Between morality and diplomacy: the Vatican's "silence" during the holocaust

Journal of Church and State, Summer, 2008 by Frank J. Coppa

On 12 June 1939, on the eve of the Second World War, the French Ambassador to the Holy See, Francois Charles-Roux, regretting the impartial reaction of Pius XII to the aggressive demands imposed upon Catholic Poland by the Nazis, observed that "the Holy See can perform its activity in two ways, either through diplomacy or by asserting the principles which stand against the theories now in fashion." (1) Rejecting the notion that "might makes right" this Frenchman favored a policy based on ethical principles. Pius XII agreed in principle with him. "The Pope at times cannot remain silent. Governments only consider political and military issues, intentionally disregarding moral and legal issues in which, on the other hand, the Pope is primarily interested and cannot ignore," Pius XII told the Italian ambassador Dino Alfieri on 13 May 1940. Quoting Saint Catherine of Sienna's critique of papal policies in the fourteenth century, this pope believed her admonition was equally applicable to him and that "God would subject him to the most stringent judgment if he did not react to evil or did not do what he thought was his duty." Referring to the European situation of 1940, Pius asked "How could the Pope, in the present circumstances, be guilty of such a serious omission as that of remaining a disinterested spectator of such heinous acts, while the entire world was waiting for his word?" (2)

A series of observers including the Swiss playwright Rolf Hochhuth and the German political philosopher Hannah Arendt subsequently posed the same question. The first brought the issue to the fore and the second concluded that more was expected of the "Vicar of Christ" than a simple political figure. (3) Referring to "the atrocities taking place in Poland, Pius XII confessed he wanted to "utter words of fire against such action," (4) but held his tongue and did not publicly and clearly denounce either Communism or Nazism during the Second World War. Some both within and outside the church condemned this "silence." The Jesuit priest Gustav Gundlach, who helped draft Pius XI's encyclical against anti-Semitism, complained that the "ethical" course pursued by Pius XI (Achille Ratti) was abandoned in favor of the more "expedient" one of Pius XII (Eugenio Pacelli). (5) Others have been even more critical accusing Pius XII of being anti-Semitic as well as pro-Nazi, with one writer branding him "Hitler s Pope."

These accusations have been countered by a series of devoted followers of Pius XII and apologetic authors who have depicted this pope as an Architect for Peace and Angelic Shepherd, defending his person and policies while condemning his Defamation and decrying his Greatness Dishonored. (6) Monsignor Giovanni Montini, later Pope Paul VI, offered an explanation of sorts for the papal position early on: "From a moral stance the Vatican could only be in favor of good against evil, and of the law a against force," he proclaimed, but added that from a political viewpoint it could only be an impartial Witness to the war." (7) Others branded the Vatican attempt to separate politics and morality as Machiavellian. These diametrically op posed evaluations have ignited a controversy that has already lasted longer than Pius XII's pontificate (1939-1958), provoking what has been termed "The Pius War." (8) An objective historical account of this pope's role during the Holocaust is long overdue in order to separate fact from fiction, and counter the polemical accusatory and apologetic "studies," which continue to clutter the field.

Despite the excuses of his defenders and accusations of his denigrators, Pius XII recognized the moral dimension of his wartime discretion and the ethical dilemma inherent in his diplomatic neutrality. Privately he apparently expressed doubts about his conciliatory approach. (9) Nonetheless, he did not utter "words of fire" in condemnation of Nazi abuses admitting as much as early as 1940, fearing his denunciation would make things worse. (10) Critics contrast this cautious conduct to his vocal crusade against Stalin's Soviet Union in the postwar period when he disdained silence. "Can, may the Pope be silent?," Pius asked the assembled crowd in St. Peter's Square in February 1949 adding "Can you imagine a successor to Peter who would bow to such demands?" The crowd shouted an unequivocal "No! (11) There followed a decree of 1 July. 1949, (Responsa ad dubia de communismo) excommunicating those who supported communism, a condemnation never before launched against adherents of Nazism or Fascism. (12) Some assumed this reflected the pope's view that Bolshevism posed a greater threat than Nazism, ignoring that the condemnation of Communism followed the end of the war, while during its course Pius had been "silent" about Bolshevik atrocities as well as those of the Nazis. Though it was illogical to discount the differences between the wartime period and the postwar one, the stark contrast between Pius XII's conduct during the Second World War and the Cold War contributed to the call for a re-evaluation of this pontiff.