Print   Search   Utenti   Join     Share : FaceboolTwitter
Pages: 1, [2], 3
TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:57 PM


10/7/2008 10:25 PM
TERESA BENEDETTA
Post: 15,237


Christopher Blosser's special site
popepiusxiiandthejews.blogspot.com/
dedicated to Pius XII and the Holocaust is probably the best one-stop site for all the post-'Deputy' material that has been published in English to debunk the 'Black Legend' of the Pope accused of having 'kept silent' about the Holocaust.

The Black Legend was fabricated and built up to monstrous proportions by anti-Church elements in the 1960s, mostly on the basis of an East German author's play entitled The Deputy.

How the dubious conclusions of a tendentious work of fiction purporting to be a docudrama managed to take tenacious root so fast in global opinion is a tribute to the power of Soviet propaganda at the time - primary motor of the smear campaign - to which equally powerful and well-financed Jewish organizations willingly gave a helping hand.



Wartime Pope overshadows
Catholic-Jewish talks

by Francis X. Rocca

October 06, 2008



Pius XII visits a Roman neighborhood to pray with the faithful after it was bombed by the Germans in 1943.



VATICAN CITY -- This Thursday, Oct. 9, Pope Benedict XVI will celebrate a special Mass in St. Peter's Basilica to mark the 50th anniversary of the death of Pope Pius XII.

The fact that Oct. 9 this year coincides with Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement, is ironic, since debate over Pius's record is one of the most divisive issues in the relationship between Jews and the Catholic Church.

As the Vatican's Secretary of State during Hitler's rise to power, and then as Pope during World War II, Pius guided his Church's response to the Nazi persecution and genocide of the Jews.

Pius's critics say that he failed to do or say all he could to stop the atrocities. The late Pope's defenders counter that he heroically condemned anti-Semitism throughout Hitler's reign, and both directly and indirectly saved thousands of Jewish lives during the Holocaust, especially during the 1943-44 German occupation of Rome.

Many students of the debate trace its origin to Rolf Hochhuth's play "The Deputy" (1963), which portrays the wartime Pontiff as prompt to abandon the Jews for the sake of the Vatican's financial and geopolitical interests.

The subject has since spawned a vast array of literature, including John Cornwell's controversial 1999 bestseller, "Hitler's Pope."

More recently, the debate has turned even more intense, as the Church inches closer to making Pius a saint. Advocates for his canonization cite accomplishments that include major reforms of liturgy and canon law, as well as his help to the Jews.

The cardinals and archbishops who sit on the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints voted unanimously last May to recognize the late Pope's "heroic virtue" and declare him "venerable," thus bringing him one step closer to sainthood.

However, instead of approving the congregation's decision, Benedict took the extraordinary step of appointing a commission to reconsider Pius's record, with special attention to Jewish concerns.

Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, the congregation's head, told reporters last February that evaluation of Pius's sanctity had "not been delayed, much less stalled," and that commemorative events linked to the 50th anniversary would contribute to the process.

Before Pius could be canonized, he would first need to be beatified and credited with a miracle due to his intercession. A second miracle would be needed in order for him to be named a saint.

Within the next few weeks, the Vatican will sponsor a photographic exhibition on Pius and an academic conference devoted to his contributions to Catholic doctrine.

A symposium in Rome last month, organized by the U.S.-based Pave the Way Foundation, was not held under Vatican auspices but received a high-level endorsement when Benedict received participants at the papal summer residence of Castel Gandolfo.

The "vast quantity of documented material" presented at the conference, Benedict said, showed that Pius had "spared no effort in intervening" on behalf of the Jews, though in many cases "secretly and silently, precisely because ... only in this way was it possible to avoid the worst and save the greatest number of Jews."

According to Michael Phayer, a professor emeritus of history at Marquette University who has written about Pius and the Holocaust, a 200-page book of documentation published by the conference contains no new evidence. Phayer called for the Vatican to open its archives for the World War II period, which are still largely inaccessible to scholars.

[I'd check out Phayer's credentials and motives. The testimony alone of the Jewish mothers who were given refuge in the Pope's own bedroom in Castel Gandolfo, where some 50 Jewish children were born, should suffice. How many accounts do they need? One single Jew saved is worth thousands, according to a Jewish saying - but why do they refuse to credit Pius XII with even one saved life, or alternately, say that those svaed lives mean nothing because he did not speak out enough? One cannot be more perverse and irrational!]

That call was echoed by Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who said that any new proof of Pius's behind-the-scenes assistance to Jews would help ease Catholic-Jewish tensions - even though it would not satisfy those who have deemed Pius's public actions inadequate.

Foxman, who survived the Holocaust in German-occupied Lithuania thanks to his Catholic nanny and a sympathetic priest, said Pius's reputation would be especially enhanced by evidence that such individual Catholics came to the aid of Jews with the support and encouragement of their Pope.

"It would be nice if I could stand up and say that I bear testimony not only to the compassion and love of my nanny and priest but to that of the Church," Foxman said. "Then the Vatican could take credit."


Aw, Mr. Forman. Cut the melodrama!

Since I read Anne Frank's diary when I was 10 years old, I have devoured World War II/Holocaust books by the dozens, and have no illusions about the failures and shortcomings, aggressions and passivity, cowardice and heroism, on the part of everyone concerned.

Why this Pope has become the Jewish scapegoat is just outrageous! Has there been a single rabbi, for instance, who has raised his voice lately against the killing of Christians in India? God expects all his creatures - not just Christians, and not just their Pope - to be merciful, as well as forgiving.

I suppose that is a major difference between Jews and Christians is that Jews do not seem to have a commandment - nor capacity - for forgiving (even if, in the case of Pius XII, it is debatable whether there is anything to forgive or not.] I quote from Rabbi Shear Yashuv Cohen's statements to the press yesterday:

"He may have helped in secrecy many of the victims and many of the refugees but the question is 'could he have raised his voice and would it have helped or not?' We, as the victims, feel yes. I am not empowered by the families of the millions of deceased to say 'we forget, we forgive.'... I have to make it very clear that we, the rabbis, the leadership of the Jewish people, cannot as long as the survivors still feel painful, agree that this leader of the Church in a time of crisis should be honored now [referring to the beatification process]. It is not our decision. It pains us. We are sorry it is being done".

Cohen said only God knows if Pius spoke out enough against the Holocaust: "God is the judge ... he knows the truth."

Well, then, if they really believe God is the judge, why are they judging Pius XII?


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Andrea Tornielli of Il Giornale, who came out last year with his biography of Pius XII, commented on bis blog today about Rabbi Choen's statements on Pius XII:

A Synod guest attacks Pius XII
Translated from

10/7/08

He quotes from the Reuters inrterview with the Rabbi:


...Interviewed by Phil Pullella, Vaticanista of Reuters, Cohen said that the Church shouldnot beatify Pius XII, and that if he had known that Benedict XVI would be celebrating the Mass to mark the 50th anniversary of Pius XII's death on Thursday, then he would never have agreed to come to the Synod.

Quite apart from the fact that the date of Pius XII's death is not exactly a Mossad secret and can be found in any encyclopedia, and that a 50th anniversary is always an important one, I find it completely out of place that a Jewish representative invited to address Catholic bishops would use the occasion to embarrass the Pope, much less on the basis of black legends.

I leave you to imagine what would have happened if a cardinal had been invited to address an important Jewish congress in Jerusalem and then comes forward immediately afterwards to make similar statements about a Jew.

I would simply wish to remind Rabbi Cohen most humbly to remember the words addressed by the Grand Rabbi of Jerusalemm Iaac Herzog to Pius XII in 1944:

"The people of Israel will never forget what Your Holiness and your distinguished representatives, inspired by the eternal principles of religion which are the basis of authentic civilization, are doing for our unfortunate brothers and sisters in the most tragic period of our history, a living proof of Divine Providence in this world."

The day after the death of Papa Pacelli, the same Rabbi Herzog said this:

The death of Pius XII si a great loss for the entire free world. Catholics are not the only ones who mourn his death.



Yet, Herzog is by no means the only prominent Jew who praised Pius XII in life and death. Does Golda Meir's testimony count for nothing, or Albert Einstein's, to name just two?

There is no explanation for irrational prejudice. The only thing that remains is that the anti-Pius Jews somehow decided he makes the perfect scapegoat for the Holocaust because of his singular eminence - and commnensurate vulnerability.

All the anger, bitterness, rancour, sorrow, pain, blame, opprobrium, malediction, etc. that they should be feeling for Adolf Hitler and the Nazis - they have somehow all displaced it and dumped it on Pius XII, who has become the victim of a paradoxical post-mortem persecution and martyrdom!







10/8/2008 6:54 PM
TERESA BENEDETTA
Post: 15,248


Cardinal Bertone on Pius XII:
He saved Jews in World War II
through prudent diplomacy
and concrete actions

By FRANCES D'EMILIO



VATICAN CITY, Oct. 8 (AP) - The Vatican stepped up its defense of Pope Pius XII on Tuesday, countering allegations the wartime Pontiff was silent about the Holocaust by saying he saved Jews through his prudent diplomacy.

The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano dedicated an entire page to praising Pius, including an impassioned tribute from the Holy See's secretary of state, Italian Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone.

"It was precisely by means of a prudent approach that Pius XII protected Jews and refugees," Bertone wrote in an introduction to a book by a nun about the late Pontiff.

Last month, Pope Benedict XVI made one of the strongest defenses yet of Pius, whose death 50 years ago is being marked at the Vatican. Benedict contended that Pius was "courageous" in sparing no effort to save Jews, and on Thursday will celebrate an anniversary Mass in St. Peter's Basilica for him.

Pius, as Italian prelate Eugenio Pacelli, had served as a Vatican diplomat in Germany and as the Vatican's secretary of state before becoming pope in 1939, a few months before World War II erupted in Europe.

The Vatican has started the process for Pius's beatification, the last formal step before possible sainthood. Jews and others have accused Pius of not speaking out forcefully enough against the Holocaust.

Bertone contended that research has shown that Pius "was neither silent nor anti-Semitic. He was prudent."

"If he had made a public intervention, he would have endangered the lives of thousands of Jews, who, upon his directive, were hidden, in 155 convents and monasteries in Rome alone," Bertone contended.

"It is profoundly unjust to extend a veil of prejudice on the work of Pius XII during the war," Bertone said.

The Jesuit priest leading Church efforts for Pius's beatification, Rev. Paolo Molinari, told Vatican Radio on Tuesday that "Pacelli made every possible effort to avert" the war. He cited Pius's efforts to try to dissuade Italy from joining the conflict.

Asked how the beatification process was going, Molinari cited Benedict's plans to lead the Mass as '"highly significant."

Earlier this week, an Israeli rabbi who became the first Jew to address a bishops' gathering at the Vatican pointedly omitted Pius when he spoke of the change in Catholic-Jewish relations from a "long, hard and painful history."

Rabbi Shear-Yashuv Cohen called his appearance a signal of "hope and a message of love," noting efforts to improve relations that began under Pope John XXIII — Pius's immediate successor.

The rabbi said some religious leaders "did not raise a voice in the effort or save our brethren, but chose to keep silent and help secretly."


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



The more I read unfair Jewish criticism - which is driven purely by emotion and not one shred of reason - the more I feel outraged.

Some religious leaders did not raise a voice in the effort or save our brethren, but chose to keep silent and help secretly.

#1 - Name one person who was able to rescue Jews during World War II and spoke about it openly! If they were to be able to help meaningfully, they had to do everything under cover, which they did. Did Oskar Schindler and Raoul Wallenberg and all those 'Righteous among Nations' that the Israelis have deigned to recognize at Yad Vashem walk around at the time advertising their opposition to Nazism and what they were trying do for the Jews they could save?????
a. Why is a different standard being applied to Pius XII retrospectively? And more important, why does he not get credit at all for even one of the lives he saved?
b. Even a living saint has to act with prudence in dealing with other human beings about other human beings. He can dare everything for himself, including death, but he cannot possibly expose others to more danger than they already live in!

#2 - What would it have helped if important leaders at the time spoke out against Hitler's racial policies - or if they were even aware of what he was actually doing with the Jews? Half the world was already at war with him, and that half a world felt personally threatened, each and everyone.
a. Does anyone in his right senses believe that it would have mattered one whit to Hitler what his enemies said? It would simply have given him another pretext to push the envelop even more!
b. In a world at war, when every man fears for himself, it is only the truly heroic who would be able to spare one thought for others. There were thousands who did so, who were heroes, sung and unsung - and Pius XII was not the least of them.

The Israelis have been the targets of constant incessant warfare since their state was born. Has any of their leaders remembered to speak out for persecuted Christians of Burmese or Tiebetans or Chechnyans or Kosovans or what have you? Or even against contemporary genocides in Africa? No, and neither has anyone called on them to do so. Because the world understands that they have more than enough problems of their own - their very survival.

#3- Despite the continuing accumulation of evidence in his favor, why do the anti-Pius Jews choose to ignore it all, including the testimony of very important Jews given freely and spontaneously, during and immediately after the war? Long before a Communist agent in East Berlin wrote that scurrilous play which has been the basis for all this false outrage against Pius XII.

a. They have been claiming that they need to look at 'secret Vatican archives' before they can make a judgment. What exactly do they expect to find in those archives - written documentation that Pius XII was a secret anti-Semite; had written to Nazi and fascist officials telling them it was all right to mistreat, deport and kill Jews; or sold out Jews to protect Christians? The whole scenario is just absurd, but it's a pretext they will use for as long as they can to continue maligning Pius XII.


As the Jews celebrate their Day of Atonement, I hope all those who have this irrational obsession and relentless drive to besmirch a dead Pope also have prayers that ask for God's enlightenment so that they may think straight, open their minds, and not behave more 'self-righteously' than God himself, with not even a glimmer of his mercy [not that mercy is needed in the case of Pius XII - just elementary human fairness].



TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:59 PM



10/10/2008 1:22 AM
TERESA BENEDETTA
Post: 15,276



'History will do justice
to Pius XII': Interview with historian
Paolo Mieli, editor of Corriere della Sera

by Maurizio Fontana
Translated from
the 10/9/08 issue of




Sometimes history comes onstage and rebounds from there completely distorted. This happened on February 20, 1963 at Berlin's Freie Volksbühne (Free People's Theater), with the premiere of Rolf Hochhuth's play, Der Stellvertreter ("Il vicario").

It was there that a black legend was born which has found its place in world historiography since then, feeding a campaign of hatred against Pius XII, who is called an 'ignoble criminal' and accused of being a Naziphile because of his alleged 'silences' over the Shoah (Holocaust). Even within the Catholic world itself.

Fifty years since the death of Papa Pacelli, the black legend about 'Hitler's Pope' lives on in the pages of newspapers. We spoke about it with Paolo Mieli, an authoritative historian of Jewish ancestry, who is the editor of Italy's most important newspaper, Corriere della Sera, in this three-way conversation with the Osservatore editor and the writer of this piece.



One often cites Hochhuth's play as an immediate cause. Actually, was there not some perplexity about Pius XII's attitude earlier? When was the 'Pius XII' problem born, really?
The staging of Hochhuth's play was definitely the watershed, but a few charges - even if they were not identical to those of Hochhuth - had been made before the beginning of the war. The first one to speak about Pius XII's hesitations was the French diplomat Emmanuel Mounier who, in May 1939, courteously reproached Pius XII for a silence that baffled many - about the Italian aggression in Albania.

Somewhat similar was an accusation made by another French intellectual, Francois Mauriac, who in a Preface to Leon Poliakov's 1951 book about the Holocaust, said that the persecuted Jews did not have the comfort of hearing the Pope denounce in clear terms "the crucifixion of countless brothers in the Lord".

But it must also be noted that Poliakov's book, one of the first important postwar texts on anti-Semitism, justified those silences. In effect, Poliakov, who was Jewish, wrote that the Pope had to keep silent in order not to compromise the safety of Jews far more than they were already endangered. [This is the most obvious reason that anyone with common sense can easily see!]


So, the first judgment from a Jewish writer was cautious?
I would say more than that! Apart from Poliakov, the first judgments of Jewish representatives around the world about Pius XII were not just cautious, but downright warm.


Could any possible caution have come from the fact that the strong accusations against the Pope started coming, even during the war, from the Soviet Communists?
Of course, Pius XII was also a very anti-Communist Pope - and I underline also. During these past few decades of polemics, he has often been faulted for having his world view allegedly distorted by his anti-Communism.

He gave two well-publicized speeches before he became Pope in which he underscored the persecutions caused by the Soviets more than that of the Nazis - during a trip to France in 1939 and to Hungary in 1939.

But let us also remember that the Holocaust was a post-war issue which developed full-blown many many years after the end of the war. I remember that in the 50s and early 60s, the extent of the tragedy was not fully appreciated - the figures about the concentration camps were tentative. The world was aware that something horrible had happened to the Jews, but the full awareness of the tragedy only came later.

Certainly in the 1930s, few had any idea of what would be done to the Jews. Yes, there were events in Germany like Kristallnacht. But even that could only be appreciated in hindsight now, after reading everything else that came to be known. And it wasn't as if the Jews who were able to flee Nazi Germany were welcomed with open arms anywhere, not even in the United States.

In short, it was a complex problem. The Western world, the civilized world, with rare exceptions, did not understand or was not aware of what was happening. So when we speak of a Pope at the end of the 1930s, it is understandable how he could have been more concerned about the anti-Christian persecutions in the Soviet Union compared to the little that was then known about Nazi activities against the Jews.


In the 1930s, controversy also touched Pius XI...
One of the reprimands against Cardinal Pacelli, who was Pius XI's secretary of state, was that he played down his condemnations of Nazism. Among such accusations - which I believe to be not entirely justified - was that he had muffled the tones of Pius XI's encyclical Mit brennender Sorge.

But if one examines Pacelli's activities according to historical fact, let me recall some specifics. When the war started, he criticized the apathy of the Church in France under the Nazi subjugation of Vichy France. Then, he criticized the obvious anti-Semitism of the Slovakian bishop Josef Tiso.

Then, according to Renato Moro's book, La Chiesa e lo sterminio degli ebrei (The Church and the extermination of the Jews), he gave his support and even a direct helping hand, incurring the gravest risks, to plots against Hitler in 1939 and 1940.

Going on, when the Soviet Union was invaded by Germany in 1940, there was a resistance in the Western world to allying with the Soviets against Germany. But Pius XII assiduously worked behind the scenes to facilitate an alliance between Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union against Hitler. [So he was pragnatic, despite his anti-Communism!]

Finally, the most important chapter: during the Nazi occupation of Rome - narrated for instance in Enzo Forcella's La resistenza in convento (Resistance in the convent), and the newly published book by Andrea Riccardi, L'inverno piu lungo (The longest winter)- the Church put itself all out to help the Jews.
Almost every basilica, every church, every seminary, every convent either harbored or gave a helping hand to Jews.

Such that in Rome, compared to two thousand Jews who were deported, 10,000 were able to escape that fate. Now, I'm not saying that all 10,000 were saved by the Church of Pius XII, but there is no doubt that the Church helped to save the majority of those. It was impossible that all this happened without the Pope's knowledge or initiative.

The result was that for years, years! - and I can cite dozens that I know about personally - the most important personalities in the Jewish world acknowledged this assistance and attributed it explicitly to Pius XII. But the reporting seems to have dropped all traces of this testimony.

Andrea Tornielli's beautiful book, Pio XII: il Papa degli ebrei (Pius XII, Pope of the Jews), uses much of it. The documentation is vast, and I can give you just a sampling.

In 1944, the Grand Rabbi of Jerusalem, Isaac Herzog, said: "The people of Israel will never forget what Pius XII and his illustrious representatives - inspired by the eternal principles of religion which is the basis for any authentic civilization - are doing for our unfortunate brothers and sisters in the most tragic hour of our history. A living proof of Divine Providence in this world".

In the same year, Sgt-Major Joseph Vancover wrote: "I wish to tell you about Jewish Rome, of the great miracle of finding here thousands of Jews. The churches, the convents, the priests and the nuns, and above all, the Pope, have come to the help and rescue of Jews, virtually snatching them from the claws of the Nazis and their collaborators, the Italian Fascists. Great efforts that are not without dangers were taken to hide and feed the Jews during the months of Nazi occupation. Some priests paid with their lives for these efforts. The whole Church was mobilized for this purpose, acting with great faithfulness. The Vatican was the center of every activity for help and rescue under the hard reality of Nazi domination."

Then there was a letter from the Italian front by the soldier Eliyahu Lubitsky, who was from the socialist kibbutz of Bet Alfa. It was published in the Jewish weekly newspaper Hashavua on August 4, 1944: "All the refugees are talking about the praiseworthy assistance they have received from the Vatican. Priests have placed their lives at risk to hide and save Jews. The Pontiff himself is taking part in this rescue operation for the Jews".

On Oct. 15, 1944, this account by the Extraordinary Commissar for the Jewish communities of Rome, Silvio Ottolenghi: "Thousands of our brothers have been saved in convents, churches and extra-territorial dependencies of the Vatican. On July 23, I received a command invitation to be received by His Holiness, to whom I conveyed the gratitude of the Jewish community of Rome for the heroic and affectionate assistance rendered to us by the clergy in their convents and colleges... I conveyed to His Holiness the desire of my co-co-religionists in Rome to come to thank him en masse. But of course, we cannot do that until after the war, in order not to compromise all the Jews in the north who are still at risk."


And that was when the war was still going on. What about today?
Today, the focus on Pius XII is so marked that even a normal historical debate about the facts becomes incendiary.


What about that famous photograph on display in the museum of Yad Vashem and its caption. Which ignores all the testimony such as you have just recounted. What happened there?
What happened was that the Black Legend grew over the years. Remember books like John Cornell's Hitler's Pope, or Daniel Goldberg's Hitlers willige Vollstrecker (Hitler's volunteer enforcers), where the accusations are even more explicit. They have fostered the idea that Pius XII was nothing less than an accomplice of the Nazi Fuehrer! A crazy idea!

Just think, for instance, of some testimony worth re-reading, given in 1961 during Adolf Eichmann's trial by the state of Israel. This was from Gideon Hausner, the State's general prosecutor: "In Rome, on October 16, 1943, a vast rescue network was organized in the old Jewish quarter. The Italian clergy took part in the rescue work, the monasteries opened their doors to Jews. And the Pope intervened personally in behalf of some Jews who had been arrested in Rome".


And this was just two years before 'The Vicar' was first staged...
And it was precisely in 1963 that 'revisionism' about the wartime role of Pius XII started - of which there was another kind.



One was malicious - it was within the Church itself - which unfavorably compared Pius XII to John XXIII. It was a devastating campaign: they made it appear that John XXIII had the sensibility that Pius XII should have had in World War-II. It was very bizarre.

And between the lines of the non-Catholic invectives against Pacelli, it appears that the black legend was a payback for his anti-Communism. But he was very much in line with the history of the Church in the 20th century. If you read what he wrote or listen to his taped speeches, it is clear that he also criticized Western liberalism. That is to say, he was not exactly a standard-bearer for the West.


He was not the Chaplain of the West?
Absolutely not. To portray Pius XII as the standard-bearer for the anti-Communist offensive by the West during the Cold War is just misleading, even if he was, as we have mentioned more than once, very anti-Communist. But even this has been presented in the press, on the stage and in films, as a bitingly negative image.

Whoever has an attitude that is not prejudiced and who tries to know Pacelli through available documents can only be stunned by this black legend that makes no sense.

Pius XII was a great Pope, who was able to rise to the challenges of World War II and to its realities. Why are we not reprimanding Roosevelt retrospectively for not having said a word about the Jews during the war years? Can one really speak out against the enemy and be effective in the middle of a war? Least of all, a man without defenses or weapons like the Pope.

The speciousness of the offensive against Pius XII is really suspicious to any person of good will, and it is a speciousness that must be counteracted. Sooner or later, someone will look at the facts again in the light of testimonies such as those that I cited.


Is there a difference between European historiography (particularly, the Italian) and that of the Americans, about Pius XII?
I believe so. We must not forget that this aversion to Pius XII was born in the Protestant and Anglo-Saxon worlds. It wasn't born among the Jews, many of whom have tried not to be drawn into this international campaign. But if a Pope is accused of having allowed free rein to anti-Semitism by others, then the entire Jewish world feels called on to clarify things.

Thus, we come to the episode of Hall #7 in the Yad Vashem museum, where there is a picture of the Pope that says his behavior about the Jews during the war was 'ambiguous'. Or the request made in 1998 by the Israel ambassador to the Holy See then to declare a moratorium on the beatification process for the Pope. [But beatification is none of their business. To begin with, they don't believe Christ was God, so why would they give a hoot about Catholic saints who become saints precisely because in life, they were faithful witnesses to Christ?]

Now, I won't weigh in on this beatification question, because it is not a historiographic problem. But there is something excessively obstinate about the hostility to this Pope - and it smells!

Since 1963, the spotlight has been turned on Pius XII in an effort to prove his guilt but no one has been able to prove anything. On the contrary, all the research has brought forth copious documentation that shows how he and his Church gave fundamental assistance to the Jews.

I remember in this connection a beautiful gesture: In June 1955, the Philharmonic Orchestra of Israel asked to give a concert at the Vatican in honor of Pius XII to express their gratitude to him. They played for him a movement of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony. That was the climate before 'The Vicar'.

So when the Pope died, Golda Meir, who was foreign minister and would become Prime Minister, said: "When the most horrifying martyrdom struck our people during the ten years of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pontiff was raised in behalf of the victims. We weep for the loss of a great servant of peace."

The Pontiff's voice was not raised for anyone [but the Pope today quoted his 1942 Christmas broadcast which could only have referred to the Jews!], but nevertheless Jews like Golda Meir 'heard' it in what he did.

William Zuckermann, editor of the magazine Jewish Newsletter, wrote: "All the Jews of Ameerican pay homage and express their mourning because probably no statesman of that generation gave more concrete help to the Jews in their time of tragedy. More than anyone else, we were able to benefit from the great and charitable goodness and magnanimity of this lamented Pontiff during the years of persecution and terror".

And that was the way Pius XII was regarded for years until his death. Were these people who praised him crazy? No, they were those who had undergone the persecutions about which Pius XII is accused to have been an accomplice.

If we took the black legend as historiographc fact, then it would be madness. But I think that, apart from some polemicists, every historian worthy of the name will fight to re-establish the truth - even a non-Catholic like me.


What has emerged so far in Israeli historiography? Has there been an evolution in the thinking of the historians? Or is the debate over Pius XII still raging?
I would say they have been very restrained. But the case remains open because of the obstinacy of critics other than the Jews.

I think three aspects should be considered. First, Pisu XII is being made to pay for his anti-Communism. Second, he knew Germany very well and he did love German, but that's not the same as loving the Nazis! Lastly, the criticisms come from circles whom one can fault ten times over compared to the Pope. People who during the war did absolutely nothing close to what Pius XII did for the Jews, people who did not even make their presence felt in this respect.

Can you give some examples?
I think of what was happening in France, in Poland and even the United States. Let us reason it out. The claim of those who criticize Pius XII is that everyone knew what was happening, that anyone could know. So I would ask them. During the Second World War, who among them raised his voice in the way they demand that Pius XII should have done? I don't know a single name.


Would you also include the anti-Fascist Italians?
Absolutely! It's quite simple. Who can they name as someone who did for the Jews what the Pope did not do? I can name no one. There will be singular exceptions, of course, as there were singular cases among the Italian Church hierarchy at the time.

But at least this Pope did everything that it was possible for him to do. His efforts resulted in sparing at least 10,000 Jews fromd eportation against the 2,000 who were deported - and the same thing happened in other parts of Italy where the Church took a hand.

I don't understand what terms of comparison the critics are using. I can only hypothesize that the invective is coming from circles which have a guilty conscience about the issue.

So the black legend coems from a guilty conscience.
I would say so. It cnanot otherwise be explained. The truth is that this hatred against Pius XII was born during a particular time, at the start of the Cold War. Let us not forget he made possible the victory of the Christian Democrats in the 1948 elections.

I am convinced that this hatred started building in the late 40s and early 50s. All the writing hostile to Pius XII dates from after the Second World War - in Italy, from the time the postwar National Unity coalition broke up in 1947, maturing rapidly during the 50s. Tnen, all that deposit of hatred or strong aversion came to the surface.

If it had come to light earlier, the Jews who were saved because of hte Church would never have been allowed to say and write what they did. But coming out 20 years after the war, then most of the witnessses - and we are talking of thousands here - would be gone, and it was the world of their children that has had to carry the pain.

And who have been the only ones to fight these false accusations? The historians.


Then we come to the aggravation from Catholics who draw these comparisons between Pius XII and his successor...
In fact, I think that the proposal for the beatification of both Popes was intentionally proposed at the same time because of that. Indeed, when Paul VI visited the Holy Land in 1964 and spoke warmly of Pius XII, no one protested. And that was the year after Operation Vicar began. The accusations simply appeared unthinkable.

But then as the generation of direct witnesses disappeared, the avalanche gradually built up. But I think that historians will do justice by Pius XII.


Speaking of Catholic critcs. La Civilta cattolica said Pius XII failed to have a prophetic voice during the war. Is that not a bit anachronistic? Perhaps he should have gone into the Jewish ghetto on October 16 as he did a few weeks earlier to San Lorenzo?[I can't place the date, and San Lorenzo is explained in the answer as a bombed quarter of Rome that the Pope visited.]
Frankly, that portion of Jewish blood in my veins makes me prefer a Pope who helped my coreligionists to survive, rather than someone who carried out a demonstrative gesture!

A Pope who visits a recently bombed neighborhood comes to weep over the victims, to show affection for the city, whereas his presence in the ghetto would have been immediately controversial.

Of course, in hindsight, one can say anything, including what has been suggested in critical articles that he should have been courageous enough to throw himself across the track to prevent the deportation trains from leaving! Though that was probably meant flippantly.

But again, in these matters, to reprimand someone for something that neither you nor your peers did takes some nerve! Not one member of the Resistance in Rome went to the ghetto to help anyone, much less nor throw himself across the train tracks to stop a deportation! That kind of talk is just over the top.


About the internal dispute within the Church, Rabbi David Dalin wrote that Pius XII became the largest stick the progressivists could use to beat down the traditionalists...
The most unsettling aspect - which is obvious to me, even if I am watching fronm the outside - is that pitting the figure of John XXIII against that of Pius XII has been a cowardly exercise, because no one has done it openly. You will not find a single book or article by any responsible or authoritative Catholic that states clearly John XXIII, yes, but Pius XII, No. It's a battle fought between the lines, working with subtleties.

The terms are quite simple to me: Either one is truly convinced that Pisu XII was complicit with the Nazis; or, if things are as we have indicated in this interview, then some people should realize that their arguments only contribute to the Black Legend about this Pope.

Let me be clear: I believe that time is running out on this black legend. Pius XII will not be a Pope with the mark of a damnatio memoriae.


Why do you say that?
From the historical point of view, the evidence in his favor is such and so much, while the lack of evidence against him is just so obvious that the offensive against him will have to die out.


One last question. How can one eplain his decision to remain 'silent'?
I have thought much about Pius XII trying to imagine what kind of a personality he was. He has been compared to Benedict XV, the Pope during the First World War. But the Second World War was very different.

