Charles Aznavour's "What makes a man a man?" (1973) has these lines:
We love to pull apart someone And spread some gossip just for fun Or start a rumour. And I can't help but think the same is true for Pius XII. The rumour that has now been circulating cyberspace is one that I wrote about at length earlier, namely the allegation by Michael Hesemann that Eugenio Pacelli was responsible for saving 200,000 Jews. My google alert on Pius has been hauling in many blogs and websites where this unsubstantiated material has been given some coverage.
One example uses the original article from the London journalist Simon Caldwell.
Others such as the article by Jeanette Pryor on David Horowitz's News Real Blog take critics of Pius to task using the attention grabbing headline It's Time to Retire "Hitler's Pope" Lie. I agree with Ms Pryor completely, but wonder why she resorts to the "non sectarian" work of Pave The Way as her main source of historical evidence. Surely she would have been better served by reading what mainstream historians have been writing for some years? But then again, Ms Pryor believes Golda Meir was the first Prime Minister of Israel. It might be a good idea to read some accurate history first, before accusing others of promoting "lies" about Pius XII.
I read the article and found it contained nothing new in fact one part borders on the offensive. She attempts to parallel the experience of the Judenrat and their "choiceless choices" and the Vatican. There is one huge difference between the Judenrat and the Vatican. Regardless of what the Judenrat did or did not do, the end result would always be the same - they were doomed to destruction. Whatever the Vatican did or did not do, they would survive.
Yet another blog ruminates on the old Lapide chestnut of the 860,000 as well as Hesemann's "facts". I wonder where it will end, if it ends at all. Even the new Protect the Pope site in the United Kingdom to counter anti-papal visit feeling has entered the fray with a startlingly ahistorical response to the questions about Pius XII. On what is otherwise a quite moderate site that does attempt to respond with logical and clearly researched answers, the comments about Pius XII are particularly jarring:
Peter Tatchell said:
Benedict has also paved the way for eventual sainthood of Pope, Pius XII, despite the war-time pontiff’s failure to speak out publicly, either during or after the Holocaust, against the Nazi mass murder of six million Jews and millions of others, including Russians, Poles, disabled, gays, Roma and many more. Pius XII was no saint. The fact that Pope Benedict wants to makes him a saint shows how far he has strayed from the moral and ethical values of most Catholics and most of humanity.
Protect the Pope comment:
During the war, the New York Times called Pius XII “the only ruler left on the Continent of Europe who dares to raise his voice at all…the Pope put himself squarely against Hitlerism…he left no doubt that the Nazi aims are also irreconcilable with his own conception of a Christmas peace.” (Christmas 1941).
New research has found that Pope Pius XII may have arranged the exodus of about 200,000 Jews from Germany just three weeks after Kristallnacht. The research is being carried out by Dr. Michael Hesemann, a German historian who is combing through the Vatican archives for the Pave the Way Foundation, a U.S.-based interfaith group. (Haaretz, 7/7/10).
On the day of Pius XII’s death in 1958, Golda Meir, Israel’s Foreign Minister, cabled the following message of condolence to the Vatican: “We share in the grief of humanity…When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pope was raised for the victims.” (Wikipedia).
As early as December of 1940, in an article published in Time magazine, the renowned Nobel Prize winning physicist Albert Einstein, himself a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, paid tribute to the moral “courage” of Pope Pius and the Catholic Church in opposing “the Hitlerian onslaught” on liberty.
Sir Martin Gilbert described as “a British historian and the world’s leading expert on the Holocaust”, is quoted as saying that the Pope should be considered as a “Righteous Gentile” by Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust remembrance authority.
In his classic study, Three Popes and the Jews, Israeli historian and diplomat Pinchas Lapide, concluded that Pope Pius XII ‘was instrumental in saving at least 700,000, but probably as many as 860,000 Jews from certain death at Nazi hands’.
Protect the Pope comment: Peter Tatchell’s concludes that ‘The fact that Pope Benedict wants to makes him a saint shows how far he has strayed from the moral and ethical values of most Catholics and most of humanity.’ This one sentence alone reveals Peter Tatchell’s hatred of Pope Benedict and the Catholic Church he represents as the Vicar of Christ. Tatchell reveals his extremism in all its ugliness when he wickedly seeks to portray Pope Benedict as an immoral man, even a monster, beyond the moral and ethical values of humanity. No fair minded person could accept such an absurd accusation!
Protect the Pope would be advised to do some serious reading before launching onto the high seas of the internet where it appears most of their response evidence came from!
Monday, September 6, 2010
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
And while on the ADSS
One book that represents something of a "lost opportunity" on the Acts and Documents is Pierre Blet's summary volume entitled "Pius XII and the Second World War". I wrote an online review for Amazon in July 2000. I think it worth putting up here on the Blog.
To the reader unfamiliar with the complexity of Holocaust and Catholic history Fr Blet's book could appear helpful. Indeed as a summary of the Vatican's 12 volume series of Vatican during WW2 it is indeed helpful. I argue that this is where the positives end. This work is so tightly bound by its parameters that it is difficult to see how it contributes anything to the debate over Pius XII's wartime role. Blet has, by his own admission, produced an edited version of the twelve volume series Actes et Documents. The lack of references, an index and contextual detail from both the wider Catholic world and the war years make this work weak. While Cornwell may have stirred things up by asking difficult questions - at least he took the risk and asked them. By failing to even address Pius' pre-1939 history (where the evidence for his future action or inaction lay) Blet has avoided taking any risks with the subject matter. It makes the case for the Pope's defenders look precarious. The treatment of the Rome Jews in October 1943 belies the whole neutrality scenario of Pius XII. The documentation cannot hope to cover all the aspects of this part of the nightmare of the Shoah. While the train rolled out of Rome he was silent. At every stop up the Italian peninsula people rang the Vatican to inform them where the train was in the hope that the Pope would say something. The silence of October 1943 has no justification for whatever reason. I respect Cornwell because he at least tried to make sense of the man's inaction. I cannot respect Father Blet's work since it looks alarmingly like a "damage control" exercise out to crush any suggestion that Pius did make mistakes after all.
Ten years later I think I may have been a tad harsh on Blet. The work is helpful as a summary of the documents, but my criticisms regarding a lack of index and direct reference to documents stand. And I publicly confess that the language of "respect" for Cornwall was inappropriate - "Hitler's Pope" is airport fiction stuff. It just goes to show what a difference a decade can make! And for something a little lighter, I have included the two comments posted about the review. Both, curiously, were posted this year (2010). One clearly thinks I am mad, the other, just bad.
