ADSS 1.198 Charles-Roux to Maglione: request for a papal condemnation of German aggression

ADSS 1.198 François Charles-Roux (1), French Ambassador to the Holy See, to Luigi Maglione, Sec State.

Reference: AES 6441/39

Location and date: Rome, 11.09.1939

Summary statement: Ambassador asks for a papal declaration against German aggression against Poland.  Refers to German announcement of the fall of Warsaw on 08.09. (2)

Language: French

Text:

PERSONAL

According to my understanding of certain radio broadcasts, events in Poland have come to a dramatic pass, with Warsaw (whose capture the Germans announced three days ago) having been defended street by street, civilian populations in towns and villages bombed, strafed and starving, children butchered, hostages host and priests tortured.

In the face of such a situation, which revolts feelings already sickened by Germany’s aggression against Poland, I am more convinced that public opinion, including some in the country where I am writing these words, eagerly awaits some word from the Holy Father as a verdict and condemnation of such violence and cruelty.

I am taking the liberty of writing this to you so as not to lose more time by arranging a visit in person, and I thank you in anticipation for the accustomed indulgence shown to the French Ambassador and appreciation of how his duty in present circumstances impels the recording of such feeling which it is trusted you will forgive.  You do, I know, realise that my concern for my own country’s interests has never minimised my loyalty to the Holy See.

Personal note of Domenico Tardini:

12.09.1939 – Delivered by me to the Holy Father and returned by him to me 13.09.1939.

Notes: 

(1) François Charles-Roux (1879-1961), French Ambassdor to the Holy See 1932-40.

(2) The reports were false.  Wehrmacht troops reached the outskirts of the city on 08.09.1939.  Polish forces finally capitulated on 28.09.1939.

ADSS 10.279 Filippo Bernardini (Switzerland) to Luigi Maglione - Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz.

This is one of the first times the name "Auschwitz" appears in ADSS.  The attachment that was not published in ADSS appears to have been a copy of the so-called "Auschwitz Protocols" written by Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler, Slovakian Jews who escaped Birkenau in April 1944.  The transports from Hungary had stopped by this point.  Because of conditions in central and northern Italy, seriously disrupted by the war, the document did not reach Rome until October 1944.  I have found no evidence to suggest any other reason for the lack of reference to the Protocols in ADSS.

ADSS 10.279 Filippo Bernardini to Cardinal Maglione

Reference: Report number 23401 (AES 6993/44)

Location and date: Berne, 28.07.1944

Summary statement: News of the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz and their extermination.

Language: Italian

Text:

I have the honour to send to your most eminent reverence by way of documentation, the attached report (1) relating to the deportation of the Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz in Upper Silesia and the treatment reserved for them.  I have no way of checking the truth of the information contained in the same, however, I know the person who has reported it well, and have no reason to doubt their sincerity.

I take this opportunity to inform your eminence that in recent days the Swiss press has, on several occasions, emphasised the protests of the Protestant Church over the persecution of the Jews in Hungary and their interest in favour of them.  I am sending a clipping from yesterday’s Lausanne Gazette which returns to this issue. (2)  Evidently various Protestant bodies, in consultation with various Jewish committees want to give it much publicity.  A Hungarian friend pointed out to me that since nothing is published about it in the Catholic press, Swiss public opinion could be induced to believe that the Catholic Church does nothing to help and rescue the Jews. (3)

Cross references: 

(1) The report was based on the disposition made by two Slovak Jews – Rudolf Vrba (originally Walter Rosenburg 1924-2006) and Alfred Wetzler 1918-1988) – deported to Auschwitz and who escaped in April 1944.  The document (four pages in length and not published) arrived after a long journey, and appears to be an abstract in French, of the German original. See ADSS 10.204.  Statistically, the French version omits mention of 50,000 Jews of Lithuania; making the death toll 1,715,000 instead of 1,765,000.

(2) Not published.