Pacelli was a tormented personality, someone who had doubts. He himself dwelt a bit in 1941 over his own 'silence' as he came to a crossroads that put some of his convictions to a test. But then, after the war, he continued to be a strong Pope, someone who was always present, important, decisive for the postwar reconstruction of Italy. In many ways, he was probably the most important Pope of the 20th century.

The fact that he was capable of self-questioning about his decision to be 'silent' gives me an indication of how great he was. Among many things, I was impressed by this: After the war, if Pius XII had felt any guilt at all, a bad conscience, he could have spoken openly of what he did for the Jews. But he never did.

He said not a word. He could have done so. He could have let others write about it or talk about it. He never bothered. For me, this proved the strength of his personality. He did not feel in any way that he had to defend himself.

As for a judgment on Pius XII, I have kept in my heart something written in 1964 by Robert Kempner, a Jewish magistrate of German origin, who was #2 man in the Nuremberg trials: "Any propagandistic position that the Church could have taken against Hitler would have been not merely premeditated suicide, but it would have accelerated the killing of a far greater number of Jews and priests."

I therefore conclude this: For 20 years (until 1963), the public judgments about Pius XII and his conduct with the Jews were unanimous and favorable. Against that, the offensive against him counts for little. Whoever wants to study this question with intellectual honesty should start from that. The scales are just so unbalanced.

TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, November 02, 2008 2:14 PM



10/10/2008 5:11 PM
benefan
Post: 3,349


TIME magazine gets into the act on Pius XII in a predictable way.


Should Pope Pius XII Become a Saint?

By Jeff Israely
TIME Magazine
Thursday, Oct. 09, 2008

Pope Benedict XVI's mostly warm but sometimes chilly relationship with the worldwide Jewish community may have just hit a major ice patch. On Thursday, Benedict put his moral weight (though not yet his signature) behind the cause for sainthood for Pope Pius XII, the wartime Pontiff who many Jewish leaders criticize for not having done enough to oppose the Holocaust.

One of the German Pope's many gestures of goodwill toward Jews during his three-year papacy was to effectively suspend the internal Vatican process that leads to sainthood for Pius, citing a need for a "period of reflection." Now, however, Benedict appears to have finished his own reflecting on the historical virtues of the Italian Pope who reigned from 1939 to 1958. At a special Mass on Thursday marking 50 years since Pius' death, Benedict praised his wartime predecessor's actions to save Jews and called on Catholics to "pray that the cause of his beatification goes forward smoothly." Beatification is the final step before canonization, when a Church figure becomes a saint. Thursday coincidentally was also Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish religious calendar.

At Thursday's Mass in Rome, Benedict lavished praise on Pius, who was the Pope when the then young German first became a priest. Like those who have actively campaigned for his beatification, the Pope said that Pius used a few pointed public — but mostly private — acts of diplomacy to try to prevent what turned into the slaughter of 6 million European Jews. He cited Pius' 1942 Christmas radio message. "With a voice broken with emotion, he deplored the situation of 'hundreds of thousands of persons who, for no fault of their own, only for reason of nationality or ethnic roots, were destined for death or for steady deterioration,' " Benedict said.

Pius, said Benedict, "often acted secretly and silently because, in the light of the concrete realities of that complex historical moment, he saw that this was the only way to avoid the worst and save the largest possible number of Jews."

Though Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said Benedict's homily Thursday does not necessarily mean that Pius will be beatified, it does seem as though the road to sainthood has now been reopened by the unequivocal words of the Pope.

Jewish leaders, who were observing Yom Kippur on Thursday, are expected to be deeply disappointed by Benedict's latest word on the matter. Earlier this week, Shear-Yashuv Cohen, chief rabbi of the Israeli port city of Haifa, who had been invited by the Pope to speak about the Bible at the current synod of bishops in Rome, told Benedict that Jews "cannot forgive and forget" the silence during the Holocaust from world religious leaders. Later, Cohen told reporters that Pius "should not be seen as a model, and he should not be beatified."

Over the past decade, historians have stepped up debate over the Vatican's actions before and during the war. Pius' defenders say that speaking out more would have made matters worse for Jews, while critics say he was too cautious, at best. Before becoming Pope, Pius, then known by his birth name, Eugenio Pacelli, served as both the Vatican envoy to Nazi Germany and later as the Vatican's secretary of state. Indeed, even while Benedict and most of the church hierarchy stand firmly behind Pius, Italian Jesuit scholars say they have recently turned up documents showing that Pacelli's secretary of state office in 1938 put its focus on saving Jews who converted to Catholicism, a revelation likely to reinforce opposition to Pius.

Benedict's own German heritage and forced service in the Nazi military as a teenager have made his rapport with Jews of keen interest. Like John Paul II, the current Pope appears to have a particularly warm rapport with Jewish leaders, and repeatedly refers to the theological and historical bonds from the Old Testament. The Pope has set aside time for visits to synagogues on several foreign trips, and even extensively cited an American rabbi in his book last year about Jesus.

Still, several issues have arisen over the past three years that have caused friction. Benedict's visit to the Auschwitz concentration camp in 2006 was much appreciated, but less so the speech he gave there, which referred to the Nazis as a "ring of criminals," roundly absolving the German people as simply victims of their leaders. Another decision last year to promote the old Latin rite liturgy, which includes a Good Friday prayer that calls for the conversion of the Jews, was also widely criticized by Jewish leaders.

It is undeniable that John Paul II, who referred to Jews as Christians' "older brothers" and was the first Pope to visit a synagogue, has built a bridge in Catholic-Jewish relations that remains solid. Benedict appreciates the importance of that bridge, but he has also shown a tendency to forge ahead with what he thinks is right for his church. In diplomatic terms, perhaps the cause for sainthood for a still controversial Nazi-era pontiff could use a somewhat longer "period of reflection." And maybe a Pope from another country. — With reporting by Francesco Peloso / Rome


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Ugh!

You're right, Benefan - SOOO PREDICTABLE - with a new riff on the 'JPII-was-so-much-better-at-this' motif.

And so mean-spirited, Mr. Israely is. What does he mean the beatification could use 'maybe a Pope from another country'? In one fell swoop, he is projecting/suggesting that perhaps this thing won't happen any time soon, and not under Benedict, i.e., casting a shadow on the Pope's mortality! What is it that people do to ward off evil spirits? St. Michael Archangel, defend us from them - and keep Pope Benedict under your protection!

I'm sure Israely doesn't mean evil, but he is being thoughtlessly flippant.

And in his desire to reinforce his tendentious wighing in on the side of the Pius XII critics, he himself is acritical and uncritical:

Italian Jesuit scholars say they have recently turned up documents showing that Pacelli's secretary of state office in 1938 put its focus on saving Jews who converted to Catholicism, a revelation likely to reinforce opposition to Pius.

What he did as Secretary of State cannot be equiparated to what he did as Pope. As Secretary of State, he had to carry out tasks in behalf of the Church, primarily - so, of course, he would be concerned about rescuing Catholic converts from Judaism!

It doesn't mean he was therefore unconcerned about other Jews (who, after all, had their own tightly knit communities to look after them) - much less that he was thereby anti-Semitic!

And why should the Vatican Secretary of State - or Catholics, for that matter - be held responsible for what happens to other religious communities alongside whom they were just as much victims of persecution? Did the German Jews at the time care what was happening to Catholics, much less do anything about it?

One only has to apply simple common sense to the questions that have been raised about Pius XII to find out how 'made up' they are.


TERESA



TERESA BENEDETTA
Tuesday, November 04, 2008 1:06 PM




Popes remain influential figures
after they die

By John Thavis



VATICAN CITY Oct. 31 (CNS) -- A confluence of anniversaries this fall has turned the Vatican's attention to deceased popes, who still loom large in the church's living memory.

In a seemingly continual procession of conferences, films, liturgies, speeches, books and articles, four late pontiffs in particular -- Popes Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II -- have been celebrated, praised, defended and, in some cases, proposed for sainthood.

On some days, the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, has carried more news about departed popes than on the current occupant of the chair of Peter.

Pope Benedict XVI has been in the forefront of the commemorations, giving speeches and celebrating special Masses for his predecessors, and drawing frequent lessons from their teachings.

Why does the church keep looking back?

"Because tradition is fundamental for the church. We look to the past so that we can look to the future," said Giovanni Maria Vian, editor of the Vatican newspaper.

For the Church, he said, the teachings of previous Popes don't merely have historical meaning, but are still alive. [Of course - their teachings become part of the Magisterium!]

The period of August-October this year marked the 50th anniversary of the death of Pope Pius and the election of Pope John, and the 30th anniversary of the "year of three Popes," with the death of Pope Paul, the election and death of Pope John Paul I, and the election of Pope John Paul II.

But the memorializing really began in July, with the 40th anniversary of Pope Paul's encyclical, Humanae Vitae ("Of Human Life"). Pope Benedict not only strongly defended its teachings against birth control, but also went out of his way to praise Pope Paul's courage and 'far-sightedness' in promulgating a position that would inevitably be criticized by many.

In September a massive campaign began to highlight the holiness of Pope Pius and defend him from accusations of failing to do enough to save Jews during World War II.

A committee of Catholic leaders was formed to promote his legacy, several conferences -- including one with Jewish participants* -- were organized, dozens of articles appeared in Vatican publications, and a photo exhibit went on display next to St. Peter's Square. *[It must be made clear that the Jewish organization Pave the Way organized the symposium entirely on its own initiative, not at the Vatican's!]

Pope Benedict celebrated a 50th anniversary memorial Mass for Pope Pius, commending not only his wartime actions but also his innovative leadership in areas of liturgy, biblical interpretation and ecclesiology.

In October, it was Pope John Paul II's turn, with major celebrations, conferences and papal messages marking the anniversary of his election in 1978, culminating in the premiere screening at the Vatican of a new film about his life.

Later in the month, Pope Benedict led memorial prayers at the tomb of Pope John, whose election in 1958 was marked in countless Italian newspaper and magazine articles, as well as a new film and a popular TV miniseries.

Increasingly, the memory of deceased Popes has been kept alive through sainthood causes. The cause of Pope Pius is perhaps the most well-known and the most controversial, with his cause currently on hold during a "period of reflection," but sainthood causes are in fact active for all of the previous five popes.

Pope John was beatified in 2000. Pope John Paul I's cause passed a recent milestone, with approval of the diocesan phase of investigation. Pope Paul's cause has also reached the Vatican. And the "santo subito!" -- "sainthood now!" -- movement is still pushing for the quick beatification of Pope John Paul II.

The push to canonize deceased Popes is a relatively recent trend. Over the last 700 years, only two Popes were declared saints. Yet today, it seems almost a given that sooner or later a Pope will be proposed for sainthood after his death. [I think it has less to do with a 'trend' than with the inherent characteristics of the Popes concerned - although I find it strange that no one seems to have considered Leo XIII, Benedict XV and Pius XI for sainthood - the three modern Popes who have been left out so far.]

Luigi Accattoli, a respected Italian journalist who has covered the Vatican for decades, wrote after the death of Pope John Paul II that papal canonizations were "pointless" and that the Church would better spend its energy by looking for less renowned saints.

He said the starting gun for the papal "race for sainthood" was fired by Pope Paul, when at the end of the Second Vatican Council he simultaneously launched the causes of Popes Pius and John.

There's no doubt recent Popes have been holy men, he said. But sometimes rushing to proclaim sainthood for a Pope is simply a way for "the Roman hierarchy to canonize itself," he said.

[First, I don't think there is a 'rush'. Despite the 'santo subito' popular movements for John Paul II and Mother Teresa, the Church has made clear it will go through the usual tedious - and often time-cosuming - process required for beatification and canonization, even for these two most popular candidates.

And to impute the move to canonize recent Popes as 'a way for the Roman hierarchy to canonize itself' is accusing the Popes directly of trying to do this! Does anyone really think Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI were motivated by that in any way for proposing the causes for sainthood respexctively of Pius XII, John XXIII, John Paul I and John Paul II?

In this case, Accattoli clearly did not think through his hypothesis well enough before committing it to paper.]


Accattoli's views are not shared widely by Vatican saint makers. [I think it is unworthy of Thavis to use the term 'saint maker']

Jesuit Father Paolo Molinari, who until recently was the postulator for the cause of Pope Paul, said it was a misconception that "every pope today has to be named a saint."

"All these recent Popes have not been proposed for sainthood just because they were Popes, but because people recognized in them an excellent way of living as Christians," he said.

The primary requisite for opening any sainthood cause is "fama sanctitatis," Latin for "reputation of holiness," which must be recognized widely among the faithful. Some think that tends to favor Popes, who live on the world stage.

But Father Molinari said global celebrity does not guarantee a reputation for holiness, even for Popes.

"It can work both ways," he said.

On Nov. 2, All Souls' Day, Pope Benedict was to pray in the grottos beneath St. Peter's Basilica in memory of all his predecessors -- another sign that Popes may be gone, but they are not forgotten. (Geez, what a banal statement to make!]


TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:57 PM
RESERVED FOR CATCH-UP RE-POSTS ON PIUS XII
TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:57 PM
RESERVED FOR CATCH-UP RE-POSTS ON PIUS XII
TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:58 PM
RESERVED FOR CATCH-UP RE-POSTS ON PIUS XII
TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, November 05, 2008 8:04 PM



Exhibit opens as debate continues
over Pope Pius XII's wartime role

By John Thavis






VATICAN CITY, Nov. 4 (CNS) -- The Vatican opened a major exhibit on the life and pontificate of Pope Pius XII, highlighting the late Pope's actions on behalf of Jews and others who suffered during World War II.

The retrospective show -- featuring photos, articles of clothing and documents -- opened Nov. 4 in an exhibition hall adjacent to St. Peter's Square.

Several sections of the exhibit are dedicated to the Vatican's actions during the war. Pope Pius is described as a "defender of peace" who opened Vatican properties to refugees and created an office to help prisoners of war and their families.

The Pope is pictured standing amid the Roman populace after aerial bombardment of the city, visiting the Vatican bakery that furnished free bread to residents, and meeting in 1943 with Jews who escaped deportation to concentration camps.

Press clippings and letters attesting to the Pope's courage in defending the Jews are included, along with transcripts of the Pope's radio broadcasts during the war.

To help demonstrate the Pope's clear anti-Nazi sentiments, one glass case displays pages of a draft version of the 1937 encyclical "With Burning Concern," which condemned the racism and paganism of the Nazi regime.

The text was written by Pope Pius XI, but with assistance from his secretary of state, then-Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli -- elected two years later as Pope Pius XII -- whose margin notes are clearly visible.

The exhibit opened as an international debate continued over the late pope's actions during the war. Some Jewish groups have said he did little to mobilize the church in defense of Jews, while other experts have gathered evidence to show that he worked quietly but effectively to save the lives of thousands of Jews and others.

Msgr. Walter Brandmuller, president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, told a press conference that the exhibit should help demonstrate that "the accusations against (Pope Pius XII) cannot be based on historical research, which ever more convincingly demonstrates how groundless they are."

Much of the Vatican exhibit presents a human side of the Pope, including his early years as a boy in a neighborhood not far from the Vatican.

It also highlights aspects of his pontificate that are often overlooked: his launching of archaeological excavations beneath St. Peter's Basilica, his interest in contemporary artistic works and his extensive travels, which included the United States.

One of the most unusual items is a handwritten page in which the Pope gave an account of witnessing the so-called "miracle of the sun," seeing the sun rotate and move in the sky. The episode occurred in the Vatican Gardens, the day before the Pope proclaimed the dogma of the Assumption of Mary in 1950.

The section titled "The Private Pope Pius" features a photo of him petting two lambs at his Castel Gandolfo country residence. Another photo shows him with a pet canary perched on his finger; it was one of several pet birds that would fly around his dining-room table as he dined alone.

The exhibit runs to Jan. 6.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


This reminds me I am behind in translating the four items in L'Osservatore Romano about this exhibit two days ago, as I mentioned in the OR 'summary' that day. I will post them in this box when I have translated.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mostre, al Vaticano apre i battenti 'Pio XII l'uomo e il pontificato'



Città del Vaticano, 3 nov. (Adnkronos/Adnkronos Cultura) - Spesso al centro di polemiche diffamatorie e di controversie storiografiche, soprattutto dopo la sua morte, Papa Pio XII(nella foto), salito al soglio pontifico nel 1939 (alla vigilia della Seconda Guerra Mondiale), fu testimone di alcuni degli eventi più significativi del XX secolo: dal conflitto mondiale all'Olocausto, fino alla Guerra Fredda. In occasione del 50° anniversario della sua morte, una grande mostra getta nuovamente luce sulla sua figura, mettendo in risalto non solo il suo operato come sommo Pontefice, ma anche alcuni aspetti meno conosciuti della sua vita e della sua personalità.

"Pio XII. L'Uomo e il Pontificato (1876 - 1958)", questo il titolo dell'evento espositivo organizzato dal Pontificio Comitato di Scienze Storiche (su esplicita rischiesta del Santo Padre Benedetto XVI), e ospitato nel "Braccio di Carlo Magno" in Vaticano, farà riscoprire al grande pubblico, attraverso numerosi scritti (molti dei quali inediti), fotografie, oggetti personali e opere d’arte, l’intero percorso di vita di Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli, nato a Roma il 2 marzo 1876, terzogenito di Filippo Pacelli e di Virginia Graziosi.

Nove sezioni per una rassegna "che metterà in risalto - ha sottolineato il professor Don Cosimo Semeraro, segretario del Pontificio Comitato di Scienze Storiche - gli aspetti meno conosciuti di questo personaggio, la sua storia personale, dalla nascita in via degli Orsini a Roma, alla sua infanzia, dalla vita come studente del liceo 'Visconti', fino alla formazione universitaria presso l'Università Gregoriana". E poi ancora il percorso spirituale di Pacelli, la sua ordinazione sacerdotale e l’inizio del lungo iter al servizio della Santa Sede, il suo ruolo di nunzio apostolico a Monaco di Baviera e Berlino, la nomina a segretario di Stato, fino al suo lungo Pontificato.

La mostra "Pio XII. L'uomo e il Pontificato (1876 - 1958)", che sarà inaugurata domani alla presenza del sindaco di Roma, Gianni Alemanno, e che resterà aperta fino al 6 gennaio, è stata realizzata grazie alla collaborazione di vari archivi e istituzioni Vaticane, italiane ed estere, e al contributo di un comitato scientifico molto corposo. "Con questa rassegna - ha sottolineato Andrea Tornielli del comitato scientifico - si cerca di andare al di là dell’immagine ufficiale di Pio XII, come pure al di là di alcune interpretazioni stereotipate in voga da decenni".

Si vuole "presentare - ha proseguito Tornielli - accanto al pastore, al diplomatico, al Pontefice, anche l’uomo". E per fare questo il comitato scientifico si è servito di alcuni documenti inediti tratti dall’archivio privato della famiglia Pacelli ed esposti per la prima volta in questa mostra. Dalla lettera manoscritta al fratello del 28 ottobre 1919, nella quale si accenna al ruolo svolto dal capitano de Luca in difesa della nunziatura di Monaco assalita dai rivoluzionari spartachisti, a quella con la quale il nunzio confida al fratello di non voler essere richiamato a Roma, come cardinale, perché lì dove si trova ha occasione di fare apostolato e non deve fare lavoro burocratico.

E poi ancora alcuni appunti a matita, come quello nel quale, ormai alla fine del pontificato, Pio XII volle raccontare ciò che vide per quattro volte (30 e 31 ottobre, 1° e 8 novembre 1950) durante la passeggiata nei giardini vaticani in occasione della proclamazione del dogma dell’Assunta (1° novembre), quando assicurò di aver assistito al cosiddetto "fenomeno del sole" accaduto a Fatima.

La rassegna commemorativa in occasione del 50° anniversario della morte di Pio XII, intende anche illustrare "la dimensione pastorale, spesso trascurata, dell'azione di Eugenio Pacelli - ha spiegato il professor Philippe Chenaux della Pontifica Università Lateranense - prima come nunzio apostolico in Germania nelle circostanze drammatiche della Prima Guerra Mondiale e del primo dopoguerra, poi come cardinale segretario di Stato negli anni Trenta; infine come pastore della Chiesa Universale negli anni Quaranta e Cinquanta".

Due momenti ben documentati dalla mostra, poi, dimostrano la sollecitudine pastorale per la sua città: il periodo della guerra e dell'occupazione nazista e l'Anno Santo del 1950. "Nel percorso espositivo - ha sottolineato Don Semeraro - si evidenzia il legame intimo di Papa Pacelli con Roma. Sono esposte delle foto molto famose che lo mostrano in mezzo alla sua gente subito dopo il tragico bombardamento di San Lorenzo. Un romano tra i romani".

Viene preso in considerazione, infine, l'aspetto della diplomazia di Pio XII nel periodo della Grande Guerra, ma anche durante la "Guerra Fredda" tra Gli Stati Uniti e l'Unione Sovietica. "Questa mostra è importante - ha sottolineato il professor Napolitano dell'Università del Molise - perché mette in risalto come Pio XII si trovò a essere Papa in un periodo tragico e senza precedenti nella storia dell'Umanità. Il bilancio storiografico su questo Pontefice, analizzando i documenti italiani e soprattutto esteri, è senza dubbio positivo. Fu un alleato della democrazia, fautore della pace, e nemico delle dittature e dei totalitarismi". La mostra volerà poi a Berlino e Monaco, e in seguito negli Stati Uniti.


benefan
Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:10 AM
Pius XII Saw "Miracle of the Sun"

By Antonio Gaspari

ROME, NOV. 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- According to his own testimony, the Pope who declared the dogma of the Assumption saw the "miracle of the sun" four times.

This information is confirmed by a handwritten, unpublished note from Pope Pius XII, which is part of the "Pius XII: The Man and the Pontificate" display. The display opened in the Vatican to the public today and will run through Jan. 6.

A commissioner of the display and a Vatican reporter for the Italian daily Il Giornale, Andrea Tornielli, explained to ZENIT that the note was found in the Pacelli family archives. It describes the "miracle of the sun," an episode that until today had only been affirmed by the indirect testimony of Cardinal Federico Tedeschini (1873-1959), who recounted in a homily that the Holy Father had seen the miracle.

Pius XII wrote, "I have seen the 'miracle of the sun,' this is the pure truth."

The miracle of the sun is most known as the episode that occurred in Fatima, Portugal, on Oct. 13, 1917. According to the Fatima visionaries, Mary had said there would be a miracle that day so that people would come to believe. Thousands had gathered at the site of the visions, and the sun "danced," reportedly drying instantaneously the rain-soaked land and spectators.

Confirming the dogma

Pius XII's note says that he saw the miracle in the year he was to proclaim the dogma of the Assumption, 1950, while he walked in the Vatican Gardens.

He said he saw the phenomenon various times, considering it a confirmation of his plan to declare the dogma.

The papal note says that at 4 p.m. on Oct. 30, 1950, during his "habitual walk in the Vatican Gardens, reading and studying," having arrived to the statue of Our Lady of Lourdes, "toward the top of the hill […] I was awestruck by a phenomenon that before now I had never seen."

"The sun, which was still quite high, looked like a pale, opaque sphere, entirely surrounded by a luminous circle," he recounted. And one could look at the sun, "without the slightest bother. There was a very light little cloud in front of it."

The Holy Father's note goes on to describe "the opaque sphere" that "moved outward slightly, either spinning, or moving from left to right and vice versa. But within the sphere, you could see marked movements with total clarity and without interruption."

Pius XII said he saw the same phenomenon "the 31st of October and Nov. 1, the day of the definition of the dogma of the Assumption, and then again Nov. 8, and after that, no more."

The Pope acknowledged that on other days at about the same hour, he tried to see if the phenomenon would be repeated, "but in vain -- I couldn't fix my gaze [on the sun] for even an instant; my eyes would be dazzled."

Pius XII spoke about the incident with a few cardinals and close collaborators, such that Sister Pascalina Lehnert, the nun in charge of the papal apartments, declared that "Pius XII was very convinced of the reality of the extraordinary phenomenon, which he had seen on four occasions."

Son of Our Lady

Tornielli told ZENIT that there was always a close link between the life of Eugenio Pacelli and the mystery of the Virgin Mary.

"Since childhood," he said, "Eugenio Pacelli was devoted [to Our Lady] and was registered in the Congregation of the Assumption, which had a chapel close to the Church of Jesus. A devotion that seemed prophetic, since he would be precisely the one to declare the dogma of the Assumption in 1950."

The future Pope celebrated his first Mass on April 3, 1899, at the altar of the icon of Mary "Salus Populi Romani" in the Basilica of St. Mary Major. "And then," Tornielli continued, "Eugenio Pacelli received episcopal ordination from Pope Benedict XV in the Sistine Chapel on May 13, 1917, the day of the first apparition of the Virgin of Fatima."

As Pope, in 1940, he approved the Fatima apparitions, and in 1942, consecrated the entire world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

As well, Pius XII often spoke with Sister Lucia, the visionary of Fatima, and he asked her to transcribe the messages she received from the Virgin. He thus became the first Pope to know the "third secret of Fatima," which Pope John Paul II would later make public.



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Andrea Tornielli wrote an account of the 'miracle of the sun' from his book last June, and it was re-posted on Page 1 of this thread (Post #15,506). With it, I also posted the contemporary reportage on the original 'miracle of the sun' in Fatima, for background.

TERESA

maryjos
Thursday, November 06, 2008 3:06 PM
Miracle of the Sun
Dear benefan, I was about to paste in this news story, which I have just a minute ago received from Andrew Rabel. I also noticed that Teresa said she had already posted it ages ago! Crumbs! It's impossible to keep up and I would be so interested to contribute to a thread on earlier popes, as I know other members would.
I expect you'll be moving our comments on Paul VI to this thread, Teresa?

Alles Gute!
Mary

The book "Pius XII - The Hound of Hitler" is proving to be quite a well-balanced account [though Gerard Noel DOES quote John Cornwell a bit too much for my liking] and it's very readable....when I can sit down to get on with it, that is!!!!!
TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, November 09, 2008 6:25 AM



EUGENIO PACELLI:
SECRETARY OF STATE
& ROMAN PONTIFF


Here is a translation of the address given by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone on Thursday, November 6, to open an international symposium on the Magisterium of Pius XII and the Second Vatican Council, at the Pontifical Gregorian University.




I wish above all to thank the two Magnificent Rectors of the Gregorian and Lateran Universities - our hosts this morning, the Reverend Father Ghirlanda and Monsignor Fisichella - for the invitation to open this conference, which is very important and timely, on the legacy of Pius XII's Magisterium.

As a premise to the work done in order to confront this subject - still little studied - one must look at the vast panorama of the work of Eugenio Pacelli, first as Cardinal Secretary of State to Pius XI and Chamberlain of the Holy Roman Church. Personally, I am happy and honored to be able to do this in my capacity as his present successor in both posts.

Therefore I will re-evoke, if only in summary form, the service of Cardinal Pacelli, bearing two facts well in mind which I shall look at amply: the work of this Roman cardinal was the last stage of an itinerary in the service of the Holy See, the universal Church and every human being, without distinction - a journey that culminated in a Pontificate that was out of the ordinary, which began on the eve of the most horrifying war that humanity has known, and which in fact, was eventually shown to be, paradoxically, a work of peace, that peace which is a fruit of justice - opus iustitiae pax - as Pacelli's motto says, which uses the root word 'pax' of his family name.

At long last, there are many signs that the debate over his person and his work - controversial to the point of becoming a veritable historiographic case - has been turning more calm and balanced lately, acknowledging the relevance and greatness of his Pontificate, beyond the exploitative polemics that is becoming less understandable because, above all, they have little to do with historical fact.

Born in Rome on March 2, 1876, to a family belonging to minor Roman nobility, and ordained a priest on April 2, 1899, the young Pacelli entered the service of the Holy See in 1901, towards the end of Leo XIII's Pontificate, starting a brilliant career that would bring him to the summit of Vatican diplomacy before the start of the First World War.

Chosen by Cardinal Pietro Gasparri to be secretary of the Commission for the revision of the Code of Canon Law in 1904, and joining the Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesial Affairs the next year, he was named its undersecretary in 1911 by Pius XI, then adjunct secretary in 1912, and secretary in 1914, on the very eve of war.

In these roles of growing responsibility, Mons. Pacelli was concerned above all by the rupture of diplomatic relations with France, and was the protagonist of two difficult missions during the catastrophic war, in repeated but futile attempts at mediation carried out by the Holy See (which for more than four decades, had been increasingly more active 'at the frontiers of peace' - activity that has been very well documented and studied).

In 1917, Mons. Pacelli was named Apostolic Nuncio to Munich by Benedict XV, who on May 13th that year, personally conferred the episcopal honor on Pacelli in the Sistine Chapel. [Which makes {Pius XII probably the only Pope to have been ordained a bishop and elected Pope in the Sistine Chapel!]

As the only papal representative on German territory, he met with the Kaiser in an attempt to sound out Germany's real intentions in the war. That encounter with Wilhelm II was solemn but unsuccessful, and was described by the Pope's diplomat in a lucid report to the Secretary of State, who was Gasparri in 1916.

Pacelli wrote:

Introduced to the Kaiser... I explained to him, according to the instructions I received, the anxious concern of the Holy Father Benedict XV, about the prolongation of the war, the growing hatreds and the accumulation of material and moral ruin which represented the suicide of civilian Europe and which would turn mankind backward on its path by centuries...

His Majesty listened to me with respectful and serious attention... I would say, nonetheless, in all frankness, that in his manner of looking intently at his interlocutor, in his gestures, and in his voice, he seemed to me - I could not say whether it was his nature or the consequence of three long and anguished years of war - rather 'exalted' and not at all normal.

He replied that Germany had not provoked the war, but that it was forced to defend itself from the destructive intentions of England, whose belligerent power - and at this point, the emperor vigorously shook his fist in the air - had to be crushed.

Five years later, a different and less credible version of the meeting by the now-dethroned sovereign in his memoirs was belied by the Holy See.

The Pontifical legation faced the disastrous postwar situation of Germany with what it called a 'diplomacy of assistance', of which Pacelli was a protagonist in a much wider context than the humanitarian activity deployed by the Holy See since 1915 in behalf of prisoners of war.

Witness to the ruin which followed the conflict, Pacelli as Nuncio in Munich - also Nuncio in Berlin since 1920 - clearly saw the dangers in the new situation provoked by the collapse of the Wilhelmine empire, the attitude of the winning powers towards Germany, the complications brought on by the successful Communist Revolution of 1917 in Russia, the risk of a possible Russo-German alliance against the western nations, the growth of German nationalism which affected many Catholics even though its roots were Protestant, and the spread of Hitler's movement.

because of all this, Mons. Pacelli supported the Weimar Republic, the collaboration between the Catholic Zentrum party and socialists, as well as German national unity. He worked towards getting Concordats which he was able to conclude with Bavaria in 1924 and with Prussia in 1929.

But in Berlin. the Nuncio's attempts to deal with Soviet emissaries - begun in 1924 and carried on for three years - were unsuccessful in trying to assure the survival of the Catholic Church in Russia.

On December 16, 1929, Pius XI made his representative in Berlin a cardinal. Pacelli left the German capital with great recognition - even in the 'adversary' press, according to a report sent later to the Vatican by the Berlin Nunciature - of his gifts and his merits.

