Customer Reviews

Pius XII and the Holocaust: Understanding the Controversy

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Jose Sanchez's Pius XII and the Holocaust is an excellent, scholarly presentation and summaryof the arguments surrounding the papacy of Eugenio Pacelli. Sanchez has meticulously reviewed and revisited much of the source material used by defenders and critics of Pius. His narrative is dispassionate and calm, always allowing the sources to speak for themselves. He cites the major historians from all camps and clearly sets out their arguments with some comments as to the helpfulness of their claims. At no point does he do other than that which he set out to do - namely allow the arguments space to be presented as clearly as possible. Sanchez leaves it to the reader to make up their own mind. For those who seek a "final word" or are waiting for the discovery of a "smoking gun", Sanchez will disappoint. I believe the greatest strength of this work is providing the historian along with the general reader with a very useful handbook with which to navigate the continual stream of material about Pope Pius. On subjects such as papal rhetoric and interpreting Vatican-speak, Sanchez does a great service. Discussing the relationship of Pacelli and the Nazi regime is another example of skillful historical analysis. It is not the last word or treatise on the subject, but it is a timely call to order on a subject that has more often than not been marred by polemic and name-calling among those who should know better.

When William Shirer published his standard work "The Rise and Fall of Hitler and the Third Reich" in 1960, about 15 years had passed since the end of WWII. At that time, Piux XII - deceased two years previously - was a minor character receiving no undue attention in the involvement of the terrible Holocaust two decades earlier.

In 1963, Rolf Hochhuth released his play, "The Deputy", and charged the late Pope with not forcefully protesting the Jewish slaughter. Over time, the "silence of Pius XII" became an indictment of a particular man (while the various other silences of persons great and small were largely brushed aside). There is no doubt that Catholic history vis-a-vis the Jews in general ("Constantine's Sword," James Carroll) and early 20th century Protestant Christian thought in particular ("Nazism, Liberalism, and Christianity: Protestant Social Thought in Germany and Great Britain 1925-1937," Kenneth C. Barnes) worked accidentally or otherwise with the neo-pagan "Volk" philosophies in Nazi Germany in such a fashion as to allow an abomination in human behavior.

With the publication of the popular (and provocatively titled) "Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII" in 1999, John Cornwell helped direct decades of frustration at one man: Pius XII. Apologists for "the Catholic position" quickly lined up ("Pius XII and the Second World War," Fr. Pierre Blet), and with battle lines drawn the student of history was left to wonder if hyperbole and polemic speech would ever allow for a sensible investigation of the matter.

I believe Jose M. Sanchez answered that call. In this book, Dr. Sanchez evaluates the problems and determines the issues, renders a concise history of the controversy and proceeds to examine the evidence: What type of life did Eugenio Pacelli lead before becoming Pius XII? What was his personality like? How did later changes to the papacy affect hindsight on the papacy of Pius XII? What were his feelings with regard to fascism and communism and how did they affect his action or inaction on various matters?

Pius XII is painted as a man who was refined, aloof, painfully diplomatic by nature and training, and probably out of his element in a world where people were gassing and incinerating their fellow men, women and children. What did Pius XII know? What should he have known? Pius is criticized where appropriate: He apparently took no action in Catholic Croatia against the genocide there in spite of the fact that he had more power there than in Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy.

Did Pius really fear that a papal protest would generate a greater retaliation against those whom he would intend to protect? All these issues and more are examined in this lucid, concise and scholarly treatment.

At the end of the day, Pius is neither condemned nor exonerated. But the reader comes away with a more clear view of a troubled man who bore an incredible weight and has been judged in wildly divergent ways over the last four decades.

Jose Snachez has accomplished what no other modern author has been able to on the topic of Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. Sanchez has provided his readers with an overall presentation of bth side of the argument. He has done a great deal of research al the while diplaying no particular preference or sense of favoritism.

He is to be commended for this, for I believe that he has done the very best in describing the events that surround this slender and frail individual.

Istrongly reccommend this work to anyone who would like to discover more of what actually took place in the years before, during and after the Holocaust. Sanchez writes in such a way as to avoid much technical language making his work accessible to readers of all ages and backgrounds.

I bought this book because I knew Dr. Sanchez when I was a student at Saint Louis University. While I agree this book is meticulously researched, the lack of any real analysis of the material is disturbing. Dr. Sanchez refutes many of Pius XII's detractors, albeit obtusely, but does not show the same critiques of Piux's defenders. If he was grading a paper this approach would not be acceptable. I kept reading hoping that at the end there would be an analysis of all the works and some kind of conclusion -- unfortunately there was not. Dr. Sanchez is a good writer -- something many contemporary historians cannot accomplish. But the lack of analysis and a conclusion, make this a very disappointing work. I could not recommend this work to anyone. Dr. Sanchez admits his lifelong Catholocism, but I feel that this may have clouded his work. I would have respected an outright defense, if well-argued, much better than an attempt to be "balanced" but never ending with a true weight of Pius and his actions during this most horrendous time in history. I expected better from a scholar such as Dr. Sanchez.