(3) See ADSS 10.381.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vrba-Wetzler_report (Accessed 18.03.2012)

"A Few Questions ..."

There are aspects of this article from the Jewish Press I came across that might well be "tongue in cheek" and there is some substance to some of the questions. What I found most intriguing about the article is the persistence of myths and ahistorical argument that is now entering its seventh or eighth decade.  There is sufficient reliable and solid historical material available for the interested reader and researcher to make a fundamentally sound assessment of Pius XII.  My comments are in red.

A few Questions to Lover of Pope Pius XII

Why did the Pope excommunicate every single Communist in the world, but never excommunicate a single Nazi?

By: DovBear Published: October 1st, 2013

Thanks to Twitter, I am in correspondence with an Italian historian who is trying mightily to convince me that Pius 12 was an all around good guy and lover of the Jewish people. By way of evidence he has supplied the fact that a few famous Jews, who were not historians, said some nice words about the Pope back in the 50s and a report compiled by some Yad Vashem historians that I have not read because it costs $50.

Meanwhile, I keep asking the following questions. Should he answer them (holding breath) I will report back.

 #1: Why did the Pope excommunicate every single Communist in the world, but never excommunicate a single Nazi? This question is not a new one and demands and commands serious attention.  Pius' clear condemnation of communism in post-war Europe was loud and constant.

#2 Why did he cancel and suppress his predecessors’ anti Nazi encyclical? This is not accurate.  Pius XII took sections of the 1938 text written for Pius XI by John La Farge and incorporated it into his first encyclical - Summi Pontificatus (October 1939)

#3 Why did he protest the Nazi euthanasia program but not Final Solution? (The Nazis backed down) A fair question.

#4 Why did he protest Nazi round ups of converted Jews, but not round ups of non converted Jews? There are levels of complexity here, but in essence the question does ask for clarification of a very uncomfortable reality in parts of German-occupied Europe as well as in Axis allies and in Vichy France.

#5 Why did he protest invasion of Scandinavia (full page headline on the front page of the Vatican newspaper!) but not the Final Solution? This is unknown to me.  Perhaps a reader could help here.

#6 Why didn’t he protest or quit  when Civiltà Cattolica ran a series of editorials accusing Jews of ritual murder, notably in 1915 following the Bellis case? His direct superior, the monster Cardinal Rafael Merry Del Val personally approved those editorials. Why didn’t he complain? Something of a long-bow here and indicative of a lack of understanding as to the inner-workings of the Vatican's various departments.

#7: Why did he permit the German Churches to hold a Requiem Mass upon Hitler’s death? Meanwhile, there there was no papal prayer or Mass celebrated in solidarity with the Jews. The best known requiem Mass was that ordered by the Archbishop of Breslau, Cardinal Bertram, for all parishes in the diocese.  In April 1945 Breslau was under siege by the Red Army, making the request for parish requiems all the more odd.  The "best spin" was that Bertram was asking Catholics to pray for the dead head of state.  I admit, it was probably not the most successful pastoral strategy.

ADSS 3.1.22 Montini notes: Papal "silence" ...

In the opening weeks of the war there was expectation from many sources that the Pope would speak out forcefully and condemn German atrocities in Poland.  Pius had adopted a strict formal and public neutrality upon the outbreak of the war, understood by most as a political requirement of his position, but not as a "muzzle" for his voice in speaking out against moral evil.  Giovanni Battista Montini who worked beside Pius XII throughout the war noted that the perceived silence of the pope was going to be a major obstacle to overcome, if it was overcome at all.  This was to be a vexatious issue throughout the entire war.  

Giovanni Battista Montini

ADSS 3.1.22

Reference: AES 7478/39

Location and date: Vatican, 08.10.1939

Summary statement: The press does not explain the Pope properly – negative opinion follows.  Necessary to explain to the Pope’s opinion towards Poland.

Language: Italian

Text:

After an audience with His Holiness.