A few weeks later, Papa Ratti named the new cardinal his Secretary of State, in a brief document dated February 7, 1930, which was completely written in his own hand - now displayed at the current exhibit at the Charlemagne Arm of the Bernini Colonnade by the Pontifical Commission on Historical Sciences to commemorate 'The Man Pacelli and His Pontificate' on the the 50th anniversary of his death, an exhibit I had the pleasure of inaugurating two days ago.

Because of its inherent interest, it is worth citing the entire papal document:

"Lord Cardinal, having believed that we should accede - which we did today, at great pain - to the request of Cardinal Pietro Gasparri to resign as our Secretary of State, we have, before the Lord, decided to call on you and name you, Eminence - as we hereby do with this legal document - to the none-too-easy and demanding succession to that high and sensitive office.

What has moved us to this nomination and what gives us full and certain confidence before everyone is your spirit of piety and prayer which can only be propitious for an abundance of divine aid, as well as the qualities and gifts that the good Lord has enriched you with, in all the high positions that have been entrusted to you till now - especially in the two Nunciatures in Bavaria and Prussia - which you have used very well for the glory of the Divine Giftgiver and in service to the Church. With all my heart, I bless you...

Thus started the last decisive stage of Pacelli's journey, before the brief Conclave which, nine years later, on his 63rd birthday, would elect him Pope - the first Roman and Secretary of State in two centuries to become Pope.

The period during which he was the prime collaborator of Pius XI was one of the most difficult and tragic times of the 20th century. It was examined in depth and studied for the first time by a reputed scholar like Fr. Pierre Blet, whom I wish to greet here today.

The international context was most difficult because of the worldwide economic crisis and the rising totalitarian tide which seemed to submerge Europe, even as - with the 'Roman question' having been resolved through the Conciliation between Italy and the Holy See [an event commemorated in the construction and naming of the Via della Conciliazione leading to St. Peter's Square] - the church of Rome began taking on more visibly that universal breadth inherent in its calling and which the Pontificates of Pius XI and Pius XII had strongly developed and underscored, paving the way for the years of the Second Vatican Council and Pius XII's successors in the second half of the 20th century.

In this task, the activities of Secretary of State Pacelli, supported by co-workers of the first order, were fundamental. Outstanding among these collaborators were two personalities who were very different but complementary - Domenico Tardini and Giovanni Battista Montini, who were named respectively, secretary for extraordinary ecclesial affairs, and deputy secretary of state. They were both confirmed in those positions when Pacelli became Pope, who then made them both pro-Secretaries of State at the end of 19523.

As Secretary of State, Pacelli was an ecclesiastic with a preparation that was out of the ordinary and who immediately impressed all the diplomats accredited to the Holy See. Here is how he was remembered in that position 15 years later by the ambassador to the Vatican from France, Francois Charles-Roux:

He was a perfect negotiator - conscientious, persevering in bringing forth the viewpoint of the Holy See and trying to make it prevail, but at the same time, conciliatory, equitable, impartial, and scrupulously loyal. He knew how not to be irritating, even when he was obliged to be intransigent or energetically assertive in posing an objection or a complaint.

Continuous association with him reminded me of a saying by the French diplomat and statesman Choiseul that true refinement is saying the truth, sometimes with force but always with grace.

These were the qualities of Eugenio Pacelli that served the Holy See invaluably in the dark years that led to the Second World War.

It is not possible for us to dwell here on a period so dense with events and so complex from the historical viewpoint, but to indicate the scope of activity of the Holy See, a few facts on the actions of the Pope and the work of his Secretary of State will suffice to recall facts that are known but which have not always been interpreted in their historical context, and which have often been distorted.

In Italy, despite the controversial 'Conciliation', tensions between the Holy See and the Fascist regime multiplied until the crisis of 1931, when Mussolini as head of government gave an order dissolving all Catholic youth associations.

Pius XI reacted vigorously and published the encyclical Non abbiamo bisogno (We have no need...). which was so strongly worded against the government decision that in order to publish it first outside Italy, out of fear that internal publication would be blocked, Mons. Montini was charged with travelling incognito to deliver the text to the Nunciatures in Bern and Berlin.

"This is an attempt to deal a death blow," began the papal encyclical, written in Italian, "to what was and what always will be dear to our heart as Father and Pastor of souls".

The crisis was eventually resolved, but the tensions would return many times more in the following years, in a country where the only press voice that remained truly free was the Pope's newspaper, as a lay representative like Piero Calamandrei would remind the Italian Constituutional Assembly afte World War II: "...that at a certain moment, during the years of the worst oppression, we realized that the only newspaper in which we could still find some sign of freedom - of our freedom, of the freedom common to all free men - was L'Osservatore Romano... (and) we experienced the fact that those who bought this newspaper were subject o being clubbed down..."

Another encyclical was published in the smae year, Nova impendet, on the gravity of the economic crisis and the worsening arms race, followed in October 1931 by another great social document to commemorate Leo XIII's encyclical Quadragesimo anno.

The worsening social situation was again the subject the following year of Caritate Christi, followed by Acerhe animi on the anti-Catholic persecutions in Mexico, which broke off diplomatic relations with the Holy See.

But a crisis was also precipitated in Spain, where the recently proclaimed Republic carried out a policy which was severely adverse to the Church, with provisions that provoked a firm protest from the Holy See in 1933, starting with the encyclical Dilectissima nobis, against the "grave offense not only against religion and the Church, but also against the principles of freedom that the new Spanish regime had declared it was based on".

"It must not be thought that our word is inspired by sentiments of aversion to this new form of government or other strictly political events that have taken place recently in Spain", the letter continued. "It is a fact known to all that the Catholic Church, which is not linked in any way to one government or another, has not found it difficult - in order to keep safe the law of God and Christian conscience - to come to terms with various civilian institutions, whether monarchic or republican, aristocratic or democratic".

"Manifest proof of this, not to mention recent facts, are the numerous Concordats and agreements reasched in the past several years with various regimes, and the diplomatic relations opened by the Vatican with various states in which, after the last great war, republican governments replaced monarchies."

This was reiterated by Cardinal Pacelli with respect to the attidue of the Church towards public authorities: "The experience of 2000 years keeps the Church from exaggerating the importance of questions related to the form of the State and the structures which such form conditions."

Proof of the moderation and realism of the Church of Rome was seen during the tragedy which would be precipitated three years later by the Spanish Civil War, with the Holy See and Pius XI himself famously opposed to the actions taken by General Franco in Spain.

What stands out, of course, among the Concordats signed by the Holy See in those years, was the one with the German Reich, which haappened in 1933, but in a situation completely different from when Pacelli left Berlin three years earlier - becsause of the growth in the meantime of German consensus favorable to Nazism.

The Holy See and most of the German bishops - unlike many German Catholics and the overwhelming majority of German Protestants - had a negative attitude, and the bishops would eventually be called to account for their initial opposition during Hitler's rise to power, against the national consensus favorable to the Nazi regime.

Just to point out one fact: At least 11,000 Catholic priests (almost half of the German clergy at the time), "received punitive measures from the Nazis that were politically or religiously motivated", which often meant ending up in concentration camps.

Among the consequences of the Concordat with Germany was the elimination from the political scene of the Catholic political party Zentrum. Nonetheless, the conflicts between the Catholic Church and Nazism grew more acute - despite the growing concerns over the Church's declarations against Communist totalitarianism and notwithstanding traditional Catholic anti-Semitism - in the wake of anti-Jewish legislation and provisions for voluntary sterilization. Against all this, the Church spoke with firmness as eawrly as 1934, above all, the Bishop of Muenster Clemens von Galen [DIM]8pt[=DIM][who became a close friend of Cardinal Pacelli, and who was beatified by Benedict XVI in October 2005].

The Church's opposition to Nazism was clear, and in 1936, a collective letter from the German bishops asked the Pope for an enchyclical on the matter. Pius XI called to Rome the three German cardinals (Adolf Bertram, Michael von Faulhaber, and Karl Joseph Shulte), as well as the two bishops who were most outspoken against the regime, von Galen and Konrad von Preysing.

With the definitive help of Cardinal Pacelli and his faithful German collaborators (Mons. Ludwig Kaas and the Jesuits Roberty Leiber and Augustin Bea), the result was Mit brennender Sorge (With burning concern), the 1937 encyclical which condemned the racial and pagan ideology of the Third Reich, followed a few days later by the encyclical against atheistic Communism (Divini redemptoris) and on the bloody persecutions by Masonic laymen against Mexican Catholics (Firmissimam constantiam).

The relationship between Pius XI and his secretary of state remains a subject to be more fully explored, but this will occur in time, and with progresive studies of Vatican archival material which was opened two years ago for the entire Pontificate of Pius XI, but which researchers have barely looked at.

The esteem that the Pope had for Pacelli would continually grow, leading Pius XI to the unprecedented innovation of sending his Scretary of State on repeated international missions. Thus, in 1934, Cardinal Pacelli crossed the Atlantic for the first time - as another future Pope had done a century earlier, when Mastai-Ferretti [who became Pius IX] went to Chile on a diplomatic mission.

Pacelli as Secretary of State and Pontifical Representative also went to Buenos Aires for an International Eucharistic Congress, and during that long trip, he visited Montevideo (Uruguay) and Rio de Janiero (Brazil), then Las Palmas in the Canary Islands and Barcelona, returning to the Vatican in 1935.

A few months later, the cardinal was in Lourdes, where his concluding homily counterposed redemption by Christ to 'the banner of social revolution', to 'a false conception of the world and of life' and to 'the superstition of race and blood'.

This condemnation of 'the idolatry of race' would be re-stated by Cardinal Pacelli when he was once again sent to France by the Pope, this time to consecrate the Basilica in Lisieux, proceeding from there to Paris, where he met with representatives of the Popular Front government.

In 1938, another International Eucharistic Congress took him to Hungary, where he reaffirmed the Church's traditonal principle of its extraneity in determining forms of government, but above all, he denounced the arms race "which has become the dominant concern of mankind in the 20th century", warning that the 'destructive fury' f new conflicts would far surpass 'the most frightening wars of the past'.

But perhaps, Pacelli's most important trip was that in autumn 1936 - a long private visit to the United States, logging thousands of miles by air, as he had already done a great deal in Germany, which farther underscored his modernity.

During that trip, the cardinal met with some eighty American bishops, adn many important political figures, including President Roosevelt who had just been re-elected,

Returning to the Vatican, the cardinal was presented by the Pope with a commemorative portrait which he dedixcated with a handwritten "Carissimo cardinale, al suo Trans-Atlantico Pan-Americo - Eugenio Pacelli feliciter redeunti" (Dearest Cardinal on his happy return from a trans-Atlantic pan-Americanrip).

Just a few days earlier, Pius XI surprised Mons. Tardini by praising his Secretary of State who was still travelling, and concluding calmly, "He will be a great Pope."

The prediction was fulfilled less than three years later just as the next great war became imminent. To try and prevent it, the new Pope, who had taken the name Pius XII, attempted a last appeal, written with the help of his deputy Montini, and delivered a week before the troops of the Third Reich invaded Poland:

A grave hour has struck once again for the great human family. A momemt of tremendous deliberation, about which we cannot be disinterested, about which our spiritual authority, which comes from God, must not be disinterested, in order to lead all souls along the ways of justice and peace. ...

We who are armed with nothing more than the power of truth, above public rivalries and passions, speak to you in the name of God, from whom all paternity in heaven and earth takes its name...

It is with the force of reason, not of arms, that justice advances. Empires that are not founded on justice are not blessed by God. Politics emancipated from morality betrays the very ones who wish it so.

The danger is imminent, but there is sitll time. Nothing is lost with peace. Everything could be lost with war... We plead, through the blood of Christ whose triumphant power in the world was his gntleness in life and in death.

Pleading thus, we know and we feel that we are joined by all who are upright in heart, all who are hungry and thirsty for justice, all those already suffering every kind of pain from the evlis of this life...

Also with us is the soul of this old Europe... which was the product of Christian faith and genius. With us, too, all of mankind who hope for justice, bread, freedom - not weapons which kill and destroy

. Papa Pacelli's appeal was in vain, as was the denunciation in his first encyclical, Summi pontificatus, published in the first autumn of the war, which condemned "forgetting that law of human solidarity and charity, dictated and imposed by both the common origins of men and the similarity of rational nature in all men, whatever people they belong to, and by the sacrifice of redemption offered by Jesus Christ".

The encyclical also forcefully advocated 'the unity of the human race' which was at the center and in the title of the last projected encyclical by his predecessor, to whom Pius XII has sometimes been compared unfavorably without a real basis.

There was no 'hidden encyclical' by Pius XI, in the same way that Cardinal Pacelli never censored the last speech written by Pius XI for the tenth anniversary of the Conciliation with Italy, which, 20 years later, John XXIII would order published in L'Osservatore Romano.

The condemnation in Summi Pontificatus was aimed at 'the concept that assigns unlimited power to the State', which the encyclical called 'a pernicious error', whether for 'the internal life of nations' or for 'relations among peoples, because it shatters the unity of supranational society, takes away the basis and the value of the law for peoples, opens the way for violating the rights of others, and makes peaceful intentions and coexistence difficult".

It concluded with a most severe denunciation of 'the hour of darness' when 'the spirit of violence and discord pours over mankind the bloody cup of unnameable sorrows" and warned that "such sorrows are perhaps only 'the beginning of labor pains' (Mt 24,8) for the people, who are now engulfed in the vortex of the war, when alrady death and desolation, lamentation and misery, rule over thousnads of families".

"The death of countless human beings, including non-combatants, raises an excruciating lament, particularly for a beloved nation like Poland, which, for its faithfulness to the Church, for its merits in defense of Christian civilization, written indelibly in the pages of its history, has a right to the human and fraternal sympathy of the world."

It continues: "The duty of Christian love, fundamental principle of the Kingdom of Christ, is not an empty word but a living reality. A vast field opens itself to Christian charity in all forms. We have full confidence that all our children, especially those who are not suffering the scourge of war, may remember, emulating the divine Samaritan, that all those who are victims of war have a right to mercy adn help".

Prefigured thus in Papa Pacelli's first encyclical was not only the horrors of war but also the gigantic work of charity that the Catholic Church would deploy for everyone, without any distinction whatsoever, during the years of conflict.

Proof of this, among others, are the three million and a half documents of the Vatican Information Office, letters written in behalf of individual prisoners of war, instituted by Pius XII soon after the war started - documents covering up to 1947 which are available in the Vatican archives and which have always been open but almost completely unused.

In fact, it seems that it suffices to openn an archive - even one whose opening has perhaps been demnaded clamorously - for its contents to then be totally ignored. Evidently, there are many for whom history is important only if it can be used as a weapon.

It is known that the archives of the Holy See have been completely open up to 1939 [to the end of Pius XI's Papacy], whereas for the period of the war and the Shoah, its contents have been largely anticipated in substance by the 12 volumes of the Actes et documents du Saint-Siege relatifs a la seconde guerre mondiale, published at the instance of Paul VI in 1965.

This impressive documentation - which adds to the immense documentation available in national and private archives elsewhere, countless testimonials and historical reconstructions of that period - confirm that the controversy over the so-called 'silence' of Pius XII, attributed to his supposed insensitivity or even outright connivance with respect to the Shoah, is merely exploitative.

This is indicated moreover by its roots in Soviet propaganda which was started during the war itself, later spilling over into Soviet propaganda during the Cold War, to be relaunched by its epigones [inferior imitators].

As a diplomat under Benedict XV, Pacelli made every effort to get widespread condemnation as early as 1915 for the anti-Jewish violence that erupted in Poland, while in the 1930s, as Pius XI's Secretary of State, he put a stop to the anti-Jweish radio propagadna of the American Catholic priest Charles Counghlin.

With his experience in Germany, moreover, the cardinal knew Nazism and its insane ideology very well, and many times, between 1937-19039, he warned both the Americans and the British, of the danger represented by the Third Reich.

Furthermore, between the autumn of 1939 and the spring of 1940, the Pontiff supported, in an unprecedented decision, the attempt - which was soon aborted - by some German military circles, who were in touch with the British, to overthrow the Hitler regime.

After the German attack on the Soviet Union, Pius XII, and with him, the Catholic Church, refused to be associated with what came to be presented as a crusade against Communism, but rather did his best to overcome the opposition by many American Catholics to any alliance with the Soviets - despite the fact that the Pope and his closest collaborators were very much against Communism.

To represent Pius XII as indifferent to the fate of the victims of Nazism - the Poles first, and above all, the Jews - and to call him Hitler's Pope outright, even before being outrageous, canot be supported historically.

In the same way, there is no historical basis for the image of a Pope who was under the thumb of the United Sattes and was 'the chaplain of the West' - something which was always maintained and disseminated by the Soviets and by their sympathizers in the European democracies during the years of the Cold War.

In the face of the horrors of war and the tragedy which would thereafter be called the Shoah, Papa Pacelli did not remain neutral or indifferent. And that which came to be denounced - and continues to be - as his 'silence' was a conscious and anguished choice based on the clearest moral and religious judgment.

So many voices, even outside the Catholic world, have acknowledged and continue to acknowledge this.

For instance, as early as 1940, Albert Eisntein wrote in Time magazine: "Only the Catholic Church has dared to oppose Hitler's campaign to suppress the truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before this, but now I feel great affection and admiration because only the Church has had the courage and constant strength to be on the side of intellectual truth and moral freedom".

For his part, the Dominican Yves Congar, later Cardinal, noted in his diary on Vatican-II the confidences of a witness to those years, his brother Dominican Rosaire Gagnebet.

After the Fosse Ardeatine massacre [mass execution of Italian civilians carried out in Rome on March 24, 1944, by Nazi German occupation troops as a reprisal for a partisan attack conducted the previous day], the Pope wrestled in anguish whether he should denounce it, Gagnebet recalled.

"But all the convents, all the religious houses of Rome, were full of refugees - Communists, ahteists, Jews, democrats, anti-fascists, ex-generals, etc., to the point that Pius XII had even suspended the rules for cloistered orders. If he had publicly protested the Ardeatine massacre, there would have been a mandatory search of all these places of refuge, and the results sould have been catastrophic. And that is why the Pope chose the route of diploamtic protest".

Later, when the Archbishop of Palermo, Cardinal Luigi Lavitrano, was threaten with deportation, Pius XII wrote him to say he would gladly 'face the authorities in your place', while he told the German ambassador promptly, "You will be arresting Mons. Pacelli, not the Pope".

The work of assistance deployed by Pius XII in behalf of persecuted Italians - among them, a great number of Jews in Rome and the rest of the country - was immense, and is increasingly shown by documentation being uncovered by auithoritative historians and intellectuals who are certainly not defenders of the papacy by occupation, such as Ernesto Galli della Loggia, Arrigo Levi and Piero Melograni.

New facts and documents are gradually re-emerging from this past that has not passed. Such documentation does full justice to what Papa Pacelli and his Church did in the face of the criminal persecution of the Jews, and would demand rewriting countless books and relegate to oblivion the defamatory myth of a Naziphile Pontiff.

Born in the early years of the Second World War, the Black Legend culminated in 1963 with the presentation of the play Der Stellvertreter (The Vicar) by Rolf Hochhuth and re-launched yet again in 2003 by Constantin Costa-Gavras's film Amen.

That this was part of an orchestrated campaign was first dneounced in Italy by Giovanni Spadolini in 1965 when the historian described 'systematic attacks by the Communist world, which has not failed to find some complicity and even condescencsion in Catholic hearts, at least in some who are not unknown, not even in Italy".

All this wqas confirmed 40 years later by an entire dossier from the German archives which shows that the heads of the Third Reich considred Papa Pacelli an enemy. These are previously unpublished Nazi documents which ended in the hands of East Germany's secret police, and which remained undisclosed until an investigation by the newspaper La Repubblica which one would hardly call a pro-Pacelli newspaper. [Nor pro-religion or pro-Vatican, for that matter!]

To summarize the historiographic case on the debate over Pius XII, there was an important and long interview published in L'Osservatore Romano on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Pope's death, with Paolo Mieli, the historian who currently the editor of Corriere della Sera.

It is a very significant text, in which Mieli, among other things, says he is convinced that history will do justice to Pius XII.

"The fraction of Jewish blood that runs in my veins," he said, "makes me prefer the Pope who helped my fellow Jews survive rather than one who would simply have made dmeonetrative gestures."

It is worthwhile to reread his conclusive judgment on Pius XII.

In many ways, he was probably the most important Pope of the 20th century. The fact that he was capable of self-questioning about his decision to be 'silent' gives me an indication of how great he was. Among many things, I was impressed by this: After the war, if Pius XII had felt any guilt at all, a bad conscience, he could have spoken openly of what he did for the Jews. But he never did.

He said not a word. He could have done so. He could have let others write about it or talk about it. He never bothered. For me, this proved the strength of his personality. He did not feel in any way that he had to defend himself.

As for a judgment on Pius XII, I have kept in my heart something written in 1964 by Robert Kempner, a Jewish magistrate of German origin, who was #2 man in the Nuremberg trials: "Any propagandistic position that the Church could have taken against Hitler would have been not merely premeditated suicide, but would have accelerated the killing of a far greater number of Jews and priests."

I therefore conclude this: For 20 years (until 1963), the public judgments about Pius XII and his conduct with the Jews were unanimous and favorable. Against that, the offensive against him counts for little. Whoever wants to study this question with intellectual honesty should start from that. The scales are just so unbalanced.

Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have all defneended the memory of Pius XII from the historical point of view, his actions during the Second World War and with rgeard to the horrid tragedy of the Shoah.

One must not forget the honor that the Popes have rendered to the memory of the six million victims of the Shoah and the undoubtable intention to ptoceed along a way of peace, reconciliation and religious encounter with Judaism - as Paul VI did during Vatican-II anf the rest of his Pontificate, as John Paul II constantly and tenaciously preached in his time, and as Benedict XVI has repeated on so many occasions, particularly this year, during his trip the United States, Australia, and recently, to France.

As is well known, the cause of Papa Pacelli's canonization is under way - a religious fatc that deserves to be respected by everyone, and which, in its specificity, is within the exclusive competence of the Holy See.

In 1965, Paul VI announcing to Vatican-II that the causes for sainthood would get started for Pius XII and John XXIII, explained his reasons: "This supports the wishes that have been expressed for one or the other by countless faithful. This would assure for history the patrimony of their spiritual legacy. This would avoid any other reason than the reverence for sanctity and therefore, the worship of God's glory, and the edification of his Church, in reproposing their authentic and beloved figures for our veneration and for that of centuries to come".

For his part, Benedict XVI, celebrating the Mass in memory of Pius XII at St. Peter's Basilica recently, called on the faithful to pray "that the cause of (his)beatification may proceed happily".

It is an appeal I gladly welcome and to which I associate myself in remembering and celebrating a Roman Pontiff who was great, and to the greater knowledge of whom this conference will surely contribute a lot.


Bibliographic summary

Giovanni Spadolini, Il Tevere più largo, Napoli, Morano Editore, 1967 (Athenaeum X), pp. 281-292.

Roberto Morozzo della Rocca, Unione Sovietica e questione comunista nell’opinione pubblica cattolica in Italia, in Pio XII, a cura di Andrea Riccardi, Roma-Bari, Editori Laterza, 1984, pp. 379-407.

Giovanni Battista Montini (Paolo VI), Lettere ai familiari 1919-1943. A cura di Nello Vian. Premessa di Carlo Manziana, Brescia, Istituto Paolo VI, 1986 (Pubblicazioni dell’Istituto Paolo VI, 4).

Pierre Blet, Le cardinal Pacelli, secrétaire d’État de Pie XI, in Achille Ratti Pape Pie XI. Rome, École Française de Rome, 1996 (Collection de l’École Française de Rome, 223), pp. 197-213.

Jean-Marie Mayeur, Guerre mondiali e totalitarismi (1914-1958), Roma, Borla - Città Nuova, 1997 (Storia del cristianesimo, 12), pp. 320-328 (traduzione italiana dell’originale francese pubblicato nel 1990).

Pierre Blet, Pio XII e la Seconda Guerra mondiale negli Archivi Vaticani, Cinisello Balsamo, Edizioni San Paolo, 1999 (Attualità e storia, 22); traduzione dell’originale francese pubblicato nel 1997.

Francesco Traniello, Pio XII, nell’Enciclopedia dei Papi, III, Roma, Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, 2000, pp. 632-645.

Burkhart Schneider, Pio XII. Pace, opera della giustizia, Cinisello Balsamo, San Paolo, 2002 (Tempi e figure, 1); traduzione dell’originale tedesco pubblicato nel 1968; terza edizione ampliata con saggi di Robert A. Graham, Pierre Blet e David Dalin.

Manfred Heim, Introduzione alla storia della Chiesa. Introduzione di Adriano Prosperi. A cura di Cecilia Asso, Torino, Einaudi, 2002 (Piccola Biblioteca Einaudi, 165); traduzione dell’originale tedesco pubblicato nel 2000.

Yves Congar, Mon Journal du Concile, I-II, Paris, Les Éditions du Cerf, 2002.

Peter C. Kent, The Lonely Cold War of Pope Pius XII. The Roman Catholic Church and the Division of Europe, 1943-1950, Montreal & Kingston - London - Ithaca, McGill - Queen’s University Press, 2002.

Renato Moro, La Chiesa e lo sterminio degli ebrei, Bologna, il Mulino, 2002.

Jean-Marc Ticchi, Aux frontières de la paix. Bons offices, médiations, arbitrages du Saint-Siège (1878-1922), Rome, École Française de Rome, 2002 (Collection de l’École Française de Rome, 294).

Philippe Chenaux, Pie XII. Diplomate et pasteur, Paris, Les Éditions du Cerf, 2003.

Ennio Di Nolfo, Dear Pope, Vaticano e Stati Uniti. La corrispondenza segreta di Roosevelt e Truman con Papa Pacelli dalle carte di Myron C. Taylor, Roma, In-Edit-A, 2003.

Massimiliano Valente, La nunziatura di Eugenio Pacelli a Monaco di Baviera e la “diplomazia dell’assistenza” nella “Grande guerra” (1917-1918), in “Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken”, 83 (2003), pp. 264-287.

Grazia Loparco, Gli ebrei negli istituti religiosi a Roma (1943-1944) dall’arrivo alla partenza, in “Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia”, 58 (2004), pp. 107-210.

Giovanni Maria Vian, Il silenzio di Pio XII: alle origini della leggenda nera, Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 42 (2004), pp. 223-229.

Alessandro Angelo Persico, Il caso Pio XII. Mezzo secolo di dibattito su Eugenio Pacelli, Milano, Guerini e Associati, 2008 (Contemporanea, 20).

Andrea Riccardi, L’inverno più lungo, 1943-1944: Pio XII, gli ebrei e i nazisti a Roma, Roma-Bari, Editori Laterza, 2008.

TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, November 09, 2008 6:57 PM


From NEWS AB9UT BENEDICT-

AN INESTIMABLE TEACHING:
THE MAGISTERIUM OF PIUS XII

by BENEDICT XVI
Translated from
the 11/9/08 issue of





The Holy Father's latest speech on Pius XII gets main play in tomorrow's issue of L'Osservatore Romano.

Here is a translation of the Holy Father's address this morning to participants of a conference on Pope Pius XII organized by the Pontifical Lateran and Gregorian Universities.


Eminent Cardinals,
Venerated brothers in the Episcopate end Priesthood,
dear brothers and sisters!

I am pleased to welcome you on the occasion of your congress on "The legacy of the Magisterium of Pius XII and the second Vatican Council", promoted by the Pontifical Lateran University together with the Pontifical Gregorian University.

It is an important congress for the subject chosen and for the erudite persons, coming from various nations, who are taking part.

In extending my greetings to everyone, I particularly thank Mons. Rino Fisichella, Rector Magnificus of the Lateran University, and Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda, Rector Magnificus of the Gregorian, for the kind words that they expressed in your behalf.

I appreciate the demanding subject on which you have concentrated your attention. In recent years, when Pius XII has been talked about, attention has been excessively concentrated on only one aspect, which moreover, has been treated in a rather unilateral manner.

Quite apart from any other consideration, this has impeded an adequate approach to a figure of such great historical and theological weight as Pope Pius XII.

The ensemble of the impressive activities carried out by this Pontiff and, in a very special way, his Magisterium on which you have dwelt in the past few days, are eloquent proof of what I have just said.

His Magisterium is, in fact, characterized by its vast and beneficial impact, as for its exceptional quality, so we can well say that it constitutes a precious legacy which the Church has considered - and continues to consider - a treasure.

I have referred to the 'vast and beneficial' breadth of this Magisterium. Suffice it to recall, in this respect, the encyclicals and the many discourses and radio messages contained in the 20 volumes of his "Teachings".

He issued more than 40 encyclicals, among which Mystici Corporis stands out, in which the Pope confronts the subject of the true and intimate nature of the Church. With ample inquiry, he brings to light our profound ontological union with Christ and - in him, for him, and with him - with all the other faithful who are inspired by his Spirit, who are nourished by his Body, and, transformed in him, allow a continuing extension in this world of his salvific work.

Intimately connected with Mystici Corporis are two other encyclicals: Divino afflante Spiritu on Sacred Scripture, and Mediator Dei on sacred liturgy, which present the two sources from which those who belong to Christ - Head of that mystical Body which is the Church - must always draw.

In this context of great breadth, Pius XII dealt with various categories of persons who, by the will of the Lord, make up part of the Church, although with different vocations and tasks: priests, religious and laymen.

Thus he issued wise norms on the formation of priests, who must distinguish themselves by their personal love for Christ, by simplicity and moderation in life, by their loyalty to their bishops, and their availability to all those who are entrusted to their pastoral care.

In the encyclical Sacra Virginitas and in other documents on the religious life, Pius XII also clearly highlighted the excellence of the 'gift' that God concedes to certain persons in inviting them to consecrate themselves totally to his service and to that of others, in the Church.

In this perspective, the Pope insisted strongly on a return to the Gospel and to the authentic charism of the Founders of the various religious orders and congregations, even projecting the need for some healthy reforms.

There were numerous occasions on which Pius XII dealt with the responsibility of laymen in the Church, profiting particularly from the great international congresses dedicated to this subject.

He gladly tackled the problems of various professionals, for example, indicating the duties of judges, lawyers, social workers, physicians. The Supreme Pontiff devoted many discourses to doctors, illustrating the deontological (morally obligatory) norms that they must respect in their activities.

In the encyclical Miranda prorsus, the Pope dwelt on the great importance of modern means of communication, which in increasingly incisive way, have been influencing public opinion. Precisely because of this, the Supreme Pontiff, who valued to the maximum the invention of the radio, underlined the duty of journalists to furnish information that is true and respectful of moral norms.

Pius XII also devoted his attention to science and the extraordinary progress achieved in that field. While admiring the conquests it has made, the Pope never failed to warn of the risks that can come with research which ignores moral values.

One example will suffice: his address on the successful fission of the atom became famous. With extraordinary farsightedness, the Pope admonished preventing at all costs that such genial scientific progress would be used to construct murderous weapons which could provoke untold catastrophes and even the total destruction of mankind.

