Pope Pius XII

Fanny Cradock

Godwin bombs away!

I'm wondering what people's opinions about Pope Pius XII are with regards to the Holocaust. It seems that the RCC are on the road to turning him into a saint, which is a controversial to say the least! And to justify such a move the RCC have had to challenge the popular history that he tacitly supported the regime and their crimes by keeping silent.

I had read a specific article which dealt with this challenge to history, but alas I can't find it now. However, there are a few articles below that might be interesting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7014069.ece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/23/religion-catholicism
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/21/pope-benedict-moves-pius-closer-sainthood

PDN

I'm going to infract the first idiot who tries to invoke Godwin's Law in this thread.

Fanny Cradock

Yes, I should have pointed out that the G bomb has already been dropped and there will be little tolerance for messing.

prinz

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I'm wondering what people's opinions about Pope Pius XII are with regards to the Holocaust. It seems that the RCC are on the road to turning him into a saint, which is a controversial to say the least! And to justify such a move the RCC have had to challenge the popular history that he tacitly supported the regime and their crimes by keeping silent.

I don't think that he intentionally supported the regime tactily or otherwise. I think the leader of said regime had the RCC over a barrel on this matter as Catholics were a favourite target of the regime party and the Pope pursued a course which he thought was best at the time.

That said their was a lot, lot more that should have been done/said and as such I wouldn't be supportive of making a saint of the man. There are literally thousands of far more deserving cases from the same time period.

I also remember reading somewhere that during the battle for Italy the Germans had an armoured division destined to liquidate the Vatican and all inside unless their warmongering was given a Papal blessing. The Vatican called their bluff on it and the threat was not carried out. Not sure where I read that though.

kelly1

This article might clarify things a bit.

Pius XII knew that outright condemnation of Hitler's regime would bring about retaliation and increase the persecution of the Jews whom he was secretly protecting.

Zombrex

I think the view that Pius XII was sympathetic to the Nazi's and was anti-semetic has been challenged a lot recently, including in a book called The Myth of Hitler's Pope, written by an American rabbi, a response to the book Hitler's Pope which condemned Pius.

The Vatican seems to helped shelter Jews in Roman, though how much of this was organised by Pius himself and how much was just allowed is contested, though if he was genuinely anti-semetic and a Nazi it would seem odd to even allow this sort of thing.

alex73

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

It seems that the RCC are on the road to turning him into a saint, which is a controversial to say the least!

Why do you say its controversial? Go back to 1930's europe and Judge historical figures in their historical context. He became Pope during WWII and already hundreds of Priests had been murdered by Nazi's, for sure he knew about the Jews persecution, but speaking out publically against hitler would have meant that all German Catholics would have been the next target of the Reich.

I think you should revisit the facts, Pius XII hated the jewish persecution, below the scenes the hierarchy tried their best to save as many as possible, they were hidden in secret. It was a very fine line to thread, did he want hitler to also focus on catholics as part of his final solution. I suggest you study the issue in depth and read Summi Pontificatus.


Todays media is happy to criticise the RCC, and with good cause sometimes, there are serious issues to resolve. But PIUS XII was a holy Pope placed in one of the most terrible situations of the last centuary.

For example,

In 1939, 80 percent of the Catholic clergy and five of the bishops of the Warthegau region had been deported to concentration camps. In Wroclaw, 49.2 percent of the clergy were dead; in Chelmno, 47.8 percent; in Lodz, 36.8 percent; in Poznan, 31.1. In the Warsaw diocese, 212 priests were killed; 92 were murdered in Wilno, 81 in Lwow, 30 in Cracow, thirteen in Kielce. Seminarians who were not killed were shipped off to Germany as forced labor.
Of 690 priests in the Polish province of West Prussia, at least 460 were arrested. The remaining priests of the region fled their parishes. Of the arrested priests, 214 were executed, including the entire cathedral chapter of Pelplin. The rest were deported to the newly created General Government district in Central Poland. By 1940, only 20 priests were still serving their parishes in West Prussia.

Fanny Cradock

alex73 wrote: »

Why do you say its controversial?

Read the 3rd link.

prinz

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Godwin bombs away!
I'm wondering what people's opinions about Pope Pius XII are with regards to the Holocaust.

Slightly off-topic but just to add, there's an upcoming movie about Pius and the Nazi/Vatican relations with James Cromwell in the title role. Should be interesting but doubtless will include the extra special affects explosions and a femme fatale nun ..

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1499680/

Zombrex

prinz wrote: »

Slightly off-topic but just to add, there's an upcoming movie about Pius and the Nazi/Vatican relations with James Cromwell in the title role. Should be interesting but doubtless will include the extra special affects explosions and a femme fatale nun ..

