St Charles Church .org   News & Events Faith & Sacraments Ministries Volunteer Search/Help Contact Us

Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust
A Dialogue Toward Consensus and Healing

Monday, May 2, 2005

Transcript of the presentation by Dr. Michael R. Marrus, part of a Dialogue Toward Consensus and Healing, at St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church

1. The Paradox of the Pius XII Controversy
Let me begin with this observation, which is of the paradox of this issue of Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. It is a paradox because, on the one hand, the context within which this debate is unfolding is a context of the most extraordinary amelioration of Catholic-Jewish relations over the past 35, almost 40, years now. It is truly a transformation of historic proportions that we have lived through. And I think that transformation, that amelioration, that bringing together of two peoples, is absolutely irreversible. And it will continue, whatever happens to this debate. It is of lasting significance.

And the leading figure in this, of course, was Pope John XXIII, but I think we're all aware and have been aware over the last month, of how this transformation was carried forward by the late Pope John Paul II. And it was John Paul II who, in a way, articulated and communicated these changes which were absolutely essential to the relations between our two peoples. I have to think these changes have some important roots in the history of the Holocaust, which we're speaking about this evening.

1.1. A Politicized Debate
So, on the one hand, you have this extraordinary progress, extraordinary transformation. And on the other hand you have the continuing obstacle to the fulfillment of that coming together of two peoples, the continuing obstacle in the shape of this debate over Pius XII. Indeed, the more progress we see in the first, the more the second appears as a kind of stumbling block or as a kind of obstacle, and I don't want to make more of it than that. Look at the images that I've chosen: a stumbling block or an obstacle, suggesting that these are not going to be lasting impediments in this coming together of our two peoples. But nevertheless it is so. I think there is a puzzle to it, and I'm frankly not entirely sure why this should be the case. I invite us as an audience, along with my fellow panelists Fr. Fogarty, Fr. Pollard, and Rabbi Rudolph, to perhaps contribute to this and help explain why this should be so.

But, in a word, the crudest and simplest explanation is that this debate has become politicized. Let's face it, it's become politicized. Shortly before coming here this evening I tested on the web "Jews, Pius XII"—I got 80,000 hits. And then I punched in "Pius XII, Catholics," and I got 108,000 hits—almost as many with "Jews" as with "Catholics." What's going on here?

I want to hasten to say that it's not just Jews. Indeed, it's not even mainly Jews. The principle writers about Pius XII in this country, in America, those whose books one can buy at the airports and those whose books sell in the many tens of thousands, are authors James Carroll, Gary Wills, John Cornwell, to name only the most widely purchased and read. Catholic all three, and Catholics all three with "issues" about the contemporary Church—issues about which I have no position whatsoever. But it is plain in the writings of each one of these authors that Pius XII has assumed symbolic importance. And in some sense I think it fair to say they're going after Pius XII because they believe he represents something in the Church which they frankly don't like.

1.2. Effects of the Beatification Campaign
On the other side, there is another explanation—or it's the mirror side of this explanation—and that is the campaign for the beatification and the canonization of Pope Pius XII. Whereas you have the detractors who want to see Pope Pius XII beaten down as one of the great villainous figures, by contrast, on the other side, you have a group of determined campaigners who want to see Pope Pius XII declared one of the great figures in history, one of the great figures in the Second World War, one of the great figures in the history of the Holocaust, one of the greatest rescuers of Jews who should be declared one of the Righteous of Nations—that actually not from a Catholic figure, but from Rabbi David Dalin, who writes in neoconservative periodicals. And, of course, it's been picked up in the world of Pope Pius XII apologetics.

And so, back and forth it goes, the dialogue de sourd, as the French say, between the detractors and those who feel exactly the opposite. Now there are many explanations for this. Again, part of the context is the context of John Paul II and the great surge of saint-making and beatifications: over 1350 beatifications, perhaps more, 450+ saints, etc.

May I hasten to say, and I'm speaking very seriously here, that Jews have no part in this debate. This is not our denomination, our church, and Jews do not have any part in the saint-making. And yet, as I've said to Catholic friends, I think friends owe it to friends to say what they think would be the effect of a saint-making of Pius XII, certainly before this debate is resolved. Fr. Fogarty and I had dinner together this evening, and I indicated that this was a test of the pontificate of Benedict XVI. I would have thought that if one wanted to ensure the continuing amelioration of Catholic-Jewish relations, this is one of the issues one might want to put on ice and wait for a few hundred years. If anyone here has any influence on this matter, I would pass this along as my view, but I hasten to say that this is not a view in which Jews have locus standi, so to speak, but my own view for what it's worth, is just that.