08.10.1939:  Perhaps it would be good to prepare an article that explains the attitude of the Holy Father with regard to Poland. (1) From various sources it is insinuated that the Holy Father does not speak as expected, has not invoked the principles, deplored the aggression etc.  La Croix, for example reported the record of the Pope’s speeches, mutilating them so that the French public can not know the true tenor of the words and the attitude of the Pope. (2) The Italian and French press give such a succinct report that the people believe (as is clear from the letters that arrive at the Holy See) that the Holy See remains indifferent or silent etc.

It might take an occasion to explain what is and has been the real attitude of the Holy See: His Holiness did not fail to recall the “principles” (Cf speeches at the presentation of credentials of the ambassadors of Poland and Belgium etc).  On the occasion of audiences, where a word of “consolation” had been requested (such as Cardinal Hlond to the Holy Father) His Holiness spoke with great affection and so on.

Cross references: 

(1) See ADSS 3.1.28

(2) The French Catholic paper La Croix published on 14.10.1939 the full official text of the speech with the remark that delays in the post had resulted in the full text not arriving in time for publishing.

1942 Christmas Message of Pius XII

Throughout the summer and autumn of 1942 Allied diplomats immured within the Vatican had been exerting pressure on Pius XII to issue a public protest against German atrocities against civilian populations and, in particular, the persecution of the Jews.  In earlier posts I have presented the documentation given in ADSS as well as FRUS.  There was a faint hope that Pius would break away from his customary reserve and speak plainly, but that seemed to fade as the months went by and no indication was given that a change was likely.  

When the pope did speak his address was long - 45 minutes - and delivered in his usual manner of general comments on the current situation within the broad context of Catholic teaching.  It is important to note that what the pope did say as opposed to what he did not say was still of value.  In his role as Chief Pastor of the Church, the pope did outline Catholic teaching and offer a way forward based on principles of natural law and Thomistic theology.

The oft-quoted section has to be seen within its context.  It comes at the end of the speech and is part of a cry for the voiceless - victims of aerial bombardment, widows, orphans, the countless dead and those condemned to death on the grounds of nationality or race.

Pius did not name names, but the Nazi regime listened to the broadcast and heard it as an indictment of National Socialism.  The British and Americans heard it and declared it a condemnation of German atrocities, although privately they expressed reservations that it was likely to be the best they would get.  The Jews of Europe most likely did not hear it or any of the other victim groups for that matter.  Nonetheless, the pope did say something - it may not have been explicit enough for many, but it was a statement nonetheless.

Arguments over the text have gone on for decades.  The principal complaint is that the pope's moral duty was to speak out clearly and unambiguously, naming the murder of European Jewry as a crime beyond any other committed in the war so far.  The counter-argument says that Pius was painfully aware of the situation and feared making things worse by naming the extermination process in clear terms.  

My understanding of the events leading up to the 1942 Christmas address is that Pius was caught in a very difficult situation.  The outcome of the war was by no means decided in December 1942 although hope for an Allied victory was becoming something more than a dream.  What causes me to lean towards a more negative assessment of the Christmas address lies in the Allied Declaration made a week earlier that named the slaughter of the Jews as a crime for which Germany would be held accountable.  In that respect the Allies had named the crime explicitly - it was secret no more.  

Pius believed that if he condemned the crimes of one side he would be obliged by papal neutrality to condemn the crimes of the other side as well.  It is competently arguable that Pius had a clear idea of crimes committed by the Soviets in Eastern Europe, especially in the Baltic States and eastern Poland and that he worried about what would happen to the Church "in the East" if he named or suggested one of the Allied powers to be as guilty as the Germans of atrocities.

In any case the Christmas message of 1942 was as far as Pius XII believed a clear statement against atrocities in general and the extermination of the Jews in particular.

The text is posted in the "pages" section of the blog.

