The Holy See and Hitler's Germany

Please give my Amazon book a helpful vote - https://www.amazon.com/review/R2W9P1HNZWF3RD/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

This is a book that is thick with details. It is virtually all trees and nothing much in the way of a forest. The writing is scholarly, but it is in no way a “page turner.” Nonetheless it fills in a lot of the details that are skipped over by other books.

The book essentially focuses on the diplomatic career of Eugenio Pacelli prior to his elevation to the papacy in 1939. There is a preface and three main chapters that take the reader through Pacelli's diplomatic career. The chapter titles are:

1. “The German and European Policy of the Vatican 1904 -20.”
2. “Vatican Foreign Policy 1920- 1929.”
3. ““The Foreign Policy of the Vatican under Cardinal Secretary of State Pacelli 1930 – 1939.”

For each of these chapters there a multiple subheadings that takes the reader to areas of interest. The book is well-provided with informative, scholarly footnotes.

I was disturbed with the preface. This is a book that elects to start with a reference to “The Deputy.” Worse, the author refers to Hannah Arendt's impression that the author of The Deputy, Rolf Hochhuth, was a legitimate source of historical information. Nonetheless, the author does fairly point out that while the Vatican does as good or worse in its diplomacy as other states, in fact, the Vatican is not a state, but a spiritual power that uses its spiritual authority. Accordingly, it is not unfair to judge it by a higher standard than applied to secular powers.

Fortunately, this is the end of subjecting history to the ends of moralizing. After this point we are served the facts, or, when theories are discussed, they are identified as theories.

Because this is a fact-laden book without a real overarching theme, the interest turns to the facts, many of which I found surprising in light of my prior reading.

For example, after reading The Holy Reich, I was under the impression that the early Nazi movement was more pro-Catholic than it later became. This would not seem to be the case according to Besier. The Hitler Putsch of November 8 and 9, 1923 left little impression on Pacelli. (P. 32.) Pacelli did warn the Vatican Secretary of State against the Naitonalists: “Situation still critical. The Nationalists rouse the people against the clergy, especially against [...]Faulhaber.” (Dispatch of November 12, 1923, p. 33.) Pacelli also warned Gasparri on November 14, 1923 of the “fundamentally anti-Catholic character of the movement.” (p. 33.) Besier writes:

“Pacelli reported in detail on the anti-Catholic outbursts against the clergy ‘with the followers of Hitler and Ludendorff...incite the people'; church people had thus been exposed to abuse and mockery. A central target for malice had been Archbishop Faulhaber, ‘who in a sermon on 4 November and in a letter to the Reich Chancellor had criticized persecution of the Jews.” (p. 33.) Pacelli, however , criticized the Catholic associations for failing to come to the aid of Faulhaber, partly from weakness and partly from confusion. (p. 33.) “Soon afterwards he informed the Cardinal Secretary of State of a “vulgar and violent campaign” waged in the press by the Hitler party against Catholics and Jews. (p. 34.) Faulhaber too, with whom he was in close contact, condemned the National Socialist doctrine and agitation. (p. 34.) The theme of National Socialism remained in his reports because the Vatican harboured the feat “that from this movement Christian doctrine in general and the Catholic Church in particular were threatened by growing dangers which should not be underestimated.” (p. 34.) In the Spring of 1924, Pacelli condemned the ‘vulgar and violent campaign of the volkisch press against the Holy See, concluding that this movement regarded Catholics and Jews as their worst enemies.” (p. 34.) Pacelli emphasized the dangerous of the ultra-nationalist press. (p. 34.) The nationalist press ran articles which put the Holy See alongside the Jews as the enemy of Germany. (p. 35.) Pacelli advised that”nationalism is perhaps the most perilous heresy of our time.” (p. 35.)

