LETTERS

Christian Century, March 22, 2000

Hitler's pope?

JOHN T. Pawlikowski's review of John Cornwall's Hitler's Pope is a slur against a significant and thoughtful work of scholarship ("Pope Pius VII and the Nazis," Feb. 23).

Pawlikowski argues that the title Hitler's Pope is deceptive in implying that Pius was an agent of the Nazis. Nowhere does Cornwall suggest any such thing. The point he makes in the title and throughout the book is simply that the posture that Pius assumed vis-a-vis the Nazi state was an ideal one from Hitler's political perspective, and the best that Hitler reasonably could have hoped for from a pope.

Pawlikowski argues that the cover photo on the dust jacket of the American edition is deceptive in that readers will think it was made after a visit with Hitler. Even if that were so, it is hardly a significant misreading. Pius had plenty of cordial communications with Hitler.

Pawlikowski argues that Cornwall spent very few hours in the Vatican library, and that his "secret" material was not really secret. Since Cornwall copied Vatican material and took it home to study, the number of hours he spent in the library would seem to be of little significance.

As to how secret the material was that Cornwall was given, who can be sure? Cornwall was at one time a Vatican, and therefore it is believable that he would be given access to material that an ordinary reporter would be denied, especially since the Vatican continues to withhold archival material pertaining to Pius.

Pawlikowski argues that Cornwall did not show evidence of having examined those scholars who have defended Pius's actions. As a reader I am not interested in being taken through every contrary view, no matter how fanciful. Such a book would be unreadable.

Pawlikowski argues that Pius's written comments about "dirty Jews," etc., are no basis for assuming any anti-Semitism on the part of the pope because many Jews said worse things about their fellow Jews who were bolsheviks.

Such an argument is unworthy of rebuttal. Shall we argue that Caucasians can be excused of slurring African-Americans on the grounds that they themselves use worse language against each other among themselves?

Pawlikowski argues that Pius centralized power in Rome not to enhance his own power, but because he felt it was in the best interest of the church at the time, and that Cornwall was unfair in impugning Pius's motives for his power grab.

In fact, Cornwall does not delve to any great extent into Pius's motives, which are mostly impenetrable. As Cornwall points out, Pius's chief motive probably was to counter communism and Slavic power. This was almost certainly the basis for his wary alliance with Hitler from the very beginning. But since Pius does not write about his own motives we are left to guess. Cornwall's book stays close to the facts and the data, and leaves the motives and intentions mostly to be guessed at by the reader, which is entirely appropriate for such scholarship.

Raymond J. Lawrence New York, N. Y.

Pawlikowski accuses John Cornwall's Hitler's Pope of being "deeply flawed" and "exaggerated," presenting "little really new."

But he also concedes the immense tragedy of the silence of Western Europe's leading moral figure in the midst of Nazi-occupied Europe, noting that Cornwall raises issues that "cannot be ignored." While Cornwall may have identified little new material and may not pass muster by higher academic standards, his book will likely inform more readers than the more scholarly and less publicized books Pawlikowski mentions.

Pawlikowski and the Vatican appear to agree that free, unfettered discourse about matters of worldwide concern are to be discouraged, and left to the rigors of approved and unpublicized scholars. I strongly disagree.

James A. Burke Santa Fe, N.M.

Authentic Christians ...

ON A WHIM, this atheist just dipped into your magazine (online) and read "What's going on?," by Garret Keizer (March 1). I was impressed.

Over the years, I have been quite unimpressed by religious folks. Keizer seems closer to what I thought Christianity should be about than I have seen or heard in a very long time.

Donald L. Anderson Harpswell, Maine

An appeal to Islam ...

MANY READERS in the West will be grateful to the CENTURY for the article by Saad M. Saad ("A Christian appeal to Islam," Feb. 23). Information from the Christians of the Middle East is relatively rare in Christian publications.

Saad M. Saad is well informed. There are many serious threats against the Copts in Egypt, and it may be wise to address Islam by appealing to the Qur'an. One is reminded of the Christian use of proof texts. But the weakness of Pope Shenouda's strategy lies in the fact that Islam is no more monolithic than Christianity, and the variations of theological interpretation in the mosques are as great as those in the churches. Qur'anic exegesis from a Christian patriarch will certainly not appeal to many Muslims.

The sad fact is that the Copts have not set us a good example when it comes to dialogue. All the delightful social gestures mentioned by Saad are good, but the real dialogue of religions is lamentably undeveloped in Egypt. Islam is expanding dramatically in the UK and in the U.S., and the need for authentic dialogue is urgent. Knowledge of the Qur'an, as exemplified by Pope Shenouda, who has admirable academic qualifications in classical Arabic, can only be helpful. But Christians' preaching to Muslims from the Qur'an is not a substitute for real dialogue.