ADSS 7.53 Maglione notes on meeting with Osborne & Tittmann

As the year wore on and the diplomats inside the Vatican kept trying to elicit a positive response from Cardinal Maglione on the subject of a papal protest, both Osborne and Tittmann remained adamant that the pope should not be distracted by fears of Allied bombing of Italian cities.  Maglione tried equally as hard to elicit a promise of some sort for the protection of Rome and other Italian cities.  At the end, the Cardinal writes as though lamenting, that despite the expressions of Jewish gratitude for all the pope has done, Osborne still insisted the pope speak publicly against the extermination of the Jews.

ADSS 7.53 

Cardinal Maglione, notes

Reference: A.E.S. 6409/42

Location and date: Vatican, 14.12.1942

Summary statement:  Maglione communicates to Osborne that the Italian embassy announced the departure from Rome of the Italian military Supreme Command; he awaits an answer concerning the Germans. Osborne observes that the Pope is too preoccupied about the bombing of Italian cities. The Pope should protest against the massacre of the Jews.

Language: Italian

Text: 

This morning I spoke with the English Minister (1) and, after, the Charge d’affaires of the USA (2) and I said to them: “Yesterday the Italian Ambassador communicated to me orally, but officially, that the Supreme Commander, Mussolini, and Military HQ have left Rome.(3)

 “I then asked Ambassador Guariglia if there are any German military leaders in Rome: if this is the case, I think they should also leave Rome. “Guariglia responded saying he would carry my question and suggestion to the Italian Government”.

I added; “In waiting for a response on this point I also ask you to bring the foregoing to the attention of your Governments”. (4)

The English Minister made the observation that his communications with the government were slow: it would be therefore good to entrust the Apostolic Delegate of London to inform the English Government. (I answered that I proposed to do this).

The English Minister then added that, although the Supreme Commander Mussolini and the General Staff are leaving Rome, the ministries will remain.

I answered that it would be dealt with, in the event, of civil offices, not military.

To Rome, I added, there are no, as far as I know war factories… ”.

“But there are the barracks, the troops…”

“In a city of one and a half million inhabitants it will be necessary to have troops in order to maintain public order!”

“The police are not enough?”

“I do not believe so.”

At this point the Minister delivered the attached letter to me, where it repeats the news that the policy of the English government expressed 19.01.1942 has not changed. (5)

I answered: If its Government had the evil intention to bomb Rome, I would try and find many excuses. But I believe in the good will of the Government of London and hope that it will take into consideration our valid reasons.

The Minister has pointed to the impression that the Holy See worries in a particular manner about Italian cities, when it speaks about bombing, because they are Italian.

I observed: firstly there are the most special reasons for Rome.  I reminded him of these (and I have not failed to repeat that if Rome was bombed, Holy See will protest); secondly, The Holy See has intervened against the bombing of civilian populations of Italian cities, because such bombings have happened.  The Minister must not forget that the Holy Father spoke against the bombing of unarmed populations on other occasions: when the English cities were bombed and all understood that the bombing of the English cities did not indeed escape the severe words of the Holy Father. (6)

The minister recognised the justice of my observation [about the Pope speaking against bombing cities] and then exclaimed:  But why does the Holy See not intervene against the terrible massacres of the Jews?  

I recalled that the Holy Father had already spoken in his messages that the right to life, to a peaceful existence and sharing of the goods of the earth belong to all people of every race and confession.  

And one cannot ignore how much the Holy Father has done to help the poor Jews.  They know this and frequently thank the Holy See. 

The minister insisted on this point:  he would have the Holy See intervene to stop the massacre of the Jews.

Cross References:

(1) Sir Francis D’Arcy Osborne

(2) Harold Tittmann

(3) ADSS 7.52

(4) Tittmann referred the cardinal to the note of the United States government passed by him via the Minister in Bern.  See FRUS 1942.3 p796.

(5) ADSS 5.208 – concerning bombing of Rome

(6) Cf Homily 24.11.1940, ADSS 4.177, 191; Christmas Address 24.12.1941, ADSS 5.172