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1499680/

will it involve an anti-matter explosion above St. Peter's square and a daring jump from a helicopter

If it doesn't I'm not going to see it :pac:

alex73

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Read the 3rd link.

its a link to the English Guardian. Not really an objective place to start.

A Saint does not have to meet the approval of Jews. The Fact is Pope Pius XII never approved/agreed with or wanted any Jew to die. The Cardinals in Germany/Poland/Hungary asked him not to draw attention to catholics, so his way of confronting the evil of hitler was not an easy decision. To openly condemn Hitler from Rome would be an act of war, europe was already at war and that church opposed the war.

Its very easy in 2010 to pronouce judgement and say he should have publicly spoken out. Indirectly he did.

There was a large network of Convents and Churchs hidding Jews. If jews wanted (many didn't) they were given false baptism certs.

Could he have done more? I am sure he himself before his death saw that maybe he could have, but he took the best decisions he could at the time. But he was by no means Hitler's Pope or anti-Jew.

Glenster

Dear Jesus,

There are too many saints these days. Please remove three.

P.S. I am not a crank

kind regards

Hitler.

Zombrex

Glenster wrote: »

Dear Jesus,

There are too many saints these days. Please remove three.

P.S. I am not a crank

kind regards

Hitler.

Before everyone starts freaking out, that is a Simpsons reference :P

Stephentlig

its a link to the English Guardian. Not really an objective place to start.

Yes I dislike the quoting of secular sources a lot, they tend to be very biased and to be honest and would be better off taken up the the job of a fictional novelist, as that's what most of them are good at anyhow.

Pax Christi
Stephen

T "real deal" J

Erich Priebke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Priebke

Had a personal telephone line and working relationship with the pope (a saint!) as a nazi emissary. What wonderful company for this infallible being. Priebke then went onto murder 335 italians (only 70 jews this time) outside Rome in full knowledge of the Vatican. He was tried recently and found guilty in Italian courts but amazingly didn't get jail.

Priebke, amongst many other nazi war-crime scumbags flocked to the Vatican at the end of the war so that they could get false passports issued by the montsigniours. the vatican then arranged for their safe arrival in south america.


Aside from this pope, Have a look at this doc on the Catholic church and ireland's helping of nazi murderers to escape justice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyrOw5x5Hn0
Very interesting the way the Catholic church issued papers for nazi murderers to get into Ireland, who welcomed them.

alex73

T real deal J wrote: »

Very interesting the way the Catholic church issued papers for nazi murderers to get into Ireland, who welcomed them.

I can't voice my opinion on the truth of your post. But what I know for sure is that Pope Pius XII didn't issue any papers for Nazi Murderers.

Also its worth noting that many nazi soldiers had little choice buy obey their commanders, it was do or die. Thats no excuse for killing innocent jews, but WWII is not a black and white subject.

After all, Ireland sat and did nothing. We played our neutrality card .

Stephentlig

alex73 wrote: »

I can't voice my opinion on the truth of your post. But what I know for sure is that Pope Pius XII didn't issue any papers for Nazi Murderers.

Also its worth noting that many nazi soldiers had little choice buy obey their commanders, it was do or die. Thats no excuse for killing innocent jews, but WWII is not a black and white subject.

After all, Ireland sat and did nothing. We played our neutrality card .

well, many Irish ( like my Grandfather) went and fought in the 2nd world war from beginning to end, so although we played the neutrality card, it can be said that many Irish men fought and died in it.

MrPudding

Stephentlig wrote: »

Yes I dislike the quoting of secular sources a lot, they tend to be very biased ...

Pax Christi
Stephen

Yes, the religious sources tend to be much less biased.

MrP

Stephentlig

Pope Pius XII was behind Jewish escapes - priest


Date:
21 Jan 2010


A Catholic priest and former fascist chaplain has claimed that Pope Pius XII was instrumental in the setting up of a wartime escape network for Jews.


Fr Giancarlo Centioni, now 97, served in Rome as a chaplain to Mussolini's blackshirts, and last week claimed he is the last surviving member of a secret network established by the late Pope to assist Jews fleeing Nazi persecution.


In his interview with the online h20news, Fr Centioni stated that the network operated under the cover of a Catholic emigrant service, Sankt Raphael's Verein (St Raphael's Association).


''I was living in the Pallotines' headquarters, where my German colleagues invited me to take part,'' Fr Centioni. ''Since I was a fascist chaplain, it was easier to help the Jews''.


