I will be posting an interview this weekend with the archeologist at St. Peter’s Basilica necropolis, Pietro Zander. He was at the Knights of Columbus Museum in New Haven, Conn., last week for the opening of an exhibit of Marian images from the Vatican.
Zander graciously gave me a personal tour through the exhibit and explained the significance of some of the paintings. He also talked a bit about his role in the beatification ceremonies for Blessed John Paul II a few days earlier.
Translating for us was Count Enrico Demajo, who heads the Knights of Columbus office in Rome. Count Demajo’s uncle was Count Enrico Galeazzi, an architect who was both the Knights’ representative in Rome and acting governor of Vatican City during World War II. Galeazzi was a friend of Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, who became Pope Pius XII and whose cause for canonization has been hampered by continuing controversy over his alleged inaction in protecting European Jews during the Nazi Holocaust.
Accompanying Zander and Demajo to New Haven was Salesian Father Agostino Corbanese, who oversees an archive of the Vatican Secretariat of State. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See’s Secretary of State, asked Father Corbanese to inspect the Knights’ New Haven archives of Count Galeazzi’s papers.
I sat down for a few minutes with Father Corbanese, and we discussed what the Galeazzi papers might reveal about Pius XII and the controversy over his cause.
What brings you to New Haven?
The superiors in the Secretariat of State, Cardinal Bertone and the sostituto [assistant Secretary of State] … asked me to come and see, especially from the point of view if, due to the closeness of Count Galeazzi with, at the time, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, who later became Pope Pius XII, and they had close links of friendship, just to see whether there were documents, hand-written documents, or documents of any kind, coming from the desk of Cardinal Pacelli, or Pope Pius XII. And I went through all this material.
What did you find?
I found, interestingly enough, due to the difficulties of the time…Count Galeazzi was asked to bring with him a letter signed by Pope Pius XII addressed to President [Franklin D.] Roosevelt. We were more or less at the end of the war, and diplomatic channels were difficult to follow, and so on. And since Count Galeazzi was a man to whom Pope Pius XII gave much relevance and attention, he was asked to do that. ...
[The letter, which asked for a halt to the Allied bombing of Rome, was not delivered because the Italian government signed an agreement with the Allies while Galeazzi was on his way to Washington.]
Count Galeazzi died [in 1986], and the heirs — Enrico Demajo and, I suppose, the family — gave all this material to the Knights of Columbus, and they went through a tremendous amount of work in ordering all this material. Let’s say that 90%, 80% of the material there are plans, reports on what Count Galeazzi did. He was the engineer, he was the man responsible for building and restoration of the papal palace. He was in charge of a special commission created by the newly-elected Pope Pius XII to look after the maintenance and restoration of the buildings. The buildings are so old that they need continuous care. So, many of his papers are requests for restoration, how restoration was carried on, what the expenses were, what colleagues were involved in these works of the restoration, and this has nothing to do with the life of the Pope himself.
One letter carried the signature of Pope Pius XII, and it was a permit, an invitation to authorities of one country in Europe, to let Count Galeazzi go through, deliver what he had to deliver, and come back with something he was supposed to collect and bring it to Rome. So, it was a visa — let’s call it that.
What was it that he had to deliver?
The little card, bearing the autographed signature of Pope Pius XII, the size of an ordinary postcard, carried no indication whatsoever about the identification of what the envoy was supposed to carry with him through the boundaries of the neighboring country, in the terrible and frightening wartime in Europe.
…
Was there anything that you discovered here that might have some bearing on the cause of beatification of Pope Pius XII?
Yes. I know that the archives have been opened and will continue to be opened. The material may be of this kind: reports sent to Count Galeazzi from various people — articles, commentaries — not many — picking up criticisms, explaining situations, backgrounds, problems. They may be useful. There are a few hints to what the Pope did to help the Jews in Rome and in Europe, but, as I said, the purpose of the archives and the purpose of the collection of these papers by Count Galeazzi was not to make a study of that particular…he received letters to bring them to the attention of the Secretariat of State, and some of these letters had this kind of content. A number of these letters were typed — as they used to do in those times — in two or three different copies, carbon copies. Of course the original is not here because the original was meant to go to the pope’s office or the cardinal’s office, wherever. But they kept the copy. And they may be of some interest.
You have here in the States Sister Margherita Marchione, and she came, I was told by the archivist. The archivist told me unfortunately she remained only one day. ... And some of these materials were, can be, or will be, useful to her, because she continues to study and to present, to understand where these criticisms against Pius XII originated: where they came from, why, who picked them up for granted. That is her particular idea. That is her enterprise, and she wrote piles of books, collecting material, demonstrating that what was brought about like a flag — Pius XII didn’t do enough, he did too little, he kept silent, things like that — they’re not true because she goes on discovering witnesses and testimonies. So this material can be related to this kind of study she continues to carry on.
