I’ve already looked at a theory about what might be delaying the beatification of Pope Pius XII and I have now come across an even more advanced example of it here. The theory, briefly but not unfairly put, holds that the only thing that is holding the former Pope back from beatification and later becoming a saint is the antipathy of the Jews towards him and their over influence the Vatican.
In their article in yesterday’s El País, M. Andrade and J. M. Muñoz refer to the fact that the current Pope, Benedict XVI, has delayed signing a document certifying the “heroic virtues” of his predecessor, a necessary step on the path to beatification, and that Pius XII’s case continues to be “the object of study and reflection”, in the words of a Vatican spokesman.
The only reasons the two journalists put forward to explain this decision are the “bitter rejection/censorship/opposition” and “enmity” of the Jews today towards Pius XII. Of course they mention the questions raised about his role in WWII but they never suggest that these had any bearing on the decision taken by Benedict XVI, who is only seen as giving into pressure from contemporary Jews.
Now let me say something you are not going to hear from me very often; let’s be fair to Benedict XVI. He’s widely recognized to be a man of deep intelligence and learning and he’s had a lifetime’s training in the resolution of complex moral questions. Forget about whether you like the answers he comes up with and give him credit for doing his job and exercising his vocation in a serious way. How come, therefore, it never occurs to anyone that Benedict XVI might himself have some doubts gnawing away at him as regards whether Pius XII was really such an exemplary Pontiff? Isn’t it possible that he has doubts about whether his predecessor deserves to be beatified?
And, furthermore, considering the grandeur, size and history of the Roman Catholic Church, how likely is it that Jews expressing opinions on any subject whatsoever are going to have any great effect on its internal decision making? Just asking…
Far from the opposition to Pius XII coming from Jewish sources it has been most evident since the 60’s when the Church proved an obstacle in Eastern Europe to Communist control. It was taken up by such as the playright Hochuth and the communist and secular media. In the 90’s it was revived by dissident catholics ( disgruntled ex-priests)seeking to undermine the authority of John Paul II by criticising his predecessors. Recently however a Jewish champion has arisen. Dr David Dalin, a Reform Rabbi, in his book “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope” has written the best defence of Pius yet in print. Other Jewish historians, such as Martin Gilbert (Churchill’s biographer) have judged similarly. It appears to hinge on the question of whether an outright denunciation of the Nazis rather than obstruction and rescue work would have been counter productive. The experience of such a denunciation in the Netherlands which had the opposite effect to that intended would suggest that the Pope was right. However it is not amatter for sloganising but for sober historical study. Pope Benedict is a scholar and will weigh the evidence.
Non-Jews and Jews alike have been critical of Pope Pius XII’s silence DURING and AFTER the war and have opposed his beatification. Surely, Pope Benedict XVI is aware of this opposition and “might himself have some doubts gnawing away at him as regards whether Pius XII was really such an exemplary Pontiff?”.
Dirk Verhofstadt, a Belgian scholar, who is a secularist, has just published a well researched and strongly argued book about the Pope’s conduct during the war : Pius XII and the extermination of the Jews (Pius XII en de vernietiging van de Joden.
http://www.uitgeverijatlas.nl/result_titel.asp?Id=2148
herewih link
Paula , how do you know the book of which you speak is well researched and strongly argued ? Have you read it? How reliable are its sources? How far are its conclusions conditioned by the religious and political position of the author? Is its tone academic and an attempt to view up the evidence? Does it for example answer the points made by Rabbi Dalin, who belongs to the people who were persecuted by the Nazis, and take into account the experience of the Netherlands where Edith Stein died as part of a reprisal for the utterances of the Dutch bishops? Does it take account of the Amazon review of Dr Dalin’s book?
As one who looks back on relatives murdered in Auschwitz and Theresianstadt I feel that no good can come of fostering strife. Sober academic research by all means but using a past Pope to attack the present one or to discredit the Church in general should be avioded. Is the book you quote guilty of that?