And how can we not recall his long and inspired addresses on the hoped-for reordering of civil, national and international society, for which he advocated that the inevitable basis was justice, the true prerequisite for peaceful coexistence among peoples: Opus iustitiae pax (Peace is the work of justice) [Pius XII's papal motto].

Equally deserving of special mention is Pius XII's Mariological teaching, which culminated in the proclamation of the dogma of the Assumption of the Most Blessed Mary, by which the Pope intended to underscore the eschatologic dimension of our existence as well as to exalt the dignity of women.

What can we say about the quality of Pius XII's teaching? He was against improvisations: he wrote with the greatest of attention each of his discourses, weighing each sentence and each word before saying them in public. He carefully studied various questions and made it a habit to consult eminent specialists about topics that required their particular competence.

By nature and temperament, Pius XII was a measured and realistic man, alien to facile optimism, but also immune to the danger of pessimism which is unworthy of a believer. Sterile polemics bored him and he was profoundly mistrustful of fanaticism and sentimentalism.

These internal attitudes confer value and profundity, but also reliability, on his teaching, and explain the faithful adherence to it bot only by the faithful but also by so many persons who do not belong to the Church.

Considering the great breadth and high quality of Pius XII's Magisterium, we can ask how he succeeded to do so much, since he had had to dedicate himself to numerous other tasks in his position as Supreme Pontiff: the daily governance of the Church, the selection and naming of bishops and their visits with him, the visits of heads of state and diplomats, the countless audiences he gave to private persons and groups of the most diverse kind.

Everyone acknowledged in Pius XII an uncommon intelligence, an iron memory, a singular mastery of foreign languages and a remarkable sensitivity. It has been said that he was a complete diplomat, an eminent jurist, and an optimal theologian.

All that is true, but it does not explain everything. There was also in him the continuous effort and the firm will to give himself to God without reserve and without regard for his delicate health. This was the true motive for what he did: everything was born from his love for the Lord Jesus Christ, for the Church and for mankind.

Indeed, he was, first of all, the priest in constant and intimate union with God, the priest who found the strength for his huge task in long periods of prayer before the Blessed Sacrament, in silent conversation with his Creator and Redeemer. It is from there that his Magisterium drew its origin and impulse, as did every other activity of his.

Therefore, it is no wonder that his teaching continues even today to spread light in the Church. Fifty years have passed since his death, but his polyhedral and fertile Magisterium still remains of inestimable value even for Christians today.

Certainly, the Church - mystical Body of Christ - is a living and vital organism, which is not stuck unmoving where it was 50 years ago. But development takes place within a consistency.

That is why, the legacy of Pius XII's Magisterium was harvested by the Second Vatican Council and re-proposed to successive Christian generations. It is well known that in the oral and written presentations of the Conciliar fathers, there were more than a thousand references to Pius XII's Magisterium.

Not all the documents of Vatican-II have end notes, but in those that do, the name of Pius XII occurs more than 200 times. This means that, other than Sacred Scripture, this Pope was the source most frequently cited.

It is also known that the notes appended to these documents were not, in general, mere explanatory notes but were often truly integral parts of the conciliar texts - furnishing not only justification and support for what was affirmed by the text, but offering an interpretative key for it.

We can very well say therefore that in the person of the Supreme Pontiff Pius XII, the Lord gave his Church an exceptional gift, for which we should all be thankful to him.

I renew my appreciation of the important work you undertook in the preparation and actual course of this international symposium on the Magisterium of Pius XII, and I wish continued reflection on the precious legacy left to the Church by this immortal Pope, so that we may draw profitable applications to the problems that emerge today.

With this wish, and while I invoke the help of the Lord for your task, I impart from the heart my blessing to everyone.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I am stunned! The Holy Father may have put on hold signing the decree on Pius XII's 'heroic virtues' for diplomatic reasons, but this address is worth a thousand such decrees.

I believe it is the first time Benedict has ever described any of his modern-day predecessors as 'immortal'. That is not a word anyone uses lightly, certainly not Benedict. [I could not help thinking that in the specific descriptions he gave of Pius XII - except, of course, that part about being 'against improvisations' - Benedict XVI was describing himself as we 'see' him or think of him ourselves!]

Eye-opening for me, not having seen it elsewhere before, is the disclosure of how much Pius XII's Magisterium influenced Vatican-II.

In this context, the AP report below that I first posted did not really look at the whole speech, choosing to look only at what the Pope said about the over-discussed aspect of Pius XII's Pontificate, thus perpetrating the mistake.

In the end, of course, Pius XII will be declared a saint - or not - based on his spiritual virtues, the impact he had on the Church and on the faithful, and what he did for his brothers regardless of race or religion - not on what non-Christians think about him.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Pope Benedict:
Pius XII was a great figure

By FRANCES D'EMILIO


VATICAN CITY, Nov. 8 (AP)- Pope Benedict XVI praised Pius XII on Saturday as a great historical figure and implied that excessive attention had been paid to what the wartime Pontiff did or did not do to save Jews from the Holocaust.

On Thursday his top aide, Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, said allegations that the Pontiff was largely silent about the Holocaust were "outrageous."

The allegations by some historians and Jewish groups have sharpened as Church officials consider whether to continue the process leading to possible sainthood for Pius, whose 1939-1958 papacy spanned World War II. ['Consider whether to continue' is obviously the writer's personal opinion!]

The Vatican maintains that Pius used quiet diplomacy to save thousands from the Holocaust.

Benedict did not specifically mention the allegations that Pius failed to use his papacy to save more Jews from the Nazi extermination campaign. But his remarks to participants in a seminar about Pius's teachings clearly referred to the sharp criticism of Pius.

[The writer omits to mention the occasion for the address: a conference on the work of Pius XII organized by the Pontifical Lateran and Gregorian Universities this week which ended today.]

"In recent years, when Pius XII is spoken of, attention is concentrated in an excessive way on only one problem, treated, for the most part, in a rather unilateral way," Benedict said Saturday.

"Leaving aside any other consideration, such (attention) has impeded an adequate approach to the figure of great historical-theological depth which Pope Pius XII was," Benedict added.

The Pope called his predecessor's church teachings a "precious legacy."

He has said he hoped the process toward possible sainthood could move ahead. ['Proceed happily', not just 'move ahead', was the phrase he used in his homily at the Mass to commemorate Pius XII's death.] But he recently was reported to have said that he would consider freezing the process until the Vatican's wartime archives are opened.

The Vatican has said Benedict wants to reflect on Pius's papacy before ruling whether his predecessor's virtues merit possible beatification. [Not exactly - rather, before he signs the decree that formally proclaims the late Pope's 'heroic virtues' which will allow the beatification process to move on to the next step.]


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


It must be noted that just a few days after the Pope - in a diplomatic answer, doubtless - was reported to have told a Jewish guest at the Vatican, in response to a direct question about suspending Pius XII's beatification, "We are seriously considering it", the conference on Pius XII organized by the two Pontifical universities opened in Rome.

Cardinal Bertone gave the opening address on Thursday - a lengthy look at the activities of Pius XII as a Pontifical diplomat under Benedict XV, then Nuncio to Munich and Berlin and later, secretary of state, under Pius XI. I have translated the address and posted it in POPES BEFORE JOHN PAUL II. It deserves to be read, because of much new information in it.

It concludes with strong words by Bertone defending Pius XII's wartime record against the unfounded accusations that began with Soviet propaganda during World War II, relaunched in 1963 by Soviet propaganda through the play The Deputy by an East German playwright, and quickly picked up and endlessly exploited by various Jewish groups [including the state of Israel which, notoriously, placed Pius XII's portrait in the Holocaust Museum's Hall of Shame with a unilateral denunciation of his alleged silence and inaction against the Nazi persecution of the Jews].

Notably, Cardinal Bertone points out that there has been a mountain of documentation - including three-million-and-a-half documents of the Vatican Information Office that have always been open, documenting individual and collective letters and appeals written by Pius XII's Vatican in behalf of prisoners of war and others persecuted by the Nazi regime.

But he says, hardly any historical researcher has looked at that vast archive, nor even at the Pius XI archives which have been open since 2006 and contain voluminous documentation of the future Pope's activities as Pius XI's Secretary of State.

"It seems," he said, unusually for a ranking Church prelate, "that some historians will look at historical facts only if they can use it as a weapon".

Bertone likewise spoke to open the exhibit on "Pius XII: The Man and His Pontificate" at the Charlemagne Arm of the Bernini Colonnade at St. Peter's Square on Tuesday, Nov. 4.

The Vatican, in its own way, is responding with a barrage of historical facts to persistent Jewish demands, which lately has included the announcement by a US-organized group of Holocaust survivors of their intention to lobby Vatican Nunciatures around the world against Pius XII's beatification.

Cardinal Bertone pointed out in his Thursday address that this was strictly a religious matter within the exclusive competence of the Church.

It well may be that all this extraordinary attention to Pius XII is the Vatican's way of preparing everyone for Benedict XVI's signing of the decree on Pius XII's heroic virtues some time soon. After all, it's been a year and a half since the Congregation for the Causes of Saints unanimously approved the decree - and Benedict XVI's as well as Cardinal Bertone's recent speeches about Pius XII, and all the historical testimonials that have resurfaced recently, indicate that more than enough 'reflection' has been given to the matter.




TERESA BENEDETTA
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 8:56 PM



On the 90th anniversary of
the Armistice of November 11, 1918:
Benedict XV - Pope of peace

by Fr Mario Jaccarini SJ

The Times of Malta
Nov. 11, 2008



Benedict XV in his study in the Vatican.


When Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope, he chose the name of Benedict and became the sixteenth Pope of that name. He stated that he chose it because of Benedict of Nursia one of the founders of European civilisation.

The present Pope Benedict continued, "I chose to call myself Benedict XVI ideally as a link to the venerated Pontiff, Benedict XV, who guided the church throughout the turbulent times of the WW1. He was a true and courageous prophet of peace who struggled strenuously and bravely, first to avoid the drama of war and then to limit its terrible consequences."

With the 90th anniversary of the Armistice of November 11, 1918, being marked today, it is fitting to recall what Pope Benedict XV, Giacomo Della Chiesa, did in order to soften as much as possible the cruel effects of the war, which he failed to prevent.

As John F. Pollard, the latest of Benedict XV's biographers, writes "Over four of the seven-and-a-half years of Benedict's pontificate [1914-1922] lay under the shadow of the WW1," which he at the time called "the suicide of Europe".

Almost immediately after his election, on September 8, 1914, Pope Benedict XV made a public statement calling for peace. During his pontificate, he was to make various other statements in favour of peace proposing an honourable settlement for both sides of the conflict.

He declared his strict neutrality, as universal Father, which in fact he tried hard to keep, though not always succeeding. The British war poet Wilfred Owen often wrote against the religious leaders of his country for their encouragement of the war.

He wrote how Christ taught, "Suffer dishonour and disgrace, but never resort to arms.... Thus you see how pure Christianity will not fit in with pure patriotism." This could be understandable in a country like Mr Owen's where the Church of England is the one established by law.

However, the French Catholic hierarchy also encouraged the war probably because they wanted to prove to their anti-clerical government that the French Church was as patriotic as the rest of the Frenchmen.

In fact, between 5,000 and 6,000 French priests were killed in the war and over 9,000 received the Croix de guerre and 900 the Legion d'Honeur out of about 20,000 French priests who served in the army (not as chaplains).

The same patriotic stance was taken by the German and Austrian hierarchies, the former still smarting from Bismarck's Kulturkampf persecutions (1871-1891) and eager to show their patriotism, the latter under the smothering "patronage" of the Austro-Hungarian Emperor.

In spite of the tug of war from opposing national hierarchies in which Benedict XV found himself, he tried to keep neutral.

The Pope, however, in spite of his efforts, did not succeed in persuading the belligerents of his neutrality. According to J. Derek Holmes in The Papacy in the Modern World, 1914-1978, each side accused the Pope of siding with the other.

The French called him "The Boche Pope", the Germans "The French Pope," while the Italians called him "Maledetto XV". He was even blamed for the rout at Copretto, because the Italian soldiers shouted, "Viva Papa Benedetto" since they knew that he was pleading for "the useless bloodshed" to stop.

Sir Basil Liddell Hart in his History of the First World War denies this: "Reviewing the drama of Caporetto in the clearer light of history, there is reason to think that excessive emphasis was placed on the effect of enemy and seditious propaganda, and that the major reason of the crumbling resistance early was the same as in France that spring - that the troops were morally tired, and that the result of being hurled endlessly against machine-gun defences had worn down their fighting spirit."

Liddell Hart continues: "The presence of imminent disaster to their country set a new light upon their position [the Italian army's], and gave a sacrificial impulse to a duty which on the Piave line, fighting 'with their backs to the wall', they honourably and gallantly fulfilled."

To return to the Pope's efforts to alleviate the suffering caused by the war, for example, Pope Benedict protested against the transportation of French and Belgian civilians for work in Germany.

Moreover, through the Opera dei Prigioneri which he set up, Pope Benedict helped the prisoners of war of both sides, by putting them in contact with their families, by negotiating the exchange of POWs such as the seriously wounded or the fathers of large families, by trying to track missing soldiers, and giving the opportunity to POWs to convalesce in Switzerland.

The Pope used most of his own private money, besides that of the Church, so that there was hardly any left for his funeral when he died on January 22, 1922, his relief work was fairly successful.

Much less successful were the Pope's efforts at ending the conflict. We may take his first encyclical as a clear example of his efforts for peace, since the intense diplomatic efforts were of their very nature more secret and more complicated.

In Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum (November 1,1914), he wrote: "Surely there are other ways and means whereby violated rights can be rectified. Let them be tried honestly and with good will, and let arms meanwhile be laid aside... Let them not allow these words of a friend and of a father to be uttered in vain."

These word, however, were uttered in vain and the Pope was, sometimes, even scoffed at for his efforts. On August 1, 1917, when all countries, especially their fighting men, were exhausted and demoralised by the war, Pope Benedict came out with his peace proposal which was rejected by the Allies.

Yet many see in the US President Wilson's own famous address to the Senate for Peace without Victory a certain similarity to Pope Benedict's suggestions in his peace proposal.

Although often reviled during his lifetime for his efforts at bringing about peace, after his death Pope Benedict XV was better appreciated and respected. This was the Pope whom Joseph Ratzinger hopes to imitate in his work for peace.

Joseph Ratzinger continued his explanation, quoted in the beginning, for his choice of name in these words: "In his [Benedict XV's] footsteps I place my ministry, in the service of reconciliation and harmony between peoples, profoundly convinced that the great good of peace is, above all, a gift of God, a fragile and precious gift to be invoked, safeguarded and constructed, day after day with everyone's contribution."

Let us hope that Pope Benedict XVI may be more successful and be able to dissuade those tempted to go to war.





MORE BENEDICT XVI
ON BENEDICT XV



In his Angelus message on July 22, 2007, when he was vacationing at Lorenzago di Cadore,
Pope Benedict XVI said this about his predecessor and namesake:



I cannot, at this moment, fail to go back to a significant date, August 1, 1917, just about 90 years ago, when my venerated predecessor, Pope Benedict XV, addressed his famous note to the belligerent powers, calling on them to put an end to the First World War (cfr AAS 9 [1917], 417-420).

While that tremendous conflict raged, the Pope had the courage to say that it was a 'useless slaughter.' This expression of his has been inscribed in history. It was justified in the concrete situation of that summer of 1917, specially on this front in the Veneto.

But those words 'useless slaughter' also contain a much wider prophetic value and can be applied to so many other conflicts which have carried off so many human lives.

This very land where we are, which in itself speaks of peace and harmony, was a theater of the First World War, as we are still reminded today by some moving Alpine songs. They tell us of events that cannot be forgotten.

We must`guard in memory the negative experiences which unfortunately, our fathers had to suffer in order that they may not be repeated.

Pope Benedict XV's note was not limited to condemning the war. It also indicated, on a juridical basis, the means to construct a just and lasting peace: the moral force of the law, balanced and controlled disarmament, arbitration of controversies, freedom of the seas, reciprocal condonation of war damages, restitution of occupied territories, and equitable negotiations to resolve disputes.

The proposal of the Holy See was oriented towards the future of Europe and the world, according to a plan with Christian inspiration that could be shared by all because it was founded on the rights of man.

It is the same formulation that the Servants of God Paul VI and John Paul II advocated in their memorable addresses to the General Assembly of the United Nations, repeating, in the name of the Church, "War never again!"

From this place of peace, in which the inhabitants are more vividly aware how unacceptable are the horrors of 'useless slaughters', I renew an appeal to follow tenaciously the rule of law, to reject the arms race with determination, and in general to resist the temptation of facing new situations with old ways.


TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:21 AM



Pius XII during
Italy's 'winter of terror':
An account by Andrea Riccardi

by ARRIGO LEVI
Translated from



Sometimes a journalist tries to transform himself to a historian, and sometimes even successfully. It is much less common that a historian of repute decides to narrate a particular historical episode with the style and working methods of a newsman.

When he succeeds in doing so - able to maintain through assembling together testimonials and documents - the detailed scrupulousness of a historian, then the result can be extraordinary, especially if the story he seeks to tell is as dramatic and emotional as it is complex.

Andrea Riccardi, perhaps the leading historian today of contemporary Catholicism, started more than 30 years ago to gather data on what would become, in time, the 'tiles of a mosaic' which he has now made into a book, published by Laterza, called L’inverno più lungo, 1943-1944(The longest winter), subtitled Pio XII, gli ebrei e i nazisti a Roma (Pius XII, the Jews and the Nazis in Rome).

As inspiration for his work, Riccardi cites a sentence from "the great Rabbi of Rome, Elio Toaff - "The story of the Shoah is like a great mosaic, in which every tile is an expression of suffering, of pain, of despair" - and the teaching of his great teacher and friend, Pietro Scoppola.

The subtitle, necessarily mentioning Pius XII as among the protagonists of those 268 days of the 'long winter', may partially mislead the reader who has been following the continuing debate in the papers for or against Pius XII for what he did or did not do during that time.

But this is not just another book about Pius XII. It is an impassioned chronicle of numerous episodes, the 'tiles of the mosaic', peopled by singular individuals, with their personal experiences of a period that was dense with tragedy.

Most harrowing was the house-by-house search of the ghetto in Rome on October 16, 1943, but it is also rich in acts of extraordinary humanity towards the persecuted who were fleeing for their lives: most of all, the Jews of Rome, but also anti-fascists or those who had already fled Nazi Germany. It was said of those days that 'half of Rome hid the other half".

Nor was there any lack, obviously, of acts of evil and malice. But I think that the dominant sentiment, to whoever reads this great chronicle, will be an identification with the sentiments of humanity and courage shown by that 'half of Rome' - or even that 'half of Italy' which in every region and city controlled by the Nazis and fascists, saved those who were persecuted, and in this way, also saved the conscience of Italy.

Because of its chronistic structure, it is impossible to offer a synthesis of this book. Every name - family and given names - is followed by an anguished tale of searching to be saved or tragedy, but is soon followed by another name, like an endless displacement from one person to the next, from one safe place to another, throughout the city of Rome during that terrible winter.

It is certainly not the author's choice that the list of protagonists consists, for the most part, of Jews and the priests and religious who saved them.

The Nazis captured between 2000-3000 Roman Jews, most of would die in the concentration camps. But the Jews who survived were between 10,000 to 12,000, of which more than 4,000 were sheltered in convents and other Church properties.

In Rome, as it was in the rest of Italy, one fact was incontrovertible: priests at every level and the Catholic world in general played the dominant role in saving Italian Jews.

"Asylum in convents and other religious houses, the help of parish priests, the availability and the actual assistance given by representatives and members of Catholic Action, were of such proportions as to assume the character of concerted action", according to Liliana Picciotto, who is perhaps the leading Italian scholar on this subject.

As for the Pius XII question, some facts are evident and indisputable.

The first is that he chose to keep silent: he never publicly denounced the house search of the ghetto, nor the massacre [of non-Jewish civilians] at the Fosse Ardeatine, nor the boundless tragedy of the Shoah.

The second is that the Holy See carried out many diplomatic attempts, mistakenly trusting Hitler's ambassador, to stop any further deportations, with the simple threat that otherwise, the Pope would be forced to speak out publicly.

The third is that, not just in Rome but in all of Italy, the opening of convents and other Church properties, as well as the organized effort to save Jews and other victims of persecution, were of such proportions that made it certain - not to mention many testimonies - that the Pope approved all this concerted action (even if not in writing - which would have been folly!)

I can add that in the first few months after the end of the war, the expressions of gratitude from the Jews to the Church and the Pope came in great numbers.

For us in the Levy family, it was most important that two of my uncles were saved by taking refuge in the Convent of the Good Shepherd in Modena, and that another uncle and his son were welcomed at the Lateran where they took refuge, protected by the extra-territoriality of the Bishop of Rome's seat. Not just Jews, in fact, but the entire central committee of the CLN[???] - Nenni, Saragat, Bonomi, De Gasperi, etc [these are names that all became leaders of the postwar Italian governments] - the Lateran had a grand total of about 40,000 persons who availed of its protection during the war.

And of course, the Pope knew all this! He did not speak, out of prudence, wanting to avoid worse tribulations.

If I were Catholic, I might lament that Pius XII did not go to the ghetto on the day of the infamous search, hand on his pectoral Cross, and thereby instantly give the Church a whole glorious host of martyrs, including himself.

But as a Jew, I associate myself with Elio Toaff who praised "the great and compassionate goodness of the Pope during the unhappy years of our persecution", and I justify his silence, without which several thousand other Jews would have ended up in the crematoria.

This divagation does not leave me space to give a wider account of the most beautiful and fascinating fresco that Riccardi offers us of that 'winter of terror' in Rome, with the exultation of the Romans and the indubitable gratitude to the Pope of both Catholics and Jews alike, during the days of liberation.

Perhaps history, in order to be veritable, should be narrated as through the eyes of a contemporary chronicler, and not from the viewpoint of a historian reporting on facts many decades or centuries after they happen.


TERESA BENEDETTA
Monday, November 24, 2008 3:50 PM



I apologize - I am using the article for translation as a place-holder so in that way I cna keep track of my translation priorities -after finishing with those that have to do with Benedict XVI, which I always try to translate ASAP (except some 'lesser' addresses and emssages). I used to keep all the article for 'priority' translation in a WORD file, but the backlog has grown so much - mostly with OR and Avvenire articles about Church affairs and issues - that I must move the 'must' pieces into the threads themselves.

Profezia ed eredità di un pontificato drammatico e difficile
Chi fu veramente Papa Pacelli
di Andrea Riccardi

