In his Christmas broadcast for 1942, Pope Pius XII spoke of the ‘hundreds of thousands of innocent people who have been killed or condemned to a slow extinction only because of their race’. As part of a wider denunciation of the Holocaust this would have been brave and useful, but in fact it was to be his only public wartime mention of it, and he did not even identify Hitler, the Nazis or the Jews by name. This failure publicly to denounce the greatest single crime in the history of mankind has unsurprisingly led to a major debate on the wartime role of the Pontiff, of which this well-researched, very well written, sane and thoughtful book is the latest and one of the most distinguished contributions.
Few people are better qualified than Gerard Noel to disinter the subtle diplomacy conducted by the prewar and wartime Vatican. A translator of the first volume of the official documents relating to the Holy See in that period and a former editor of the Catholic Herald, Noel had a private audience with Pius XII at the Castel Gandolfo in 1948, partly because he is collaterally descended from three saints, including Sir Thomas More. Yet far from being biased towards the Pontiff, as one might expect from this ultra-papabile curriculum vitae, this book lands some heavy blows against him.
Since Pius’ death in 1958 the debate on his actions — or inaction — has been dominated in the media by the case for the prosecution, principally Rolf Hochhuth’s 1963 play The Representative, Constantine Costa-Gravas’ film Amen, Daniel Goldhagen’s A Moral Reckoning, David Kerzer’s The Pope Against the Jews, David Cornwell’s outrageously titled Hitler’s Pope, Robert Katz’s Fatal Silence and other important and more nuanced books by Ralph McInery, Susan Zuccotti and José Sanchez. The case for the defence was best put by Professor Owen Chadwick in his succinct study Britain and the Vatican During the Second World War in 1986, but Pierre Blet S.J., Eamon Duffy, Clifford Longley, Cardinal Winning, Michael Burleigh, Paul Johnson, Ronald Rychlak and Denis Mack Smith have all landed blows that have tended to undermine the prosecution’s more extreme positions.



Comments
Chris Inwien
July 20th, 2008 6:26pmAh, the last refuge of a bigot is anti-Catholicism. I can't wait to see this commentator publish a cartoon mocking Mohammed -- using the same modernist lens, there's plenty to complain about, isn't there?
Report this comment
bruce
July 20th, 2008 11:26amThe single greatest issue during the life of Pius XII was the seemingly imminent prospect of the collapse of civilisation and the consequent possibility of many holocausts. That was how events of the early to mid 20th century were seen by those who lived them: How to avoid a new Dark Age, for which the WWII genocide would have been just a prelude?
Report this comment
JohnA
July 19th, 2008 3:27pmEllen Vosbury - many thanks for your correction: it was indeed Pius XI, not Pius XII who wrote 'mit brennender Sorge' and in 1937 not 1939. Apologies for my mistake.
I agree with Denzil that many true saints go unrecognised. But - for all we know at this stage of the canonisation process - that category might include Pius XII.
Report this comment
Denzil
July 18th, 2008 9:54pmMy attention was drawn to the halucinations suffered by the Pope and the blood curdling screams emanating from the papal apartments.My conclusion is that there are no known saints, only very ordinary good and bad men. The saints live unnoticed and unknown.
Report this comment
Andrew Azzopardi
July 18th, 2008 6:10pmOf course non-Catholics can have their opinions on candidates for canonisation, but such opinions should not be permitted to influence the outcome in any way. Especially when they deride 'sainthood proposals' as 'silly'.
Pius XII was acclaimed by all (including Holocaust survivors and personalities such as Golda Meir) after the war and at the time of his death.
The dark myth spread only after Hochhuth's play - a work of fiction.
Report this comment
Ellen Vosbury
July 18th, 2008 2:33pmThe encyclical "Mit Brennender Sorge" was written in 1937 by Pius XI,not by the pope under discussion, who shouldn't be canonized. And yes, non-Catholics are allowed to have opinions with regard to silly sainthood proposals.
Report this comment
aloysiusmiller
July 18th, 2008 2:30pmHow exquisitely presumptuous (and pompous) to use such narrow hindsight to judge a man.
Report this comment
Anthony Ozimic
July 18th, 2008 2:03pmFirstly, Pinchas Lapide calculated that Pius XII's actions saved 800,000 Jews, more than all the governments and humanitarian agencies put together. Secondly, for those of us who read Gerard Noel's articles in the Catholic Herald, we are well aware of his factual and historical errors and his Whig-like prejudices against the pre-Vatican II Church. Thirdly, it is not the place of Andrew Roberts, a non-Catholic, to tell the Catholic Church which of its Popes it should not declare to be a saint.
Report this comment
KARL ROLEWICZ
July 18th, 2008 2:00pmIF YOU REALLY THINK THAT THE CONGREGATION FOR THE CAUSES OF SAINTS IN THE VATICAN IS GOING TO TAKE ANY NOTICE OF YOUR BIASED 'WISE WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT' OPINIONS,THEN YOUR EGO HAS MOST DEFINTIELY OUTGROWN YOUR COMMONSENSE AND YOUR REALLY HAVE STARTED TO BELEIVE YOUR OWN SELF-PROPAGANDA!
Report this comment
Joseph Wilson
July 18th, 2008 1:45pmOne name: Edith Stein. One of hundreds of people of Jewish lineage dragged out of their homes and killed because the Dutch bishops publicly denounced the Nazis. Pius XII saved thousands of Jews. The Vatican and Castel Gandalfo were sanctuaries for them; rules of cloister were lifted in hundreds of Italian convents and monasteries to shelter them. At Christmas 1942 the NY Times referred to him as the lone voice for justice raised in a dark continent. It is astounding how short the memory of our society is.
Report this comment