What is holding up the cause? Is there any movement on it?
I think that while the cause is going on, Pope Pius XII has already been proclaimed a venerable — meaning that his life, what he did, his attitudes, are ones of a real strong Christian — the virtues as they say have been studied and approved….There are some miracles being studied at the moment.
One of the major difficulties is the opposition against Pius XII from a number of Jewish groups, individual people, associations, who are still imbued with that kind of criticism: Pope Pius XII didn’t do enough, he kept silent, he didn’t defend the Jews.
...
Besides this, as I mentioned, is the fact of concretely, deeply, with serenity, with capacity, historical understanding, study the material, and of course the material dealing with the Second World War is as immense as the world is.
So I think any time, for any reason around the world, there is a discussion you have to take the points and calmly, nicely, with strength you have to analyze them, you have to come to a conclusion. You cannot say yes or no from the very beginning.
Especially since this seems to have stemmed from this play by Rolf Hochhuth, and who knows that that was not a smear campaign begun by the communists.
It would be extremely useful to go back to one of the latest books by Sister Margarita…. She maintains that, let’s call it, the “enemy” of Pius XII was the communist regime. Some people used to say that it was the Germans. She maintains it was not the Germans who put their loud voices and criticisms; it was the communists, it was Moscow — Moscow which tried to demolish the figure and authority of Pius XII, which was taken up by plays, by writers, media agencies and so on, for granted. Now Sister Margarita has clearly indicated that historical line of the Russians being behind the scenes because they saw in Pius XII the great enemy of the expansion of their power all over the world.
And, according to George Weigel, they tried to do the same with Pope John Paul II.
Exactly. Things keep repeating.
Comments
Post a Comment
Moscow. Makes sense because Our Lady of Fatima requested “Russia” be consecrated by the Pope & bishops to Her Immaculate Heart and only Pope Pius XII came close to doing it. He consecrated Russia but he didn’t know it had to be with all the bishops. It it wasn’t done then Russia would spread her errors throughout the world! Watch videos at the Fatima Conference in Rome at: http://www.consecrationnow.com
Pius XII is a venerable and he will be declared a Saint…The Church (and maybe during Pope Benedict XVI pontificate) will ultimately do what is deservedly just based on “facts”. Personal “opinions” have no bearing on the declaration ...it is a supernatural event. The real question is why single out just Pius XII? The answer is most probably that the Jews hate him as they hate Our Blessed Lord…“blind guides” as Our Lord called them in His time and little has changed in 2000 years. Why not roosevelt who turned away the St Louis with 600 Jews, or stalin who murdered 3 times more their number than is alleged to have been done by the nazis…and what exactly did england or france contribute to the aid of the jews? The jews were NOT the only people to suffer during WWII.
Why didn’t Pope PiusXII offer himself as a sacrifice to stop not only the slaughter of Jews but also to stop Christians from killing each other in a world war?
I think that the reason that even some of the people who admit that Pius XII wasn’t a National Socialist claim that he didn’t do enough to save Jewish lives is the same reason that some claim that John Paul II didn’t do enough to prevent clergy sexual abuse—to some people a pope is always bad and cold never do enough good to satisfy them.
I remember Pope Pius xii and I always thought him to be a very holy Pope, I was a little girl then. From what I have heard from People who knew him well,said he did a lot more than people know. He also from what I heard had to be careful what he said and did for Hitler was keeping an eye on thing he said and did and Pope pius xii knew he could jeopardize more anquish on the jews, so he had to be discreet in order to help the jews in a manner that would save more of them. To me he is a saint, even the jews at that time praised him for the work he did for them.
I respectfully disagree. Being in the Seat of Peter I expect more of a sacrifice from our Popes based on the martyrdom of Christ and of those who followed Him. They were not discreet and conversion was miraculous because of their example of martyrdom.
@ Ronlad King Have you…done as much?
Felix, I am stating what I expect from our spiritual leaders. My expectation is not out of line with our faith. The general laity follow the example of their spiritual leaders in terms of how much they will sacrifice for their faith. What do you think he could have done?
The Pope performed heroically and saintly actions. And I do not recall the duties of the Pope including protecting the very people who, to this day, continue their obstinate rejection of the Perfect Society established by Jesus.
To demand such actions of Peter is an absurdity. It would have been like asking Peter himself to die for the Synagogue which is simply preposterous.