The priest added that head of the network was a German priest, Fr Anton Weber, then stationed in Rome, who was, Fr Centioni said, in ''direct contact'' with Pius XII.


According to Fr Centioni, St Raphael's was active in Rome before the German army took control of the city, in 1943, and then continued its work after the war ended.



The priest himself was forced to flee the city when, he claimed, one applicant for help turned out to be ''a Russian spy''.
Fr Centioni's interview came as Pope Benedict's official visit to Rome's main synagogue last weekend was met in some quarters by renewed criticism of Pope Pius's wartime record. One leader of the city's Jewish community, Ricardo Pacifici, said Pius should have spoken out more forcefully on Jewish suffering, though Pope Benedict used the occasion of his visit to again publicly defend his predecessor.
http://www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/pope-pius-xii-was-behind-jewish-escapes-priest

Stephentlig

MrPudding wrote: »

Yes, the religious sources tend to be much less biased.

MrP

Yes I tend to listen to the Church and those closest to it, before I dabble into the secular worlds explanation of things. Sometimes both have it right and most of the times, because of the seculars hate for the Church, they interpret what the church says as wrong and show it in a bad light and the Church is the one with the true story.

Xluna

Here's a documentary about his that I've just came across. Hitlers Pope by John Cornwall,a practising Catholic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXRVn_nFHB0

Xluna

Stephentlig wrote: »

... because of the seculars hate for the Church, they interpret what the church says as wrong and show it in a bad light and the Church is the one with the true story.

An honest question. I often hear this mentioned by Christians. Are you sure that in some cases you just don't want to accept the secular explanation,even when the evidence is on it's side,as it would make you question your faith and instead just say "Oh well secular scholars hate the Church so they're biased." and just ignore their explanation?

Stephentlig

Xluna wrote: »

An honest question. I often hear this mentioned by Christians. Are you sure that in some cases you just don't want to accept the secular explanation,even when the evidence is on it's side,as it would make you question your faith and instead just say "Oh well secular scholars hate the Church so they're biased." and just ignore their explanation?

no contraversies within the church could ever prompt me to question my faith, contraversie has always been within the church, old testament and new are rife with scandals but Jesus promised us that the gates of hell will never prevail against her. I do not judge my church upon her conduct but on whether or not she teaches me truth in accordance with sacred scripture and Tradition, but if we wanna use conduct then why not point out the thousands of great saints she has produced since she was founded over the years?

I usually listen to both, and pray for justice to be done no matter whats been brought up, but the secular media will always be biased towards the Catholic Church and Christianity itself, and the evidence of which has been seen down through the years and even on the BBC programme ''a history of Chrisitianity'' it was seen. sometimes both are right, and sometimes the secular are right, yet go about in a more biased and mean way, leaving out bits as they go along, again we must use our conscience, but I listen to the church, those closest to her such as the Irish Catholic and then I listen to the secular media, and to be honest it can be the other way around, either way I get some grasp of whats going on.

Matt. 13:24-30 - scandals have always existed in the Church, just as they have existed outside of the Church. This should not cause us to lose hope in the Church. God's mysterious plan requires the wheat and the weeds to be side by side in the Church until the end of time.


Matt. 13:47-50 - God's plan is that the Church (the kingdom of heaven) is a net which catches fish of every kind, good and bad. God revealed this to us so that we will not get discouraged by the sinfulness of the Church’s members.


Matt. 16:18 - no matter how sinful its members conduct themselves, Jesus promised that the gates of death will never prevail against the Church.




Matt. 23:2-3 - the Jewish people would have always understood the difference between a person's sinfulness and his teaching authority. We see that the sinfulness of the Pharisees does not minimize their teaching authority. They occupy the "cathedra" of Moses.


Matt. 26:70-72; Mark 14:68-70; Luke 22:57; John 18:25-27 - Peter denied Christ three times, yet he was chosen to be the leader of the Church, and taught and wrote infallibly.


Mark 14:45 - Judas was unfaithful by betraying Jesus. But his apostolic office was preserved and this did not weaken the Church.


Mark 14:50 - all of Jesus' apostles were unfaithful by abandoning Him in the garden of Gethsemane, yet they are the foundation of the Church.


John 20:24-25 - Thomas the apostle was unfaithful by refusing to believe in Jesus' resurrection, yet he taught infallibly in India.


Rom. 3:3-4 - unfaithful members do not nullify the faithfulness of God and the work of the Holy Spirit in the Church.


Eph. 5:25-27 - just as Jesus Christ has both a human and a divine nature, the Church, His Bride, is also both human and divine. It is the holy and spotless bride of Christ, with sinful human members.