"Sono un Papa politico e perciò enigmatico" - dice il Pio XII di Pier Paolo Pasolini. E aggiunge: "Della carità so solo, come dice l'autorità, che c'è". Insensibile ai dolori degli uomini, rigido e politico. Questa è l'immagine invalsa da quarant'anni in una parte non piccola della storiografia e della pubblicistica. Ma chi fu Pio XII? Lo storico si incontra con due domande: quella sulla figura di Papa Pacelli, ma anche quella sull'enigma della leggenda nera su di lui. Quest'ultimo interrogativo tocca a fondo il modo di fare storia contemporanea.
Chi fu? Fu un Papa di grande popolarità. Non pochi giovani cattolici di allora ricordano come, alla sua morte, nel 1958, sembrasse impossibile un papa diverso da Eugenio Pacelli. Un grande pontificato finiva. Arturo Carlo Jemolo, storico cattolico liberale, ha concluso: "In quei diciannove anni di pontificato incarnò veramente la Chiesa cattolica". Fu considerato un Papa così grande che si sentì il bisogno di concepire l'idea di un papato di transizione. Lo stesso Giovanni XXIII, nei suoi primi passi, è ancora sotto l'impressione di Pio XII e confessa: "Quando sento parlare del Papa intorno a me(...) per esempio: bisogna dire al Papa, bisogna trattare questo col Papa, eccetera, io penso ancora e sempre al santo Padre Pio XII".
Pio XII fu considerato un grande Papa. Fu il primo Papa dei media e la sua immagine entrò nel piccolo schermo delle case europee e nordamericane. Il suo volto divenne noto, come la sua parola pronunciata in parecchie lingue. Dopo che, con l'Ottocento, la figura del Papa cominciò a essere conosciuta dai fedeli, non più solo un nome remoto e venerato, avvenne un'altra svolta con Pio XII: il Papa diventò un leader pubblico presente nei media. Attorno a lui ci fu consenso, eccetto che nel mondo comunista. Le testimonianze ebraiche alla morte - che vengono spesso ricordate - mostrano una popolarità al di fuori del cattolicesimo. Solo "l'Humanité", quotidiano comunista francese, parlò di silenzi sulla Shoah. Ma la stampa comunista dell'Est e dell'Ovest bersagliava da sempre il Papa come collaboratore del nazifascismo.
Che cosa è successo in meno di dieci anni? Come un Papa popolare è divenuto una figura esecrabile che lasciava una pesante eredità? Il processo revisionista su Pio XII, come è noto, ha il suo catalizzatore ne Il Vicario di Rolf Hochhuth, pubblicato nel 1963, nella linea del teatro politico di Erwin Piscator. Madre Pascalina suggerisce che parte della documentazione provenga dal prelato filonazista tedesco, monsignor Alois Hudal, rimosso da Pio XII. Altri pensano alla documentazione fornita da un ecclesiastico non fedele alla Santa Sede. La rappresentazione de Il Vicario a Broadway all'inizio del 1964 aprì un dibattito negli Stati Uniti. Ma la quasi totalità delle organizzazione ebraiche, soprattutto l'Anti-Defamation League e l'American Jewish Commitee furono su altra lunghezza d'onda: guardavano con interesse prioritario al grande cambiamento che il Vaticano II stava introducendo nei rapporti con gli ebrei. Anzi un esperto della League preparò una brochure in difesa del Papa per il National Catholic Welfare Committee. La tournée americana de Il Vicario fu annullata. Nel volgere di qualche anno, però, l'opinione ebraica avrebbe registrato significativi cambiamenti.
Il clima doveva evolversi anche nell'opinione americana con il processo ad Adolf Eichmann (1960) e con la guerra dei Sei Giorni (1967). La cultura della vittima, oggi così rilevante negli Stati Uniti e altrove, non era amata nel mondo di John Wayne e Gary Cooper. Con gli anni Sessanta molto cambia: le minoranze, le vittime, acquistano un loro rilievo nei confronti delle maggioranze o delle istituzioni tradizionali. Il processo di revisione di Pio XII subisce l'impatto del movimento antiautoritario del Sessantotto: quale istituzione incarnava l'autorità tradizionale meglio del Papato e del Papa che lo incarnò sovranamente?
La revisione coinvolge il mondo dei cattolici. Nel 1964, al momento della sua pubblicazione in Italia presso Feltrinelli, Il Vicario fu introdotto da un noto studioso cattolico, Carlo Bo: Pio XII è "un Papa che si adatta a una società che da troppo tempo è stata abituata a non tener conto delle verità del Vangelo". Il silenzio di Pio XII manifesta una Chiesa in pieno "adattamento" al mondo: "Scegliere la strada del minor male risponde in fondo a uno spirito di adattamento". Bo così rappresenta la posizione del Papa dopo Il Vicario: "La Chiesa non è la principale accusata, è soltanto seduta fra altri sullo stesso banco". Un Papa che si adatta. Eppure negli anni dopo il concilio, una parte del dibattito sulla Chiesa verte sulla necessità di colmare il suo iato con il mondo, adattandosi alla realtà.
Già lo scrittore francese, François Mauriac, aveva scritto negli anni Cinquanta: "Il silenzio del Papa e della gerarchia altro non era che un ripugnante dovere; si trattava di evitare sciagure peggiori. Ciò non toglie che un crimine di tanta ampiezza ricada in parte non indifferente su tutti i testimoni che hanno taciuto, quali che siano state le ragioni del loro silenzio". D'altra parte Mauriac era stato sensibile all'arcivescovo di Parigi, cardinale Emmanuel Célestin Suhard, grande figura, ma vicina a Pétain. Dopo la guerra, il modernista Ernesto Buonaiuti - che aveva conosciuto il giovane don Eugenio, prima del suo distacco dalla Chiesa - aveva scritto sul fallimento di Pio XII nel confronto con le grandi domande della contemporaneità: la difesa dell'immutabilità irrorata dal senso della romanità e l'uso dello strumento diplomatico ne erano i principali ingredienti. Su questa linea, vent'anni dopo, si era mosso anche Carlo Falconi, che, prima di lasciare la Chiesa, era stato vicino a monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini. Prima del Il Vicario esisteva quindi uno strutturato pensiero critico su Papa Pacelli, come realista e uomo fuori dal tempo. Ma, dalla metà degli anni Sessanta, diventò un pensiero di massa, per così dire. La miscela di Concilio e Sessantotto, uno spirito del tempo, ansioso del nuovo e del non istituzionale, trovarono in Pio XII un antiprofeta, un realista dell'adattamento.
La sua eredità diventava imbarazzante per i cattolici alla ricerca del nuovo. Il rinnovamento del concilio, il Papato "profetico" di Giovanni XXIII, l'attesa di un rapporto nuovo con il tempo, motivarono, nel giro di pochi anni, lo slittamento della figura di Pio XII da Papa popolare a simbolo del passato: l'ultimo Papa dell'età costantiniana, sovrano e politico, la cui eredità era da liquidare. Influisce lo "spirito del Sessantotto" non solo con la sua carica anti istituzionale, ma con il senso utopico del nuovo e dei tempi nuovi. Non aveva la stessa Chiesa cattolica, la più antica istituzione d'Occidente, con il Vaticano II, detto la sua volontà di uscire dal vecchio? Bisognava rinunciare all'eredità del Papa-re.
La modernizzazione di Paolo VI negli ambienti vaticani, come strutture, corte e arredamento, non andava nel senso di una dimissione della regalità? Certo le forme dell'autorità di Pio XII erano un po' anacronistiche in un tempo di repubbliche e di monarchie nordiche. Il Papa, nato nel 1876, quasi coetaneo di Stalin nato nel 1879, di Churchill del 1874, apparteneva a una cultura dell'autorità segnata da un "cesarismo" nelle figure pubbliche, per dirla con George Mosse. Gli anni Sessanta anelavano a un clima diverso: Kennedy, Kruscev e Papa Giovanni rappresentavano la volontà di uscire da un mondo della politica tipico degli anni della guerra e della guerra fredda? Pio XII diventò quasi anacronistico. Il Papa del concilio e del futuro non doveva essere come Pio XII!
Paolo VI, che pure aveva innovato rispetto a Pio XII, lo difese costantemente. Fu Paolo VI, nel 1964, a promuovere la pubblicazione dei documenti vaticani sulla seconda guerra mondiale a soli vent'anni dalla conclusione del conflitto. Si trattava di una decisione molto innovativa per i tempi degli archivi vaticani. Tale decisione mostra come l'accesso alle fonti sia decisivo per scrivere la storia della Chiesa proprio nei suoi punti più controversi. La documentazione di altri archivi, come quella dei diplomatici accreditati in Vaticano, per sua natura, non porta alla piena ricostruzione delle motivazioni e alla complessità dell'agire dei responsabili vaticani. Eppure è su documentazione secondaria che viene scritta gran parte di questa storia, perché quella della Chiesa fa parte del più vasto dibattito della storia contemporanea.
La difesa di Pio XII non è stata condivisa da una parte del mondo cattolico, mentre la sua figura è divenuto simbolo del Papa del preconcilio, l'ultimo Papa-re, quello dei tradizionalisti. Intanto si sviluppava una storiografia critica. Giovanni Miccoli, autore di numerose e significative opere in questo senso, ne è forse l'autore più significativo: egli parla di un "anacronismo" di Pio XII, rinchiuso nell'atemporalità. Osserva che Pio XII e la sua Chiesa, bloccati nella loro rigidità istituzionale e ecclesiastica, privi di senso della storia, ossessionati dal comunismo, non percepirono la realtà mostruosa della distruzione degli ebrei e del nazismo. Una parte degli scritti cattolici su Papa Pacelli sono stati caratterizzati da un tono difensivo, espressione dello stupore che un Papa così popolare potesse essere oggetto di accuse di questo tipo.
Sono stato da sempre convinto che la figura di Pio XII sia uno dei principali luoghi storici della Chiesa del Novecento. In questa prospettiva, nel 1983, promossi presso l'Università di Bari un convegno sulla figura di Pio XII, aperto da una relazione di uno studioso di grande capacità critica, Francesco Traniello, che esprimeva il nostro sforzo: "Pio XII dal mito alla storia". C'era infatti "una nuova verità inattaccabile e indiscutibile" su Pio XII, come afferma Sergio Romano, più nell'ordine del mito che della storia. In quell'occasione rilevavo come molti aspetti di questo pontificato fossero elementi portanti della stagione conciliare e postconciliare, mentre i vescovi novatori del Vaticano II fossero in larga parte creature pacelliane. Per questo mi permisi di parlare di "governo e profezia" nel pontificato di Pio XII, perché esiste, in qualche modo, un certo profetismo pacelliano, sorprendente nell'uomo, considerato fino all'elezione saggio, moderato, equilibrato.
Gli uomini, i problemi, la tradizionale continuità, facevano degli anni di Pio XII un luogo storico decisivo per capire il tempo successivo. Purtroppo il dibattito storiografico contemporaneista si muove spesso nell'ignoranza delle argomentazioni e degli scritti. È un dibattito che, nella diversità delle interpretazioni, non tiene talvolta conto delle acquisizioni, anche perché - come notano gli editori - le questioni attorno a Pio XII fanno vendere e sollecitano emozioni, nonostante i tanti anni trascorsi. Così si ondeggia tra la storiografia e la pubblicistica. Si giunge, attraverso storie che non sono storiografia, al paradosso di John Cornwell: "Fu il Papa ideale per l'indicibile piano di Hitler. Fu la pedina di Hitler. Fu il Papa di Hitler". Oppure alle affermazioni di Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, per cui la Chiesa, in quanto erede di questo Papa, è chiamata a un risarcimento materiale, politico e spirituale.
In realtà l'eredità di Pio XII è quella di una storia difficile. I suoi anni sono un periodo in cui la Chiesa si confronta, in grande solitudine, con sfide temibili, come il nazismo e il comunismo che, dopo il 1945, conduce un'opera di distruzione del cristianesimo nell'Est europeo, paragonabile solo alle distruzioni operate dall'invasione islamica nella storia della Chiesa.
La questione comunista è decisiva, perché Papa Pacelli, avverte il presidente Roosevelt del rischio di una presenza di Mosca in Europa e rifiuta l'interpretazione americana di un cambiamento comunista in materia di libertà, significativa coincidenza di visione con Karol Wojtyla. D'altra parte Pio XII, come è noto, non consente che i cattolici nordamericani intralcino la politica di Roosevelt in sostegno dello sforzo bellico sovietico contro la Germania.
Perché il Papa, silente con i nazisti, aveva scomunicato i comunisti nel 1949? Andrebbe ricordato che la storia con i sovietici è lunga e registra anche una fase in cui la Santa Sede tentò di trovare un accordo con Mosca. Pacelli, nel 1925, negoziò con il commissario sovietico Georgij Vasilevic Cicerin a Berlino e poté scrivere al cardinale Pietro Gasparri un parere non pessimistico sul colloquio: "Il Governo dei Soviety, ora per la prima volta e in via di eccezione a favore della Chiesa cattolica, dice di ammettere sul suo territorio la gerarchia soggetta alla Santa Sede, che essa pure riguarda come potere estero". I negoziati falliscono e la situazione dei cattolici in Russia è disperata.
Pio XII, nel secondo dopoguerra, vede come i poteri comunisti vogliano "nazionalizzare" le Chiese cattoliche, rompendo il loro rapporto con Roma e colpendo i vescovi fedeli al Papa, per esercitare un pieno controllo su di esse. In questo clima, soprattutto guardando all'Est, nasce la scomunica, come gesto disperato di denuncia, limite morale a ogni rapporto con i sistemi comunisti, quasi scudo protettivo. L'anticomunismo di Pio XII, scomodo in un'età di negoziati con poteri comunisti, riacquista peraltro un suo valore dopo il 1989.
La personalità di Pio XII è complessa, ma il suo tempo è tormentato. Si è già detto del nazismo, del comunismo e il suo dominio in Europa e in Asia, ma andrebbe anche accennato all'incipiente consumismo con la secolarizzazione, alla fine del colonialismo, ai mutamenti indotti dalla democrazia, allo sviluppo delle scienze. Giovanni Spadolini scrive acutamente nel 1973: Pio XII "non è personaggio adatto ai terribles semplificateurs del nostro tempo; tutto bene, tutto male, tutto destra, tutto sinistra, tutto luce, tutto tenebre". Padre Raimondo Spiazzi, che lo conobbe, ne parla come di una figura poliedrica: una fibra religiosa sensibile, fedele custode della tradizione, capace di immedesimazione in mondi lontani, "a suo agio nel lavoro di ricostruzione di una umanità migliore soprattutto come maestro", ma segnato da limitata "calda spontaneità di movimento e incisività di azione pratica".
Affrontare da un punto di vista storico il suo pontificato è però decisivo per comprendere la vicenda novecentesca della Chiesa. Infatti l'eredità di Papa Pacelli è notevole: i suoi anni hanno avuto un'influenza decisiva, anche perché i quadri della Chiesa nei decenni successivi sono stati scelti e orientati da questo Papa. Nella Chiesa la classe dirigente si sviluppa con un forte senso di continuità, in modo ben lontano dallo spoil system della società politica. Gli uomini di Pio XII hanno fatto la stagione conciliare e postconciliare. Primo Giovanni Battista Montini, stretto collaboratore di Pio XII. Sull'episodio del trasferimento a Milano del futuro Paolo VI nel 1954, sono giunto alla convinzione che non significasse una rottura personale tra il Papa e il suo collaboratore, quanto una sua valorizzazione con l'esperienza pastorale di Milano in un momento in cui quest'ultimo passava un tempo di difficoltà con la curia. Basterebbe pensare a come Montini difese la memoria di Pio XII per le scelte della guerra, in cui era stato direttamente coinvolto - era redattore del messaggio sulla guerra del 1939 - assieme a monsignor Domenico Tardini e al cardinale Luigi Maglione.
L'eredità di Pio XII è notevole. Non meraviglia che si ritrovi tanto del suo magistero nei documenti e nei dibattiti del concilio, divenendo l'autore più citato. Non lo ricordano la Sacrosanctum Concilium sulla liturgia - ma cita solo il magistero fino a Trento -, il decreto sulla vita religiosa, senza note; quello sull'ecumenismo che cita solo due Padri, i concili e la Scrittura; quelli sulle religioni non cristiane e sulle comunicazioni sociali. D'altra parte la Mystici Corporis e la Mediator Dei sono molto utilizzate nella Lumen gentium; la Divino afflante Spiritu ricorre nella Dei Verbum, o le encicliche missionarie nel decreto sulle missioni. Non si tratta di citazioni di maniera per dire la continuità del magistero, ma di una ripresa sostanziosa di problematica e prospettive nella logica di compimento e di sviluppo. Del resto le citazioni di Pio XII sono molte nel magistero di Giovanni XXIII, specie nei primi due anni, mentre si attestano tra le ventuno e le trentasei citazioni nei tre anni successivi. Significativamente Pio XII resta un Papa molto citato anche da Paolo VI, tanto che la sua presenza supera nel 1973, a quindici anni dalla sua morte, il ricordo di Giovanni XXIII.
Il costante richiamo all'insegnamento di Pio XII da parte del concilio e dei suoi due successori può apparire ovvio. Ma c'è anche una continuità di metodo politico-diplomatico della Santa Sede. Eppure su di essi, dagli anni Sessanta, già aleggiava lo spettro dei cosiddetti silenzi. Infatti la questione dei silenzi è divenuta progressivamente una categoria morale applicata in ogni campo. Un capitolo importante della politica vaticana di Paolo VI è il rapporto con i governi dell'Est. La sua grande preoccupazione è la vita dei cattolici in quei regimi: cerca quindi contatti con i governi per garantire un minimo di vivibilità. Non è una politica entusiasmante per l'antico sostituto di Papa Pacelli, bensì - come la definisce il segretario di Stato Jean-Marie Villot - un modus non moriendi. Ebbene questa politica richiede un cambiamento di atteggiamento pubblico verso il comunismo. Emerge dal silenzio del Vaticano II su di esso o da attenuazioni di tono nelle dichiarazioni del Papa. Quella che è interpretata da taluni settori cattolici come volontà di dialogo con il marxismo, è in realtà un atto di amaro realismo per la curia montiniana. Questo avviene negli anni delle denunce del potere sovietico da parte di Aleksandr Solzenicyn.
Si tratta di nuovi silenzi? La persecuzione dei cristiani non è un olocausto, ma una gravissima violenza di massa che colpisce i credenti dall'Urss all'Europa e all'Asia. Il realismo continua a imporre di modulare gli interventi pubblici anche dopo Pio XII. Sono scelte fatte con la collaborazione di monsignor Agostino Casaroli, formatosi alla scuola del cardinale Tardini, personalità diplomatica non timida, ma realista. Del resto così era avvenuto durante la prima guerra mondiale con Benedetto xv, intervenuto sulla strage degli armeni nell'impero ottomano con vari passi e con documenti al sultano ottomano, ma che aveva difeso fino in fondo l'imparzialità riservata della Santa Sede tra i belligeranti. Solo nel 1978, con l'avvento di Giovanni Paolo ii, il Papa, pur proseguendo la politica di contatto con i governi comunisti, comincia a parlare forte dei "diritti umani".
Al di là delle continuità o discontinuità politiche, il pontificato di Pio XII rappresenta un tessuto di approfondimento dottrinale e pastorale che connette la Chiesa della prima metà del Novecento con quella della seconda metà. Pio XII, che ha passato la sua giovinezza sacerdotale durante la crisi modernista e che è succeduto come sottosegretario agli Affari Ecclesiastici straordinari al capofila antimodernista, monsignor Umberto Benigni, è ovviamente uomo della tradizione e della difesa della dottrina. Tuttavia avverte che nei Paesi di antica tradizione cristiana esistono una crisi e un allontanamento dalla Chiesa: ne parla anche a proposito della sua amata Roma cristiana, definita in un discorso terra di missione in alcune sue parti.
Un piccolo episodio illustra la sensibilità tormentata di Papa Pacelli, custode della tradizione e alla ricerca di un contatto nuovo con la gente. Egli confida ai suoi familiari di aver perduto il sonno nei giorni prima dell'approvazione della riforma del digiuno eucaristico. Le riforme liturgiche vanno nel senso di una restaurazione dell'antico, come per la Settimana santa, ma anche di un adattamento che renda la liturgia più accessibile ai fedeli, come con la messa della sera, la riduzione del digiuno eucaristico e l'introduzione parziale delle lingue volgari in Cina, dal 1949, si può dire tutta la messa in cinese, eccetto il canone.
Adattamento della Chiesa? È quel che Bo rimprovera a Pio XII nei confronti della guerra. Ma l'adattamento promosso da Pio XII è per il rilancio della missione della Chiesa. È l'adattamento che Pio XII richiede ai religiosi, che conoscono un grande sviluppo negli ordini antichi e nelle nuove congregazioni nel Novecento: il punto più alto è proprio negli anni di Papa Pacelli. Il Papa procede alla riforma dei religiosi, sia nella riscoperta del carisma del fondatore, che in una cooperazione più forte con la missione. Ma nascono anche forme di vita religiose nuove, come l'Opus Dei approvata a Madrid nel 1941 e a Roma nel 1946, gli istituti secolari. Si noti anche il rapido itinerario compiuto dalle piccole sorelle e dai piccoli fratelli di Gesù. Colpisce anche l'accesso facile che la fondatrice, piccola sorella Magdaleine di Gesù, ebbe presso il Papa. In realtà - sia detto per inciso - è attestata una certa accessibilità del Papa non solo alle folle cattoliche, ma anche alle singole persone: un giovane piemontese diciassettenne, inquieto sulla sua vocazione, ebbe la sorprendente possibilità di parlarne al Papa, che gli consigliò di entrare dai gesuiti.
Pio XII volve a un rilancio della missione della Chiesa, anche perché sembrava intuirne una crisi da qualche sintomo. Per Papa Pacelli la Chiesa doveva farsi missionaria: ne è espressione la manifestazione più alta e partecipata del pontificato, l'Anno santo del 1950, il proclamato gran ritorno. Dal dopoguerra sono insistenti gli inviti alla mobilitazione. Riccardo Lombardi, il gesuita che anima dal 1952 il movimento per un mondo migliore - tanto influente in America Latina -, è il missus dominicus del Papa, come lo definì Montini. Esitante a condurre una riforma strutturale o a operare cambiamenti, di cui sentiva però la necessità, Pio XII autorizzò il gesuita a mobilitare i cattolici in una prospettiva per lui necessaria. La missione era prioritaria. Permise i preti operai in Francia e poi li chiuse nel 1954, quando gli sembrò si mettesse in discussione il sacerdozio cattolico; ma ne riorganizzò la presenza con la prelatura della Missione di Francia.
Le arditezze apostoliche, nella prospettiva di un rilancio missionario della Chiesa, sono consentite e auspicate, purché si evitino le "false opinioni che minacciano la dottrina cattolica", così si esprime nel 1950 nell'enciclica Humani generis. Il quadro del rilancio della Chiesa va completato accennando alle missioni dove, facendosi erede della linea di attenzione alle culture di Benedetto xv e Pio xi, Papa Pacelli prepara l'impatto con la stagione delle indipendenze che sente prossima. Richiede però - con due encicliche missionarie - un nuovo impegno di tutto il mondo cattolico, che portò a una vasta mobilitazione in questo senso. Durante il suo pontificato, avvenne il raddoppio dei preti nelle missioni - più di 18.000 - mentre i preti africani passarono da poco più di 300 a 1.800. L'ordinazione del poco più che trentenne, monsignor Bernardin Gantin, nel 1957 nella cappella di Propaganda Fide, fatta dal decano cardinale Eugène Tisserant, dal prefetto di Propaganda Fide e dal cardinale Celso Costantini, costruttore della strategia missionaria dal primo dopoguerra, è un evento simbolico di come l'eredità missionaria di Benedetto XV e Pio XI, passando per Pio XII, divenga realtà della Chiesa del concilio e del dopo concilio.
La Chiesa di Pio XII si sente movimento nel mondo, sia nelle società europee che nei cosiddetti mondi nuovi. Deve farsi presente in tutti i modi, perché per Pio XII la radice dei mali moderni è l'assenza di un radicamento in Dio e nell'insegnamento della Chiesa. La Chiesa di Pio XII, il Papa diplomatico, riduce di molto le attese verso la diplomazia e gli Stati, seppur conduce una politica concordataria; in realtà confida soprattutto nei popoli, cercando il contatto con la gente, come nota un testimone della vita di Pio XII. È convinta, dopo la guerra mondiale, di dover proporre una via di civiltà cristiana. La Chiesa è, per Papa Pacelli, non impero ma "educatrice di uomini e di popoli": "Con uomini così formati - dice nel discorso programmatico per il concistoro del 1946 - la Chiesa prepara alla società umana una base, sulla quale potrà riposare con sicurezza".
La Chiesa non è legata a civiltà del passato né a una sola civiltà, non è "inerte nel segreto dei suoi templi", ma cammina guidata dalla "legge vitale - dice Pio XII - di continuo adattamento". Pio XII, con il più ampio magistero tra i suoi predecessori, discute di tutto, anche di temi remoti, e lo fa per mostrare che niente è estraneo alla Chiesa e per condurre questa a vivere in mezzo alle nuove realtà contemporanee. Il vasto capitolo sulla vita, il corpo, la salute, le cure, la riduzione della sofferenza - dove ci furono posizioni innovative - è un esempio di questo atteggiamento del Papa.
Le sollecitazioni, le esigenze di cambiamento, i problemi, sono tanti. Il Papa assume su di sé tanta problematica, la ricerca di nuove piste, la responsabilità di dare impulso, prefigurandosi non solo come dottore ma anche come profeta. Questo lo fece con fatica di un uomo che il cardinale Tisserant, un po' duramente, considerava "indeciso, esitante". Per Tardini era invece delicato e fragile. Padre Yves Congar, che subì le limitazioni del controllo teologico degli anni di Pio XII, scrive acutamente: "Il grande Papa Pio XII non era certo contrario a ogni cambiamento, ma voleva conservarne uno stretto controllo e l'iniziativa".
L'assunzione diretta di tanti compiti da parte del Papa, a partire dal governo della Segreteria di Stato senza segretario, al contatto con la gente, all'insegnamento e alla profezia, rendono il suo ministero faticoso, talvolta drammatico. Il senso drammatico viene accresciuto dalla percezione delle difficoltà e delle crisi con la persecuzione comunista, la secolarizzazione, le "cose nuove" del mondo contemporaneo. Desideroso di adattare e cambiare, ma preoccupato della portata dei cambiamenti, il Papa traccia, personalmente, la linea, moltiplicando iniziative e interventi. Vuole rispondere ai problemi aperti. Molti dei quali emergono poi con i vota dei vescovi in preparazione al Vaticano II.
In realtà la percezione di Pio XII sullo stato della Chiesa fu drammatica soprattutto nei suoi ultimi anni, segnati dalla malattia. La guerra fu un periodo difficilissimo, ma il lungo dopoguerra fu contrassegnato da una complessità inedita. La sua eredità umana e dottrinale è stata quella di un Papa che si è confrontato con la complessità nella tradizione della Chiesa cattolica, ma animato dall'ansia di raggiungere il mondo. La vicenda umana di Eugenio Pacelli è ricca e significativa, emblematica delle difficoltà e delle risorse della Chiesa del suo tempo. Nel 1954, parlando di Gregorio VII, ricordò il "crollo apparente di tutta l'opera sua", ma poi - aggiunse - "egli apparve il vero vincitore della lotta per la libertà della Chiesa". L'eredità di Papa Pacelli, forse come quella del suo lontano predecessore medievale, pur così diversa, si può cogliere nel tempo e con lo studio.

(©L'Osservatore Romano - 16 novembre 2008)



TERESA BENEDETTA
Monday, November 24, 2008 4:08 PM



First, a health warning to those who have hypertension or cardiac problems! This is almost guaranteed to cause apoplexy.

It is a September 2006 article prompted by the controversy over Regnesburg, that the Guardian has now re-activated on its online alerts - chiefly because of the revived Pius XII controversy, I imagine, but note the early reference to Benedict XVI himself about saying 'the wrong thing'.

I suppose one might call its outrageous snarkiness and almost near-contemptuous attitude for Popes typical of the secular British anti-Catholic bias, but I am posting it here for the record.

It is marked by deliberate distortion throughout - so it does not pay to fisk it because one would have to fisk practically every expression of bias used, in addition to the other distortions. But some of its leads on early Popes may lead some of us to make further research independently if we are so inclined.



Villains of the Vatican:
Controversial Popes through the ages

by Peter Stanford



Popes have only officially been infallible since 1870. [The fact that the writer makes a stark general statement like this without qualifying what it is that papal 'infallibility' refers to is emblematics.]

The tradition, however, stretches back much further, and is part of Catholicism's eternal efforts to depict its leader as a holy man with a hotline to heaven; someone who is head and shoulders - in matters of faith and morals - above the rest of us, as we fall prey to secular whims, sexual urges and the blandishments of the devil.

So each new incumbent is, in theory, as good as hand-picked by God. Which, unfortunately, means that even God himself is not infallible. For some of the men he has anointed have, like Benedict XVI, a habit of saying or doing the wrong thing, especially when it comes to their relationships with other faiths.

The most controversial pope of modern times was Pius XII, who took over in 1939 and was labelled "Hitler's Pope" by those who accuse him of turning a blind eye to reports of the Holocaust.

He did so, they claim, in the firm belief that it was better for the church to sup with a dictator who killed six million Jews than it was to condemn him and risk seeing him replaced by "godless" communists.

Try as it might, the Vatican has still not managed to find a decent gloss to put on Pius's actions, though, like his 19th-century predecessor Pius IX, who described Jews as "dogs who bark in the street", he is on the fast track to canonisation.

Further back, there was Pope Leo XIII, who, in the closing years of the 19th century, dashed fledgling hopes of reconciliation between the Church of England and the Church of Rome by declaring that all Anglican ordinations were "null and void", a judgment which, incidentally, still stands.

So however friendly the Pope is to the Archbishop of Canterbury when they occasionally meet, the official Catholic teaching is that Rowan Williams is an imposter who is only pretending to be a man of the cloth.

Even further back there was yet another blow against the suggestion that different faiths should live and let live. In 1034 Pope Leo IX wrote a long and scathing letter to his Orthodox opposite number, Patriarch Michael Cerularius, claiming that the latter's office was worthless because a woman had once held it.

By way of what some might see as divine justice, the same charge was later brought against the papacy - namely, that a young German woman named Joan had disguised herself as a man and tricked her way into office, only to be discovered when she gave birth in the street.

However, the offence that Benedict XVI has caused to today's Muslims pales next to the rousing recruitment appeals for Crusaders that Urban II made at the end of the 11th century. Those who helped him forcibly eject Muslims from Jerusalem and much of the Middle East, Urban said, were promised eternal salvation as their reward. (The jihadists of today might find this promise familiar.)

So when the First Crusade reached Jerusalem in 1099, the entire population - Muslim and Jewish - was massacred, an act for which the papacy only apologised in the late 1990s. Benedict has stolen a march on his predecessors in this regard by issuing his mea culpa in just 24 hours.

If it took the Popes a millennium to say sorry to Muslims for the Crusades, it needed almost two before they asked forgiveness of the Jews. It was only in the 1965, in the document Nostra Aetate, that Catholicism finally acquitted the Jews of deicide, an accusation that had fuelled 2,000 years of persecution by the Church.

While not strictly a competing code of belief, science has also attracted the wrath of misguided popes. Urban VIII in 1633 was prepared to see his erstwhile friend Galileo Galilei literally hauled over the coals by the Inquisition in order to prove that this new science nonsense was a fad that would not last.

So if infallibility has left more than one custodian of what is regarded as God's business address on earth looking foolish, then the parallel claim to an apostolic succession has caused no end of trouble.

One of the most powerful weapons used by the Protestant reformers of the 16th century against the Catholic church was to detail quite how unsavoury were some of the men who had managed to get their hands on the Keys of Saint Peter, a traditional symbol of the papacy.

Far from being a glowing example to the world of Christian values, the papacy spent much of its first thousand years being passed from one disreputable scion of a Roman family to another.

Stephen VI (896-7) decided to exhume the corpse of his predecessor but one, Formosus (891), so that it could stand trial. Dressed in the papal vestments, it unsurprisingly offered no adequate defence and was condemned to be mutilated and thrown into the Tiber.

And in what was a low point for the sexual morals of the papacy, in 954 the 18-year-old John XII, the son of a previous Pope, took office and turned the Lateran - the papal palace before the Vatican - into a brothel, and was ultimately murdered a decade later by an outraged cuckold who found him in flagrante with his wife.

Popes getting it wrong? Old news.


TERESA BENEDETTA
Thursday, November 27, 2008 12:02 AM



The Pius XII controversy:
A Connecticut rabbi speaks up

By Cindy Mindell



One must really commend the writer and the newspaper - Connecticut's only Jewish newspaper, a weekly - for presenting the story this way.


CHESHIRE, Connecticut - The dispute has raged for nearly 50 years: Was Pope Pius XII, whose pontificate began with the outbreak of World War Two, "Hitler's Pope" or "the Jews' Pope?"

Some say he turned a blind eye to the Nazis and forsook the Jews. Others insist that he saved more Jews than any other leader in Europe, perhaps as many as 860,000.

Since 1965, the Church has been working to canonize Pius, but has slowed the process because of serious doubts raised about the Pope's legacy, by Jews and Catholics alike.

From Sept. 15 to 17, as Catholics were marking the 50th anniversary of Pius's death, Pave the Way Foundation (PTWF) held a symposium at the Vatican to try to put the controversy to rest.

Among the 80 participants from around the world - Jewish and Christian clergy, historians, journalists, and authors - was Rabbi Eric Silver of Temple Beth David in Cheshire. Silver had been with PTWF in 2005 when Pope John Paul II granted his last private audience.

"We studied the documents in the Vatican's archives and had eye-witness interviews, and what we learned was truly world-shaking," Silver says. "There is nobody who did more to rescue Jews than Pius."

Pave the Way Foundation was created by Gary Krupp, the only Jew to hold two papal knighthoods. The Long Island-based non-profit organization works to increase tolerance and understanding between religions through cultural, educational, and intellectual exchanges.

Krupp's interest in Jewish-Catholic relations began in 2000, when he received the Knight Commander in the Order of St. Gregory the Great from Pope John Paul II. With the honor came a realization that he could serve as a bridge between the two religions.

"I had to do something with this position within the Papal household to benefit the Jewish People and the State of Israel," says Krupp.

The distinction also brought access to the massive Vatican archives, home to one of the world's largest collections of original Judaic texts. Krupp arranged for groups of Jewish clergy to view the Mishna Torah and the original copy of Maimonides's Commentaries, and brokered the first loan of the manuscripts to the Israel Museum.

Krupp and his wife, Meredith, established Pave the Way in 2003. In 2007, Krupp was knighted by Pope Benedict.

A year earlier, Krupp unwittingly entered the fray surrounding Pius. Like many Jews in post-war America, "I grew up in a Conservative home hating Pius," he says. But when Krupp received a call from author Dan Kurzman, the tables began to turn.

Kurzman needed help with research for his book, A Special Mission: Hitler's Secret Plot to Seize the Vatican and Kidnap Pope Pius XII. Krupp contacted an archivist at Yad VaShem, who wasn't aware of the story; nor was the Israeli ambassador to the Vatican.

"I thought, 'Something's wrong here,'" says Krupp, who was eventually put in touch with a nun in New Jersey. "She told me, 'Not only was he not a Nazi collaborator or an antisemite, but he did more to save more Jews than anyone else,'" Krupp recalls.

After the war, there seemed to be a positive consensus among Jewish leaders about Pius.
-On Dec. 1, 1944 the New York Times reported that the World Jewish Congress publicly thanked the Holy See's protection of Jews, especially in Hungary.
- In October 1945, the World Jewish Congress made a financial gift to the Vatican in recognition of Pius's work to save the Jews.
- In May 1955, the Israel Philharmonic played at the Vatican as a gesture of thanks to the Pope for his services to Jews during the war.
- When Pius died on Oct. 9, 1958, the public accolades continued. In fact, the New York Times received so many tributes over the next three days that it could only publish the authors' names, among them, leaders of major Jewish organizations.
- Two days later, the Times cited memorial services for Pius in several New York City synagogues.

Last month, at a meeting of the Vatican's synod of bishops, Haifa's Chief Rabbi Shear-Yashuv Cohen advised that Pius "should not be seen as a model" or be canonized. Israeli social affairs minister Isaac Herzog called the canonization process "unacceptable."

What sparked the sea change? Most historians mark 1963 as the year that soured public opinion, with the production of a play, "The Deputy, A Christian Tragedy."

"It was a trash job that was taken seriously, and it accused the Pope of being antisemitic and pro-Hitler," says Dr. Eugene Fisher, retired associate director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Secretariat for Ecumenical and Inter-Religious Affairs and panelists at the September symposium.

Written by then-unknown West German playwright Rolf Hochhuth, the eight-hour play debuted in the Eastern Bloc and portrayed Pius as a "cold-eyed" collaborator.

It was later revealed that "The Deputy" was part of Operation Seat 12, a KGB effort to discredit the anti-Communist Pius, and was based on KGB-forged documents. But the play had already been widely produced and its message was lodged in the mainstream consciousness.

(In 2005, Hochhuth was back in the news when he defended Holocaust denier David Irving in an interview with a German newsweekly.)

In response to the play, Dr. Joseph L. Lichten, then-director of the International Affairs Department for the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, wrote "A Question of Judgment: Pius XII & the Jews," a monograph published by the National Catholic Welfare Conference, forerunner of the United States Catholic Conference.

"Lichten talks about what the Pope was doing, what he could do and what he couldn't, and what he thought he could do versus what he did," Fisher says.

Proponents claim that Pius was responsible for hiding Jews on Vatican property, including his own residences, and for issuing similar orders to priests and nuns throughout Italy, and to Vatican representatives in other countries.

As a result, they claim, hundreds of thousands of Jews were hidden in churches, monasteries, and convents, given forged baptismal certificates and passports, and smuggled out of Europe to safety - all by the Pope's direct decree or, at the very least, with his knowledge.

One problem for scholars and others looking at Pius's legacy is the lack of clear documented evidence of his efforts to save the Jews. With no records, it's easy to point to what he didn't do, says Rabbi Silver.

"But my question is this: Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out why there is no paper trail? Rome was occupied by the Nazis, there were German spies in the Vatican, so what would have happened if they had found physical evidence of the Pope's actions?

"There is no paper trail linking the Final Solution to Hitler. If you don't want to give credit to the Pope because there was no paper trail, you can't blame Hitler for the Final Solution, because there was no paper trail there either."

There are some 16 million documents in the Vatican's archives pertaining to Pius's pontificate, catalogued so far into 11 volumes. Opponents of the canonization - including organizations such as Yad VaShem and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum - want access to all documents through 1945.

A statement released by the U.S. Holocaust Museum notes that the museum "views with concern recent indications that definitive conclusions are being drawn regarding the record of Pope Pius XII during the Holocaust. Such pronouncements, and any actions that might follow, can only be substantiated when the archives of the Vatican from this period are fully opened to the public for in-depth scholarly research."

While Fisher acknowledges that opening the archives would move the discussion along, he maintains that the 11 volumes contain most of the "meat" of the period in question.

"There are no smoking guns or 'gee whiz' amazing things in there," he says. "Everybody feels that everything's out on the table."

But the U.S. Holocaust Museum maintains that the 11-volumes "are not a complete record of the Vatican's actions during the Holocaust."

Yad Vashem agrees.

"Pope Pius XII's activity during the Holocaust is an issue debated among historians around the world," reads a statement released by the Jerusalem institution. "...the opening of Vatican Archives on the relevant period would help further research on the subject, which would clarify this historical issue."

Another criticism is that Pius kept silent as the Nazi machine rolled on, or didn't speak out boldly or often enough.

