to the attention of the Secretariat of State, and some of these letters had this kind of content. A number of these letters were typed — as they used to do in those times — in two or three different copies, carbon copies. Of course the original is not here because the original was meant to go to the pope’s office or the cardinal’s office, wherever. But they kept the copy. And they may be of some interest.

You have here in the States Sister Margherita Marchione, and she came, I was told by the archivist. The archivist told me unfortunately she remained only one day. ... And some of these materials were, can be, or will be, useful to her, because she continues to study and to present, to understand where these criticisms against Pius XII originated: where they came from, why, who picked them up for granted. That is her particular idea. That is her enterprise, and she wrote piles of books, collecting material, demonstrating that what was brought about like a flag — Pius XII didn’t do enough, he did too little, he kept silent, things like that — they’re not true because she goes on discovering witnesses and testimonies. So this material can be related to this kind of study she continues to carry on.

What is holding up the cause? Is there any movement on it?

I think that while the cause is going on, Pope Pius XII has already been proclaimed a venerable — meaning that his life, what he did, his attitudes, are ones of a real strong Christian — the virtues as they say have been studied and approved….There are some miracles being studied at the moment.

One of the major difficulties is the opposition against Pius XII from a number of Jewish groups, individual people, associations, who are still imbued with that kind of criticism: Pope Pius XII didn’t do enough, he kept silent, he didn’t defend the Jews. When Pope John Paul II approved the venerability of Pius XII there was a turmoil among the Jews. I personally think that that is not the case. You can do things at home, in your house. You cannot put your nose in what other people do. I cannot come and study and pass judgment on what you do.


So Jews, with all due respect the Catholic Church has towards them, have no right to stand up and say You must not proclaim Pius XII a blessed. What is the point? You’re not within your compound, you’re not within your house. You’re not at home.

Besides this, as I mentioned, is the fact of concretely, deeply, with serenity, with capacity, historical understanding, study the material, and of course the material dealing with the Second World War is as immense as the world is.

So I think any time, for any reason around the world, there is a discussion you have to take the points and calmly, nicely, with strength you have to analyze them, you have to come to a conclusion. You cannot say yes or no from the very beginning.

Especially since this seems to have stemmed from this play by Rolf Hochhuth, and who knows that that was not a smear campaign begun by the communists.

It would be extremely useful to go back to one of the latest books by Sister Margarita…. She maintains that, let’s call it, the “enemy” of Pius XII was the communist regime. Some people used to say that it was the Germans. She maintains it was not the Germans who put their loud voices and criticisms; it was the communists, it was Moscow — Moscow which tried to demolish the figure and authority of Pius XII, which was taken up by plays, by writers, media agencies and so on, for granted. Now Sister Margarita has clearly indicated that historical line of the Russians being behind the scenes because they saw in Pius XII the great enemy of the expansion of their power all over the world.

And, according to George Weigel, they tried to do the same with Pope John Paul II.

Exactly. Things keep repeating.

Reggie's Review of Michael Burleigh's Sacred Causes (2006)

I have long been a Burleigh reader and was honoured when he agreed to be one of my PhD examiners (he passed me!)  Reggie has written a very insightful review of Burleigh's Sacred Causes.  It is in two parts and is a very good recount of the principal features of Burleigh's narrative.  Of interest to me in particular, are his comments on Pius XII which begin the second part of the review.  Burleigh's treatment of Pius follows what I believe is an authentic historians response - he basis his judgement on the available data, and avoids the polemic that has so often clouded any rational debate on Pius XII.  It is long article, so rather than reproduce the review here, I encourage the reader to indulge and go to Reggie's blog and enjoy the experience.

Wistrich on Pius XII

Professor Robert Wistrich's article featured in Israel's National News during the days of Holocaust remembrance.  Wistrich is Neuburger Professor of European and Jewish history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the head of the University's Vidal Sassoon International Centre for the Study of Antisemitism.  He is a distinguished historian and one of the members of the International Catholic Jewish Historical Commission formed to examine ADSS in 1999.  His best known work is The Longest Hatred (1981).

Robert Wistrich

Pope Pius XII could have saved many Jews if he had publicly condemned the Nazi campaign of annihilation against the Jews during the Second World War, says Professor Robert Vistrich, who spoke to Arutz Sheva's Hebrew-language news service on Sunday, the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day.


Professor Vistrich was the only Jew on a special committee established one decade ago to examine Pius XII's behavior during the war. The committee was given access to church files documenting the pope's actions and words and those of other senior church officials. Its work was terminated after two years, when church leaders realized committee members were preparing to condemn the pope.

Pius XII “knew, from the summer of 1942, exactly what was happening in occupied Europe, and the scale of the slaughter of the Jewish people,” Vistrich said. Catholic churches were located in nearly every city across the continent, he pointed out.

“The question is what was done with this information, and what options he had. It is a fact that he was pressured to issue a condemnation and did not do so during the entire war. He did not name the Jewish people as the victims of the massacre,” Vistrich continued.

“He gave one speech on the radio in late 1942 in which he made a single statement about unfortunate people who are persecuted due to their race alone, but even there, he did not mention that the people in question were Jewish, and did not speak of the scale of the Holocaust.”

“If he would have said things openly, and would have announced that what was being done in Europe was a terrible violation of Christian humanitarian and ethical norms, millions of Catholics would have known about it, and some would have felt the obligation to do something,” Vistrich stated. A direct, open condemnation from the Pope may have led some Nazi officers to refuse orders as well, he said.

“The Germans may have imprisoned him following such a statement, but that would have given him the status of a great spiritual and ideological leader,” he added.

The pope had two reasons to avoid condemning the Nazis, Vistrich said: his fear for the safety of Catholic leaders throughout Europe, and his desire to see communist Russia, an enemy of the church, defeated in battle.

Pope Pius XII did help save Jews by allowing them to take shelter in churches in Italy, Vistrich noted. A relatively large percentage of Italian Jews survived the war. However, after the war Pius XII refused to return Jewish children sheltered in churches and monasteries to their families and to the Jewish people, he said. In addition, the pope refused to express regret that the Catholic Church had not done more to save the Jews of Europe.


Recent popes have sought to canonize Pius XII. Vistrich said they were not motivated by anti-Semitism or by support for his inaction during the Holocaust, but rather, “They are convinced that Pius did more than enough to save the Jews, despite the fact that the facts do not support this view.” Church leaders have made efforts to grow closer to the Jewish people, he noted.