1 Tim. 5:19 - Paul acknowledges Church elders might be unfaithful. The Church, not rebellion and schism, deals with these matters.


2 Tim. 2:13 - if we remain faithless, God remains faithful for He cannot deny Himself.


2 Tim. 2:20 - a great house has not only gold and silver, but also wood and earthenware, some for noble use, some for ignoble use.


Jer. 24:1-10 - God's plan includes both good and bad figs. The good figs will be rewarded, and the bad figs will be discarded.


1 Kings 6,7,8 - the Lord commands us to build elaborate places of worship. Some non-Catholics think that this is controversial and the money should be given to the poor, even though no organization does more for the poor of the world that the Catholic Church. We create our churches with beauty because Christ our King lives in the churches in the blessed Eucharist.


Matt. 26:8-9; Mark 14:4-5; John 12:5 - negative comments concerning the beauty of the Church are like the disciples complaining about the woman anointing Jesus' head with costly oil. Jesus desires that we honor Him with our best gifts, not for Him, but for us, so that we realize He is God and we are His creatures.


Matt. 26:10-11 - Jesus says we have both a duty to honor God and give to the poor - a balanced life of reverence and charity.
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html#the_church-VII

Fanny Cradock

Xluna wrote: »

An honest question. I often hear this mentioned by Christians. Are you sure that in some cases you just don't want to accept the secular explanation,even when the evidence is on it's side,as it would make you question your faith and instead just say "Oh well secular scholars hate the Church so they're biased." and just ignore their explanation?

I think there is often a misunderstanding as to what secular means. It's can be seen as a by-word for anti-theism (which, I guess, it is in certain cases).

Secular schools or the secular media or a secular state - if they are truly secular - are removed from religion, which is distinct from being anti-religion. Of course the lines are sometimes blued and people become confused.

ISAW

Stephentlig wrote: »

Pope Pius XII was behind Jewish escapes - priest

In fact and Irish Priest in The Vatican saved more then three times the Number of Jews then Oscar Schlindler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individuals_and_groups_assisting_Jews_during_the_Holocaust#Prominent_individuals
In Rome, some 4,000 Italian Jews and prisoners of war avoided deportation, many of them hidden in safe houses or evacuated from Italy by a resistance group organized by an Irish priest, Hugh O'Flaherty. Once a Vatican ambassador to Egypt, Haiti, Santo Domingo and Czechoslovakia, Fr. O'Flaherty used his political connections to help secure sanctuary for dispossessed Jews

Her are some other sources:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0033.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany#Catholicism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_Nazi_Germany#Mit_brennender_Sorge

Read Piux XI encyclicals from 1930 on (when Naziism rose) and you will find oit difficult to find one which does not criticism Nazism. None put Nazism in a good light.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/index.htm


You might also note the following maps of religion/catholics and voting patterns in Nazi Germany.
http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2007/07/catholics-fiercest-anti-nazis-in-pre.html

antiskeptic

kelly1 wrote: »

This article might clarify things a bit.

Pius XII knew that outright condemnation of Hitler's regime would bring about retaliation and increase the persecution of the Jews whom he was secretly protecting.

It's a well documented fact that WWII grew out of mistakes made in the years following WWI - not least of which was ignoring and appeasing the growing threat and rise of Adolf Hitler. Is there a record of Pious XXII remonstrating against the Nazi regieme before it became all-powerful in Germany and before it became a threat to the world?

say from about Kristal Nacht onwards.. '

prinz

antiskeptic wrote: »

Is there a record of Pious XXII remonstrating against the Nazi regieme before it became all-powerful in Germany and before it became a threat to the world?

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_14031937_mit-brennender-sorge_en.html

drafted by Pius XII as Cardinal Pacelli.

wow, and that was before Kristallnacht... :eek:... as if it took that night to show to the world how messed up the regime was. It was even before the Brits celebrated that they had achieved peace in our time etc.

The controversy also motivated additional research, and new material now seems to arrive every week. As far as I can tell, all this recent information tells in favor of Pius XII. A recently discovered 1923 letter to the Vatican from Eugenio Pacelli, then nuncio to Germany, for instance, denounces Hitler’s putsch and warns against his anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism. A document from April 1933, just months after Hitler obtained power, reveals how Pacelli (then secretary of state) ordered the new German nuncio, Cesare Orsenigo, to protest Nazi actions.