Doggreen had this to say on February 15: You are obviously an anti-catholic and an idiot. Golda Meir, awarded Pope Pius the title "A rightous [sic] gentile." Every time the Pope spoke up the Nazi's executed thousands of Jews.......Never mind you are too damn stupid to understand.
(Never let the truth get in the way of a good dose of vitriol I say! Clearly Doggreen knows something the rest of the world doesn't - Righteous Gentile?)
And on March 27 James E Egolf wrote: The Catholic Bashers who attack Pope Pius XII cannot cite one source from the Vatican Documents to accuse Pope Pius XII-not one. The Vatican Documents have been digitized, and 99% plus of his tenure as Pope have NO indication of Pope Pius XII hating Jews or anyone else. The documents do confirm Pope Pius XII's compassion, kindness, mercy, and rare courage. Not one of Pope Pius XII's critics have looked at the actual documents-not one. They repeat each other's media driven stupidity and then get angry when the actual historical sources refute their media driven lying and stupidity.
(I have had a short online discussion a few months after this post with James and he strikes me as someone who is prepared to listed to an alternative view.)
Oh the wonderful world of blogging and internet discussion!
To the reader unfamiliar with the complexity of Holocaust and Catholic history Fr Blet's book could appear helpful. Indeed as a summary of the Vatican's 12 volume series of Vatican during WW2 it is indeed helpful. I argue that this is where the positives end. This work is so tightly bound by its parameters that it is difficult to see how it contributes anything to the debate over Pius XII's wartime role. Blet has, by his own admission, produced an edited version of the twelve volume series Actes et Documents. The lack of references, an index and contextual detail from both the wider Catholic world and the war years make this work weak. While Cornwell may have stirred things up by asking difficult questions - at least he took the risk and asked them. By failing to even address Pius' pre-1939 history (where the evidence for his future action or inaction lay) Blet has avoided taking any risks with the subject matter. It makes the case for the Pope's defenders look precarious. The treatment of the Rome Jews in October 1943 belies the whole neutrality scenario of Pius XII. The documentation cannot hope to cover all the aspects of this part of the nightmare of the Shoah. While the train rolled out of Rome he was silent. At every stop up the Italian peninsula people rang the Vatican to inform them where the train was in the hope that the Pope would say something. The silence of October 1943 has no justification for whatever reason. I respect Cornwell because he at least tried to make sense of the man's inaction. I cannot respect Father Blet's work since it looks alarmingly like a "damage control" exercise out to crush any suggestion that Pius did make mistakes after all.
Ten years later I think I may have been a tad harsh on Blet. The work is helpful as a summary of the documents, but my criticisms regarding a lack of index and direct reference to documents stand. And I publicly confess that the language of "respect" for Cornwall was inappropriate - "Hitler's Pope" is airport fiction stuff. It just goes to show what a difference a decade can make! And for something a little lighter, I have included the two comments posted about the review. Both, curiously, were posted this year (2010). One clearly thinks I am mad, the other, just bad.
Doggreen had this to say on February 15: You are obviously an anti-catholic and an idiot. Golda Meir, awarded Pope Pius the title "A rightous [sic] gentile." Every time the Pope spoke up the Nazi's executed thousands of Jews.......Never mind you are too damn stupid to understand.
(Never let the truth get in the way of a good dose of vitriol I say! Clearly Doggreen knows something the rest of the world doesn't - Righteous Gentile?)
And on March 27 James E Egolf wrote: The Catholic Bashers who attack Pope Pius XII cannot cite one source from the Vatican Documents to accuse Pope Pius XII-not one. The Vatican Documents have been digitized, and 99% plus of his tenure as Pope have NO indication of Pope Pius XII hating Jews or anyone else. The documents do confirm Pope Pius XII's compassion, kindness, mercy, and rare courage. Not one of Pope Pius XII's critics have looked at the actual documents-not one. They repeat each other's media driven stupidity and then get angry when the actual historical sources refute their media driven lying and stupidity.
(I have had a short online discussion a few months after this post with James and he strikes me as someone who is prepared to listed to an alternative view.)
Oh the wonderful world of blogging and internet discussion!
Sunday, August 29, 2010
ADSS and references to Jews and elements of "The Final Solution"
One of the re-occurring problems in the study of Pius XII and what he and the Vatican knew or did not know during the war lies in the simple fact that the Acts and Documents of the Holy See during the Second World War are so often overlooked.
The collection of over 5000 documents is an unavoidable source for any student or scholar who wants to grasp the complex realities surrounding Vatican responses to the murder of European Jewry. What ADSS reveals is, quite simply, a high degree of awareness of events occurring across German Occupied Europe. When compared with the growing awareness of the Holocaust in Britain and the USA as demonstrated by scholars such as Richard Breitman. Breitman's books, Official Secrets: What the Nazis Planned; What the British and Americans Knew and US Intelligence and the Nazis, the student discovers great similarities.
Table 1: "The Conventional War"
Vol Title Docs Jews
1 War Mar 1939–August 1940 379 4
2 Letters of Pius XII to the German bishops 124 4
3.1 Poland and Baltic Sates Feb 1939–Dec 1941 344 10
3.2 Poland and Baltic States Jan 1942–May 1946 261 6
4 War: Jun 1940 –Jun 1941 433 8
5 War: Jul 1941–Oct 1942 511 11
7 War: Nov 1942–Dec 1943 505 7
11 War: Jan 1944–May 1945 552 6
Table 2: The Victims of War
Vol Title Docs Jews
6 Mar 1939–Dec 1940 419 154 (36%)
8 Jan 1941–Dec 1942 581 195 (33.5%)
9 Jan 1943–Dec 1943 492 205 (41.6%)
10 Jan 1944–Jul 1945 488 180 (36.8%)
Of the 5,089 documents in ADSS, 734 (14.5%) relate directly to persecution and murder of Jews. When placed in context and the Vatican's global concerns, the number of documents related to the dispossession and murder of the Jews is significant.
The collection of over 5000 documents is an unavoidable source for any student or scholar who wants to grasp the complex realities surrounding Vatican responses to the murder of European Jewry. What ADSS reveals is, quite simply, a high degree of awareness of events occurring across German Occupied Europe. When compared with the growing awareness of the Holocaust in Britain and the USA as demonstrated by scholars such as Richard Breitman. Breitman's books, Official Secrets: What the Nazis Planned; What the British and Americans Knew and US Intelligence and the Nazis, the student discovers great similarities.