As for the Jews qua Jews, since when do they have a say in who we Canonise or nor? Politely tell them to mind their own business and try and explain why not one Jewish Organisation stepped forward to try and save the 100 million Christians slaughtered by Communism.
Ronlad King, Felix has a point. We who post here are, in our ways, spiritual leaders also. I think it a valid point that those amongst us who are critical of others need also to be even more critical of ourselves. If you already are, then very good.
But more seriously, a realistic view of Nazism shows that public and overt resistance was futile. If Pius had offered such resistance in 1941-42, he possibly would not have survived into 1943. You and I might applaud that from an idealistic view, but then he would not have been present to save the Jews of Rome.
The worst moral choices are never clear-cut.
Mr. King, what would you have had him do? What good would it do to more “forcefully” have spoken out against the Nazi’s treatment of Jews (which he already did)? How well does it go for Christians in Moslem lands when a spiritual leader speaks out against Muslims’ treatment of Christians? Really, you yhink he could hagve “sacrificed” himself in exchange or some silliness like that? He has already sacrificed his good name because of slanderers by doing things behind the scenes. Perhaps you should think things through a little more.
I continue to be amazed at your comments and, yet again, I expected such comments. It was “silly” for Christ to die on the Cross? St. Max offered himself for someone else. He is an example of what I expect from the Chair of Peter. Has anyone seen the WWI movie Jeaux Noel that depicts an actual event in which warring Catholic Christians stopped killing each other when Christmas arrived and they took Communion together and afterwards intentionally missed their targets for killing each other?
In WWII we had Catholic Christians killing each other and the Pope did not take a stand against that.
My observation comes from Our Lord’s free choice to be stripped naked and tortured to death in order to save us. What other way is there than than “silly” way? That is God’s Way.
We Christian Catholics have had 265 Popes and, off the top of my head, I recall that, oh, the first 33, or so, were martyred.
You may have to read some history to satisfy your desire for Popes being martyred - although, to be fair to us, Pope Blessed John Paul II was almost killed.And where in the New Testament, or Papal Encyclical, or Ecumenical Conciliar Document, is it taught that your personal opinion is normative and binding on others?
Ronald:
You seem so certain that Pius XII didn’t offer himself in sacrifice? You also seem particularly keen on tying up heavy burdens for others to carry while exempting yourself from that. The world is full of war right now. So do we all get a pass while we demand that you go off and sacrifice yourself to stop Obama’s adventure in Libya? Can we phrase questions with the presumption of your guilt as you do in presuming Pius’ guilt? How about, “Why doesn’t Ronald King sacrifice himself to stop the US wars abroad?” How’s that? That’s way we start with the bases loaded against you and the assumption that whatever it is you do all day, it’s selfish and cowardly and that you never offer yourself in sacrifice in any way. If it’s okay when you do it to Pius it must be okay when others do it to you, no?
The attack on Saint-to-be Pope Pius XII is indefensible and it is not surprising that some of the attack comes from putative Christian Catholics. There is the New Testament example of Judas, for instance
He was a great and brave man and I was proud to have my photo taken before his Statuary in the Basilica of St Peter’s last year.
It is much easier to attack him from the anonymous safety of one’s house because, unlike what Saint-to-be Pope Pius XII faced, it is unlikely that Nazi Tanks surround the attacker as they surrounded the Vatican
Why are you so threatened by the truth?
Mr. Shea and I are responding to your indefensible tactics. Why don’t you just bear with what you think is unfair - you know like Jesus did during His Passion. Why are you so quick to complain?
I am not threatened by what you are doing. And what you are doing is not the truth. What you are doing is manifestly unfair and, as Mr Shea has pointed-out, hypocritical
Ronald:
Why are you sitting here doing nothing but attacking a dead man about whose interior life you know nothing when you should be out sacrificing yourself? Why are you so threatened by the truth?
I might agree with the arguments presented by Ronlad King had he occupied the chair of Peter before and during World War II. He would at least have had the spelndid opportunity to put his money where his mouth is. Barring that he ought to be decent enough at this late date to give credit where credit is due.
I suggest he read the several books authored by Sister Marguerita Marchione (who knew Pius personally) as well as “The Defamation of Pius XII” by Ralph McInnerny; “The Pius War” co-edited by Joseph Bottum and Rabbi David G. Dalin; “But for the Grace of God,” by Msgr John Patrick Carroll-Abbing, founder of Boys’ Town of Italy who was in Rome during the war; “Pius XII and the Holocaust,” a reader published by the Catholic League; and “The Jesuits and the Third Reich,” by Father Vincent A. Lapom,arda, S.J.