My interest in this area was kicked off by Christopher Hitchens slur that Goebbels was excommunicated for marrying a Protestant. I have never found any evidence that he was excommunicated, but it is clear that Goebbel's marriage effectively put him outside of the Catholic communion. Besier offers this detail about Goebbels from a character study from Berlin nuncio Msgr Orsenigo:

“Goebbels is one of the best educated and most active of the ministers. He is a Catholic by religion, and his past years, especially his youth, were spent in a Catholic atmosphere. He completed his studies with the help of a scholarship from the Albertus-Magnus Society, and in his early years his piety was considerable, and stamped its mark upon him. Before long he joined the National Socialist movement and took a higher position in it. Last year he married a Protestant without making any attempt to follow the canon law rules governing mixed marriages. On the contrary – to the great pain of Catholics, he celebrated the rite in Berlin before a Protestant pastor. Given such a previous life, I do not accept that even on a visit to Rome, he plans any visits to the Vatican.” (p. 129 – 130.) Goebbels did avoid a visit to the Vatican. (p. 130.)

I found Catholic activities concerning Jewish converts to Catholicism interesting. Cardinal Bertram requested an intervention from the Holy See in favour of Catholic civil servants who had been dismissed by the Hitler government. (p. 130.) Orsenigo was resigned to the fact that Catholic civil servants were being systematically driven out of employment, but tended to blame subordinate Nazis for these actions. (p. 131.) Even before the Nazis, Catholic parity had not been achieved. (p. 131.)
“Unlike Nazi anti-semitism there was a means of being accepted into the Christian cultural circle: conversion. In this respect too, the formula of Pius XI protected Hlond with crystal clarity: ‘ When God's grace enlightens the Jews, and when he honestly joins the ranks of his and our Messiah, then we will gladly welcome him into the Christian host.' It was just this principle that the Hitler regime undermined – first in Germany, then in the Europe it dominated. At any rate it is fair to ask whether a clear separation of traditional religious anti-Judaism and modern, racially based and politically motivated anti-Semitism could be sustained in the Catholic Church itself. The Catholic societies of Europe could scarcely escape completely from the modernizing processes even in this field. In the interests of an ideology directed against modernity, modern racial patterns of argument – for example, in connection with the stereotyped of the moral ‘destroyer'-motif – see into the inherited apologetic polemic.” (p. 135.) From 1935 the Roman Catholic Church concerned itself in various ways by facilitating emigration from Germany for Catholic Christians of Jewish descent. (p. 135.) The Vatican power had its limits: it could not induce Brazil to issue a promised 3000 visas for Catholics of Jewish descent. (p. 136.)

About 12,000 secular and regular priests from all German dioceses were affected by measures of persecution, which began after Hitler's seizure of power and constantly increased in scale. (p. 143.)

Also interesting is the bind that Catholics found themselves in with respect to Rosenberg's Myth of the 20th Century. Rosenberg's Myth of the 20th Century was required reading for German education or examinations. (p. 144.) The Myth was put on the Index of Forbidden Books. (p. 145.) Alois Hudal attempted to build bridges with the Nazis. (p. 145.) Hudal intended the Catholicization of National Socialism. (p. 149.)

In April of 1935, at Lourdes, Pacelli raised his voice against the “superstition of race and blood” as being opposed to Christian faith. (p. 152.) Nationalism, totalitarianism and racism were determined to common products of a single new idol by Konsultors in 1936. (p. 153.)

Besier also postulates that Pacelli's was wedded to an earlier diplomatic style. Pacelli criticized Hitler privately. (p. 178.) “Educated in the diplomatic customs of the late nineteenth century, the Cardinal Secretary of State vacillated between the maxims of a diplomacy at once discreet and secret and the beginnings of modern diplomacy, distinguished by open conferences, detailed debates and personal connexions between the leading diplomats. Hence Pacelli preferred to utter harsh criticism of the Nazi regime in personal conversations with high-ranking diplomates and Church people, and not to proclaim such views in public. ‘Like many diplomats of his time he was not capable of breaking altogether with the old rules of diplomatic behavior.'” (p. 178.)

Finally, it is important to remember how bad these times were for Catholic. Mexico and Russia were also problem areas. Pius XI issued three encyclicals that each dealt with one of these areas. American liberals, however, tended to side with the persecutors and to characterize Catholicism as allied with democracy's enemy facism. (p. 202.)

I found the book interesting, but I had a substantial background in a lot of the issues raised by Besier. My conclusion was that Pacelli was doing his best in difficult circumstances.