"No matter what the Pope said, Hitler didn't care what he thought, nor did the Pope have a whole lot of influence over governments in Europe," Fisher says. "This image of the Pope speaking and something magically goes away - that doesn't happen."

Silver cites Hitler's foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, who allegedly claimed at the Nuremberg Trials that he had "a whole desk full of protests" from the Pope, and from no other European leader.

"Eichmann, in his diary, records that his efforts are being frustrated by the Pope; he just can't prove it," Silver says.

"People say, 'Why didn't the Pope speak out? He should have denounced Hitler,'" Silver says. "That was easy for FDR to do 4,000 miles from Rome. The Vatican is 110 acres, the world's smallest country, and it was ringed by German-occupied Rome, with the closest German 200 yards away. If the Pope speaks out and Hitler invades the Vatican, Pius can't fight back with his 22 Swiss Guards. Dutch clergy ran up a trial balloon by speaking out, and immediately, 40,000 Dutch Jews were rounded up, including Edith Stein."

The Pave the Way Foundation invited representatives of the Jewish and Israeli organizations that oppose Pius's canonization to the September symposium, to no avail.

Participants reviewed a number of supporting documents from the Vatican archives, as well as pre-war and wartime newspaper accounts, and Nazis' propaganda and personal writings.

A group of 20 participants presented the symposium's conclusions to Pope Benedict in a private audience. Krupp says he's recommending accelerated cataloguing of the Pius-related archives, but supports Benedict's deliberately slow pace in the canonization process.

A book is planned on the symposium proceedings and findings.

"This is the greatest character assassination in the 20th century," Krupp says, "I'm doing this for the Jewish people - for when the Holocaust happens again, not if it happens. If the guy who did so much for us last time is demonized, what will the next guy who wants to help us say?"

Silver says the symposium "completely turned me around. It turns out that Pius wasn't a collaborator or in collusion; he didn't keep quiet in exchange for the safety of Christians. In August 1942, the murders in the concentration camps were publicized, and the Allies did nothing. Anyone who wants to examine what Pius did or didn't do needs to do so in the context of what others did or didn't do, and for that you don't need access to the Vatican archives."


TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, November 30, 2008 3:43 AM


Because of the Holy Father's visit tomorrow to the Basilica of St. Lawrence outside the Walls, I inevitably came across material about Blessed Pius IX - and I was actually very amazed to read the controversy that surrounded his beatification in 2000 (at which time, I was NOT following news about the Church at all!)... Mutatis mutandis, it reads very much like what's being said about Pius XII today, when one of the principal objections to his beatification came from Jewish circles who considered him anti-Jewish. The Italian translation of Pius IX - Pio Nono - apparently became a convenient tag for him in the media: 'PIUS NO-NO!'

To start it off, I think this TIME article captures the sense and tone of that controversy as well as the media skepticism, if not hostility, directed at a Pope erroneously branded an 'enemy' of modernity because he did list the errors of modernity in a famous document...



He was also the longest-reigning Pope ever (32 years), the Pope who called the First Vatican Council, and the Pope who proclaimed the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, and papal infallibility (which superficial commentators choose to read in the absolute sense)
.



Not So Saintly?
By David Van Biema

Sunday, Aug. 27, 2000



The funeral of Pius IX in 1878; and his first tomb at the Basilica of St. Lawrence outside the Walls.

Officially the rite is called Recognition. On April 4, a delegation of bishops and monsignors in full regalia arrived at Rome's Basilica of St. Lawrence Outside the Walls. They descended to the 6th century cathedral's crypt and were led to a white stone tomb. A casket was opened for them.

At this point, wrote Monsignor Carlo Liberati of the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints, "there was a moment of profound and intense commotion."

The body within, that of 19th century Pope Pius IX, was "almost perfectly conserved." Pius, known universally in Rome as Pio Nono, died in 1878.

Yet here he was "in the beauty of his humanity, just as he is seen in the photographic documentation" of his deathbed, back when the entire city came "and admired the beautiful face of the Pontiff smiling in the sleep of death."


Pius IX in a glass sarcophagus, after bhis beatification; the face is covered by a silver mask.

Although Pius's face is now masked, Liberati's observations suggest that the old Pope is smiling still.

If so, he is in a minority. The April exhumation cleared the way for Pio Nono's beatification, scheduled for this Sunday. Beatification will confirm Pius's "heroic virtue," affirm a miracle (a nun's broken kneecap healed) and encourage Catholics to venerate his remains, which will be transferred to a clear crystal casket. The next step will be canonization, or sainthood.

Although the Vatican will not admit it, Pio Nono is a last-minute substitution for a controversial successor, Pius XII. The beatification of the later Pius was to have balanced that of Pope John XXIII, the liberal hero who called the Second Vatican Council.

The past 40 years, however, have seen an unabating storm of complaint that Pius XII did not do enough to oppose the Holocaust. Postponing Pius XII's "cause" and replacing it with that of Pio Nono - also a conservative favorite - must have seemed a good idea at the time.

[I find this retroactive politicization - on sheer speculation - of the beatification process very offensive; it runs through the article. It is typical of TIME, which embodies all the ills of contemporary journalism, though perhaps to a degree slightly less reprehensible than its rival Newsweek which has totally gone to the pits.]

But in actuality the Vatican has exhumed far more than just a venerable body.

"I am appalled that the Catholic Church wants to make a saint out of a Pope who perpetuated...an act of unacceptable intolerance," declared a professor named Elena Mortara in Rome.

Pio Nono, it turns out, had a Jewish problem of his own. Mortara is the great-grandniece of Edgardo Mortara, who was taken from his Jewish parents at age six in 1858 by the papal police and raised - in part by Pius himself - as a Catholic.

The incident typified Pius's ham-fisted treatment of the Jews, and many feel his beatification contradicts Pope John Paul II's embrace of that people and his apologies for their treatment by Church members.

Israel's Ambassador to the Holy See, Aharon Lopez, while stressing that beatification is a church "internal matter," told TIME that Pius' might have "implications" for Israeli-Vatican cooperation in "bridging difficult periods" of history. [OH, HOW BACK-TO-THE-FUTURE DEJA VU!]

Pius, in fact, is one of the modern church's problematic giants. His papacy as a whole was far more controversial than Pius XII's. He was the longest-serving Pope since St. Peter, reigning 32 years from 1846 to his death.

He lost the Papal States, the Vatican's worldly kingdom. [As if that were an irredeemable mortal sin! He's a Pope, not a king or an emperor, even if apparently, the newspapers of the time referred to him as the Pope-King]

He promulgated two of Catholicism's most triumphal doctrines - the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and papal infallibility. He pioneered the papal personality movement that John Paul embodies so brilliantly. Many historians believe he created the modern papacy.

Yet some also think his narrowness crippled his Church. Pius reigned just as the old order in the West was giving way to new notions of God, the state and the citizen.

His response - a wholesale rejection of modernity - dominated Catholicism for almost a century after his death and continues to color its present.

A true reactionary who saw the secular state, and indeed civil rights, as satanic manifestations, he made it difficult for generations of believers to claim intellectual independence or integrity.

Says journalist-historian Garry Wills, who savages Pius in his best seller Papal Sins: "He was a disaster, and his influence has been bad ever since. If you beatify him now, there will be a whitewashing of him, which will involve the church in more dishonesty." [If Garry Wills is the writer's authority of record, then you can bet it's a very poisoned source, indeed.]

Pius is the heavy in the well-reviewed The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara, by Brown University historian David Kertzer, which is being adapted for Broadway by playwright Alfred Uhry (Driving Miss Daisy). Even the author of the definitive, three-volume Pius biography, Jesuit historian Giacomo Martina, does not favor his subject for sainthood.

The Vatican has long been aware of Pius's explosiveness as a candidate for canonization. As Kenneth Woodward reports in his book Making Saints, the first time Pius's cause was formally addressed, every firsthand witness criticized his papacy's conduct.

His beatification was repeatedly postponed, most recently in the 1980s, when Churchmen apparently deemed it not to be "opportune." That seems to have changed. It will be interesting to see whether the upcoming ceremony will end the debate or spark an even more thorough public airing of this larger-than-life Pope's remarkable career.

Giovanni Mastai-Ferretti was born at a disadvantage. The ninth child of a minor count in the town of Senigallia, he applied early to join the Pope's Noble Guards. They rejected him: guards did not have epilepsy.

[When I was researching background material about Loreto before Pope Benedict's visit there, I found - and posted - the story of how Pius IX was cured of his epilepsy by praying to Our Lady of Loreto:

Pope Pius IX, who was beatified along with Pope John XXIII during the year 2000, had a special devotion to Our Lady of Loreto and with good reason. As a youth in Piceno, Italy he went annually with his mother to Loreto. When he was small he fell into a stream, after which he was frequently tortured with fatigue and fever. The doctors were unable to pinpoint the cause. He was a bright student but his future became clouded with epilepsy seizures.

Upon leaving the seminary, he visited his close friend, Pope Pius VII, who comforted him with this wisdom: "God is mysterious. He throws down to raise up. He throws into the gutter the ones He wants to lift to the stars. Above the wildest storms gleams the Star of the Sea. Renounce yourself and place yourself in the hands of the Madonna. Call out to her 'save me!' The Virgin of Nazareth is your future."

The young man went to Loreto with this prayer on his lips: "Mother, behold your child - sick, miserable, useless. I am the shame of my family and disgust to myself. I dedicate myself to you - save me. Immaculata, make me clean!"

He was cured and with the Pope's approval he returned to the seminary and became a priest, then archbishop of Spoleto, and eventually Cardinal of Imola. The conclave of 1846 elevated him to the papacy and he assumed the name of Pius IX. In 1854, he proclaimed the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, thus officially inaugurating the Marian Era. During Vatican Council I he promulgated the definition of Papal Infallibility. As Pope he visited this his favorite shrine seven times.

A biographer quoted him complaining that because of his condition, he "could not concentrate on a subject for any length of time without having to worry about his ideas getting terribly confused." He was ordained in 1819 on condition that another priest always be present when he celebrated Mass. By 1827 he was Archbishop of Spoleto.

The position plunged him into a supremely complicated religious and political game. Throughout Europe the old order of divinely sanctioned kingdoms was battling models of popular sovereignty and citizenship inspired by the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and the adolescent U.S.

The Italian peninsula was a crux of this struggle. The Pope himself was a monarch, ruler of the states girdling the boot approximately from Naples to Venice, playing survival politics amid what historian Kertzer describes as "a patchwork of duchies, grand duchy, Bourbon and Savoyard kingdoms [and] Austrian outposts."

Would-be nation builders plotted Italy's unification from the south and the north. Revolutionaries, writes Kertzer, goggled across papal borders at those who regarded "the notions that people should be free to think what it pleased them to think [as] heretical."

For a few brief years, it seemed as though Mastai might bridge the gap. In Spoleto he had brokered a peaceful surrender of 4,000 Italian revolutionaries to the archconservative Austrian forces. This led to his 1846 election to the papacy as a moderate.

Once installed, he gave amnesty to political prisoners in the Papal States, bestowed on Rome a constitution and a Prime Minister and talked about creating an Italian federation. He unlocked the Jewish ghetto and allowed its wealthier inhabitants to live among the Christian population.

Austria's Prince Metternich, the genius of the ancien regime, quipped that he "had allowed for everything in Italy except a liberal Pope."

The detente didn't last long. In 1848, as revolutions blazed throughout Europe, Italian nationalists tried to enlist Pius in their plan to expel the Austrian forces and attain unification. He refused. Achieving an Italian Republic anyway, they slit his Prime Minister's throat.

Pius fled Rome disguised as a priest and wearing tinted spectacles. When he returned three years later, supported by French troops, he was a different Pope.

"The knock came at nightfall." So begins The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara. Kertzer's echo of Holocaust literature is daring but eerily appropriate. The unwanted visitors to the Jewish Mortara family in June 1858 were papal police; they left with Edgardo.

A family servant, thinking he was mortally ill, had secretly baptized him, and law required that he be removed from Jewish influence and brought up by the Church.

Pius may not have initiated the action, but he soon embraced it, and Edgardo, wholeheartedly. In a memoir, Edgardo later recalled that "like a good father, [Pius] had fun with me hiding under his great red cloak and said, jokingly, 'Where is the boy?' and opening up the cloak, he showed all those standing around, 'Here he is!'"

Edgardo eventually became a priest, lecturing on the miracle of conversion to Catholicism.

To Pius's astonishment, the child's abduction became an international scandal, a focus for global ambivalence regarding the Church. The New York Times ran 20 articles on it in a month; the New York Herald cited "colossal" interest in the matter.

Pius's response set the tone for his next 20 years. "The newspapers can write all they want. I couldn't care less about what the world thinks," he told a Jewish delegation. And he added a threat: "Take care. I could have made you go back into your hole."

In fact he had already confined the Jews to the ghetto again and rescinded their civil rights. In 1870 he declared them "dogs...there are too many of them in Rome, and we hear them howling in the streets." [If I have the time, I would check each and every one of these allegations.]

Pius was a divided personality. A biographer wrote that "looking into [his] sparkling eyes and hearing the warm measure of his sentences, you felt how beautiful the world could be."

He was famously accessible. He played billiards with the Swiss Guard and was the first modern Pontiff to grant audiences to commoners. He personally tended cholera victims, Gentile and Jewish, during an epidemic. He was truly pious.

However, he was also excitable, oversensitive and bullying. Sometimes this expressed itself in wit. The benediction he bestowed upon a group of Protestant clergy was borrowed from the prayer over incense: "May you be blessed by Him in whose honor you shall be burnt."

But often he employed the bludgeon: bishops who displeased him were ordered to kiss his foot. Later, members of the Vatican's saintmaking congregation seriously questioned whether he had lacked the essential Christian virtue of charity. (A related objection involved his sustaining of the death sentences of two anarchists. His successor reportedly remarked, "This fact alone would impede [his] canonization.")

Biographer Martina describes a "siege complex": unable to understand liberals on political or psychological terms, he saw them as "unbelievers...[operating] a war machine against the church."

In 1864 this intemperance was writ very large indeed. The Vatican released the Syllabus of Errors, an index of don'ts that summed up Pius' response to modernity - by spitting in its face.

The 80 delusions in question included separation of church and state, freedom of conscience, civil rights and rationalism. Error No. 80 was that "the Roman Pontiff can...reconcile himself to any compromise with progress, liberalism and modern civilization." [And is that not valid and right? A Pope cannot possibly compromise Catholic doctrine in any way, shape or form.]

Writes Wills: "The Syllabus dumbfounded the world." It still has its defenders. Theologian Don Gianni Baget Bozzo says Pius "simply refused to accept the tenets of liberalism in their entirety." [And I'll take don Gianni's judgment any time over Garry Wills! In this case, he is also stating simple fact.]

It is true that the knee-jerk anti-religious sentiment and materialism that irked Pius plague Western culture today. Still, the tract defined Catholicism in the negative - and placed good Catholics at odds with modern Western governance.

Wills maintains that it "gave ammunition" to anti-Catholics "down to the time when John Kennedy was running for President and many felt no Catholic could be free - that the Church was opposed to democracy in every way." [But that was due to deep-seated WASP distrust of Catholicism dating back to Henry VIII, not because of Pius IX, whom most Americans probably never heard of, much less of the Syllabus of Errors!]

Many of the Syllabus's most egregious positions were repudiated 35 years ago at the Second Vatican Council. But Vatican II let stand what may be Pio Nono's most lasting achievement, the doctrine of papal infallibility.

By 1869 most Catholics already believed that a Pope could, alone, define the word of God through Church dogma. But no Pontiff had ever said so explicitly, and some bishops thought this might drive an even greater wedge between Catholicism and the rest of the world.

Pius's war on the dissenters featured deception, obfuscation and railroading. When the Archbishop of Bologna complained that church tradition in Europe argued against infallibility, Pius roared, "I am tradition!" and reassigned the Archbishop to a monastery. (He came around.)

Said British Cardinal John Henry Newman: "It is not good for a Pope to live 20 years. He becomes a God [and] has no one to contradict him." No one but history.

In 1870, Piedmont's King Victor Emmanuel arrived in Rome to complete the unification of Italy and end the Church's 1,116-year history as a worldly monarchy. The Pope, 79, long white hair flying, climbed the Scala Santa staircase on his knees and told his troops to show token resistance and then surrender honorably.

Victor Emmanuel offered him some powers in return for recognition. Pius excommunicated him and vowed to become a "prisoner of the Vatican." He never again left the grounds. Many Catholics loved him for it. The Italians did not; after his death, a Roman rabble tried to toss his coffin into the Tiber.

The judgment of the mob was too harsh," wrote ethicist Daniel Callahan in a 1966 essay. "Pius IX was no villain. But he was...a man who used the wrong weapons at the wrong time to fight for the wrong cause." Most historians concur.

Yet someone clearly loves Pius, someone with the power to make saints. Vaticanologists have suggested that he is a "hero" of John Paul II's. The two Pontiffs do share a special reverence for the Virgin Mary, a generally conservative world view and an impatience with church dissenters.

But John Paul's conservatism is tempered with an un-Pius-like humanism. Pius's comfort with executions runs counter to John Paul II's campaign against the death penalty. And then there are the Jews.

Vittorio Messori, collaborator with John Paul on the best seller Crossing the Threshold of Hope, says, "I think Pius's cause is something of a problem. When John Paul II asked for forgiveness for the Church's treatment of the Jews over the centuries, I think perhaps he was thinking of Pius IX."* [Let me get back to this in a comment after the article.]

If not John Paul, then who? Each year a group of aging, high-ranking clerics convenes for a special Mass on Feb. 7, Pius's birthday. They share a belief that a Pope's administration of worldly states (and by extension Pius's treatment of the Jews) has little bearing on his sanctity.

Saintmaking's fine print sets great store by a candidate's intent. And so, says Austrian Cardinal Alfons Stickler, presenter of Pius IX's case in 1985, "you can't condemn someone for something he believed was an act of virtue."

Most important, the group feels, was that Pius successfully preserved the church's great truths during a period of unbelief.

But if the Feb. 7 Club alone could prevail, it would have done so in the 1980s. Some see this year's events as the work of parties less keen on Pius himself than on blunting the thrust of the Second Vatican Council.

As John Paul becomes weaker, liberals hope someday to interpret Vatican II's watchwords of openness and dialogue to revive seemingly shut issues like women priests. [HAH! Dream on!]

Guido Verucci, a Roman historian, is among those who see conservatives using Pius' beatification to reaffirm his contrasting "vision of a strong, unerring Church."

There is one other possibility: the Vatican simply needed a beatifiable Pope in a hurry. Even liberals admit the wisdom of balancing John XXIII with a conservative.

Says Kertzer: "There are not so many recent Popes who can represent the right wing. Pio Nono's cause went through the administrative hoops in the 1980s, so everything was ready. He was from so long ago--who knew him? They thought he'd just slide by."

And so he has, after a fashion. Somewhere in Rome, a crystal casket is being readied. Pius will be beatified, and all will get a clear look at him. They will quite likely still be arguing about what they've seen years later, when his canonization rolls around.



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


*About the Mortara case - I first became aware of it, in fact, when researching Vittorio Messori in 2005 after the Conclave. He came out that year with a book entitled IL CASO MORTARA: Io, il bambino ebreo rapito da Pio IX (The Mortara case: I, the Jewish boy abducted by Pius IX). Here is what the blurb says, in part, about the book:

In the extremely violent protests provoked by the 'Mortara case', the Jewish communities of Europe and America were joined by the Masonic lodges, while the politicians - starting with Cavour [the Italian prime minister] - rejoiced over all the furor that favored their plan to destroy the Papal States.

About the eventual fate of the real Edgardo - not the Edgardo of popular myth - few really cared, as shown by most reconstructions of the events, who devote only a few hasty indications to what happened after the 'abduction'.

In fact, the boy felt from the very first that the Church was the goal Providence had intended for him. When Rome weas invaded by the Piedmontese, he fled by night in order not to be 'liberated' from the seminary which he had chosen to enter. He became a religious of the Order of the Reglar Canons of St. John Lateran, takign the name 'Pio' as a homage to the man the world considered his brutal abductor, but towards whom he always felt extraordinary devotion and gratitude.

In 1888, at age 37, Fr. Mortara testified to his real story in the pages which are being published in this book for the first time, in which he severely contradicts those who had been presenting him as the victim of a Church he truly loved.

Although eh never had good health, he died just before turning 90 in a Belgian monastery, after a life spent preasching in many languages, of apostolic work, penitence and prayer. His only prayer was that he never succeeded to convince his Jewish family to accept Christ.

Now, after almost a century and a half, the Mortara case is still alive. It is being pushed continually as a polemical weapon against Catholics and in 2000, Pius IX's opponents sought to prevent John Paul II from beatifying Pius IX calling him ' a criminal abductor of boys".

Therefore, to reconstruct what really happened and describe the events in their real context is a work of justice and truth not only for the Blessed Pius IX but even for Edgardo Mortara who wanted to become the Catholic priest Pio Maria, which he became and remained to the very end.

How better than to give him the last word, by publishing his memoir that Vittorio Messori recovered from the Rome archives of the Order of Regular Canons of the Most Holy Savior attached to St. John Lateran Basilica. He annotates the pages from the perspective of a profound knowledge of the 'case' and with a force deriving from precise and unimpugnable facts.




TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, December 03, 2008 4:00 AM


Benedict XVI proves everyday how remarkably consistent he is about anything that has to do with the faith, but we wre seeing his consistency now demonstrated in strongly affirmative declarations of absolute loyalty to the memory of Pius XII, almost as though he were saying to his critics, "Say what you will, but this is who he was, and the Church stands by him".

So, during his pastoral visit to St. Lawrence outside the Walls on Sunday, he paid him this tribute:




This year is also the 50th anniversary of the death of the Servant of God Pius XII, and this recalls to us an event that was particularly dramatic in the pluricentennial history of your Basilica.

It took place during the Second World War, when on July 19, 1943, a violent bombardment inflicted very serious damages on the Church and on the entire neighborhood, sowing death and destruction.

Never can that generous gesture by my venerated predecessor be erased from historical memory, in coming immediately to the aid and comfort of the people who had been so severely struck, meeting them among still-smoking ruins.



Afterwards, he visited the memorial to that wartime visit of Pius XII:

At the memorial to Pius XII's wartime visit after the neighborhood was bombed in 1943.

And in the Monday-Tuesday issue of L'Osservatore Romano, his tribute to Pius XII was singled out to headline the text of his homily at the Basilica, with yet another image of that historic visit, this time,a color painting showing the Pope with the people amid the ruins of St. Lawrence Basilica.





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

After Pope Benedict's pastoral visit to San Lorenzo, Elizabeth Lev filed a story for ZENIT about the Basilica, posted by Benefan earlier in the CULTURE&POLITICS THREAD. As Ms. Lev also writes about the particular associations of Pius IX and Pius XII with the Basilica, I am cross-posting it in this thread, along with some photos I used in NEWS ABOUT BENEDICT.


Benedict XVI lauds St. Lawrence's
Christian witness in troubled times

By Elizabeth Lev






ROME, DEC. 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Though a beloved treasure for Romans, the Basilica of St. Lawrence Outside the Walls hovers at the bottom of the must-see list for most pilgrims and tourists. Although one of the minor patriarchal basilicas and a stop on the St. Phillip Neri Seven Churches route, St. Lawrence's often remains devoid of visitors. [Which is a great pity, since it also houses the remains of the first-ever Christian martyr, St. Stephen!]

Last Sunday however, Benedict XVI, with his tireless efforts to reclaim our Christian traditions, put St. Lawrence back on the hot spot map. In honor of the 1,750th anniversary of Lawrence's martyrdom, the Pope celebrated Mass on the tomb of the Roman deacon.

After Lawrence’s slow death by torture and fire at the hands of the Emperor Valerian, his remains were laid to rest in a simple grave outside the city walls.

Along with Sts. Peter and Paul, St. Lawrence was given a shrine by the Emperor Constantine and, as in the case of St. Agnes, a large U-shaped covered cemetery was constructed around his tomb to accommodate the many people who wanted to be buried near one of Rome’s most illustrious martyrs.

Even today, the cemetery of Verano engulfs St. Lawrence’s Basilica as Rome’s most important burial ground.



The shrine and cemetery grew into a large church under Pope Pelagius, who brought the body of St. Stephen, the first martyr, to rest side by side with Lawrence, but the basilica truly blossomed in the 13th century.

In wake of attacks and harsh struggles with the temporal issues of the age, the church of St. Lawrence became an emblem of a stronger and brighter Rome. An elegant bell tower, an ornate porch and numerous decorations in inlaid marble rekindled admiration for this churchman who served the poor, obeyed his Pope and loved Christ unto death.

Martyred by an empire intolerant of the Christian message, St. Lawrence has fueled the resolve of many others in like situations over the centuries. Blessed Pope Pius IX, who died in exile within the walls of the Vatican palace in 1878, asked to be buried near the proto-martyrs. The predicament of the 19th-century Church, emarginated and homeless after the unification of Italy, bore similarities to that of the early Christian martyrs.


The Pius IX crypt chapel in San Lorenzo.

Mosaics sheathe Pope Pius’s burial site in a dazzling skin of color and light; the ancient form of art recalls the early Christian homages to their martyrs. Although the tomb shelters a man who was humiliated and scorned in his lifetime, the brilliantly shimmering space extols Pius’ glory in heaven.

Just as St. Lawrence suffered in the turmoil of his age, so his church fell victim to the tumult of our modern times. On July 19, 1943, the Minor Patriarchal Basilica of St. Lawrence was bombed, destroying almost the entire building, causing extensive damage in the cemetery, and killing 3,000 people.

During his homily on Sunday, Benedict XVI praised his “venerated predecessor” Pope Pius XII, reminding the Romans how Pius “ ran to help and console the harshly affected people, among the still-smoking ruins.”

It seemed as Pope Benedict noted that “this year is the 50th anniversary of the death of the servant of God, Pope Pius XII,” there was a comparison to be made. St. Lawrence suffered a slow and painful martyrdom, while the memory of Pope Pius XII has also endured a long destructive roasting by the hostile forces of secularism.

Yet the church still stands, restored through the efforts of the Pope and the Romans in five years and still ready to rally what Pope Benedict described as examples “of intrepid Christian fidelity to the point of martyrdom.” In this year of St. Paul, as we revisit the very roots of the Church, we have a new opportunity to see our tradition with eyes unclouded by misinformation, and at long last recognize our heroes and history.


Benedict XVI at the tombs of Pius IX (left) and Alcide De Gasperi (right).

Benedict XVI also stopped at the tomb of Alcide de Gasperi in the porch of the church. This Italian statesman, who strongly opposed the establishment of a Communist government in Italy and became a co-founder of the European Union, is under consideration for beatification.

Jailed for opposing fascism, Alcide de Gasperi suffered poverty and was ostracized during the hard years of pre- and post-war Italy. His simple monument was made by Giacomo Manzù and represents Gasperi’s favorite saint, St. Virgilius, the patron of his home of Trento. This eighth-century saint was nicknamed the "Geometer" for his knowledge of geography as he evangelized from one part of Europe to another.

As a great statesmen and a powerful witness of Christ, Alcide de Gasperi and the many others resting in St. Lawrence Outside the Walls, suggest that this overlooked basilica has many lessons to offer future generations of Christians as they try to live out their vocations in troubled times.



Crotchet
Wednesday, December 03, 2008 9:31 PM
Thank you for this informative and highly interesting thread.



Dear Crotchet -

Thanks for the 'thumbs up'! It's a thread that was more than overdue, and it is part of my own LONG-OVERDUE learning process about previous Popes.

TERESA


benefan
Friday, December 05, 2008 5:43 AM

The archive holds the answers

By Martin Gilbert
Haaretz.com
Dec. 5, 2008

Four years ago, Pope John Paul II invited me to the Vatican to discuss the proposed canonization of Pope Pius XII from a historical perspective. After careful consideration, I decided I could not go. As a Jew, I did not feel able to comment on whether or not a pope should become a saint. That is an internal Roman Catholic theological issue, entirely within the competence of the Church.

This does not mean that as a Jewish historian I do not have an opinion on what the Pope did or did not do; indeed, I have written about it in my book "The Righteous: The Unsung Heroes of the Holocaust" (2002), in which I discuss, for example, positive aspects of his activities in Rome in October 1943.

Pope Benedict XVI asks that the public debate about the canonization of Pius XII wait until he makes an official statement. As, however, the Vatican has cited me as a supporter of Pius XII's candidacy on this issue, I feel I should explain my view. It is this:

If the Vatican feels today, as Pope John Paul II felt, that the Pope's behavior during the Holocaust merits particular recognition, it should send - as I have several times urged - to the Righteous Among the Nations Department at Yad Vashem the notarized material - the evidence in the Vatican archives - on which to base an application for him to be made a Righteous Gentile.

To date more than 21,000 Righteous Gentiles, almost all of them Christians, many of them Roman Catholics, have been recognized by Yad Vashem, which - as I know from my own work in its archive - makes extraordinary efforts to give honor where honor is due.

Yad Vashem's response to such a request with regard to Pius XII would depend on the material the Vatican provided from its wartime archive. At the moment only archival material up to 1939 is accessible to scholars; for later material, they will have to wait until 2013.

Like many historians, Jewish and non-Jewish, including a distinguished international panel initially welcomed by the Vatican, I have long urged the Vatican to open its wartime archive. The British government long ago opened its files with regard to Britain's response to the Holocaust, and has accepted whatever the documentation reveals.

There are many historical episodes in which the evidence of the Pope's positive involvement will be confirmed or negated by the documents in the Vatican archives. One is the refuge given to 477 Jews in Vatican City and its enclaves on the eve of the German roundup of Jews in Rome in 1943. A further 4,238 Jews were saved when they were given sanctuary in monasteries and convents throughout the city. Among those in Rome at that time already recognized by Yad Vashem was Father Pietro Palazzini, later a cardinal. Only the Vatican archives can reveal what part the Pope himself played in these two acts of rescue, which saved four-fifths of the Jews of Rome.

On December 17, 1942, the British, American and Soviet governments issued a declaration denouncing the "bestial" Nazi crimes against the Jews. When asked to support the declaration, the Pope declined. A week later, in his annual Christmas message, he denounced racial crimes, but did not mention the Jews by name. This has been held against him ever since. But in Berlin, we now know, from the German records, Nazi leaders felt that this papal message aligned the Pope with the Jews, as their supporter and advocate. What is the truth? The Vatican archives will show what the Pope intended: perhaps various drafts of the message, and the Pope's comments on them, and his hopes for the message.

When senior Roman Catholic Church leaders in Vichy France denounced the deportation of Jews and urged their flocks to hide and save them, did Pius initiate that, or support it? Only the Vatican archive holds the answer.

When the papal nuncio in Budapest worked tirelessly in 1944 to help save Jews from Arrow Cross massacre, did Pius XII initiate this act of rescue, or support it? Only the Vatican archive holds the answer.

When - encouraged by Chaim Barlas of the Jewish Agency - the papal nuncio in Istanbul, the future Pope John Paul II, successfully pressed the Bulgarian king not to deport Jews to Germany, did Pius XII initiate this act of rescue, or support it? Only the Vatican archive holds the answer - for it contains the complete two-way correspondence between the Vatican and its emissaries overseas.