2. An Example: The Pope's Speech to Holocaust Survivors, November, 1945
But let me now continue with this discussion, a discussion of the wartime Pope, which, I have to confess, I'm somewhat tired of, at least in its most familiar landmarks. That's one of the reasons I appreciated Fr. Fogarty's more scholarly approach to the subject. But he and I went through this issue some years ago and did so in the good company of Eugene Fisher from the National Council of Catholic Bishops, who has certainly done as much as any single person I know when it comes to the amelioration of Catholic-Jewish relations.

I'm approaching the issue now from my "mature phase" as a historian. I used to try to sweep across all of the documents and all of the chronology, and my wife always said, "Michael, you've got much too much in this lecture. Cut it way, way down." So I want to talk about one specific speech that Pacelli made. I want to focus on that speech and read parts to you in order to illustrate some of the many themes that are frequently discussed in this debate, to indicate why I think the debate is a false debate. Why I think that our focus, when it comes to ruminating on the Holocaust should not be Pius XII. And why I think that both sides, polarized as they have been in this debate, have each of them got it wrong in some important respects.

2.1. The Setting and Text of the Speech
More and more I'm turning in my own research and my own interest, to the immediate post-War period, when so much of the wreckage of the Holocaust was being reassembled, painfully, by Jewish organizations in Europe. And at that time—my date is the 29th of November, 1945—a group of Holocaust survivors had an audience with the Pope. Indeed, they asked to see the Pope in order to have "the great honor of thanking him in person for the generosity that he had shown when they were persecuted during that terrible period of Nazi fascism." That's a curious fragment of a sentence. I actually haven't been able to establish that that's what the Holocaust survivors themselves said. It was published in L'Osservatore Romano the next day, but I wouldn't be surprised if they said that, because that was the feeling, at the time, of many in their position. I'll come back to that. But listen to what the Pope said to them. You'll have to concentrate on this, because it is in a language all of its own, as Fr. Fogarty said before.

Your presence, gentlemen [there were no women survivors in the group] seems to us an eloquent testimony to the psychological transformations and the new orientation that the world conflict has, in its different aspects, created in the world.

The Pope then referred to

. . . the abyss of discord, the hatred, and the folly of persecution, which, under the influence of erroneous and intolerant doctrines, in opposition to the noble human and authentic Christian spirit, have engulfed incomparable numbers of innocent victims, even among those who took no active part in the War. The Apostolic See remains faithful to the eternal principles of the Law, written by God in the heart of every man, which shines forth in the divine revelation of Sinai and which found its perfection in the Sermon on the Mount, and has never, even in the most critical moments, left any doubt as to its maxims and applicability.

Your presence here is an intimate testimony of the gratitude on the part of men and women who, in an agonizing time, and often under the threat of imminent death, experienced how the Catholic Church and its true disciples know how, in the exercise of charity, to rise above the narrow and arbitrary limits created by human egoism and racial passions. Without doubt, in a world which only little by little and in struggling against numerous obstacles must confront and resolve the multiple problems that are the unhappy heritage of the War, the Church, conscious of its religious mission, can only maintain a wise reserve in the presence of the different questions, inasmuch as they have a purely political and territorial character. Nevertheless, that doesn't prevent that in proclaiming the grand principles of a true humanity and fraternity, it establishes the bases and sure foundation for solution of those same problems with justice and equity.

You've experienced yourselves the injuries and wounds of hatred, but, in the midst of your agony, you've also felt the benefit and sweetness of love, not that love that nourishes itself from terrestrial motives, but rather, with a profound faith in the Heavenly Father, whose light shines on all men, whatever their language and their race, and whose grace is open to all those who seek the Lord in a spirit of truth."

Now, what does one make of that? The first thing to observe is that this is not written in a language that is familiar to us. Gerry Fogarty called it "popespeak"; I refer to it perhaps a bit more politely as "Vaticanese." But it is prolix, it is dense, and it is utterly unfamiliar to us. Even popes don't speak this way any longer. So virtually everything that the Pope says—may I extrapolate, going back through the War—is written in this language and must be susceptible to translation.

2.2. Why Didn't Pius XII Speak of "the Holocaust"?
Now, here's a group of Holocaust survivors. Imagine how differently any religious figure would speak today. Any religious figure speaking today would talk about the Holocaust, right? They would talk about the special significance of that particular perverse victimization of the Jewish people. And the Pope doesn't.

But guess what? Nobody did. This was at a time before there was a word, "Holocaust." This was at a time before there was even a conception, except on the part of a very few. This was at a time when the notion of a Holocaust is not even beginning. Indeed I would venture—moving way forward—that it wasn't until the 1960's that we got the word Holocaust. And it wasn't until the 1970's that the historical framework was put together. People here are younger and can't remember this in their own biography, but I can tell you that I was a graduate student interested in these matters in the 1960's. You couldn't find anything. There were no books on the shelves, there was no conception, there was no chapter, even in history books written specifically on World War II. The word "Holocaust" was not part of the vocabulary of public figures. And it certainly didn't form part of the vocabulary of Pope Pius XII.