Table 1: "The Conventional War"
Vol Title Docs Jews
1 War Mar 1939–August 1940 379 4
2 Letters of Pius XII to the German bishops 124 4
3.1 Poland and Baltic Sates Feb 1939–Dec 1941 344 10
3.2 Poland and Baltic States Jan 1942–May 1946 261 6
4 War: Jun 1940 –Jun 1941 433 8
5 War: Jul 1941–Oct 1942 511 11
7 War: Nov 1942–Dec 1943 505 7
11 War: Jan 1944–May 1945 552 6
Table 2: The Victims of War
Vol Title Docs Jews
6 Mar 1939–Dec 1940 419 154 (36%)
8 Jan 1941–Dec 1942 581 195 (33.5%)
9 Jan 1943–Dec 1943 492 205 (41.6%)
10 Jan 1944–Jul 1945 488 180 (36.8%)
Of the 5,089 documents in ADSS, 734 (14.5%) relate directly to persecution and murder of Jews. When placed in context and the Vatican's global concerns, the number of documents related to the dispossession and murder of the Jews is significant.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
After a few weeks away ...
John Allen is a regular columnist with the Kansas-based National Catholic Reporter, a left-of-centre English language journal. He is widely regarded as one of the best Vaticanistas around. His column this week is of interest from my perspective because of the unnecessary blunders caused when time is not taken to get facts right and express them in such a way they are easily understood. Benedict XVI's PR disasters are not stand-alone incidents. The 1999 International Christian Jewish Historical Commission fell foul of a similar information disaster when the Vatican effectively shut down the work of the commission. No amount of "spin" takes away the impression that there are things to hide or conceal. And impressions are what many remember - not convoluted statements attempting to justify or "put the record straight".
Allen's column adds to the reasoned arguments why the archives for Pius XII and the war years must be opened as soon as possible and with complete transparency. They must not only be fully open, but they must appear to be fully open.
Read the column here: 'Attack on Ratzinger': Italian book assesses Benedict's papacy
The section on the mess around the lifting of the excommunication of Richard Williamson is worth copying here:
It concerns the affair of Bishop Richard Williamson, one of four traditionalist prelates whose excommunications were lifted by Pope Benedict XVI in January 2009. Williamson infamously gave an interview to Swedish television in November 2008, repeating statements he had made two decades earlier in Canada, to the effect that Nazis did not use gas chambers and that only 200,000 to 300,000 Jews had died in Nazi camps during the Second World War. The interview was not broadcast in Sweden until Jan. 21, 2009, but its contents were anticipated in a piece in the German weekly Der Spiegel the day before, on Jan. 20.
By that stage, Benedict XVI had already decided (sometime in late 2008) to lift the excommunications of the four bishops -- seeing it, he would later insist, as the beginning of a process of reconciliation, not the end. A formal decree was presented to Bishop Bernard Fellay, leader of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, on Jan. 17, 2009, and it took effect on Jan. 21. The decree was not made public by the Vatican, however, until noon Rome time on Jan. 24, when it was published in that day's news bulletin.
Once that happened, headlines about the pope "rehabilitating a Holocaust denier" became the shot heard round the world. After weeks of controversy, Benedict XVI would eventually issue an agonizing letter to the world's bishops apologizing for the hurt caused by the affair.
All that, of course, is a matter of record. What Tornielli and Rodari add is that on Jan. 22, 2009 -- two days after Der Spiegel broke the story of Williams' interview, and two days before the Vatican formally announced the lifting of the excommunications -- a high-level meeting took place in the Vatican to discuss the presentation of the pope's decree. The meeting was convened by Italian Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state. Also present were:
•Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, then president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission for relations with the traditionalists;
•Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith;
•Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, then prefect of the Congregation for Bishops;
•Cardinal Claudio Hummes, prefect of the Congregation for Clergy;
•Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts;
•Archbishop Fernando Filoni, substitute in the Secretariat of State.
The gathering, in other words, brought together the Vatican's most senior brain trust. Tornielli and Rodario reconstruct the meeting on the basis of a previously unpublished set of confidential Vatican minutes.
Here's the mind-blowing point: During the meeting, there was no mention whatsoever of Williamson's explosive comments on the Holocaust, despite the fact that they had been in circulation for two full days. The minutes reflect a detailed discussion about whether, and how, the lifting of the excommunications applied to other clergy of the Society of St. Pius X, but there was apparently no consideration of how this move might go down in the broader court of public opinion.
Two key figures were not on the guest list for the Jan. 22 meeting: Lombardi, who had to explain the decision to the world's media, and Cardinal Walter Kasper, who had to explain it to the Jews. Instead, Filoni led a brief discussion about a proposed statement to the press, and the minutes reflect general agreement not to grant any media interviews. Coccopalmerio was commissioned to publish an article in L'Osservatore Romano explaining the decree, but only "after a few days."
The lack of any sense of urgency, or alarm, about public reaction is astonishing. The impression one gets is that the Vatican's best and brightest were acutely sensitive to the kinds of questions canon lawyers might ask, but either unaware of -- or, even more troubling, indifferent to -- how the decree might strike the rest of the world.
The rest is history. After being whipped around by a global tsunami for 10 full days, the Vatican's Secretariat of State finally released a statement on Feb. 4, calling Williamson's statements on the Holocaust "unacceptable." It clarified that by lifting the excommunications, Benedict XVI only opened a door to dialogue, and it's now up to the traditionalists to prove their "adherence to the doctrine and discipline of the church." The four prelates still have no authority to act as Catholic bishops, and their movement is still not recognized. If they want to be fully reintegrated into the church, they will have to accept the teaching of the Second Vatican Council.
Looking back, here's the thing.
Even if Williamson had never given his interview to Swedish TV, anyone looking at the situation from a PR point of view should have anticipated that once the Vatican announced these four bishops were no longer excommunicated, reporters would look into their backgrounds. Had anyone in the Vatican spent even five minutes on Google searching under the name "Richard Williamson," his troubling history on the Holocaust would have leapt off the screen, which was a matter of public record long before he spoke to the Swedes. (Indeed, all the Swedish journalist did was ask Williamson to repeat stuff he had already said.)
Armed with that information, the Vatican could have issued its detailed Feb. 4 statement along with the decree itself, to explain from the outset that these guys have not been "rehabilitated," but rather given an opportunity to clean up their act. They could also have organized a press conference, so there would be TV sound bites assuring the world that this decision in no way signified a rollback on Catholic/Jewish relations or anything else.
Under any set of circumstances, failure to take such common sense steps is hard to explain.