Once we can see Pius XII's personal involvement, those who wish to see him honored will be able to make a case, if indeed there is a case to be made. At the moment, the evidence for the many historical episodes in which he must have been involved, consulted or given advice to his cardinals and senior clergy - each episode of crucial importance in the Jewish story - is still locked away. As a historian whose instinct is to credit people like Pius with a desire to help, even I cannot predict what the archives will hold.

The Vatican should have confidence in the outcome, allow the world to see the evidence, and let truth prevail. Surely the time to do so is now.

Sir Martin Gilbert's book "The Righteous: The Unsung Heroes of the Holocaust," which includes material on Pius XII, is published in paperback by Holt (U.S.) and Doubleday (U.K.).

TERESA BENEDETTA
Thursday, December 11, 2008 7:33 AM




A Pope in Wartime:
Why did Pius XII act as he did?

By Gerald P. Fogarty

DECEMBER 15, 2008


Gerald P. Fogarty, S.J., holds the Loyola Chair of History at Fordham University in New York City.


Over the last few months, the question of Pope Pius XII’s conduct during World War II has again made the news. At the recent Synod on the Word of God in Rome, Chief Rabbi Cohen of Haifa said that many Jews still believe certain Catholic leaders did not do enough to prevent the Holocaust.

On Oct. 9, the 50th anniversary of Pius XII’s death, Benedict XVI endorsed the beatification of the late pontiff.

Meanwhile, Abraham Foxman, the U.S. director of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, has called for opening the Vatican archives for the war years to ascertain whether, as Benedict stated in October, Pius actually did work secretly to save many Jews.

In fact, there already exists historical evidence to make certain judgments about Pius XII. Researchers can glean much from the archives for Pope Pius XI that were opened in 2003 and 2006, especially in regard to Eugenio Pacelli, the future pope, as secretary of state.

Twelve volumes of wartime documents published between 1967 and 1981, together with other national archives and newspapers, provide an additional basis for assessing Pacelli’s behavior during wartime.

Largely because of his 1937 encyclical condemning the racial policies of the Nazi state (Mit Brennender Sorge), Pius XI has often been praised for his boldness on the eve of war. Pius XII, on the other hand, has been condemned for his relative “silence” in the face of Nazi aggression. Pacelli, critics contend, was so fearful of Communism that he sided with Hitler.

Yet a close study of Pacelli’s activities as secretary of state and later as pontiff yields a different picture.

Eugenio Pacelli was appointed Vatican secretary of state in 1929. He was the first to hold the position after the signing of the Lateran treaties, which established the Vatican City State in order to guarantee the spiritual sovereignty of the pope.

The treaties effectively ended the state of siege that had existed between the Holy See and the Kingdom of Italy since 1870. Pacelli had the task of shaping a new direction for Vatican diplomacy, yet he sometimes looked to past solutions to solve the problems he faced. He, for example, trusted concordats, such as the one he negotiated with Nazi Germany in 1933, to guarantee the legal rights of the Church.

The Nazis violated the agreement as early as the fall of 1933, and consistent violations led Pius XI to issue Mit Brennender Sorge. A few episodes surrounding the drafting and promulgation of this encyclical illustrate Pacelli’s anti-Nazi sentiment.

In November 1936 Pacelli returned from a monthlong tour of the United States that included a visit with President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In Rome, he found, the conflict between the German church and the Nazi government had worsened.

Early in January 1937, Pacelli summoned five leaders of the German hierarchy to a meeting in Rome. The six prelates developed a statement listing grievances against the Nazis and presented it to Pope Pius XI, who then signed it.

Because of government restrictions, the nuncio in Berlin, Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, had the encyclical distributed by courier and read from the pulpits of German Catholic parishes on Palm Sunday 1937. The German police confiscated as many copies as they could and called it “high treason.” In the end, the encyclical had little positive effect, and if anything only exacerbated the crisis.

The American ambassador reported that it “had helped the Catholic Church in Germany very little but on the contrary has provoked the Nazi state...to continue its oblique assault upon Catholic institutions.”

The encyclical also occasioned the renewal of show trials against Catholic school teachers for supposed violations of morality. The Concordat of 1933 guaranteed the Church’s right to educate, but by bringing these charges against Catholic educators, the Nazis sought to prove that the Church itself was in violation of the terms of the agreement.

Cardinal George Mundelein of Chicago made the Nazi attacks on the German Church the topic of his address to his clergy in May 1937. He wondered how “a nation of 60,000,000 people, intelligent people...will submit in fear and servitude to an alien, an Austrian paperhanger, and a poor one at that I am told.”

The cardinal’s office released the full text to the press, which broadcast it around the world. Upon learning of the speech, Pacelli asked the apostolic delegate to the United States for a copy of the “courageous declaration.”

The German ambassador to the Holy See demanded that Mundelein be reprimanded for his attack on the German head of state. Instead, Pacelli, together with the cardinals who comprised the Vatican’s advisory group on foreign relations, stood by Mundelein’s right to freedom of speech in his diocese and informed the German embassy that the problem arose from the Nazi persecution of the Church. The Mundelein episode, however, provided the German government with another excuse for further attacks on the Church.

Pacelli’s handling of the case of Cardinal Theodor Innitzer of Vienna is a further illustration of his anti-Nazi feelings. In March 1938 Innitzer embraced the Nazis’ entry into Austria and led the hierarchy in urging Austrian Catholics to vote for the Anschluss.

The nuncio to Vienna, Archbishop Gaetano Cicognani, the brother of the apostolic delegate to the American hierarchy, informed the American embassy that the Vatican did not support Innitzer’s position. According to the nuncio, Innitzer had undermined the German bishops in their opposition to Nazism.

In the name of the Pope, Pacelli summoned Innitzer to Rome for a meeting. Arriving in the evening of April 5, Innitzer had a long meeting with Pacelli that journalists described as a “stormy session.”

The next day, the Austrian met with the Pope, who treated him more gently as a wayward son. Innitzer then issued a new statement basically retracting his earlier one and upholding the rights of the Church.

His penance did not last long: when he returned to Vienna he flew the swastika over his cathedral. By the following fall, however, Innitzer had broken with the Nazis and became an object of their attacks.

In the meantime, Pacelli sent a memorandum to Joseph P. Kennedy, then ambassador to the United Kingdom, whom the cardinal had met during his American visit, to say that Innitzer had originally spoken without the Vatican’s knowledge or approval and had now issued a new statement, which was enclosed.

Pacelli asked Kennedy to pass the information on to Roosevelt, as Charles Gallagher, S.J., wrote in America (9/1/2003). Kennedy also had the document sent to the State Department, which published it in Foreign Relations of the United States in 1955.

Aside from archival documents, there are other indications of Pacelli’s aversion to the Nazi agenda. In May 1937, when the Mundelein affair had just begun, U.S. Ambassador William Phillips met Pacelli at a dinner arranged by the Irish ambassador to the Holy See.

Phillips recorded in his diary how enthusiastic the cardinal was about his trip to the United States and his visit with Roosevelt, but “he talked mostly about his difficulties with Germany. He mentioned that these were growing worse every day and he foresaw the time before long when the entire German people would become ‘pagans.’”

Phillips characterized Pacelli as having “great personal charm and is a man of force and character with high spiritual qualities, an ideal man for Pope if he can be elected.”

When Pacelli was elected, Phillips opined that his choice of name “is an intimation to the world that he intends to pursue the strong policy of Pius XI.”

Phillips’s wife, Caroline, wrote that Pacelli’s election was “to the joy of everyone except perhaps Hitler & the Duce.” Phillips added a further note that he hoped Roosevelt would appoint a representative to the coronation “to show the respect and admiration which all Americans must feel for the new Pope.”

In an unprecedented action, Roosevelt appointed Kennedy as the first American representative at a papal coronation. Subsequently, on Dec. 24, 1940, he appointed Myron C. Taylor as his personal representative to the Pope, a substitute for formal diplomatic relations.

Pacelli’s years as Pope have been the subject of intense scrutiny. Was he silent because of insensitivity to the plight of Jews and other victims of Nazi aggression, such as Polish Catholics? A review of the available historical data points to a different conclusion.

In June 1941 Germany invaded the Soviet Union, and Roosevelt immediately announced the extension of Lend Lease to this new victim of aggression. If Catholics supported this policy, did it mean they were cooperating with Communism, which had been condemned in 1937 in Divini Redemptoris?

In a radio address from Washington funded by the State Department, Bishop Joseph Hurley of St. Augustine, a former Vatican official, drew the distinction between cooperation with Communism and aid to the “Russian” people. This created some public controversy among the American bishops, but the Vatican ultimately adopted Hurley’s position as its own.

On Dec. 17, 1942, eleven allied nations, including the Soviet Union, condemned the Nazi extermination of Jews. Critics have noted that Pius XII refused to sign the declaration, but they do not mention the reason for his refusal.

The cardinal secretary of state, Luigi Maglione, explained that if the Holy See was to maintain its policy of “impartiality,” it would also have to condemn by name the Soviet Union, which had also committed atrocities.

In his Christmas allocution a week later, however, the Pope called for a postwar reconstruction of society on a Christian basis. To prevent future war, he urged humanity to make a vow to all the victims of the war, including “the hundreds of thousands of persons who, without any fault on their part, sometimes only because of their nationality or race, have been consigned to death or to a slow decline.”

Many critics have claimed that the Pope was so vague that it was not clear that he meant the Jews. [What could have been vague about the statement? (The same one quoted by Pope Benedict in his homily about Pius XII last month.) It wasn't as if there were any other group of people numbering 'hundreds of thousands' who were 'being consigned to death or slow decline' at the time? It can only be vague to those who want to find fault with Pius XII on this score.]

Even strong papal supporters like Vincent McCormick, S.J., an American in Rome and former rector of the Pontifical Gregorian University, thought the allocution “much too heavy...& obscurely expressed.”

McCormick suggested that the Pope should abandon his German tutors and “have an Italian or Frenchman prepare his text.”

Harold Tittmann, Myron Taylor’s assistant who resided in the Vatican, also reported that the statement contained vague generalities, but added that the allusion to the Jews was clear enough that the German diplomats boycotted the Pope’s midnight Mass.

Pius did have an abstract manner of speaking. In this, he may have been guilty of Pope-speak or Vaticanese, the use of which was not unique to him. For example, on Oct. 25, 1962, in the midst of the Cuban missile crisis, John XXIII gave a radio address in which he called on the world’s leaders to negotiate rather than resort to war, but he never mentioned Cuba or Kennedy or Khrushchev. Everyone at the 8time understood the context. [But I always assumed that Popes - at least the Popes in my lifetime - hardly ever name culprits by name, as a way to underscore that what they condemn are evil deeds and actions, not persons.]

Other documents provide a broader context for understanding the actions of Pius XII. On Feb. 18, 1942, William Donovan, then director of the office of Coordinator of Information, forerunner of the Office of Strategic Services, informed Roosevelt that he had set up a State Department liaison for the Vatican ,and that Amleto Cicognani, the apostolic delegate, had paid him a long visit and pledged to turn over all information gained through diplomatic channels. Unfortunately, there is no further documentation on this issue, but it would be unlikely that information was transmitted in writing.

Another provocative document is Harold Tittmann’s report in June 1945 that Josef Mueller, a leader of German resistance, told him that throughout the war Pius XII had followed the advice of the resistance not to attack Hitler personally because the German propaganda machine would construe it as an attack on the German people.

With this survey, I have attempted not to argue that Pius was not silent in regard to the plight of the Jews and other victims, such as the Poles, but rather to deny that this silence was due to indifference.

When he was secretary of state, Pius learned that public protests had little effect on Hitler. As we have seen, the charge that he ever sided with Hitler out of fear of Communism is groundless.

Many historians, including this writer, have asked that the Vatican open the Pius XII archives, but I suspect that the archival material will only add more shades of gray to a man who was trying to govern the church during an unprecedented period of inhumanity.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Far be it from me to engage professional historians at what they do, and in their particular fields of expertise. But at least Fr. Fogarty is less disingenuous that Martin Gilbert in the preceding article, who argues to 'let the archives settle the case'.

The French historian who was in charge of putting out the twelve volumes of preliminary material about Pius XII's wartime activities has already indicated that the major facts have been disclosed in those volumes.

It also stands to common sense that it is hardly likely that the archives that have not yet been open to the public would contain any 'smoking gun' directly showing Pius XII had ever expressed any anti-Semitic sentiments or ordered things done that could be construed as anti-Semitic. (And if they find no 'smoking gun' or anything that could be construed as anti-Semitism, they will most certainly cry 'Foul' and claim that the Vatican must have pre-purged the records. They're not looking for resolution or truth or justice - all they're looking for is for their worst biases to be confirmed and validated.]

On the other hand, there may well be more documentation about how Pius XII encouraged the Church and Catholic institutions to do what they could to help, if not rescue, Italians who were being persecuted or likely to be persecuted in those years.

The problem, however, is that Pius XII's critics prefer to completely ignore all the positive things documented in his favor - including the testimony of people like the chief Rabbi of Rome at the time, or of prominent Jews like Golda Meir and Albert Einstein, who spoke out unsolicited - during or soon after the war - in praise of Pius XII's conduct towards Jews during the war,

From the time the Pius XII controversy re-erupted during the life of this Forum, I always wondered from the start why his Jewish critics were ignoring in his case their famous saying that "Whoever saves one life, it is as if he has saved the whole world." I believe this is the basis for their definition of who is 'righteous', particularly if the life saved was a Jew.

So I must admit I was rather flabbergasted by Martin Gilbert's article for Haaretz in which not only does he join the critics in their obsessive insistence on the archives, but also suggests that the Vatican should apply to Yad Vashem to have Pius XII declared 'Righteous'! He must be joking. He cannot possibly be serious in any way - and for an esteemed historian like him to be so cavalier about his proposition is definitely unworthy.

If the Yad Vashem people have already pre-judged Pius XII enough to put him in the Museum's Hall of Shame, what do you think they would do with an application by anyone to have Pius XII declared one of the 'Righteous'? They'd probably toss it into the wastebasket right away with delirious howls of scornful laughter, or just as bad, answer back and say, "Sure, we'll investigate his case. Show us the Archives now!" and turn the whole thing around as another propaganda ploy to denigrate the late Pope.

Besides, and probably more important, the Vatican does not need any committee of museum bureaucrats, fossilized in their prejudices, to decide whether a Pope was 'righteous' or not.

My question still stands: Why do his Jewish critics ignore all the lives Pius XII was instrumental in saving - completely ignoring their own age-old dictum about the virtue of saving even one life - to harp on what Pius XII did not say?

Let's not even get into the hateful but in many ways defensible thesis of some historians that the Jews of Eastern Europe were effectively complicit in their own destruction. [They were too complacent, they thought they could still buy their way out of difficulties, they never thought Hitler would go to the extremes he did, etc.]

What the Jewish naysayers also forget is that Pius XII had a duty to his own flock first of all, to minimize their exposure to retribution by the Nazis. If he was prudent about what he could openly say, his prudence concerned the Catholics of occupied Europe as well - who certainly far outnumbered the Jews of Germany and Poland.

I find the completely blind spot that the Jewish critics have about this aspect particularly troubling - as though Jews alone had any cause to fear the Nazis at the time. As though the whole world - at a time when each man was trying to keep his own skin intact - owed the Jews particular attention even if it be to the detriment of their own kind. Because that, in effect, is what they are retrospectively demanding Pius XII should have done!

And the experience of the Warsaw ghetto should tell them about the pros and cons of heroic resistance versus prudence. Is there any consolation in a moral victory when at the end, almost everyone who resisted was decimated? The heroes of the Warsaw ghetto were heroes for acting on behalf of themselves and their community - but they reaped the consequences, for which they had consciously taken personal responsibility.

Whereas an imprudent statement or action by Pius XII and the Church at the time would have resulted - as it did in Holland - in retribution to both Jews and Catholics who would be made innocent victims for no direct actions of their own. I suppose that is why there is a saying like 'Discretion is the better part of valor'.

Things are never simply black or white - and in wartime, the grey zones present individuals with even more frightening dilemmas. If the Abraham Foxmans of the world ever had to face such dilemmas, would they play the hero and martyr without a second thought for possible consequences to others?



TERESA BENEDETTA
Monday, December 22, 2008 2:56 AM



This story did not originally start out as a Pius XI story, but it became inevitable since he was the Pope when Mussolini's Fascist regime passed Nazi-inspired racial laws for Italy in 1938.


12/18/2008 1:00 AM
TERESA BENEDETTA
Post: 15,999


ITALY'S #3 GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL
RAISES NEW OUTCRY OVER
THE CHURCH AND ANTI-SEMITISM




Pope Benedict XVI greets Fini at a June 2005 event in St. Peter's Square.


The new tempest in Italy's political-media teapot over the past few days is about a reformed neo-Fascist, now president of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, who has chosen to fuel the flames of anger in some Jewish circles on the supposed failure of the Catholic Church to speak out about anti-Semitism in the late 30s.

Since there have been a number of changes about the issue since then, let me start with ANSA's English account of how it started yesterday.




Fini blasts Fascism's racial laws
and criticizes Church 'silence' over
Mussolini's racist laws in 1938




ROME, December 16 (ANSA) - Parliament Speaker Gianfranco Fini on Tuesday criticised the Catholic Church for its silence when Fascist Italy adopted its anti-Semitic racial laws in 1938.

Speaking at a conference marking the 70th anniversary of the laws, Fini, who began his political career in the neo-Fascist Italian Social Movement (MSI), said that "Fascist ideology alone is not enough to explain these infamous racial laws and one must ask oneself why Italian society as a whole did not stand up against the anti-Jewish legislation".

"And the same goes, and it pains me to say this, for the Catholic Church," the speaker of the Chamber of Deputies added.

"Today we remember this chapter in Italian history. Those laws represent one of this country's darkest moments," Fini observed.

Italy's 1938 'laws for the protection of the Italian race,' were drawn up along the lines of the anti-Semitic laws passed earlier in Germany and were in part responsible for more than 7,000 Italian Jews being killed in Nazi death camps.

Although there has been no official reaction from the Church to Fini's statements, Father Giovanni Sale, a historian from the Jesuit magazine Civilta' Cattolica, told ANSA that Fini's observations were 'disconcerting'.

Fini, he added, "does not know a page of this nation's history which saw Mussolini and Pope Pius XI on opposing sides... Or perhaps he is seeking to divert responsibilities which have something to do with his own past, even if not a recent one.

On the other hand, words of appreciation for Fini's observations were voiced by the former president of the Union of Italian Jewish Communities, Amos Luzzatto.

"This was important not only because it came from the third-highest official of the state, but because it also recalled how at the time the Church took no official position against the Shoah", he said. [No one knew about the Shoah at the time, simply because it had not yet been formulated as policy, Mr. Luzzatto. Read your history. In fact, the infamous Wannsee Conference of top Nazi leaders which decided to implement the so-called Final Solution (Endloesung) for 'the Jewish problem' - i.e., mass extermination - did not take place until 1942! All the critics of the supposed Church silence over the Holocaust tend to play fast and loose with historical facts - and that is just absolute bad faith.]

After rising to the top of the MSI, Fini, 56, was responsible for cutting the party's Fascist roots and moving it into the conservative political mainstream as the National Alliance, which he first defined as a 'post-Fascist' party and later as a right-wing, pro-democracy party.

Fini's condemnation of Fascism's anti-Semitic policies were among the reasons which led hard-right elements to break away from the party.

The National Alliance leader, who once claimed that Mussolini was the greatest statesman of the 20th century, said that every effort should be made to ensure that Italy "unanimously condemns these obscene and tragic pages of our past".

His position against Fascist policies was consolidated in 2003 when, while deputy premier in an previous center-right government, he paid a ground-breaking visit to Israel.


Other Parliament leaders immediately reacted to protest Fini's misrepresentation of historical fact, especially with regard to the Catholic Church, but Fini also drew this reaction from L'Osservatore Romano:


Vatican paper accuses Fini
of petty opportunism




Vatican City, Dec. 17 Dec. (AGI) - "It is certainly surprising and upsetting that one of the political inheritors of fascism, which was the sole creator of the infamous racial laws, who has for some time now commendably tried to distance himself from this past, now openly criticises the Catholic Church revealing historical inaccuracies and petty political opportunism".

That was the conclusion of a brief article in L'Osservatore Romano today about Italy's racial laws, below a concise heading, "On the declarations of Gianfranco Fini".


The Vatican abstract of items selected from tomorrow's issue (12/18/08) of OR does not include the said item, so I have no access to the full article.


As usual, the northern Italy regional newspaper L'Eco di Bergamo proved more enterprising than others in MSM with their early follow-up:


Jesuit historian speaks up
against Fini's 'analysis':
What Pius XI did

By Alberto Bobbio
Translated from



He does not wish to enter into a polemical exchange with Parliament Speaker Gianfranco Fini. But he calls the politician's statements "disconcerting ... (failing) to take account of recent studies based on documents made public since 2006 in the Vatican Secret Archives".

But Fr. Giovanni Sale, Jesuit historian with the journal La Civilta Cattolica, knows those archive materials very well. He has read all the pertinent documents and says Fini is wrong about the Catholic Church having kept silent on Mussolini's 1938 racist laws that were anti-Semitic. He says the facts show how Pius XI opposed those laws.





Father Sale, why do you refer particularly to Pius XI?
Because Pius XI was the only public personality who openly opposed Mussolini for his anti-Semitic and racialist policies. We know from historical sources that Il Duce was very resentful towards the Pope, to the point of accusing him of overdoing his criticism of his policies.


What about the rest of the Church in Italy?
Various prelates, including some in the Vatican, assumed positions looking for dialog and seeking to understand the reasons of the regime, while explaining that Italian racism was not anti-Christian like that of the Nazis. But the Pope himself was simply and clearly against those laws.


When did Pius XI first talk about this in public?
The very day that the Manifesto on Race was published - on July 15, 1938. In an audience with nuns from the Cenacolo [I don't know if this refers to an order, a convent, an organization], he expressed his concerns to them. He said "This has now become a true and proper apostasy".

One week later, speaking to 150 ecclesiastic assistants of Catholic Action on July 21, 1938, he said, "Catholic means universal - not racist nor nationalist nor separatist. Such ideologies are not only un-Christian, but end up being outright inhuman".

And from that day on, it was a crescendo of similar statements, because for Pius XI, racism was the most burning issue of the moment.[For good reason, the first words of his famous 1937 encyclical against Nazism, which listed breaches of a German agreement with the Catholic Church and condemned anti-Semitism, was 'Mit brennender Sorge' (with burning concern).]


Are there testimonials?
There was the American Jesuit Lafarge, On June 22, he was asked by the Pope to draft an encyclical against racism. Lafarge writes in a letter that Pius XI was 'anguished' over the issue, that it agitated him a great deal.

The encyclical was to have been entitled Humani generis unitas, but it was never finalized. Pius XI died the following year without being able to make his revisions. But the draft contains an explicit condemnation of anti-Semitism.


What was the high point of the rupture with Mussolini?
His speech to students at Propaganda Fidei on July 28. The Pope posed the question of why Italy had any need at all to imitate Nazi Germany's racism. Mussolini was very upset, and he asked his foreign Minister, Count Ciano, to summon the Apostolic Nuncio in order to convey to him the Italian government's displeasure and disapproval of the Pope's words.

The following day, Mussolini responded indirectly to the Pope when he spoke to some Fascist youth in Forli: "You must know - as everyone must - that on the question of race, we are moving ahead with our policies". It was clearly aimed at Pius XI.


And how did the Nuncio respond to Ciano?
The Nuncio was Mons. Borgognini Duca. He kept a diary in which he described a tempestuous meeting. Ciano challenged him: "Monsignor, what shall we do? This morning, the Duce called me and he was most irritated."

But then Ciano apparently calmed down and sought to discuss the Jewish question in a more diplomatic way, seeking to exploit the fact that at the time, Catholic sensibility in general was markedly hostile to Jews.

But the Nuncio makes it clear that despite Ciano's attempt to downplay the issue, the government appeared determined to proceed with taking a hard line against Jews. However, we have no record of whether the Nuncio discussed this with the Pope and what the Pope's reaction was.


Was the July 28 speech ever published?
The government-controlled press ignored it, but it was published in some Catholic newspapers. And the government was furious. On August 4, it sent a note to the police prefectures asking them to require all editors of Catholic publications to be discreet about their commentaries. And on August 6, it banned outright any publication of "the pontifical allocution of July 28".

On August 8, the Secretariat of State, with a note signed by Mons. Montini (future Paul VI), informed the Pontifical Legation in the United States about these restrictions on the Catholic press in Italy, in order to avoid the impression being spread abroad that the Holy See was complicit with the Fascist regime on the racist laws.

The speech was published outside Italy, and the worldwide Jewish alliance thanked the Pope for his condemnation of those laws.


And Mussolini?
He was outraged to the point where, speaking to some of his closest collaborators, he expressed the wish that the Pope would die.


But then, he also tried for a secret accord....
Yes. The Curia and Vatican diplomacy worked on this through Fr. Tacchi Venturi, a confidant of the Holy See who was close to the Duce. the agreement was signed on August 16 as a compromise to avoid further tension. It stated that it was the desire of the head of the Italian government that the Catholic press and its priests should abstain from speaking of the racial issue.


What did the Pope do?
He proceeded with his solitary battle against totalitarian ideologies. When, at the beginning of September, Mussolini had the first anti-Jewish provision approved - namely, the expulsion of Jews from Italian schools - Pius XI delivered a memorable speech against racism and anti-Semitism to a group of Belgian pilgrims on Sept. 6. It was not reported anywhere, except by Documentation Catholique (a French publication) which published it in full, having transcribed it in shorthand while the Pope was speaking.

In it, Pius XI says: "Anti-Semitism is an odious movement with which Christians can have nothing to do. It is not permissible for any Christians to have any part in anti-Semitism. Spiritually, we are all Semites." Never before had a Pope spoken about anti-Semitism in such terms.

But the Secretariat of State chose to be prudent. In L'Osservatore Romano, the statements about the Jews were not included in the account of the Pope's speech.

The Pope was unyielding, nevertheless, and on Sept. 9, he called Fr. Tacchi and gave him a message for Mussolini: "The Holy Father, as an Italian, is truly saddened to see the whole history of Italian good sense forgotten, in order to open the door or window to allow a wave of German anti-Semitism through". Pius XI, in short, was determined to the end to oppose the Duce.


And what was the reaction ultimately?
The Fascist hierarchy lost all hesitation. Farinacci, the 'ras' of Cremona, in an interview with an SS journal, said "Fascism will realize each of its intentions without bothering about the Pope".

But Pius XI sent a protest note through his Secretariat of State to the Italian government for the disrespectful and offensive rremarks Farinacci used 'against the august person of the Holy Father'.

Fini cannot ignore all these historical facts!



12/18/08
Here is the OR article in today's issue about Fini's accusations:

On Gianfranco Fini's statements
about the racial laws of 1938 in Italy

Translated from
the 12/18/08 issue of




ROME, Dec. 17 - The speech given yesterday by Gianfranco Fini, president of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, to mark the 70th anniversary of the introduction of racial laws in Italy has aroused stupefaction and much controversy.

"Fascist ideology alone," Fini said, "does not explain the infamy. One must ask why Italian society, in general, lived with such anti-Jewish legislation and why, except a few luminous examples, there were no particular demonstrations of resistance. Not even, it pains me to say, from the Catholic Church."

Politicians, historians and the media immediately intervened to correct or sustain Fini's statements.

Vatican Radio pointed out that it is not true the Church in Italy did not oppose the racial laws of 1938, and interviewed two authoritative contemporary historians who have dedicated important studies to the period in question: Francesco Malgeri of La Spaineza Unviersity in Rome, and Andrea Riccardi, of Rome-III University.

And Corriere della Sera had a Page 1 detailed article entitled "The silences of an entire nation" by deputy editor Pierluigi Battista, showing how intellectuals, senators and known anti-fascists almost all kept their mouths shut.

Avvenire on its website wrote 'Fini slips over the 1938 laws and the Church', which also critized the leader of the Partito Democratico leader [Walter Veltroni] who immediately called Fini's analysis as 'established truth'.

It is certainly surprising and upsetting that one of the political heirs of fascism, which was the sole creator of the infamous racial laws, who has for some time now commendably tried to distance himself from this past, now openly criticises the Catholic Church, revealing historical inaccuracies and petty political opportunism.


Pius XI was Pope from February 1922 to February 1939. He died of a heart attack at age 81.



TERESA BENEDETTA
Monday, December 22, 2008 3:04 AM



John XXIII and Repubblica's
false 'scoop'

by Marco Roncalli
Translated from

Dec. 21, 2008


The 'Prayer for the Jews' supposedly written by John XXIII as he lay dying and to which La Repubblica yesterday dedicated a page to present it as 'a document substantially unpublished in Italy till now' which has "re-surfaced after 45 years of substantial and inexplicable oblivion", is fake.

It has been floating around the Internet for several years and has been denounced as a fakery for decades.

"The prayer attributed to John XXIII is not by him. And an apocryphal text is not necessary to show the affection that the late Pontiff has for the Jews," wrote Avvenire in September 1966.

It's true. One simply has to look at the documentation produced by the Wallenberg Foundation. But if this text, which was to be read at the monastery of St. Cecilia in Rome today, "will inevitably constitute the peak moment of the event". then people should know it has zero reliability.

And that those 15 lines - which ask the Lord's forgiveness "for not having understood the beauty of the Chosen People", in addition to all the other 'sins' committed by Christians who still bear on their forehead 'the sign of Cain'- did not at all come from the hand of the late Pope.

In the archives of the John XXIII Foundation in Bergamo, not only is there not a trace of this text, but there is a thick file filled with letters exchanged and newspaper clippings that attest to its inauthenticity.

There are notes by Papa Giovanni's closes co-workers, starting with his private secretary, Mons. Loris Capovilla, as well as prelates in the Secretariat of State and foreign correspondents who were interested in inter-religious dialog.

A summary of the entire hoax was prepared in 1983 for La Civilta Cattolica (#3192) by the Jesuit priest Giovanni Caprile.

The 'prayer' first came out in January 1965 - with no source cited - in American Commentary, organ of the American Jewish committee. The article was signed F.E. Cartus (pen name of ah Irish ex-Jesuit Malachy Martin, who, according to subsequent testimony by Fr. Stephan Schmidt, secretary to Cardinal Agostino Bea, was really the one who wrote the 'prayer').

But soon some ecumenical centers started releasing it as a prayer written by the late Pope, trusting the 'testimony' of a Mons. John Quinn who made it public at an inter-confessional meeting in Chicago. Quinn apparently believed it was authentic.

In March, the prayer appeared in a Dutch newspaper, the next month, in a German newspaper, and came to Italy around that time through Questitalia.

And in France, the prestigious journal Documentation Catholique took the bait.

"It is said that editors in Paris failed to 'smell' right away that the whole thing is fake", wrote Mons. Jacques Martin to Mons. Capovilla. "But a denial on your part would be very authoritative."