The fact of history is that the Catholic Church under the leadership of Pope Pius XII saved the lives of more Jews during the war than all the other institutions combined.
Mark, You interpreted it as an attack. I am stating what I expect should be done from the Chair of Peter. If you cannot understand that perspective so be it.
Mark, anytime you want to meet me to talk about this face to face I will. As a matter of fact you can reach me June 18th at the U of WA Medical Center the day after my operation. You have my name, feel free to visit.
Vermont, “manifestly unfair”? You have not even thought about what I have said. Instead, you reacted emotionally because it goes against the comfort of your beliefs. I just ran and prayed the Rosary while you were reacting with indignation and I told Pious XII that I was not attacking him. We must learn from the past through the lens of Christ. If not we let 55,000,000 babies die because of our fear of losing out comfort.
Mark Shea, To paraphrase, those who are given much, much is expected. The SEAT OF PETER IS MUCH.
Bill, I am decent enough to look at history and measure that history against Christ on the Cross. Behavior speaks louder than words in a book. Our Lord said there is no greater love than to give one’s life for his brother. That is the measuring stick.
The Pope condemned events in China in “Ad Sinarum Gentem”, about three years after the Maoists took power. That being so, why did he not do likewise when the Nazis were in power ? Or are the two cases too different to be comparable ?
It just seems a bit strange to be outspoken in condemning one form of totalitarianism (despite the effects this might have), while not condemning another form of totalitarianism (despite the effects this might have). The argument that he might have hurt those he wanted to help, therefore he did not explicitly & outspokenly condemn the Nazis, does not seem quite airtight, given his condemnation of events in China.
Has anyone written the definitive biography of Pope Pius XII?
@Ronlad King Pope John Paul II was not Beautified because of his pontificate nor will Pius XII. Each demonstrated a life of almost perfect virtue in this world…“For what have I to do to judge them that are without? Do not you judge them that are within? For them that are without, God will judge. Put away the evil one from among yourselves.” 1 Cor 5:12-13
How curious is the world, when we as sinners decide who is saint?
Dear Mr. King. You frame all disagreements with your personal opinion as some deficit, ignorance, or sin in those who do not agree with you.
And then you ask Mr. Shea to fight you. Just like Jesus would do.
I have not one more thing to write to one like you.
Vermont Crank, Do you really believe what you have written? I told him if he wanted to see me face to face to discuss this that I would be at the University of WA. Medical Center for an operation and he could visit me the day after my operation for a face to face discussion since he and you insinuated that I was cowardly. Your distortion of what I have written is profoundly troubling to me. I cannot believe how some readers twist my words to suit their prejudice.
Felix, I am not judging. You are judging based on what your cognitive distortion of what I have written. I simply stated that I expect more from the Seat of Peter. Please read everything I have written without prejudice. You only see what you want to see.
VC:
Don’t be silly. Ronald wasn’t threatening to fight me, just inviting me to talk.
Thanks Mark. Hope you’re having fun with the kids.
Oh, ok, Mr. Shea. Thanks for the correction
“The Pope condemned events in China in “Ad Sinarum Gentem”, about three years after the Maoists took power. That being so, why did he not do likewise when the Nazis were in power ?”“
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_14031937_mit-brennender-sorge_en.html
Vermont Crank:
Rabbi David G. Dalin wrote “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope,”
and Israel Zolli, the arch-rabbi of Rome during the war years who wrote “Before the Dawn” to explain why he took the baptismal name “Eugenio” in honor of Pius XII,
have written about Pius XII—but the Catholic-haters refuse to read these books, and prefer to follow the KGB’s lead.
Ever hear about them?
Ronald King,
Is that your defense of your attacks on Pius XII, that you believe that god endowed him with super-powers that eliminated the need for him to be prudent?
Again, read “The Myth of Hitlers’s Pope” and “Before the Dawn,” and if you don’t think that those books describe a saint, then no human is good enough to be declared a saint for you.
Mr. King, old movies depicting Christians killing Christians would never satisfy any history professor I ever studied under. And just what it has to do with the alleged “silence” of Pius XII baffles me. You may fault Pius for not shedding his own blood during the war, but where’s the courage in demeaning the reputation of a man who is no longer alive to defend himself?
Manticore, you are correct in pointing to the condemnation of Mao by the Pope.I call to your attention that Msgr. Carroll-Abbing in his book points to the resentment of the Nazis toward Cardinal Pacelli. “They had rightly attributed to him a large share in the drafting of the Encyclical Mit brennender Sorge, Pius XI’s scathing denunciation of Nazism. Between 1933 and 1939, as Cardinal Secretary of State, he delivered more than 55 protests to the Nazi government.”
