More Evidence Pius XII Was Not Hitler's Pope - German Files Point to a Russian Plot

Zenit News Agency ^ | April 2, 2007

[Dominick]

Show me all those proclamations from the Pope and Archbishop calling for the end of the slaughter of the Jews and Serbs.

Already been posted. You are not debating but just trolling.

[Dominick]

Show me one prohibition signed by the Pope or the Archbishop against saving refugees from the war.

I assume you have none. You didn't respond to the question.

[Petronski]

Pius XII saved eight hundred times more Jews from the Holocaust than righteous Gentile Oskar Schindler.

[Religion Moderator]

We do not allow Christian Identity, KKK, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, V-Dare, Holocaust denial, anti-Semitic or any other racist, hate mongering posts.

We do not allow Jack Chick posts, the falsified Oath for the Knights of Columbus or any links to jesus-is-lord.com because they are anti-Catholic hate mongering.

Click here for more on Hate websites

There are disputes from the Jewish corner on mainstream sources such as Time and PBS that Pius XII was an innocent man, i.e. that he didn’t do enough or could have made a difference but didn’t. For that reason I do not characterize interpretations of his role as hate mongering but an ordinary, albeit heated, dispute.

However, if a claim of fact is made which is indisputably false – e.g. that an event occurred on date A when it was actually B – then that claim should be pulled if made again after having been corrected.

[AnAmericanMother]

First time I've seen Time or PBS cited on FR as an authoritative source . . .

Unfortunately, the flurry of articles in Time, Newsweek and the program on PBS were based on Cornwell's sensational accusations . . . which he has now retracted.

You can't cite an authoritative scholarly source because there isn't one. Unfortunately, I myself have Jewish friends who believe the slander against the church, but when you ask for their sources it always goes back to Cornwell and Hochhuth (never had a Jewish person cite Jack Chick.)

By allowing unsourced, disproved, and retracted slander you are helping perpetuate it, guaranteeing that it will continue to show up in places like Time and NPR.

[Religion Moderator]

Please understand that I cannot contribute to the discussion and also be the Religion Moderator.

Nevertheless, I will provide a few clues which can be researched for a scholarly effort to review the issues involved:

A Catholic-Jewish commission was established in 1999 to study the role of the Vatican during the Holocaust. There were three Jewish members appointed by the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations: Hebrew University Prof. Robert Wistrich, Free University of Brussels scholar Bernard Suchecky and Michael Marrus of University of Toronto. The Catholics on the committee were appointed by the Pontifical Commission on Religious Relations with the Jews (PCRRJ): Montclair State University in New Jersey, Eva Fleischner - University of Virginia, Rev. Gerald Fogarty - Seton Hall University in New Jersey, Rev. John Morley.

[trisham]

bookmark

[AnAmericanMother]

The work of that committee was suspended because of a dispute over the provision of confidential documents.

So far as I know, it has never been reconstituted. If you have information to the contrary, I would appreciate it.

The members of the committee were also accused of having prejudged the cause, and later two of them resigned. Again, if you have other information, I'd like to hear it.

[Religion Moderator]

Exactly, for if the issue remains open among the scholarly for unwillingness to reveal documents and prejudice then the issue must remain open here as well.

[Revenge of Sith]

There was no burial because Goering’s ashes were scattered along with the defendants who were executed.

[AnAmericanMother]

There were confidentiality problems. You know that the U.S. Census bureau does not release the handwritten returns for iirc 75 years because of confidentiality concerns.

The Vatican released all records from the 30s and 40s pertaining to WWII and the Jews in Italy and Europe, but some members of the committee demanded that ALL records be made available, regardless of age or relevance. Obviously that presents severe problems to have people looking through medical records, criminal investigations, and personal information having nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Even legal proceedings require relevance, you can't just go on a fishing expedition hoping to find stuff.

Anyhow, the fact that 2 members of the committee made public statements prejudging the cause and then scuttled the entire process (and then later resigned) militates against this being a scholarly committee. In fact, it smells of a setup.

Just because people happen to be faculty at a college doesn't make them scholars or prevent them from having an axe to grind (just look at the Duke 88, if you can bear it.)

Your example is invalid, both because the committee reached no conclusion and because at least some members prejudged the cause.

[Religion Moderator]

Again, I cannot debate the issues with you, but again I will provide some clues for anyone interested.

Click here to review the issues involved with the suspension of the committee and Cardinal Keeler's statement.

And click here to review the preliminary report, including the 47 questions which require additional documentation.

[AnAmericanMother]

"At an early stage a European member of the group, Dr. Bernard Suchecky, caused serious damage to the group’s credibility by leaking its Preliminary Report during their meeting in Rome last October. This event seriously impeded the work in progress, making it impossible for them to complete a critical phase of their research in timely fashion and diminishing the level of trust of the other members toward one of their number. Earlier this year, another member, Professor Robert Wistrich, troubled the trust level further when, in an interview with the Jerusalem Report, he imputed bad faith to the Holy See.

With sadness I note that the Coordinator of the Jewish side, Mr. Seymour Reich, Chair of the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultation, has released to the press the Group’s joint letter to Cardinal Kasper and used the occasion to misrepresent its content in his press release. Neither Dr. Eugene Fisher, Catholic Coordinator for the group, nor the Catholic members of the team were consulted in this by Mr. Reich, and all three Catholics have firmly rejected it. It now seems more difficult than ever to see a way forward."

. . . in other words, this was a political football, not a serious historical inquiry.

[Dominick]

I do not challenge your authority. I wanted to ask that this should also be set aside as unproven fantasy of enemies of the Church. Please pardon the length. I am not engaging you in a debate. Thanks in advance for reading.