Meanwhile, newly examined diplomatic documents show that in 1937 Cardinal Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII) warned A.W. Klieforth, the American consul to Berlin, that Hitler was “an untrustworthy scoundrel and fundamentally wicked person,” to quote Klieforth, who also wrote that Pacelli “did not believe Hitler capable of moderation, and . . . fully supported the German bishops in their anti-Nazi stand.” This was matched with the discovery of Pacelli’s anti-Nazi report, written the following year for President Roosevelt and filed with Ambassador Joseph Kennedy, which declared that the Church regarded compromise with the Third Reich as “out of the question.”

Archives from American espionage agencies have recently confirmed Pius XII’s active involvement in plots to overthrow Hitler. A pair of newly found letters, written in 1940 on the letterhead of the Vatican’s Secretariat of State, give Pius XII’s orders that financial assistance be sent to Campagna for the explicit purpose of assisting interned Jews suffering from Mussolini’s racial policies. And the Israeli government has finally released Adolf Eichmann’s diaries, portions of which confirm the Vatican’s obstruction of the Nazis’ roundup of Rome’s Jews.

There’s more, a regular flow of new material. Intercepts of Nazi communications released from the United States’ National Archives include such passages as “Vatican has apparently for a long time been assisting many Jews to escape,” in a Nazi dispatch from Rome to Berlin on October 26, 1943, ten days after the Germany’s Roman roundup. New oral testimony from such Catholic rescuers as Monsignor John Patrick Carroll-Abbing, Sister Mathilda Spielmann, Father Giacomo Martegani, and Don Aldo Brunacci insists that Pius XII gave them explicit orders and direct assistance to help persecuted Jews in Italy. The posthumous publication this year of Harold Tittmann’s memoir, Inside the Vatican of Pius XII, is particularly interesting, for in it the American diplomat reveals, for the first time, that Pius XII’s wartime conduct drew upon advice from the German resistance

http://www.firstthings.com/article/2008/12/001-the-end-of-the-pius-wars-1

prinz

Xluna wrote: »

Here's a documentary about his that I've just came across. Hitlers Pope by John Cornwall,a practising Catholic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXRVn_nFHB0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler's_Pope#cite_note-The_Papacy-4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Hitler%27s_Pope

Cornwall is an ex-seminarian with an axe to grind. Years after Hitler's Pope he acknowledged that evidence showed that the picture he painted was not quite accurate.

kelly1

So is it OK to go ahead with the canonization now?

Slav

Unfortunately after WWII no big power wanted the full truth about that war. RCC is no exception I'm afraid.

It is quite clear that RCC and German Nazis were not friends as there were many victims of Nazi regime among Catholic laity and clergy. In Italy the Church managed to co-exist with the authorities without huge sacrifices.

But the Reich and Italy were not the only players in Holocaust. Take Croatia as another example. There are some facts that I'm not very comfortable with:

• The Church and the Ustashi governed State were tightly coupled.
• Many bishops and priests did have very close relations with fascist Ustashi, form the head of the Croatian Church, archbishop of Zagreb, to the commandment of the largest death camp in Croatia, a RCC priest.
• Catholic press in Croatia did publish a lot anti-Semitic stuff; thousands of Jews and Gypsies were slaughtered in Croatia and even more were sent to other places like Auschwitz.
• Organised forced conversion of Serbs to Catholicism did take place with thousands converted under the death threat. Almost half a million Serbs (including thousands of children) were slaughtered probably in the most cruel way in WWII, even by the German Nazis standards.

All the above does not automatically make a book of evidence against the Pope but it raises some very serious concerns. With the genocide of that scale happening just across the Adriatic See it's almost impossible to assume that it was happening without the Pope being informed. It's very unlikely anyway, I think. Or was it just the naive Archbishop of Zagreb fooled by tricky Ustashi? Not very believable either; by all means he was not stupid.

After the war for obvious reasons neither RCC nor the authorities of Communist Yugoslavia were interested in revealing the full truth about the genocide. Unfortunately it is still the case.

As far as Pius XII canonisation is concerned it is probably OK to go ahead with it. After all that very archbishop of Zagreb after being released from the jail was promoted to cardinal by the same Pius XII and then was canonised as blessed and martyr by John Paul II....

Xluna

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I think there is often a misunderstanding as to what secular means. It's can be seen as a by-word for anti-theism (which, I guess, it is in certain cases).

Secular schools or the secular media or a secular state - if they are truly secular - are removed from religion, which is distinct from being anti-religion. Of course the lines are sometimes blued and people become confused.

By secular I mean just purely academic scholarship,objective as possible. I know some people who,when there is some evidence which they don't like, just say "well they're all anti Christian.",even when the evidence is and research method is sound.