@“Posted by Vermont Crank on Friday, May 13, 2011 11:42 AM (EDT):
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_14031937_mit-brennender-sorge_en.html”
## Fair point: but although “Mit Brennender Sorge” does condemns the Nazis, it was an act of Pius XI - and although there is a cause for Pius XI, the one under dfiscussion is the cause for Pius XII. Pius XI is not the one being accused of not speaking out clearly against the Nazis; Pius XII is. Which is why the action of Pius XII in condemning the Maoist action in China, but not the actions of the Nazis a few years before, is puzzling.
Thanks all the same though :)
Posted by Bill Loughlin on Friday, May 13, 2011 3:10 PM (EDT):...
I call to your attention that Msgr. Carroll-Abbing in his book points to the resentment of the Nazis toward Cardinal Pacelli. “They had rightly attributed to him a large share in the drafting of the Encyclical Mit brennender Sorge, Pius XI’s scathing denunciation of Nazism. Between 1933 and 1939, as Cardinal Secretary of State, he delivered more than 55 protests to the Nazi government.”
## Thanks for the info & the quotation - but that doesn’t really explain why Pius XII didn’t complain on his own account, during his own pontificate. The issue would not be terribly important, except that someone being considered for beatification needs to be beyond criticism or as nearly so as possible. Something the Church doesn’t need is the beatification of someone whose reputation has not been cleared of all accusations that suggest he was morally compromised.
Bill L. Read my comments carefully. I am tired of interpreting what you misinterpret.
Dear Manticore. So, he is being castigated for not writing what had alraedy been written by another Pope?
I"n fact it was Secretary of State Pacelli (later Pius XII) who reinforced Cardinal Faulhaber’s first draft of what became the 1937 encyclical Mit brennender Sorge”
http://www.chivalricorders.org/vatican/piusXII.htm
Dear Mr Schenk. Oh yes. Excellent citations..and there are many others.
He was a great, holy, and brave man and how others react to him reveals what is in their hearts, not his.
Those courting calumny had better exercise caution when it comes to the question of Saint-to-be, Pius XII.
It is easy, I mean REALLY easy, to google the truth about the situation.
Hell’s Bells, baby. Back in the day even the New York Times got it right…
http://users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html
You are not getting what I am saying. Go online to World War 1 and look up the Christmas Truce. I am not against Pius XII. I am simply stating that while in prayer one day five years ago it came to me how spiritually powerful the Seat of Peter actually is and what effect the outward action of sacrificial love would accomplish in times of a world crisis. While still praying the Rosary it came to me how Christ’s Sacrifice converted some of those who killed him. He also told his apostles that they would perform greater deeds than He. That influenced me to write Pope Benedict to lead us on a pilgrimage to Darfur to care for the widows and orphans and show the world what our faith is in action rather than words. I wrote him in 2006 and received a reply about a month later from his secretary in DC expressing his concern about the Darfur suffering and suggesting I read his first encyclical God Is Love. I was disappointed because I was ready to go to Darfur with him. Then the question came to me about the impact Pius XII might have had on WW II if he had gone to the front lines of a major battle and asked Christians on both sides of the killing to stop and pray with him to end the slaughter of each other and the Jews. That is how I see my faith working. No limits in how the action of God’s Love can work with us and through us when we are free from the ways of the world.
Dear Mr. King. Everybody knows what you are saying but nobody agrees with your personal opinion about what the Pope ought to have done.
You keep insisting he should have done what you desired he do and it is passing obnoxious to keep reading you hammering away at him.
He had Doctorates in Theology, Canon Law, and Civil Law and his entire public life was an example of saintly Catholic Orthopraxis. He was a Priest; he was a Diplomat: he was a Pope; and for you not to give him the benefit of the doubt that he knew better than you what had to be done makes you look like a strident fool in your repeated insistence that you are right about what he ought to have done.
You do not know what is best for others. You really do not.
Try a little humility, sir. And quit trying to dogmatise your personal opinions
VC, You say you understand but you do not. By the way, I have worked with suffering people over 30 years and your telling me that I do not know what is best for others is just plain mean. You keep projecting your distorted perceptions on to me. I see what you see but for some reason you cannot understand what I am saying.
What is the reason for the name Vermont Crank?
There are different forms of martyrdom. To presume that Pius XII was called to the
martyrdom of shedding blood is just that - a presumption and a lack of trust that Pius was led in his actions by the
Holy Spirit. Had the Spirit led him to die, I believe Pius would have gone willingly. But he Was led to a different martyrdom. His severe fasts in solidarity w the suffering Jews led to his emaciated condition, as can be seen in photos of the period. He was born to a wealthy family, and inherited great wealth - which he spent to ransom Jews, pay for them to be extradited to safe havens, paid for those in hiding to be fed kosher food. He died broke. To claim that he did not sacrifice himself is truly bizarre - and just plain wrong.
