VATICAN - “In defense of Pius XII - The Historical Reasons”

Vatican City (Agenzia Fides) – Upon the gracious consent of the author, we here publish a translation of the Introduction to the book “In difesa di Pio XII – Le ragioni della storia” (“In defense of Pius XII – The Historical Reasons”), written by Giovanni Maria Vian and published by Edizioni Marsilio.

Pius XII? A distant pope, with such faded depictions that he is left almost unrecognizable...or deformed by a controversial representation that is so harsh and insistent that it veils the historical reality. This is the image that today prevails of Eugenio Pacelli, elected to the See of Peter on the eve of the Second World War. It was a unique destiny, that of the first Roman Pontiff that, on the path paved by his predecessor, would become popular and literally visible throughout the world. Thanks to the incipient and tumultuous modernity, present also in communications, which the Pope of Rome wanted and knew how to use: from his frequent visits to Europe and America as diplomat and Secretary of State, to the new generation of radio-messages...from the great public demonstrations to magazine covers...from the cinema to the dawn of the television, destined for success. It is an even more unique of a destiny if one considers the authority with which he was recognized in life and the almost unanimous positive commentaries that accompanied him upon his departing [this world] in 1958, half a century ago.
How did such a change of image come about in such a short time (more or less beginning in 1963)? There are two main reasons. First of all, there are the difficult political options made by Pius XII from the beginning of his pontificate, then during the tragic war, and finally, during the Cold War. The position he took during the years of the conflict for the Pope and the Holy See, against totalitarianism, but traditionally neutral, were in fact favorable to the anti-Hitler alliance and was characterized by an unprecedented humanitarian effort that saved a great many human lives. This position was also anti-Communist and thus, during the war, the Pope began being considered by Soviet propaganda as an accomplice in Nazism and its horrors. The second reason came with the arrival of his successor, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, as even before the Conclave he was depicted as the “transitional Pope” and juxtaposed, without foundations, to his predecessor on account of his character and style which were completely different, and most especially, on account of his unexpected decision to hold the Council.
The main reasons behind the change in the image of Pope Pacelli were, therefore, the anti-Communist option of Pius XII and the juxtaposition with John XXIII. This comparison was even more pronounced following the death of the latter and the election of Paul VI (Giovanni Battista Montini), as it was encouraged by the polarization of opposite sides during Vatican II, between conservatives and progressivists, two sides which later became symbols of the two dead Popes. An additionally important role was played by the drama “Der Stellvertreter” («The Deputy») of Rolf Hochhuth, first shown in Berlin on February 20, 1963 and based completely on the Pope's silence presented as indifference to the persecution and extermination of the Jews.
In response to the spread of the controversy to England, Cardinal Montini came out in defense of Pius XII (as he had also served as his close collaborator), with a letter to the Catholic magazine “The Tablet,” which reached the editing staff on the day of his election as Pope, June 21, and was also published in the L’Osservatore Romano on June 29: “An attitude of condemnation and protest, such as that for which the Pope is accused of having not taken, would not only have been useful, but harmful; that is all.” Grave and marked by words chosen with great care, Montini concludes: “Neither these arguments nor the historical figures we know be trifled with, by the creative imagination of theater artists not sufficiently prepared for historical discernment and, God forbid, human honesty. Because otherwise, in the present case, the true drama would be completely other: that of someone trying to blame the Pope, extremely aware of his own duty and the historical situation, in addition to an impartial by faithful friend of the German people, the horrible crimes of Nazism. Pius XII will equally have the merit of having been the “Deputy” of Christ, who tried with courage and integrity to fulfill his mission; but can a similar theatrical injustice be classified as culture and art?”
As Pope, Montini mentioned Pacelli on several other occasions, defending his work of peace and his “venerable memory,” on January 5, 1964 as he bid farewell to the Israeli President in Jerusalem, while in the shrine dedicated to the victims of the Nazi persecution, Cardinal Deacon Eugene Tisserant lit 6 candles in honor of the millions of Jews exterminated. When “Paul set foot on Israeli soil, in what was the most important and 'revolutionary' moment of his mission in Palestine, everyone knew,” recalls Giovanni Spadolini in “Il Resto del Carlino” of February 18, 1965, in the wake of the first showings of Hochhuth's play in Rome and the sparked debate that followed... “which the Pope tried to respond to, from the very heart of Jewish national ardor to the systematic attacks of the Communist world that even among some Catholics found accomplices and sympathizers.” For the secular historian, it was clear that the Communist propaganda played a role in the negative myth about Pacelli, with the awareness that in the public representation of the following decades had almost disappeared, in order to give way to a denigrating association of the person of Pius XII with the tragedy of the Shoah, which he had supposedly responded to with silence and even as its accomplice.