Yet Williamson did give that interview to Swedish TV, and in that light, the revelation that the pope's top aides assembled two days after it went public and still seemed oblivious to the train wreck hurtling towards them -- well, you'll never need additional proof that the Vatican has a PR problem.
Tolle legge, tolle legge!
Allen's column adds to the reasoned arguments why the archives for Pius XII and the war years must be opened as soon as possible and with complete transparency. They must not only be fully open, but they must appear to be fully open.
Read the column here: 'Attack on Ratzinger': Italian book assesses Benedict's papacy
The section on the mess around the lifting of the excommunication of Richard Williamson is worth copying here:
It concerns the affair of Bishop Richard Williamson, one of four traditionalist prelates whose excommunications were lifted by Pope Benedict XVI in January 2009. Williamson infamously gave an interview to Swedish television in November 2008, repeating statements he had made two decades earlier in Canada, to the effect that Nazis did not use gas chambers and that only 200,000 to 300,000 Jews had died in Nazi camps during the Second World War. The interview was not broadcast in Sweden until Jan. 21, 2009, but its contents were anticipated in a piece in the German weekly Der Spiegel the day before, on Jan. 20.
By that stage, Benedict XVI had already decided (sometime in late 2008) to lift the excommunications of the four bishops -- seeing it, he would later insist, as the beginning of a process of reconciliation, not the end. A formal decree was presented to Bishop Bernard Fellay, leader of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, on Jan. 17, 2009, and it took effect on Jan. 21. The decree was not made public by the Vatican, however, until noon Rome time on Jan. 24, when it was published in that day's news bulletin.
Once that happened, headlines about the pope "rehabilitating a Holocaust denier" became the shot heard round the world. After weeks of controversy, Benedict XVI would eventually issue an agonizing letter to the world's bishops apologizing for the hurt caused by the affair.
All that, of course, is a matter of record. What Tornielli and Rodari add is that on Jan. 22, 2009 -- two days after Der Spiegel broke the story of Williams' interview, and two days before the Vatican formally announced the lifting of the excommunications -- a high-level meeting took place in the Vatican to discuss the presentation of the pope's decree. The meeting was convened by Italian Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state. Also present were:
•Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, then president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission for relations with the traditionalists;
•Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith;
•Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, then prefect of the Congregation for Bishops;
•Cardinal Claudio Hummes, prefect of the Congregation for Clergy;
•Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts;
•Archbishop Fernando Filoni, substitute in the Secretariat of State.
The gathering, in other words, brought together the Vatican's most senior brain trust. Tornielli and Rodario reconstruct the meeting on the basis of a previously unpublished set of confidential Vatican minutes.
Here's the mind-blowing point: During the meeting, there was no mention whatsoever of Williamson's explosive comments on the Holocaust, despite the fact that they had been in circulation for two full days. The minutes reflect a detailed discussion about whether, and how, the lifting of the excommunications applied to other clergy of the Society of St. Pius X, but there was apparently no consideration of how this move might go down in the broader court of public opinion.
Two key figures were not on the guest list for the Jan. 22 meeting: Lombardi, who had to explain the decision to the world's media, and Cardinal Walter Kasper, who had to explain it to the Jews. Instead, Filoni led a brief discussion about a proposed statement to the press, and the minutes reflect general agreement not to grant any media interviews. Coccopalmerio was commissioned to publish an article in L'Osservatore Romano explaining the decree, but only "after a few days."
The lack of any sense of urgency, or alarm, about public reaction is astonishing. The impression one gets is that the Vatican's best and brightest were acutely sensitive to the kinds of questions canon lawyers might ask, but either unaware of -- or, even more troubling, indifferent to -- how the decree might strike the rest of the world.
The rest is history. After being whipped around by a global tsunami for 10 full days, the Vatican's Secretariat of State finally released a statement on Feb. 4, calling Williamson's statements on the Holocaust "unacceptable." It clarified that by lifting the excommunications, Benedict XVI only opened a door to dialogue, and it's now up to the traditionalists to prove their "adherence to the doctrine and discipline of the church." The four prelates still have no authority to act as Catholic bishops, and their movement is still not recognized. If they want to be fully reintegrated into the church, they will have to accept the teaching of the Second Vatican Council.
Looking back, here's the thing.
Even if Williamson had never given his interview to Swedish TV, anyone looking at the situation from a PR point of view should have anticipated that once the Vatican announced these four bishops were no longer excommunicated, reporters would look into their backgrounds. Had anyone in the Vatican spent even five minutes on Google searching under the name "Richard Williamson," his troubling history on the Holocaust would have leapt off the screen, which was a matter of public record long before he spoke to the Swedes. (Indeed, all the Swedish journalist did was ask Williamson to repeat stuff he had already said.)
Armed with that information, the Vatican could have issued its detailed Feb. 4 statement along with the decree itself, to explain from the outset that these guys have not been "rehabilitated," but rather given an opportunity to clean up their act. They could also have organized a press conference, so there would be TV sound bites assuring the world that this decision in no way signified a rollback on Catholic/Jewish relations or anything else.
Under any set of circumstances, failure to take such common sense steps is hard to explain.
Yet Williamson did give that interview to Swedish TV, and in that light, the revelation that the pope's top aides assembled two days after it went public and still seemed oblivious to the train wreck hurtling towards them -- well, you'll never need additional proof that the Vatican has a PR problem.
Tolle legge, tolle legge!
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Population figures on "non-Aryan" Christians.
I did some reading through material I have collected over the years on the so-called "non-Aryan" Catholics and Protestants and decided to summarise some of the information.
Exact numbers are almost impossible to determine because of the cross-overs between self-identification (particularly for converts), family tradition (most children of converts did not regard themselves as Jewish) and communal identity (Jewish community groups did not regard converts as Jews) and the various legal formulations constructed between 1933 and 1935.
Firstly, some historical context is necessary.
1933
April 7: The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service.
This was the first time where a "non-Aryan" was legally defined. The classification depended on the number of "non-Aryan" grandparents a person had. While the term could be used to describe a number of so-called "racial" groups, it was only ever applied to Jews. Therefore, according to the law, a "non-Aryan" was a person with three or four "full" "non-Aryan" grandparents.
Exemptions were made for veterans of WWI, civil servants who had been employed before or since 1914, and anyone whose father or son had died at the front. These exemptions lasted until the death of President Paul von Hindenburg on 2 August 1934.
1933
20 July Foundation of "Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc." It was renamed the Paulus Bund in September 1936 and survived in various forms until the government dissolved it in August 1939. The membership was Protestant.