Thank you Theresa. You have reached the heart of the problem raised by Ronald King. Clearly, Pius’ actions were governed by Almighty God, and not by any moral cowardice implicit in Mr. King’s criticism. Again, that you Theresa.
Manticore, it’s true that Mit brennender Sorge bore Pius XI’s name, but the fact is that Cardinal Pacelli had served in Germany for several years and was fluent in German, whereas his predecessor was not. Furthermore, shortly before the publication of the encyclical, the Pope received Cardinal Faulhaber and two other German bishops who thanked him for the encyclical. The pope told tham to thank Pacelli: “He has done it all.”
Cardinal Pacelli was outspoken in his critiicism of Nazism years before ascending to the papacy. He denounced them as “miserable plagiarizers who dress up ancient errors in new tinsel” while speaking to 250,000 pilgrims at Lourdes, April 28, 1935. At Notre Dame, in Paris, on March 21, 1937,he described Germany as “that noble and powerful nation whom bad shepherds would lead astray into an idolatry of race.” Which helps explain the bitterness of the Nazis toward Cardinal Pacelli following his election to the papacy.
Dear Mr. King. It is clear that you feel at liberty to criticise a saintly Pope while thinking others must be constrained from opposing your personal opinion so there really is no basis for an exchange and as Saint Bill Belichick saays;it is what it is.
Say, how ‘bout them Red Sox?
You do not know nor undestand what I think. I am simply pointint out an alternative to what he did do to oppose the slaughter. If you can’t see what I see so be it. I am finished.
Zenit news article on the discovery of more documents showing what Pius XII did to denounce anti-Semitic laws:
“ROME, MAY 17, 2011 (Zenit.org).- The United States and Great Britain discouraged Pope Pius XII from speaking out against Nazi brutality, warning the Pope that a public protest could have grave consequences.
The Allies’ recommendation is reported in a document unearthed recently by the New York-based Pave the Way Foundation, founded by an American Jew, Gary Krupp.”
Read the rest here:
http://www.zenit.org/rssenglish-32598
The introduction to Mit brennender Sorge was added by Cardinal Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII) dealing with the historical background of the Reichskonkordat|Concorda between the Catholic Church and the Third Reich. At the time Pius XI credited the encyclical to Cardinal Pacelli. In fact, Pacelli is credited with changing the title from Mit grosser Sorge (With great concern) to the more strident Mit brennender Sorge (With burning concern). “When Pius XI was complimented on the publication, in 1937, of his encyclical denouncing Nazism, Mit Brennender Sorge, his response was to point to his Secretary of State and say bluntly, ‘The credit is his.’ “
Pham, Heirs of the Fisherman: Behind the Scenes of Papal Death and Succession (2005), p. 45
@Vermont Crank who posted on Saturday, May 14, 2011 7:39 AM (EDT):
“Dear Manticore. So, he is being castigated for not writing what had alraedy been written by another Pope?
In fact it was Secretary of State Pacelli (later Pius XII) who reinforced Cardinal Faulhaber’s first draft of what became the 1937 encyclical Mit brennender Sorge””
No. I’m just wondering why, if endangering Catholics in China did not silence him, the danger of endangering Catholics in Nazi-occupied should do so. Mention of his part in “Mit Brennender Sorge” is fine as far as it goes, but mentioning it does not explain why there was no equivalent of “Ad Sinarum Gentem” for the Nazis once Cardinal Pacelli had been elected Pope.
What Pius XI did or thought or was, does not show that Pius XII is a fit person to be beatified or canonised; and it is Pius XII who is under discussion, not Pius XI.
If the argument is that Pius XII was silent because he did not want to to endanger the victims of the Nazis, that does not explain why he helped Pius XI with “Mit Brennender Sorge”. If OTOH it was possible for him to be involved in that, why was he silent once he became Pope ? Not, apparently, because of the danger to Catholics - that did not stop him condemning what happened in China, under another totalitarian government.
Because there is a cause for his beatification, his behaviour comes under a scrutiny it would not invite if he were a mere common-or-garden Pope. Putative Beati or Saints by contrast attract very close scrutiny, because of the Church’s teaching on her holiness. And it is absolutely right that they should be scrutinised, as searchingly as possible. Behaviour that would tolerable in a very upright but not saintly Catholic is not necessarily tolerable in someone with a reputation for sanctity. The Church has been very strict in the past when examining the lives of those whose cause for beatification has been opened, and so it should be.