The committee was suspended. This is a fact. I can see in looking at the requests they were asking for working papers. I know that documents in progress are often destroyed when the release comes out.

They were offered documents, but not the drafts they were asking about. I was told but I can't prove right now that the Camerlengo who presides after the Popes death is charged with burning all the documents, drafts and papers not worthy of the archive. The documents may no longer exist.

The central catalyst of the controversy, the book, "Hitlers Pope" contained a great deal of characterizations and sensationalisms that are subjective. For example,
Pacelli had been recruited into the Vatican in 1901, at the age of 24, to specialize in international affairs and church law. Pious, slender, with dark luminous eyes, he was an instant favorite.

SO tell me, how does the author gather information that objectively tells him that because of his slender appearance, and dark eyes he was appointed into a position. Other passages all but paint a homo-erotic relationship between the future Pope and German politicians. How would the author conclude that the Pope was gay? How are we as Catholics prove something did not occur?

I would put these things exactly in the same category as the "Protocol of Zion" and the Jesuit/Knights of Columbus oath. It is a slander that required the speaker to prove a negative did not occur and not require the slanderer to prove the statement. Proving innocence is exactly opposite the practice we demand. We should have evidence the Pope was guilty but the author can't provide it, just innuendo and vague intimations of Papal abuses.

Other charges are likewise tainted with characterizations that are not borne out by the original documents. The committee could have studied them and reflected on them, but since the archives did not contain drafts they stopped. I don't understand why they abdicated this duty, however, is this enough to say the wild charges issued by persons here should bear weight?

[trisham]

I know little about this issue, but this thread has been most interesting. Thanks to you both.

[Dominick]

From Hilters Pope:

He died at the age of 82 on October 9,1958.
Fact.

His corpse decomposed rapidly in the autumnal Roman heat.
Fact.

At his lying-in-state, a guard fainted from the stench.
Apocryphical Fact. They did rotate the guards frequently so they would not get sick.

Later, his nose turned black and fell off.
Fact.

Some saw in this sudden corruption of his mortal remains, a symbol of the absolute corruption of his papacy.
Shameful fictionalization.

He decomposed because the embalmer, Dr. Galeazzi-Lisi, encased Pius in a cellophane bag with herbs and spices in some sort of experimental treatment. It sped up the decay of the body, instead of retarding it. John XXIII expelled him from the Vatican for life.

So the author had what source that the decomposition of the Pope was a sign of God's displeasure? Does this show how this source can only be considered a hachet job?

[trisham]

Some saw in this sudden corruption of his mortal remains, a symbol of the absolute corruption of his papacy. Shameful fictionalization.

He decomposed because the embalmer, Dr. Galeazzi-Lisi, encased Pius in a cellophane bag with herbs and spices in some sort of experimental treatment. It sped up the decay of the body, instead of retarding it. John XXIII expelled him from the Vatican for life.

So the author had what source that the decomposition of the Pope was a sign of God's displeasure? Does this show how this source can only be considered a hachet job?

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

Good question. It does seem to indicate some kind of emotional investment in the issue.

[AnAmericanMother]

No surprise.

Cornwell washed out of seminary (I have no idea why) and appears to still be treasuring a grudge against the Church on that account.

He has written quite a number of frankly anti-Catholic books, and his latest is a book trashing Pope John Paul II.

That will no doubt make him even more popular among the anti-Catholic crowd.

[reagandemocrat]

Nicely done.

[Alamo-Girl]

I have been following this thread with some interest, reading the links and such, and have a few observations to make.

Please remember that I am not anti-Catholic, I am pro God. I'm not anti-Protestant or anti-Jew or anti-Orthodox or anti-Mormon either, btw.

I assert that to whatever extent the Pope may have failed in the WWII era – and his memory suffered since - it could be a Spiritual matter and if so, beyond the ability of mere mortals to repair.

In sum, if he truly believed that the gates of Hell cannot prevail against the Church – then he should have had no concern whatsoever that the parochial schools would be closed or public worship stopped in Germany. He should have had no fear of arms or politics whether Nazis or Communists. He should not fear Protestants for that matter or any mortal or supernatural power except God Himself.

IOW, if the act of signing a Concordant was for fear then it would have constituted a statement of disbelief. Further, I assert that God deals harshly with the ones who disbelieve Him especially those who are leaders.

Conversely, when one believes God, especially under duress, God’s protection remains. Joshua and Caleb, for instance, were not fearful of the inhabitants of the promised land whose mortal strengths were many. Instead, they believed God – and for that reason they alone were allowed to enter there 40 years later while all those who disbelieved died in the wilderness.

The LORD [is] on my side; I will not fear: what can man do unto me? – Psalms 118:6

[Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord [is] my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me. – Hebrews 13:5-6

I will love thee, O LORD, my strength. The LORD [is] my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, [and] my high tower. – Psalms 18:1-2

Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin: That walk to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt! Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame, and the trust in the shadow of Egypt [your] confusion. – Isaiah 30:1-3

My other remark is “earthy.” Namely, that the preliminary report indicates that the scholarly commission of Catholics and Jews were asking for open access to whatever the Vatican had in order to complete their mission. The volumes they had been given to work with were compiled and edited by the Vatican.

It stands to reason that scholars would want open access much like attorneys would want answers to their interrogatories or requests for documents – even if they stand as advocates for one side or the other. In the absence of full disclosure, any objective third party observer would have just cause to question the results of the inquiry.

However, if the Concordant was a statement of disbelief as I wonder here - and the dishonor which followed was according to God’s will - then no mortal will be able to undo it. So the Church will have to live with it - and in such cases it is best to let a sleeping dog lie.

Any hoot, that's my "two cents"...