1935
15 September: Laws for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour.
Jews were stripped of their Reich citizenship and made "guests" with limited civil rights. They were forbidden to marry or have any sexual relationship with non-Jews, fly German flags or insignia, employ female domestic servants under the age of 45.
The illustration shows in a very basic table the definitions Jews, mischlinge and Aryans.
German Catholic bishops make the St Raphael's Association (predecessor of Caritas in Germany) the official assistance group for "Non-Aryan" Catholics. Between 1937 and the end of 1938 the helped 1,000 Catholics of Jewish ancestry leave Germany. The figure is small because of the extremely limited resources at their disposal.
To try and solve the "problem" of part-Jews, ie people with some Jewish ancestry, the category of mischlinge was introduced. The term literally means "mongrel" or "mixed breed".
Statistics - these are estimates only based on census data between 1933 and 1939. Because of the growing discrimination against German, and later Austrian Jews, the numbers were never entirely accurate. Despite heavy penalties for attempting to try and hide Jewish identity after 1935, some people still lied on census forms. The figures also do not take into account Jews who left Germany after 1933 but who returned before the war.
1933 - the Jewish population was around 566,000.
Since the census did not ask for ancestry there is no exact way of determining the number of Germans with Jewish ancestry. Attempts have been made based on calculations of Jews who converted to Christianity from the 19th century, but these are estimates only.
1933 - estimated German population with Jewish ancestry, ie at least one Jewish grandparent - close to 500,000.
1939 - Jewish population according to Nuremberg Law definition. Note that this last pre-war census, conducted in May 1939, included those places annexed to the Reich since 1933 - Saar 1935, Austria and Sudetenland 1938, Memel 1939. Jews - 259,000.
Non-Aryan Christians - 138,500 - which included both "full Jews" and mischlinge.
Total number of Jews (full and mischlinge) defined as such by the Nuremberg Laws: 330,539.
Religion was irrelevant in the Nazi definition of Jews.
Sources:
Paul O'Shea, A Cross Too Heavy, p 253.
Exact numbers are almost impossible to determine because of the cross-overs between self-identification (particularly for converts), family tradition (most children of converts did not regard themselves as Jewish) and communal identity (Jewish community groups did not regard converts as Jews) and the various legal formulations constructed between 1933 and 1935.
Firstly, some historical context is necessary.
1933
April 7: The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service.
This was the first time where a "non-Aryan" was legally defined. The classification depended on the number of "non-Aryan" grandparents a person had. While the term could be used to describe a number of so-called "racial" groups, it was only ever applied to Jews. Therefore, according to the law, a "non-Aryan" was a person with three or four "full" "non-Aryan" grandparents.
Exemptions were made for veterans of WWI, civil servants who had been employed before or since 1914, and anyone whose father or son had died at the front. These exemptions lasted until the death of President Paul von Hindenburg on 2 August 1934.
1933
20 July Foundation of "Reich League of Christian-German State Citizens of non-Aryan or not Completely Aryan Origins, Inc." It was renamed the Paulus Bund in September 1936 and survived in various forms until the government dissolved it in August 1939. The membership was Protestant.
1935
15 September: Laws for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour.
Jews were stripped of their Reich citizenship and made "guests" with limited civil rights. They were forbidden to marry or have any sexual relationship with non-Jews, fly German flags or insignia, employ female domestic servants under the age of 45.
The illustration shows in a very basic table the definitions Jews, mischlinge and Aryans.
German Catholic bishops make the St Raphael's Association (predecessor of Caritas in Germany) the official assistance group for "Non-Aryan" Catholics. Between 1937 and the end of 1938 the helped 1,000 Catholics of Jewish ancestry leave Germany. The figure is small because of the extremely limited resources at their disposal.
To try and solve the "problem" of part-Jews, ie people with some Jewish ancestry, the category of mischlinge was introduced. The term literally means "mongrel" or "mixed breed".
Statistics - these are estimates only based on census data between 1933 and 1939. Because of the growing discrimination against German, and later Austrian Jews, the numbers were never entirely accurate. Despite heavy penalties for attempting to try and hide Jewish identity after 1935, some people still lied on census forms. The figures also do not take into account Jews who left Germany after 1933 but who returned before the war.
1933 - the Jewish population was around 566,000.
Since the census did not ask for ancestry there is no exact way of determining the number of Germans with Jewish ancestry. Attempts have been made based on calculations of Jews who converted to Christianity from the 19th century, but these are estimates only.
1933 - estimated German population with Jewish ancestry, ie at least one Jewish grandparent - close to 500,000.
1939 - Jewish population according to Nuremberg Law definition. Note that this last pre-war census, conducted in May 1939, included those places annexed to the Reich since 1933 - Saar 1935, Austria and Sudetenland 1938, Memel 1939. Jews - 259,000.
Non-Aryan Christians - 138,500 - which included both "full Jews" and mischlinge.
Total number of Jews (full and mischlinge) defined as such by the Nuremberg Laws: 330,539.
Religion was irrelevant in the Nazi definition of Jews.
Sources:
Werner Cohn, Bearers of a Common Fate ? The "Non-Aryan Christian Fate-Comrades" of the Paulus Bund, 1933-1939, Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook, vol. XXXIII, 1988, pp. 327-366
Pius XII saved 200,000 Jews after the 1938 Pogrom? No.
I was more than a little surprised when google updates on Pius began arriving in my email this afternoon. My surprised turned to something quite different when I began reading the lead article "Hitler's Pope saved thousands of Jewish lives".
Frankly, the article is a collection of half-baked assertions, backed with no credible documentation - or if there is documentation, I am curious why it has not been revealed in a more scholarly manner with direct quotes from the text.
I find it amazing that it was even published - but I guess sensationalism sells. This version of the article comes from the online edition of the UK Telegraph.
I hope Pave The Way is prepared to qualify the article or withdraw Hesemann's claims. And Simon Caldwell, the journalist who wrote this piece, should have at least consulted scholars who have an expertise in the field.
My comments are in red type.
'Hitler's Pope' saved thousands of Jewish lives"
Pope Pius XII, the controversial wartime pontiff, may have saved thousands of Jews by secretly securing visas so they could escape Nazi Germany, a historian has claimed.
By Simon Caldwell
Published: 10:00PM BST 06 Jul 2010
Pope Pius XII: The claim was made by Dr Michael Hesemann, an academic carrying out research in the Vatican Archives for the Pave the Way Foundation, a US-based interfaith group.