Is Pius XII fit to be beatified ? I have no idea. Those in favour tend to concentrate on the War, and to ignore events in China, which is a shame.
Thanks for the info :)
@Posted by Bill Loughlin on Saturday, May 14, 2011 2:22 PM (EDT):
Thanks :) I knew some of that, but not all. There were about 60 violations of the Concordat, and it is clear that the Reich had no liking for Cardinal Pacelli. This does not address the issue of or alleged inaction or silence during the War. It might be worth asking those who make the criticisms why they make them, so as to clear the air.
Manticore,the critics who truly are fouling the air, need to examine their consciences. The answer to Pius’ “silence” surely will be found in the lesson he learned from the Nazis’ response to the public protest of the bishops of Holland, a lesson ignored by his critics. One wonders why? I can only surmise that those gifted with 20/20 hindsight in reality are blind to the reality the pontiff was faced with. He is criticized for not speaking out in behalf of Europe’s Jews. Had more Jews been slaughtered because of his public denunciation of Nazism, would his critics praise him for that? Check out the Zenit news release dated May 17, 2011, mentioned earlier by Theresa, regarding British and U.S. documents referencing the pope.
Millions of people were slaughtered in WW2 -about 53 million. Twelve million people ( of all faiths ) perished in the Nazi concentration camp. Pope Pius 12 was not God. He was just a man albeit a special man but he did not have the power of God. He could not just snap his fingers to make everything alright again so to speak. I believe Pope Pius to be a good man and he did what he could in very trying times.
I sometimes have to shake my head when I hear some people say Pope Pius 12th should have done more to save more Jews. Who are these people? How dare they demand something they wanted someone else to do. Are they God? Were they in the Vatican knowing EXACTLY what was going on at the time? All they are are just complainers and we all know who complain the loudest - right?
I also believe the Vatican is cow towing to Israel right now and that is the only reason they are not pursuing the path of having Pope Pius 12th beatified. They are listening to Israel complaining about a very good man and it makes me sick to the back teeth. I wonder if the roles were reversed .. would we see Israel helping catholics? I know the answer with a resounding NO !!
What is wrong with seeing Pope Pius XII offering himself as a sacrifice for his sisters and brothers who were being slaughtered and slaughtering each other. St. Max Kolbe did it as an example of the path of martyrdom. I have no doubts about Pius XII being a good man and I am not criticizing him. I am simply stating that there was another path he could have taken and that we should not underestimate the spiritual influence that is present in the position of Pope.
Ronald King,
What’s the matter with Pius XII abandoning his duty to do all that he could to protect the innocent (as he, in fact, did) to showboat? Everything.
Read “Before the Dawn” by the wartime arch-rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli (who took the baptismal name “Eugenio” in honor of Eugenio Pacelli, Pius XII) or “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope” by Rabbi David G. Dalin, if you want to disabuse yourself of some of that self-righteousness
Don, Just because I point out something you do not like nor understand you do not have to call me self-righteous.
Ronakld King,
Have you read either of the books I pointed out yet? And if so, why do you continue to deny the truth—that Pius XII was a great protector of the Jews?
Don, I haven’t read the books you referenced. I agree he protected the Jews within the limits of his human influence. I am talking about the spiritual influence of sacrificial love and how we underestimate that influence by limiting our choices to those of human logic. As a leader of the Church the Pope has tremendous spiritual influence on all of the members as to how the faith will be expressed. Where the head goes the body will follow.
Ronald King,
If you haven’t read either book I suggested to you, don’t condemn Pius XII out of bigoted ignorance. Of course Pius XII used all of his “spiritual” influence to protect the Jews—Just read how Hitler condemns the Catholic Church in Mein Kampf. He also sheltered as many of them as he humanly could—which is why his activities during world War II speak well of him.
Dear Don, Who is condemning Pius XII? I’m not. It is obvious you can’t understand nor want to attempt to understand my comments. Goodbye.
Ronald King,
So you insist that you’re not condemning Pius XII, yet you write that “As leader of the the Church the Pope has tremendous spiritual influence on all the mambers as to how the faith will be expressed. Where the head goes the body will follow.”—that isn’t an attack on the character of Pius XII? My point was that, as “Before the Dawn” and The Myth of Hitler’s Pope” point out, Pius XII used his spiritual influence—and means—to protect the Jews, and should be praised for all that he did.
That is not an attack.
King,
...And i’m simply pointing out the truth. Anyone who denies Pius XII’s goodness, if not sanctity, is either ignorant or bigoted.
Your truth.