The question of the Pope's silence in this way became preponderant, often developing into a heated debate, provoking defensive reactions which were often exclusively apologetic and placing more obstacles on the road to solving this real historical problem. In fact, Catholics themselves were the source of the suspicions and accusations regarding the silence and apparent indifference of Pius XII versus the incipient tragedies and horrors of the war. This was the case with Emmanuel Mounier,who in 1939 – in the first weeks of his pontificate – and later on, of Polish followers in exile. Pacelli himself often questioned his own behavior, which was based upon a conscious and difficult decision to try to save as many human lives as possible, before continually denouncing the evil with the real possibility of worsening the horrors. Paul VI also affirmed that Pius XII acted “in accord with what the circumstances, which he judged with intense and conscientious reflection, allowed,” to such a degree that one cannot “attribute innumerable humanitarian disasters to the culpability, indifference, or selfishness of the Pope. Whoever sustains such an opinion offends truth and justice” (March 12, 1964). Pacelli, in fact, was “completely free from any actions of conscientious omission of any possible intervention any time the supreme values of human life and liberty were in danger. Moreover, he always took the risk of trying, in difficult circumstances, to do all he could to avoid any inhumane or unjust actions” (March 10, 1974).
In this manner, the endless war over the silence of Pope Pacelli ended up casting a shadow on the objective influence of an important pontificate, one which played a decisive role in the passing from the tragic World War and the Cold War, along with the struggles of reconstruction, to a new era, touched upon by Cardinal Montini in the message he gave his diocese on the death of the Pontiff, October 10, 1958: “with him an era ends; another chapter of history comes to a close. The world clock chimes another hour passed.” It was an era that included the dark and painful years of war, along with the hardships of the post-war epoch, whose real traits were thought to be better left forgotten, along with the Pope that had had to face them, defenseless. Soon forgotten were his governing, attention, and efficiency in the face of a Catholicism that was becoming more global and his powerful and innovative teaching that had also contributed to the II Vatican Council...in the process of dialogue and understanding of modernity. In addition to this intricate historiografical outlook – to which Paul VI also contributed with the publication of the Vatican archives of thousands of Actas and documents of the Holy See on the Second World War, in 12 volumes beginning in 1965 – there was also the cause of canonization. Its initiation, along with that of John XXIII was announced precisely that year by Montini during the Council, in an effort to compensate for the comparison made between the two predecessors and thus, the use of their figures, which had become almost symbols of opposing Catholic tendencies.
Half a century after the death of Pius XII (October 9, 1958) and 70 years after his election (March 2, 1939), however, it seems that a new historiographical consensus is being formed regarding the importance of the figure and pontificate of Eugenio Pacelli, the last Roman Pope. The “L'Osservatore Romano” has wished to contribute to this acknowledgment with the publication of a series of texts and historical and theological contributions, both Jewish and Catholic, that include the addresses of Benedict XVI and his Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone. Reflecting on the case of Pius XII, Paolo Mieli shows the inconsistency of the “black legend” and convincingly declares that historians recognize the importance and greatness of Pacelli. Andrea Riccardi synthesizes the formation and career of the future Pope and the significance of his pontificate. Rino Fisichella offers a reflection on the theological teachings of Pius XII in response to modernity and his influence on Catholicism. In the Pope's addresses, Gianfranco Ravasi reflects on his cultural world.
Posthumously, the nostalgic evocation of Saul Israel – written at the time of the devastation of the Jewish people, in the fragile shelter of a Roman convent – expresses the most profound reality of the closeness and friendship between Jews and Christians, but especially the faith in the one Lord who blesses and protects us all, “under the wings where life has had no beginning and will know no end.” (Giovanni Maria Vian) (Agenzia Fides 9/6/2009)