Pope Pius, who was labelled “Hitler’s Pope” because of his silence during the Holocaust, may have arranged the exodus of about 200,000 Jews from Germany just three weeks after Kristallnacht, when thousands of Jews were rounded up and sent to concentration camps.
Jewish Population statistics:
1933 Jews in Germany c566,000
Jews in Austria c192,000.
Jewish Population change between 1933-1939 – due to emigration:
Germany c282,000;
Austria (only after the Anchluss in March 1938) c117,000.
Total Jewish population change in the Greater German Reich 1933-1939:
Decrease of c399,000
Factors to include: 1935 Nuremberg Laws defined a “full” Jew as a person with four “full” Jewish grandparents; a person with three “full” Jewish grandparents; a “mixed race person” (mischlinge) a person with at least one “full” Jewish parent. Religious practice was irrelevant. Jewish converts to Christianity were regarded as racial Jews. Christians of Jewish descent were regarded as racial Jews. The Nuremberg Laws were applied to Austria after the Anchluss. Some Jews returned to Germany between 1934 and 1938 when it appeared the regime had “settled” the “Jewish question”.
Austrian Jewish population figures 1938:
Number of Jews according to Jewish communal census (did not include Jews who had converted to Christianity) 181,778
Number of Jews according to Himmler’s statistics using the Nuremberg Laws: 220,000
Estimated number of Catholics of Jewish descent in Greater German Reich 1938 – estimated at around 180,000 – figures compiled by the Raphaelsverein (German Catholic assistance for Non-Aryans)
Jewish men and boys arrested in the wake of the Pogrom 8/9 November 1938
Approximately 30,000. Most were released with several weeks and months usually on condition that they left the Reich.
Emigration in the aftermath of the Pogrom 8/9 November 1938
Germany – 36,000
Austria – 77,000
Jewish Population 1939
Germany: c202,000
Austria: c57,000
The claim was made by Dr Michael Hesemann, a German historian carrying out research in the Vatican archives for the Pave the Way Foundation, a US-based inter-faith group.
He said that Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli – the future Pius XII – wrote to Catholic archbishops around the world to urge them to apply for visas for “non-Aryan Catholics” and Jewish converts to Christianity who wanted to leave Germany.
It would be helpful to know more about these documents. They sound very much like two documents that are found in Volume 6 of Actes et Documents du Sainte Siege relatifs a la Seconde Guerre Mondiale. These documents have been available since 1972.
ADSS 6, pp 48-49: 9 January 1939: Cardinal Pacelli wrote in the name of Pope Pius XI asking for assistance for the formation of assistance committees to help non-Aryan Catholics.
ADSS 6, pp 49-50: 30 November 1938: Cardinal Pacelli wrote in the name of Pope Pius XI to the Nuncios in Ireland, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Costa Rica, the Apostolic Delegates in the USA, Australia, Lebanon, Egypt, French Indo-China, Belgian Congo and Turkey, asking them to do all they can to help converted Jews forced to leave Germany and Italy.
Based on the population statistics the figure 200,000 seems improbable in part because the total number of Jews who left Germany and Austria in November-December 1938 (and probably before the last pre-war census conducted in May 1939) amounted to c113,000. Even if these were all non-Aryan Christians, the figure falls well below 200,000.
Elliot Hershberg, the chairman of the Pave the Way Foundation, said:“ We believe that many Jews who were successful in leaving Europe may not have had any idea that their visas and travel documents were obtained through these Vatican efforts.
This is still far too vague. If the claim is true, why has it not been mentioned before? It seems very strange to me that no historical specialist has found anything connected with Hesemann’s claim. And there are more than a few of them working in the ASV in Rome. Hubert Wolf makes no mention of anything along these lines in his recent book Pope and Devil (2010).
“Everything we have found thus far seems to indicate the known negative perception of Pope Pius XII is wrong.”
Pius XII was criticised for failing to denounce explicitly the Holocaust, the Nazi regime or to excommunicate Hitler.
Dr Hesemann says that additional evidence suggests that the visas would have been given to ordinary Jews desperate to escape persecution.
What and where is the "additional evidence"?
“The fact that this letter speaks of 'converted Jews’ and 'non-Aryan’ Catholics indeed seems to be a cover,” said Dr Hesemann.
The language of “converted Jews” and “non-Aryan” is perfectly consistent with records from many sources (such as the Akten Deutsche Bischöfe über die Lage der Kirche) and the language of ADSS. The Vatican used the legal terminology employed by the German government when dealing with Reich agencies or German Catholic groups. Reich Jews also used the language of “non-Aryan” when referring to themselves. The legal formula was used by the Prioress of Cologne Carmel to explain why one of the nuns - Edith Stein - did not vote in the 1938 plebiscite – she was no longer a citizen of the Reich according to the Nuremberg Laws.
“You couldn’t be sure that Nazi agents wouldn’t learn about this initiative,” he said.
This statement makes no historical sense. The “Nazi agents” actively encouraged Jewish emigration until 1941. It was Reich policy!
“Pacelli had to make sure they didn’t misuse it for their propaganda, that they could not claim that the Church is an ally of the Jews.”
Again, this statement does not make sense. Pius XI and Pacelli were pilloried in sections of the Nazi media as “Jew-lovers”.
The appeal from Cardinal Pacelli, then the Vatican’s Secretary of State, was dated Nov 30, 1938 – 20 days after Kristallnacht, the “night of broken glass”.
ADSS 6, pp 49-50: 30 November 1938 - see reference above. This has been well known for over 35 years.
The appeal came from the Pope, Pius XI. Pacelli was acting on instructions given by the Pope. And while there is no evidence to suggest that Pacelli would have opposed the instructions, it must be kept clear that the order did not originate with him.
Cardinal Pacelli was able to ask for the visas because the 1933 concordat he signed with the Nazis specifically provided protection for Jews who converted to Christianity.
This is news to me. Please show me where this occurs in the Concordat. I have re-read the text and I find no mention of Jews, converted or not.
Dr Ed Kessler, the director of the Cambridge-based Woolf Institute of Abrahamic Faiths, said: “It is clear that Pius XII facilitated the saving of Roman Jews.”
Something of a red herring in this article. What is the connection?
In December, Pope Benedict XVI placed Pius one step closer to sainthood when he declared him “Venerable”, meaning that the Church believes he lived a life of “heroic virtue”.
Two miracles are needed to canonise him as a saint and the Vatican is investigating at least one apparently inexplicable healing.
Some Jewish groups want the process frozen until the Vatican is ready to open its secret wartime archives in 2014. As do more than a few Catholic and other historians!