King,
Yes, my truth. on this planet, based on facts. What are your “truths” based on, besides bigotry?
First of all stop the name calling or go to confession, please. Secondly, my statements are based on Christ’s giving Himself to the Cross for everyone’s salvation.
Ronald King,
I should go to confession because I pointed out that what you claim are “statements…based pm Christ’s giving himself on the Cross for everyone’s salvation” are actually false attacks on Pius XII’s character?
I do go to Confession, but not for defending the truth.
And your claim that the Facts that I cite are only my truth, and that I should go to Confession for pointing out your canards, isn’t name calling?
Don you said,”...ignorant or bigoted. “What are your truths based on, besides bigotry?”
Ronald King,
I asked a simple, honest question. After I pointed out two books that defend the truth about Pius XII, “Before the Dawn” by Eugenio Zolli and “the Myth of Hitler’s Pope” by Rabbi David G. Dalin, you continued to defame his honor without reading either book.
So which is it, are you deliberately ignorant and refuse to read those books, or are you just bigoted?
After all, you’re the one who posted all those posts attacking the honor of a dead man. I’m sorry if your skin is so thin.
There you go again. Assuming you know my heart and intentions. Just stop. I go to the Cross and view human actions through the Sacrifice of Christ and that is all. Stop being paranoid and projecting your thin skin onto me.
Ronald King,
Writing to yourself again? Read the books that I cited and start viewing Pius XII through the light of truth.
You read the books and I trust your judgment on their content. I am talking about the spiritual path of Christ on the Cross. It is different from yours and the world’s perspective. Because it is different from your perception you believe I am attacking PiusXII—mistaken belief. I do not doubt what God has shown me in my prayers and contemplations. God Bless you Don. Goodbye. I am now disengaging from this thread and will no longer receive any notificaitons.
Ronald King, Christ has apersonal message for you:
“Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye? You hypocrite! Remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.” (Matthew 7:1-5)
In the city where I live, one man lost his business to a boycott led by abortion supporters, and others spent time in jail. How much did you suffer for opposing the slaughter of innocents called abortion?
On July 26, 1942, a pastoral letter from the Primate of the Netherlands was read in all the Catholic churches of the country. (Anne Frank mentions this in her diary.) In retaliation, on August 2 the Nazis sent all Catholic Jews (including St. Edith Stein) to the death camps while leaving the Protestant Jews alone. Jewish leaders asked Pius XII to be more careful.
But he still did what he could. On February 28 1945 the Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem Isaac Herzog wrtote that “The people of Israel will never forget what His Holiness and his illustrious delgates, inspired by the eternal principles of religion which form the very foundations of true civilization, are doing for us unfortunate brothers and sisters in the most tragic hour of our history.”
When Pius XII died, Golda Meir praised him before the U.N.
In your copy you mention that Count Enrico DeMajio is Count Enrico Galeazzi’s nephew. Enrico D is in actuality Count Galeazzi’s: Grandson.
Enrico is a friend,I just thought that you might want to correct the error.
Copy was in regard to a visit to K of C to discuss P.P XII sainthood.
Tom
The Jew’s Don’t believe Christ is there Savior. I do not understand why the Catholic Church alway’s tries to accomadate every non Christine religion. He was our Pope and we should canonize him it is are right and we should not let any other religion dictate ours.
First of all, Pope Pius XII did speak out against Nazi treatment of the Jews….
Secondly, if God wanted him to be martyred, He would have arranged for it to happen. We might simply accept that the Holy Spirit was protecting this pope since he was needed for further work later on. Hitler did want Pius to be arrested and brought to him, and events worked against it. Again, perhaps the Holy Spirit protected Pius or perhaps the Virgin Mary did so..as she protected John Paul II when he was shot….
Hmmm…It seems as if we don’t quite understand the office of the Papacy! The Pope has an almost unbearable workload. He must be the Spiritual Leader of the Church, address wrongs, correct deviations from the truth, encourage his flock, take care of finances, etc. The Pope is only one man. In my opinion, he did as much as he could. He chose the unglamorous way, serving behind the scenes. Had he spoken out loud against the Nazis, what would have happened? They simply would have killed him in addition to the Jews. He would not have helped them one bit by his death. My father once told me about how he smuggled Jews out by saying that they were going on a pilgrimage. That’s only one example of his secret help. If you want to know the truth, you have to look at both sides. Jews obviously don’t particularly like Catholics. If you only take their word for it (or the secular media), then you will have a very one-sided view. So research prayerfully (on REPUTABLE websites; simply googling will not cut it), and remember that the Pope is NOT perfect. The Church has never taught that. Impeccability is not the same as Infallibility…God Bless.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.