The Pius XII debate

The Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem has amended a text which had accused Pope Pius XII of failing to intervene in the Nazi persecution and intimated that he was indifferent to the crimes of the Hitler regime. This revision has been overdue.

The new text maintains a critical view of the war-time pope, in particular about his failure to unambiguously condemn the persecution of Jews. To this charge there can be no conclusive verdict.

It is a fact that Pope Pius issued no explicit condemnation which named the perpetrators and the victims of the Shoah, though he did speak out briefly. In his often neglected 1942 Christmas broadcast, Pope Pius said: �Humanity owes this vow [of working towards a just society] to those hundreds of thousands who, without any fault on their part, sometimes only because of their nationality or race, have been consigned to death or to a slow decline.�

For Pius� defenders, the pope�s reluctance to speak out more trenchantly was a prudent decision, intended to prevent tragic repercussions, such as the round-up of Jews and non-Aryan Catholics in the Netherlands, in reprisal for the local Church�s anti-Nazi pronouncements.

One may speculate that a compelling declaration of the Church�s solidarity with the persecuted Jews might well have persuaded a greater number of people to come to their aid. Yet, there is no evidence that public pronouncements of protest would have had any positive consequences, but much to support the view that such protests might have been counterproductive.

The notion that Pius XII was indifferent to the Shoah is no longer sustainable, if it ever was. He did much to facilitate the Catholic Church�s initiatives in saving Jews, especially in Italy as well as through papal nunciatures such as those in Budapest and Istanbul. Indeed, the pope�s official neutrality might have been a key to these efforts.

In that light, the decision by the Yad Vashem Memorial to temper its critique of the pope is a step in the right direction.

Archbishop Antonio Franco, the papal nuncio to Israel and the Palestinian territories, is not entirely impressed by the amended text, but he has perceived a shift in attitude: �This effort is being done in good faith in the search for the truth.�

This does not put to rest the Pius controversy, of course. Until all relevant documents are released from the Vatican archives�� and there is no deadline for that�� uncertainty, speculation and misrepresentation will continue to cloud the debate.

The disputes will inevitably rumble on even once all documents are released and studied. In the event that the archive�s documents serve to exonerate Pope Pius, many critics doubtless will cling to old certainties, and the conspiracy theorists will allege a cover-up.

The narrative of �Hitler�s Pope�, as the title of a poorly researched 1999 book put it, has deep roots�� and sometimes it serves as a convenient stick with which to beat the Catholic Church.

Even for some people of good will, the pope�s failure to make a big statement against the Shoah will remain unpardonable.

The Church, even if it is convinced of Pius� righteousness, must beware of ignoring the strong feelings of Jews on that matter.

Yad Vashem�s new formulation still does not vindicate Pius XII, and the text seems to accurately reflect the understanding of Jewish leaders, even and especially those who are engaged in dialogue with the Catholic Church.

Because of the tragic history of anti-Semitism, the Catholic Church�s relationship with Judaism must be grounded in humility and sensitivity. The manner in which Catholics treat the Pius XII issue must reflect these characteristics in the pursuit of the mission decreed by Nostra Aetate.

The prospect of beatifying Pius XII, for example, should be put on ice until the debate about his war-time conduct is fully resolved, following the release and due study of the archive documents.

One day the full story will emerge, and perhaps Pope Pius XII will be included among both the Righteous Gentiles and the College of Saints.