2.3. A Speech from a Different World
Did you notice what Pius XII said about the divine revelation of Sinai? That's kind of nice, but then it "found its perfection in the Sermon on the Mount." Now what kind of a thing is that to say to Jewish survivors of the Holocaust? Answer: Guess what, this is before Vatican II. This is supersessionism—polite supersessionism, very polite supersessionism, hyper-polite. But it's supersessionism.

These people came from a different world, and that's the main theme of what I have to say: Pacelli came from an utterly different world. And it was utterly natural to him to articulate-again, in the most gentle and polite way possible: My friends, Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, yes, divine revelation at Sinai, but it "found its perfection in the Sermon on the Mount." Again, no Catholic public figure would. . . I assume. . . [laughter from the audience] Well, in any event, this is what Vatican II is all about, ending that supersessionist discourse, or at least signaling it from the very top of the Church.

It's a religious document. It's a religious speech. The Pope could speak in no other idiom. He actually says specifically: Well, there are these political questions, and there are these territorial questions, but we "observe a wise reserve" when it comes to them. And again, this is part of his discourse. Note, by the way, this is November 1945. No more Nazism. The Nazis are gone from Rome, and one doesn't have to resort to the explanation: Well, he must speak in obscure terms because, of course, the Nazis are at the gate. Now, there are no more Nazis here. This is the Pope speaking freely, and he's speaking generously. I think one can't deny the generosity of his speech, but again it is also, it seems to me, extremely limited from our ecumenical perspective.

2.4. Views of the Holocaust Survivors
Whatever did the Holocaust survivors think of this? This is a question I would love to answer, and I can't, because I don't know. But suppose they had been interviewed afterwards: Well, what did you think if it? My guess is that they thought it was terrific. How many times in this debate have we heard Golda Meir's obituary for Pope Pius XII? In 1958, when the Pope died, she said something about how wonderful he was during the War. And over and over and over again, this canned obituary, which was probably written for her by someone in the Israeli Foreign Ministry, is sort of recycled as somehow an imprimatur or a testimony or evidence for the Pope's great rescue of Jews during the War. But there's an element of truth in it, one finds in her memoirs. Golda Meir was about as rough and tough a political customer as one could find, and in the Israeli cabinet she could absolutely break lesser figures. And yet she writes, "What, me? A carpenter's daughter from Milwaukee, I met the Pope!"

Only today I was reading in the archives of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum the documents coming from Leon Kubwitsky, who was the secretary general of the World Jewish Congress, a man who was in charge of rescue efforts of the World Jewish Congress during the War. He gets an audience with the Pope in September 1945. I'll tell you more sometime about that whole incident (I'm still researching it), but I can tell you this: He gets the invitation on Vatican stationery, and he just loves it. Wow, the Pope! And then when he comes for his audience, they actually take the invitation, and he writes, "Oh, I'm so sorry. I wanted to keep it!" In other words, he's star-struck.

Ladies and gentlemen, there's something about Jews and the Pope. Jews love the Pope, I don't know why. Not long ago, 130 rabbis got to see the Pope, and they simply were star-struck. I can't explain it, perhaps Rabbi Rudolph can, but do you know what I'm talking about? They love the Pope. And all of the criticism, all of the reservations, all of the things they might have said—about Jerusalem, about this or that, about the Middle East, about Pope Pius XII—were somehow pushed under the carpet, because of the star-struck nature of that encounter. So there's some of that there as well.

3. Comparing Pius XII to John Paul II
I don't want to make more of this one statement than one should. The history of Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust is a complicated, involved, intricate one, and it's one which historians continue to research. But I do believe that the beginning of wisdom on this subject is to start with the notion that we're dealing with someone—that is, Eugenio Pacelli—who comes from an utterly different world than any of us know. And an utterly different world, I might want to stress, from that of John Paul II. And, for so many of us, and for so many young people especially, the world of the Pope is the world of John Paul II, the only pope they have known. And so they want to contrast Pacelli with John Paul II.

But John Paul II, of course, comes from Poland. He grew up in a city that was half Jewish, he knew the Yiddish language, and he had a feeling for the Jewish experience of the Second World War. And he had a feeling, of course, for the experience of Jews in that particular country, Poland, where the Holocaust was centered. In Eugenio Pacelli, we're dealing with someone who is other-worldly, who knew very few Jews, and the Jews that he did know were utterly divorced from that kind of world of persecution and suffering during the Holocaust.

4. Conclusion
So over and over again we find encounters, issues, correspondence, reactions, in which, to my way of thinking, Pius XII is not failing to meet his own standards or the standards of the Church of his day, but rather failing to meet our standards, or what we would like to think popes should do. But our notion of what we would like to think popes should do comes in part—Jews and Catholics, Catholics and non-Catholics—from Vatican II and from the world of a transformed relationship that is at the center of our preoccupations this evening.