Sir Martin Gilbert, a British historian and the world’s leading expert on the Holocaust, has said that Pope Pius XII should be considered as a “Righteous Gentile” by Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust remembrance authority. Sir Martin is entitled to his opinion, but his views on this matter are not shared by most mainstream historians.
********
This is not history; this is polemic and propaganda. It has no place in any discussion on Pius XII. It disturbs me greatly that such inaccurate and misleading material is posted.
Frankly, the article is a collection of half-baked assertions, backed with no credible documentation - or if there is documentation, I am curious why it has not been revealed in a more scholarly manner with direct quotes from the text.
I find it amazing that it was even published - but I guess sensationalism sells. This version of the article comes from the online edition of the UK Telegraph.
I hope Pave The Way is prepared to qualify the article or withdraw Hesemann's claims. And Simon Caldwell, the journalist who wrote this piece, should have at least consulted scholars who have an expertise in the field.
My comments are in red type.
'Hitler's Pope' saved thousands of Jewish lives"
Pope Pius XII, the controversial wartime pontiff, may have saved thousands of Jews by secretly securing visas so they could escape Nazi Germany, a historian has claimed.
By Simon Caldwell
Published: 10:00PM BST 06 Jul 2010
Pope Pius XII: The claim was made by Dr Michael Hesemann, an academic carrying out research in the Vatican Archives for the Pave the Way Foundation, a US-based interfaith group.
Pope Pius, who was labelled “Hitler’s Pope” because of his silence during the Holocaust, may have arranged the exodus of about 200,000 Jews from Germany just three weeks after Kristallnacht, when thousands of Jews were rounded up and sent to concentration camps.
Jewish Population statistics:
1933 Jews in Germany c566,000
Jews in Austria c192,000.
Jewish Population change between 1933-1939 – due to emigration:
Germany c282,000;
Austria (only after the Anchluss in March 1938) c117,000.
Total Jewish population change in the Greater German Reich 1933-1939:
Decrease of c399,000
Factors to include: 1935 Nuremberg Laws defined a “full” Jew as a person with four “full” Jewish grandparents; a person with three “full” Jewish grandparents; a “mixed race person” (mischlinge) a person with at least one “full” Jewish parent. Religious practice was irrelevant. Jewish converts to Christianity were regarded as racial Jews. Christians of Jewish descent were regarded as racial Jews. The Nuremberg Laws were applied to Austria after the Anchluss. Some Jews returned to Germany between 1934 and 1938 when it appeared the regime had “settled” the “Jewish question”.
Austrian Jewish population figures 1938:
Number of Jews according to Jewish communal census (did not include Jews who had converted to Christianity) 181,778
Number of Jews according to Himmler’s statistics using the Nuremberg Laws: 220,000
Estimated number of Catholics of Jewish descent in Greater German Reich 1938 – estimated at around 180,000 – figures compiled by the Raphaelsverein (German Catholic assistance for Non-Aryans)
Jewish men and boys arrested in the wake of the Pogrom 8/9 November 1938
Approximately 30,000. Most were released with several weeks and months usually on condition that they left the Reich.
Emigration in the aftermath of the Pogrom 8/9 November 1938
Germany – 36,000
Austria – 77,000
Jewish Population 1939
Germany: c202,000
Austria: c57,000
The claim was made by Dr Michael Hesemann, a German historian carrying out research in the Vatican archives for the Pave the Way Foundation, a US-based inter-faith group.
He said that Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli – the future Pius XII – wrote to Catholic archbishops around the world to urge them to apply for visas for “non-Aryan Catholics” and Jewish converts to Christianity who wanted to leave Germany.
It would be helpful to know more about these documents. They sound very much like two documents that are found in Volume 6 of Actes et Documents du Sainte Siege relatifs a la Seconde Guerre Mondiale. These documents have been available since 1972.
ADSS 6, pp 48-49: 9 January 1939: Cardinal Pacelli wrote in the name of Pope Pius XI asking for assistance for the formation of assistance committees to help non-Aryan Catholics.
ADSS 6, pp 49-50: 30 November 1938: Cardinal Pacelli wrote in the name of Pope Pius XI to the Nuncios in Ireland, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Costa Rica, the Apostolic Delegates in the USA, Australia, Lebanon, Egypt, French Indo-China, Belgian Congo and Turkey, asking them to do all they can to help converted Jews forced to leave Germany and Italy.
Based on the population statistics the figure 200,000 seems improbable in part because the total number of Jews who left Germany and Austria in November-December 1938 (and probably before the last pre-war census conducted in May 1939) amounted to c113,000. Even if these were all non-Aryan Christians, the figure falls well below 200,000.
Elliot Hershberg, the chairman of the Pave the Way Foundation, said:“ We believe that many Jews who were successful in leaving Europe may not have had any idea that their visas and travel documents were obtained through these Vatican efforts.
This is still far too vague. If the claim is true, why has it not been mentioned before? It seems very strange to me that no historical specialist has found anything connected with Hesemann’s claim. And there are more than a few of them working in the ASV in Rome. Hubert Wolf makes no mention of anything along these lines in his recent book Pope and Devil (2010).
“Everything we have found thus far seems to indicate the known negative perception of Pope Pius XII is wrong.”
Pius XII was criticised for failing to denounce explicitly the Holocaust, the Nazi regime or to excommunicate Hitler.
Dr Hesemann says that additional evidence suggests that the visas would have been given to ordinary Jews desperate to escape persecution.
What and where is the "additional evidence"?
“The fact that this letter speaks of 'converted Jews’ and 'non-Aryan’ Catholics indeed seems to be a cover,” said Dr Hesemann.
The language of “converted Jews” and “non-Aryan” is perfectly consistent with records from many sources (such as the Akten Deutsche Bischöfe über die Lage der Kirche) and the language of ADSS. The Vatican used the legal terminology employed by the German government when dealing with Reich agencies or German Catholic groups. Reich Jews also used the language of “non-Aryan” when referring to themselves. The legal formula was used by the Prioress of Cologne Carmel to explain why one of the nuns - Edith Stein - did not vote in the 1938 plebiscite – she was no longer a citizen of the Reich according to the Nuremberg Laws.
“You couldn’t be sure that Nazi agents wouldn’t learn about this initiative,” he said.
This statement makes no historical sense. The “Nazi agents” actively encouraged Jewish emigration until 1941. It was Reich policy!
“Pacelli had to make sure they didn’t misuse it for their propaganda, that they could not claim that the Church is an ally of the Jews.”