John XXIII's ex-secretary, who even yesterday reaffirmed that the 'prayer' was fake, did write to the French editors right away to explain that all the prayers written by John XXIII (authenticated by the Apostolic Penitentiary or said at the close of his speeches or written at the end of his texts) can all be seen in the volumes of the Pope's Discorsi, Messaggi, Colloqui (1958-1963, Polyglot Edition, LEV).

Mons. Capovilla also wrote up a formal note, kept in the Foundation files, in which he said at the time: "An analysis of the text shows that it does not correspond either to John XXIII's spirit nor to his letter, since, for instance, in order to express good feelings about the Jews, he would never have branded all Christians as having 'the mark of Cain'..."

Papa Giovanni's attitude towards the Jews was one of maximum respect, in word and deed, throughout his life, without a need to display it.

But he does have the merit of having obeyed the Lord's inspiration to make corrections to the liturgical texts in order to be more clear to Christians everywhere, as well as revising the Good Friday prayer for the Jews to make its sense clear to the Jews.

And of course, he is credited for having urged the Second Vatican Council to pay attention to 'the Jewish question'.



Andrea Tornielli places Repubblica's misguided journalistic stunt in context:


Papa Roncalli:
The media's 'maximum' Pontiff
for the wrong reasons

By Andrea Tornielli
Translated from

Dec. 21, 2008


A whole page of La Repubblica yesterday (12/20) disclosed an exceptional 'previously unpublished' text by John XXIII, a 'prayer for the Jews' that the 'Papa buono' - reportedly in his dying days - had written to acknowledge the sins of Christians who, the text says, carry the 'mark of Cain' on their foreheads.

What better way to stoke the new polemic over Italy's racial laws of 1938, about which the Speaker of Parliament has accused the Catholic Church of silence and inaction? [In effect, extending back to Pius XI the same moral cowardice that Pius XII has been accused of since the 1960s.]

The 'prayer' was to be declaimed this evening at the monastery of Santa Cecilia by actor Guido Roncalli (no relation to the Pope) at an event entitled 'Roncalli reads Roncalli'.

Too bad that the 'prayer' is a fakery that has been repeatedly refuted over the years and therefore, long known about.

An apocrypha, clearly, of which there exists no written proof, whose origin is shadowy, and first published in 1965 by an ex-Jesuit Malachy Martin using a pseudonym, and immediately branded false by all those who worked with John XXIII, starting with his secretary, Mons. Loris Capovilla, who was the faithful and attentive custodian of everything that the Pope from Bergamo wrote.

Repubblica's story is that, reaching the end of his days, Papa Roncalli in May 1963 - "in the privacy of his room in the Apostolic Palace", dedicated 'his last energies to the Jewish people in the form of a prayer composed almost spontaneously on a bank sheet, before the Crucifix".

Thus, the story goes, leaving posterity "a clear and passionate plea for forgiveness for the 'sins' committed by Christians over the centuries with their anti-Semitism".

The extraordinary text, writes Repubblica, "until now substantially unpublished in Italy", was published "only in part by a Dutch newspaper in 1965 and briefly noted by an Italian newspaper in the same year, apparently at the initiative of a young American monsignor who had taken part in the Council as an expert and became very good friends with Pope John."

An important and inconvenient text that had fallen inexplicably "into oblivion for 45 years" until it was rediscovered by actor Roncalli [again, no relation to the Pope at all] and the newspaper of Eugenio Scalfari.

In fact, there was good and well-founded reason for the oblivion.

"It is fake," Mons. Capovilla reiterated to Il Giornale. "John XXIII had nothing to do with it. When it was first reported, we promptly rejected it".

In fact, the entire episode was summarized in 1983 by the Jesuit priest Giovanni Caprile for the Rome-based Jesuit magazine La Civilta Cattolica (issue of June 18, 1963) using reports and letters from the archives of the John XXIII Foundation in Bergamo.

The documentation shows that the apocrypha was first published - without indicating a source nor any authenticating testimony - in the magazine of the American Jewish Committee in an article signed 'Cartus', the pseudonym of ex-Jesuit Malachy Martin. He has been for decades the prime suspect for fabricating it.

Capovilla, who had promptly rejected the claim at the time, now says more emphatically: "it is pure invention, and it is offensive that anyone can believe it is authentic when it does not correspond at all to the style nor to the spirit of John XXIII, who, for instance, would never have written that all Christians bear on their foreheads the mark of Cain".

"The Roncallian texts are well-known and well-studied, and have all been published. There is not a trace of this prayer among the papers of the late Pope, and all those who have been behind it have never once shown any proof of authenticity, which is belied by the text itself."

Guido Roncalli, the actor who is part of the fakery's revival, apparently presented a show at the Vatican Governatorate recently, but made no mention of this 'prayer'.

There is no need for such a text to know that John XXIII was always attentive to Jews, and had taken important decisions that contributed much to changing the atmosphere after centuries of Christian anti-Judaism.

Not only while he was apostolic delegate to Istanbul - during World War II, and ,it must be recalled, always in close contact with Pius XII's Secretary of State - when he saved many Turkish Jews from deportation. And as Pope, he decided to do away with the references to 'perfidious' Jews in the eighth prayer intention in the Good Friday liturgy.

And finally, by insisting that the Second Vatican Council convened by him attend to 'the Jewish question'. And thus was born the declaration Nostra aetate through which the Council fathers abolished the accusation of 'deicide' that Christians had directed against Jews in various ways.

To underscore the fakery of the supposed prayer does not mean failing to acknowledge a Roncallian 'epiphany' about the Jews, even while it must be noted that Pius XII had previously said in public that the meaning of the Latin word 'perfidis' meant 'without faith', in the case of Jews, 'without faith in Jesus Christ', and not 'treasonous' which is the meaning of the cognate form in Italian[and the other Romance languages, as well as in English].

The complexities of history should not be exploited for journalistic battles that use the 'vulgar' device of branding Popes 'good' or 'bad', in which the 'anti-Semitic and Nazi-loving' Pius XII is often contrasted with the Good Pope John.

Increasingly, there is a confusion of roles: archivists in reputable institutions style themselves as historians; professors of history who write for the newspapers claim that journalists do not have any credentials to write about history whereas they themselves are free to make appalling historical claims which all their academic titles do not make right.

To cite the more recent of these 'historians' errors': the 'chilling document' published incomplete and without the required context by Corriere della Sera in December 2004, that accused Pius XII of refusing to return Jewish children rescued during the war to their parents afterwards; or Sergio Luzzato's recent fabrications against Padre Pio whom he accuses of having produced his stigmata by using store-bought sulfuric acid; or the 'revelations' two months ago by two researchers, reported by ANSA and promptly taken up by Repubblica, on documents regarding papa Pacelli's conversations with British and American diplomats in the days immediately after the Fascist-Nazi raid on the Jewish ghetto of Rome [they happened to come across the documents in an American archive and thought they had made a fresh discovery, not knowing that those documents have been well-known and published in several books, and previously commented on quite amply in La Civilta Cattolica).



Repubblica's wrap-up story on its claim may be found on
ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2008/12/20/giovanni-xiii-prego-per-gli-eb...
I will translate it when I find the time.

TERESA BENEDETTA
Monday, January 19, 2009 3:23 PM



Thanks to New Catholic at

for this historical gem:






TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, February 22, 2009 8:07 PM




RESERVED FOR RECENT ARTICLES IN O.R.
ABOUT PIUS XI AND THE 80th ANNIVERSARY OF TEH LATERAN PACTS
TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, February 22, 2009 8:07 PM



US Jewish foundation has new proof
of Pius XII's help to the Jews




NEW YORK, FEB. 20, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Recently uncovered documents show gestures of friendship and protection that Pius XII showed to Jews before, during and after World War II.

The Pave the Way Foundation, which works to promote dialogue between religions, publicized this Thursday.

The discoveries were made by the German historian and advisor of the foundation Michael Hesemann, author of the books The Pope Who Defied Hitler and The Truth About Pius XII.

Hesemann found a number of documents in the Vatican Secret Archives that certified Pope Pacelli's numerous interventions in favor of Jews.

He noted that Archbishop Pacelli intervened in 1917 while papal nuncio in Bavaria, going through the German government to demand that Palestine Jews be protected from the Turkish Ottoman Empire.

Hesemann also shows that in 1917, the future Pius XII used his personal influence to enable the World Zionist Organization representative, Nachum Sokolov, to meet personally with Benedict XV to talk about a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

In 1926, Archbishop Pacelli urged German Catholics to support the Committee for Palestine, which supported Jewish settlements in the Holy Land.



The foundation's president, Gary Krupp, added these findings to the evidence he already had complied for a Pius XII symposium last September in Rome. Since this event, 300 new pages of original documents have been uncovered.

These documents, available for downloading from the foundation's Web site, include a nun's manuscript from 1943, detailing the Pope's order to hide Jews in Rome and a list of protected Jews.

Another document is a 1939 report on the "new Pope" by the U.S. Foreign Service, from the American consul in Cologne. The diplomat reported surprise at the "extreme dislike" of Pacelli toward Hitler and the Nazi regime, and his support to the German bishops in their opposition to Nazism, even at the cost of losing German Catholic youth.

The foundation also provides a 1938 document, signed by then Secretary of State Eugenio Pacelli, in which he opposes the Polish bill outlawing kosher slaughter because he understood that this law would be a "grave persecution" against the Jewish people.

During the war, Pius XII saved 80,000 lives by persuading the Hungarian regent to prevent the deportation of the Jews. He also requested the Brazilian government to receive 3,000 "non-Aryans."

Another document provided by the foundation is an interview with Monsignor Giovanni Ferrofino, secretary of the nuncio in Haiti. The priest said 11,000 Jews were saved by Pius XII's continual requests for visas from General Trujillo, president of the Dominican Republic.

There is also evidence that the Vatican secretly issued baptismal papers to allow Jews to emigrate to many countries as "Catholics."

The commitment of the Pave the Way foundation reflects that of its president, a Jewish American, who acknowledges that he grew up "despising Pius XII."

This changed when he read Dan Kurzman's book, A Special Mission: Hitler's Secret Plot to Seize the Vatican and Kidnap Pope Pius the XII.

The foundation acknowledged that there were spies in the Vatican and German snipers less than 200 yards from the papal windows.

The foundation stated that the lack of public statements by the Pope, which has been a source of criticism against him, is explained by the increased punishment in concentration camps, witnessed by former prisoners, when Church leaders spoke openly against the Nazi regime.

Krupp also discovered a secret plot of the Communist KGB, revealed by Lieutenant General Ion Mihai Pacepa, to manipulate Vatican documents and discredit the Holy See in international public opinion.

Krupp said: "I was surprised when I personally researched archived news stories from the New York Times and the Palestine Post from 1939-1958. I could not find one negative articleabout Pius XII."

The foundation undertakes the correction of Pius XII's image in order to "eliminate an obstacle" to understanding between Jews and Catholics, "which impacts over one billion people."

Krupp added: "In the interest of Jewish justice we must acknowledge the efforts of one man during a period when as a people we were abandoned by the rest of the world."

"It's time," he said, "to recognize Pope Pius XII for what he really did rather then what he didn't say."


TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, March 06, 2009 12:53 PM



This initiative seems to me a great earnest of good faith by the officials of the Holocaust Museum, whose frequent repetitions of the official Jewish line about Pius XII indicated an absolutely closed mind on the issue before this.



Yad Vashem co-sponsors amd hosts
conference on Pius XII and the Shoah




ROME, March 5 (Translated from Apcom) - An international conference on 'Pius XII and the Holocaust' will be held Sunday and Monday at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem, jointly sponsored by the memorial and the Studio Teologico Salesiano.

The workshop takes place a few weeks before Pope benedict XVI's visit to the Holy Land in mid-May and a three-year-long issue of a a Pius XII photograph in the Museum's Hall of Shame.

Various historical stages will be studies, starting from Pius XII"s pre-papal years when he was Nuncio to Germany and then Secretary of State, to the war years and the consequences of the Holocaust.

Participating historians and research will share their findings on specific questions that have been posed regarding Pius XII adn the Jews in world War II.

Avnere Shelev, president of Yad Vashem, and Mons. Antonio Franco, the Apostolic Nuncio in Israel, will open the conference.

Moderating will be Fr. Roberto Spataro for the Salesian sponsors, and Prof. Iael Orvieto, for Yad Vashem.



Yad Vashem to host
2-day study session on Pius XII





JERUSALEM, MARCH 5, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The International Institute for Holocaust Research of the Yad Vashem and a Salesian study institute will join to evaluate the investigation on Pope Pius XII and the Shoah.

The Studium Theologicum Salesianum will join with the research group from Jerusalem's Holocaust memorial for two days of research this Sunday and Monday.

Salesian Father Francesco De Ruvo told ZENIT that "historians will come together who will share the results of their investigations to respond to a series of questions that affect the current controversy."

Yad Vashem has a caption regarding Pius XII that attributes to the Pope "silence and the absence of guidelines" during the Holocaust, something which many historians, including Jewish ones, say is blatantly false.

The study session will occur as Benedict XVI prepares his May visit to the Holy Land and a stop at Yad Vashem.

"In recent years, many books and new articles have been published, and as a result, new material has been presented that permits bringing to light new aspects, which should be looked at and synthesized to see if there are novelties and if something should be revised," Father De Ruvo explained.

Among the themes to be considered are the period before Pius XII's papacy, relations with the German bishops, Pius XII and the Holocaust, the situation of Italy during the Holocaust, and the period following the Holocaust.

Those who will participate include Sergio Minerbi, Paul O'Shea, Michael Phayer, Susan Zuccotti, Thomas Brechenmacher, Jean-Dominique Durand, Grazia Loparco, Matteo Luigi Napolitano and Andrea Tornielli.

"For some," Father De Ruvo noted, "[Pius XII] has been an indifferent spectator of the Holocaust who, with his silence, became an accomplice of the tremendous tragedy that was occurring. Other investigators and historians, on the other hand, have affirmed for some time now a totally different thesis, which offers a positive evaluation of the work of Pius XII: He worked to limit with every possible means the effects of the Holocaust, sometimes achieving efficacious results."

This latter position, the Salesian continued, "is based on archived historical documents and spoken and written testimonies of the protagonists. The historians who exalt the action of Pius XII in the saving of the Jews propose their conclusions regardless of their ethical or religious belonging. Among them there are many Jewish scholars."

Father De Ruvo said that "a climate of cordial and respectful listening has been maintained till now among the institutions involved in this initiative which, as everyone hopes, will lead to an understanding of the current text that can be seen in the Yad Vashem."


Andrea Tornielli, author of the most recent biography of Pius XII, has a story on two recent documents unearthed showing Pius XII's direct involvement in ordering Catholic institutions in Italy during the war to rescue and shelter Jews from Nazi-Fascist persecution. I will translate later.

P.S. An ASCA news item on the conference says that Tornielli, a reputed religion sholar-researcher in his own right, will be one of those who will take part in the conference. He did groundbreaking research on Pius XII's wartime activities for his 600+-page biogrpahy of Pius XII published last year.





TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 03, 2009 5:30 PM
PLACE-HOLDER FOR REPORTS AND COMMENTARY
AFTER THE YAD VASHEM CONFERENCE ON PIUS XII


I have been remiss about this, but Inside the Vatican has a pretty good round-up that must be posted for the record.


TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 03, 2009 5:34 PM



Pius XII:
A new book and an essay
shed light on the 'black legend'



The image of Pacelli as "Hitler's Pope" is contested by a growing number of scholars.
There were many responsible for creating this image, including Catholics.
But Soviet propaganda was decisive. A Jesuit historian reveals the strategy.




ROME, April 3, 2009 – Recently the Vatican produced two new texts in defense of Pius XII, the most controversial Pope of the 20th century. Both of them are aimed at dismantling the "black legend" about him.

The first is a book that went on sale in Italy yesterday, printed by a non-Catholic publishing house, Marsilio, and written by authors who are also of various cultural and religious backgrounds, including two Jews – but all of whom agree in exonerating Pope Eugenio Pacelli.

The second contribution is the essay that opens the latest issue of La Civiltà Cattolica, the journal that is examined by the Secretariat of State before publication. Its author is Jesuit Fr. Giovanni Sale, an historian who specializes in the 20th century Church.

Here as well, the title goes to the heart of the question: "The birth of the black legend of Pius XII."


In difesa di Pio XII: Le ragioni della storia
Edited by Giovanni Maria Vian
Marsilio, Venice, 2009, 168 pp., 13.00 euro

The book, entitled In difesa di Pio XII. Le ragioni della storia [In defense of Pius XII. Historical arguments], presents - in a more elaborate and extensive form - articles published in recent months in the newspaper of the Holy See, L'Osservatore Romano.

The authors are: Paolo Mieli, a history scholar and editor of Corriere della Sera, the leading secular Italian newspaper; Saul Israel, a biologist and writer who was sheltered in a convent in Rome during the German occupation; Andrea Riccardi, a professor of contemporary history and the author of the 2008 book L'inverno più lungo, 1943-1944. Pio XII, gli ebrei e i nazisti a Roma [The longest winter, 1953-1944. Pius XII, the Jews, and the Nazis in Rome]"; Archbishop Rino Fisichella, rector of the Pontifical Lateran University; Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, president of the Pontifical Council for Culture; and Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State.

The volume concludes with Benedict XVI's speech on November 8, 2008, to a conference on "The legacy of Pius XII's magisterium."

In the introduction, Giovanni Maria Vian, the editor of the book and editor of L'Osservatore Romano, points out that the bad image of Pius XII took hold on a worldwide level during the 1960s, a few years after Pius XII had died amid almost universal respect.

At first, the Church of Rome reacted in two ways. First of all, in June of 1963, with a letter in defense of Pius XII written to the English Catholic weekly The Tablet by then-cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini, who would soon be elected Pope. Vian quotes extensive passages from this letter.

And then there was the publication of twelve large volumes of documents from the wartime period, taken from the Vatican archives, which are still not open to complete public consultation.

But the "black legend" of Pacelli as Hitler's friend was born long before the 1960s. Vian recalls that "questions and accusations over the silence and apparent indifference of Pius XII in the face of the impending tragedies and the horrors of the war had come from Catholics like Emmanuel Mounier as early as 1939, during the first weeks of the pontificate."

Vian provided a more detailed reconstruction of this Catholic prehistory of the "black legend" in an essay in Archivum Historiae Pontificiae in 2004, subsequently published by www.chiesa.

Giovanni Sale, in the essay published in the latest issue of La Civiltà Cattolica, also makes reference to those "Catholic-social" circles which, already during the 1940s, were accusing Pius XII of silent complicity with the Nazi atrocities, quoting the Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain, who at the time was France's ambassador to the Holy See.

But in addition to the participation of some among the Catholic intelligentsia - and more significantly - the "black legend" of Pius XII had its precursor in Soviet propaganda during and after the war.

And it is to this propaganda that Fr. Sale dedicates his latest essay on this topic. In it, he adds new information beyond what he has highlighted in previous essays, and in particular in an article in La Civiltà Cattolica in 2005.

The following is an extensive extract from Fr. Sale's article, published on March 21, 2009, about how the communist world molded the image of Pacelli as Hitler's friend.

It was an image destined to meet with great success during the 1960s and afterward, but is now on the decline, contested by a growing number of scholars.


The birth of the "black legend" of Pius XII
by Giovanni Sale
Translated from


The "black legend" of a Pope who was a friend of Hitler and a supporter of totalitarian regimes was not born, as is often maintained, in Jewish circles, in response to the presumed silence of Pius XII on the Holocaust, but in the communist world, in the period during which, shortly before the end of the Second World War, the division of the world into two opposing blocs was approaching, one under Soviet influence and the other under that of the United States. [...]

From the sources, it emerges that the "accusation" of Pius XII as a friend of Hitler, Mussolini, and other fascist dictators predates the scorching and even more controversial accusation of the Pope's silence over the extermination of Jews in Europe. [...]

In reality, the perception and its theoretical elaboration, which were lightly developed in the years just after the war, made headway only beginning in the 1960ss.

The events surrounding the Eichmann trial [held in Jerusalem in 1961] and his execution in 1962 made a noteworthy contribution to making the genocide of the European Jews the founding event, from the moral point of view, of the state of Israel.

In this regard, the historian and diplomat Sergio Romano writes: "Up until that moment, the essential elements of Israeli identity had been the Zionist saga, the laborious progress of the Jewish presence in Palestine, the fight for life, the victorious war against the Arab states [...]. The Eichmann case changed the picture and contributed to making Jewish genocide the cornerstone of Israel. The state of pioneers and farmer-soldiers was thus replaced, in collective self-representation, with the state of victims and their heirs."

The play The Deputy by Rolf Hochhuth, performed for the first time in Paris in 1963, spread among intellectuals and the wider public the accusation of a Pope who was silent and indifferent toward the fate of the Jews; of a Pope who, out of fear of the atheistic and revolutionary communism, had aligned himself with the dictators of his time.

In this way, Pius XII was brought before the tribunal of history to be included in the roll of those charged for the offense of the Holocaust.

Calling the Pope a 'co-defendant' amplified beyond Nazi Germany the field of responsibility for what happened to the "hated and despised" Jews in Christian Europe.

Anti-Catholic historical literature then had a field day creating the legend of a silent Pope who was Hitler's friend; this literature had great success in the English-speaking world, but today it has been subjected to serious and well thought-out historical criticism. [And more importantly, to rebuttal supported by a multitude of documentation!]

These events, moreover, were and still are exploited by the most radical and intransigent form of Judaism, interested in keeping alive, for reasons that are more political than intellectual, an old dispute with the Catholic Church for an anti-Judaism which was held by many Catholics until the Second Vatican Council.

The recent position statements by the Jewish world on the beatification process for Pius XII is situated in this climate of undue pressure on the Holy See.

The events referred to must be seen in the international historical context of the 1960s, still dominated by the logic of the cold war, when Pius XII had already died and the See of Peter was occupied by a pontiff, John XXIII, whose friendly charisma had won over even many nonbelievers in just a few years.

Pius XII himself, during his long and difficult pontificate, was greatly loved and venerated by Catholics all over the world, and respected by the leading personalities of the day. [Many contemporary commentators and newsmen, even Catholics themselves, forget this. He was the Pope of my early years, and I cannot begin to describe how my generation was taught to regard and venerate the Pope - both as Pope, and as the person Eugenio Pacelli.]

The news of his death, on October 9, 1958, was received everywhere with great emotion and personal participation. Statesmen, diplomats, religious leaders of various faiths sent messages of condolence to the Vatican, emphasizing the tremendous work the Pope had done during the conflict on behalf of peace, and above all the humanitarian contribution made by the Holy See in order to alleviate the sufferings of the victims of the war, in particular the Jews, who had been persecuted in most European countries. [...]

***

What was Pius XII's attitude during wartime toward Soviet Russia, which, in 1941, became part of the Allied bloc?

It must be remembered above all that during the conflict, according to the long-standing tradition of the Holy See, he held an attitude of formal neutrality toward the parties at war, all the more so in that both sides were nations and peoples of ancient Christian and Catholic tradition.

Some events whose authenticity cannot be brought into question – for example, the role that the Pope played in putting some representatives of the anti-Nazi resistance into contact with representatives of the London government – lead us to think that Pius XII must have desired the overthrow of Hitler's regime in Germany, and the reestablishing of democracy in that country, which he loved. [...]

In any case, the Pope clearly warned of the so-called "Red menace," especially during the last months of the war. [...] The change in the presidency of the United States in the spring of 1945 (F.D. Roosevelt died on April 12, and was succeeded by H.S. Truman) made the Vatican hope for a change in U.S. foreign policy, which was considered excessively benevolent toward Moscow, and a greater awareness of the "communist threat" in Europe. [...]

In fact, Truman immediately took on a very critical and even hostile attitude toward Moscow's political decisions, such that the United States mobilized itself, both with the threat of a new war and with economic aid sent to countries ravaged by the war, where the risk of communist infiltration was the strongest, in order to block the advance of the "Red menace" in Europe.

With the passing of time, as was to be expected, the relationship between the Vatican and the United States administration became increasingly close and unified especially in the common struggle – naturally, in different fields and by different means – against international Communism.

International Communism, led by Moscow, took on a highly aggressive attitude toward the Vatican during the last years of the war. [...] Above all, the speech that Pius XII made to the cardinals on June 2, 1945, on the occasion of the feast of his namesake, St. Eugene, put into action a concerted campaign of personal attacks on the Pope.

In this important message, the Pope reviewed the struggle supported by the Holy See, from the time of Pius XI, against Nazism and against the anti-Christian doctrines that it spread. [...]

"We ourselves during the war," the Pope said, "did not cease to contrast the ruinous and inexorable application of the doctrine of national socialism – which went so far as to use the most refined scientific methods in order to torture and kill people who were often innocent – by presenting the unfailing demands and norms of humanity and of the Christian faith."

In his speech, Pius XII also called upon the victorious powers to use moderation, and not allow themselves to be guided by a spirit of vengeance toward the defeated peoples.

He granted that individual responsibility could be legally determined, and excesses punished, but not that "the collective guilt" of such a disastrous and inhuman war should be attributed to the entire "German people," already severely stricken by hunger and by the Allied bombings. We know that not everyone, including many in Catholic circles, shared the Pope's view on this point.

This message, which called upon Christian peoples to construct peace and a new international order founded on justice and democracy, was skillfully exploited by the international Communist press in order to create the legend of a Pope who was the friend of Hitler and of the German Nazis. [...]

In fact, immediately after the speech on June 2, Radio Moscow commented on the Pope's message in stronger terms than ever before. Pius XII was accused of being Hitler's Pope, of failing to condemn National Socialism, of remaining silent in the face of the Nazi atrocities:

Those who have heard the Pope's speech on the occasion of the feast of Saint Eugene," Radio Moscow commented, "have been stunned to learn that the Vatican, during the years of Hitler's domination of Europe, acted with courage and audacity against the Nazi criminals. The Vatican's real actions tell the opposite story. [...]

No atrocity committed by the followers of Hitler provoked any repugnance or indignation from the Vatican. The Vatican was silent when the German death machines were operating, when the chimneys of the crematory ovens in Maidanec and Osfensil [sic] were smoking, when hundreds of bombs were dropped on the peaceful population of London, when Hitler's doctrine of the elimination and extermination of nations and peoples was transformed into a harsh reality. [...]

The statements from the Vatican appealed for mercy and forgiveness of the Nazi criminals."

This text is of great interest for two different reasons.

In the first place, it was intended to guide the international Communist press in its anti-Pacelli, anti-Vatican propaganda.

Moreover, the text already indicates in a precise and detailed way all of the themes of the "black legend" of Pius XII; in it, for the first time, the Pope's silence at the massacre of the Jews is spoken of. [ . . .]

These motifs would be repeated by the Communist and pro-Russian European press, but also by the media identified with the more moderate left. Even a number of social activist Catholics allowed themselves to be influenced by this propaganda.

In Italy, the Communist left, headed by Pietro Secchia and Luigi Longo, politically exploited for a long time this legend of a Pius XII who was first the friend of Hitler and of totalitarian regimes, and now a supporter of the United States imperialists.

In a meeting with Communist organizers on January 7, 1946, Longo addressed the need to monitor closely the work of the Church and the Vatican:

The Church is responsible, in the person of Pacelli, for Hitler's rise to power, in order to create a front against the pressing danger of Russia, and this at the time when he was the nuncio in Berlin.

Currently, after the death of Roosevelt, the Pope has found himself alone in Europe opposing the Russian peril, so now he is leaning on America, with the appointment of cardinals etc., for the purpose of constructing another anti-Russian front with the support of the American and Italian capitalists.

This legend was also used extensively during the 1048 elections, when some Communist leaders, caught up in rhetorical fervor, scandalized many by denouncing at a few rallies "the Pope's white hands, stained with innocent blood."

Anti-Pacelli propaganda was welcomed in Italy and France, but also in Germany, not only in radical leftist circles, but also in some Christian-social intellectual circles.

The Vatican was blasted for contributing, through the signing of the Concordat in 1933, to the international recognition of the new Nazi regime, and of supporting this afterward in spite of the anti-religious attitude adopted by Nazism, out of fear of communism, believed to be the true enemy of the Church and of Christianity.

Interesting in this regard is a long exposition sent to the Vatican during the last months of 1945 by a German intellectual, probably Protestant (the document does not show his name) in which both Pius XI and Pius XII are accused of supporting Hitler, thus contributing to the ruin of Germany and Europe.

If there is collective guilt – the author of the exposition says – this is not to be attributed indiscriminately to the Germans, but "only to Christianity," for failing its lofty civilizing mission.
He continues:

I know very well that the German bishops protested against Hitler's attitude through pamphlets. But these pamphlets were distributed in secret, they were passed from hand to hand, but because they were never published, they never reached Germans as a whole"

I also know that many Catholic priests were imprisoned in the concentration camps, solely for having made a few remarks against Nazism; but this has nothing to do with the official position taken by the Vatican.

Rome never spoke out officially against Hitler and against his party; it never officially distanced itself from the dictator, it never broke off relations with him, it never disowned the Concordat agreed with him. Moreover, the Vatican nuncio was never recalled from Germany.

[Did anyone recall their ambassadors from Germany before the war? What about UK Prime Minister Chamberlain's now infamous (and ignominious)'appeasement' capitulation when, after meeting Hitler in 1938, he declared that he had obtained 'peace in our time'?]

The writer, in a somewhat overdone "prophetic" tone, continues: "it would have been sufficient for Rome to give clear instructions for Catholic priests to form a united front against Hitler. It is possible that he would have sent all the priests and religious of Germany to the concentration camps to die, but by doing this it would have acted according to the spirit of the Gospel," and would have helped the German people to realize the gravity of the situation.

Such positions contributed to creating and keeping alive, sometimes for different ideological motivations, the legend of a Pope who compromised with Nazism and was in some way jointly responsible for the resilience of Hitler's regime, a legend that in the political climate of those years, marked by the ideological-political opposition of the cold war, no one was willing to oppose on the historical level.

In short, the "black legend" of Pacelli as a friend of Hitler and silent in the face of Nazi atrocities, created – as we have seen – for purposes of propaganda, gradually took on the contours of historical reality.

This legend, as has been said, only expanded beginning in the 1960's, with other themes and motifs – like that of the Pope's silence about the Holocaust – which were also frequently exploited in order to attack the Catholic Church and keep it under constant blackmail.

Recent studies are contributing to analyzing with greater objectivity and detachment the figure and work of Pius XII, outside of the legend and ideologies that for too many years have held this prisoner.

We believe that the future opening of the Vatican archives concerning the Pacelli pontificate, as well as the opening of other government archives around the world, will help to bring clarity to this delicate matter, and do justice to a Pope who was, in the difficult climate of the war, a wise peacemaker and a teacher of humanity.

*********************************************************************

A story from www.chiesa with a previous article by Fr. Sale and the essay by Giovanni Maria Vian on the Catholic prehistory of the negative image of Pius XII:
> The Black Legend of Pius XII Was Invented by a Catholic: Mounier (20.6.2005)
chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1336647

Questa è la versione 'lo-fi' del Forum Per visualizzare la versione completa click here
Tutti gli orari sono GMT+01:00. Adesso sono le 12:05 PM.
Copyright © 2000-2013 FreeForumZone snc - www.freeforumzone.com