Again, this statement does not make sense. Pius XI and Pacelli were pilloried in sections of the Nazi media as “Jew-lovers”.
The appeal from Cardinal Pacelli, then the Vatican’s Secretary of State, was dated Nov 30, 1938 – 20 days after Kristallnacht, the “night of broken glass”.
ADSS 6, pp 49-50: 30 November 1938 - see reference above. This has been well known for over 35 years.
The appeal came from the Pope, Pius XI. Pacelli was acting on instructions given by the Pope. And while there is no evidence to suggest that Pacelli would have opposed the instructions, it must be kept clear that the order did not originate with him.
Cardinal Pacelli was able to ask for the visas because the 1933 concordat he signed with the Nazis specifically provided protection for Jews who converted to Christianity.
This is news to me. Please show me where this occurs in the Concordat. I have re-read the text and I find no mention of Jews, converted or not.
Dr Ed Kessler, the director of the Cambridge-based Woolf Institute of Abrahamic Faiths, said: “It is clear that Pius XII facilitated the saving of Roman Jews.”
Something of a red herring in this article. What is the connection?
In December, Pope Benedict XVI placed Pius one step closer to sainthood when he declared him “Venerable”, meaning that the Church believes he lived a life of “heroic virtue”.
Two miracles are needed to canonise him as a saint and the Vatican is investigating at least one apparently inexplicable healing.
Some Jewish groups want the process frozen until the Vatican is ready to open its secret wartime archives in 2014. As do more than a few Catholic and other historians!
Sir Martin Gilbert, a British historian and the world’s leading expert on the Holocaust, has said that Pope Pius XII should be considered as a “Righteous Gentile” by Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust remembrance authority. Sir Martin is entitled to his opinion, but his views on this matter are not shared by most mainstream historians.
********
This is not history; this is polemic and propaganda. It has no place in any discussion on Pius XII. It disturbs me greatly that such inaccurate and misleading material is posted.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Hubert Wolf and the ASV
In my earlier post on Wolf's book - Pope and Devil - I made mention of the review that spent most of the time analysing Bishop von Galen of Munster. I've had the opportunity to read Wolf's book. It is one of those "Wow" books that keep you riveted from beginning to end. Wolf's research is meticulous and his conclusions compelling. He has spent considerable time looking at the material available in the ASV and putting Pacelli's story together from his days in Germany through his time as Secretary of State.
Among the very interesting points Wolf makes in the book are:
1. Pacelli's reports to Rome on the German bishops from the early 1920s. He is not particularly kind when it comes to Cardinal Adolf Bertram, Prince-Bishop of Breslau. Pacelli considered Bertram a "typical" Prussian state bishop, namely, one who would avoid conflict with the state at all costs and whose reliability could never be counted on 100%. On Bishop von Preysing, first in Eichstatt and then Berlin, Pacelli pushed his candidacy because he saw a "Roman party man". Von Preysing was not highly regarded by some of the episcopal electors, and remained something of an outsider until his move to Berlin and his confrontational stand against the Nazis. Von Galen was thought to be a bit limited. Of course once the war started and Pacelli was now Pope, he found among his greatest supports in Germany to be these two men whose careers he had such an influential role.
Bertram above
von Preysing below
2. As Secretary of State from 1930 Pacelli and Pius XI operated virtually as a "two man show". Wolf went looking for discussion and "sessioni" from the Congregation of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, Pacelli's department, and found very little. The robust and lively arguments that marked much of the 19th century and early 20th century sessioni disappear from the succession of Pius XI. Pius and his Secretary tended to work on major Vatican policy without much consultation. The Pope would discuss things with Pacelli, make decisions and leave it to his Cardinal Secretary to issue instructions to ensure things happened. When he looked for sessioni on the major events in Germany in 1933 Wolf found nothing. This gives us a very important insight into how the future Pius XII viewed governance, especially when it came to Germany - it was his affair.
3. Throughout the 1930s as the persecution of German Jewry grew more oppressive, there is very little comment from the Pope or Pacelli. Nuncio Orsenigo reported regularly and reliably to Rome but there appears to have been little response from the two men "at the top". It took the violence of the November 1938 pogrom to shake Pius XI into a more vigorous action.
Nuncio Cesare Orsenigo and Foreign Minister Ribbentrop
4. The 1928 condemnation of Antisemitism. Until the archives were opened, the dissolution of the Amici Israel was considered an odd footnote in the history of the period, except for the very clear condemnation of antisemitism. Wolf's study of the inter-congregational documents surrounding this episode show that the original intentions of the Amici - to reform the Good Friday liturgy and have the adjective "perfidis" dropped from the prayer for the Jews; renounce the charge of deicide and the theology of supercessionism - were seen by the Holy Office to be an accusation that the Church was herself antisemitic, or if not deliberately,her liturgy could give that impression. This challenge to authority was not to be taken lightly. The Prefect of the Holy Office, Merry del Val, rushed an investigation of the Amici and their petition in comparative haste recommending Pius ban the group altogether. Pius accepted Merry del Val's recommendation, showed his displeasure at Abbot Schuster, the Benedictine liturgical expert who said the Amici's requests were liturgically legitimate, and issued the ban. He couched the ban in terms of dissolving the Amici because they had strayed from orthodoxy, and then issued a loud condemnation of antisemitism asserting that the Church had always defended the rights of the oppressed. In the light of the archival material, the whole three month affair (January to March 1928) is rather shabby. Yes, it was good antisemitism was denounced, but it was not good that the very group who urged its denunciation was itself denounced as unorthodox!
4. Interpreting "silence". Here is where von Galen enters the picture. It was, as I have argued in my book, Pius XII's hope that the bishops of Germany would take up the fight. This also follows a well-established pattern. In April 1933, Giuseppe Pizzardo, in the Secretariat of State, was ruminating on how to respond to letters from Jewish community leaders in Europe and the USA who appealed to the Holy See for the Pope to condemn German antisemitism. Pizzardo posed the question - "would it not be better for the German bishops to take such a step (ie do something)? Or "Perhaps, later, indirectly, via the nunciature??" This remained the pattern for the rest of the 1930s - Jewish matters were to be handled by the local bishops. It was part of the tragedy of the German episcopate that this largely did not happen. Remember that von Galen preached fierce and very direct sermons against euthanasia. He did not preach against the transports heading East.
The Lion of Munster 1946
This is a book I recommend very heartily. It is a timely reminder of the value of studying the pre-war years with rigour and thoroughness. There are patterns emerging that will, undoubtedly, continue into the war years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