Out of the many works on the subject of Pius XII and the Holocaust, I chose this as a primary source for a research paper in college. Why? Because he lets the reader draw his own conclusions by providing the facts. He doesn't overdo the analysis because he doesn't want to appear biased like many other authors. A good writer of history should be as neutral as possible unless he's specifically trying to prove a point. His goal is to not receive an "A+" paper by offering too much analysis - it is to lead the reader to their own conclusion. Most of the other authors on this subject pull a veil over the readers eyes by drawing the conclusions for them.

Ultimately one comes to the conclusion that Pius XII was not in alliance with Hitler, a fact which Sanchez illustrates with hard facts and evidence. This is certainly a scholarly work. If you do not think so, please compare Mr. Sanchez's bibliography to that of someone like Cornwell's (Hitler's Pope). I would recommend this book to anyone.

One of these days I plan on reading some of the numerous books that have come out pro and con concerning Pius XII and the Jewish holocaust. Since I don't have the time now, I was pleasantly surprised to come across this book by Prof. Jose Sanchez. Prof. Sanchez provides a readable background to the controversy, discussing the sources available, the books that have been written, and the arguments that have been made. This book is somewhat favorable to Pius XII, but not uncritically so.

Even though I'm reasonably well-read in history, I learned a lot. For example, the Vatican's intelligence ability is not necessarily the best in the world, contrary to what you would imagine given the large number of Catholic priests. Also, I've read dozens of times that Pius XII (while Secretary of State) wrote Pius XI's anti-Nazi Mit Breneder Sorge, when in fact he only made some edits.

The best part of the book is that it puts Pius XII's actions in historical context. It's important to realize that contrary to what some people believe, the Roman Catholic Church is not an all-powerful institution whose members walk lock-step in agreement with the Pope. As Prof. Sanchez notes, the Vatican had tried for years to stop the enactment of anti-clerical legislation, with limited success. Indeed, this only made the church look weaker in the eyes of politicians.

One thing that is interesting is how much times have changed, probably because of television. Pius XII was admired for being aloof with an almost regal air to him. On the other hand, John Paul II has inaugurated a "show biz" papacy, much to the consternation of many traditionalist catholics.

Pius XII and the Holocaust - one of the most testing subjects in recent history. And in the face of it, almost everyone is victim to surrendering reason to their passion. And Jose points it right - that everyone looks at Pius XII and this controversy with a pre-defined idea of what they like to derive out of the entire ordeal. Either someone wants to defile Pius XII with baseless alacrity or the usual defensive hagiography. And Jose has treaded the most careful line of walking between these two sides and that is what makes this work very compelling.

Pius XII needs to be seen in the context of the tragic times of WWII.

Of course, the intellectual elite, who have spent so much energy lashing out at Pius all these years, are those anachronistic revisionists who might want a Hollywood-style Pope, the Spartacus or the Schindler, who will stand up to Nazi tyranny in the Roman colosseum, and offer to be shot before the Roman Jews are transported to, say, Auschwitz. If this had really happened, Pius XII would certainly have had a different reputation, but still those the perpetrators had sought to exterminate would still have been exterminated, as they had been. The difference - nothing.

On the other hand, there may have been Pius XII, the realist that he was, totally indifferent to popularity or the prospect of a famed legacy, who may have sought to save jewish lives in a more clandestine manner, as opposed to extreme reactions, like, say, excommunicating Hitler, which the post-war intellectual elite clamours for.

The pope may have been the most powerful man in pre-Napoleonic Europe. But it has to be remembered that Napoleon changed the course of Europe and with it, the political state of the papacy, finally rendered fangless by Mussolini's pre-war operations.

The Papacy was powerless against the Nazi machine, as all of Europe was.

When the complete political elite of Europe was a mute spectator, or worse, collaborator, in some cases, to Hitler's holocaust, placing all the blame at the doorstep of a powerless Papacy whose territory was cornered to the Vatican, by dint of the changing equations of European politics, holds little water.

Perhaps the most compelling argument on Pius' moderation may have been that, as Jose puts it, Pius XII simply was not the kind of person like his predecessor who did openly condemn Nazi policies in the papal encyclical. But Pius XI may not have been so confrontational, had he seen Wehrmacht trucks roll through Rome, from upon his pulpit, something Pius XII had to live through.

Pius XII also had difficult choices - what if any confrontation with the Nazis brings about extermination of catholics, who so far had been spared, given that Nazism was an extremely pagan ideology.

And how easily Pius' detractors choose to forget the thousands of Jews saved by heroic catholic clergymen, most of whom have stood by Pius XII. And even if Pius had not given explicit orders towards the Jewish cause, it is dangerous to conversely derive that he was a Nazi collaborator. This kind of derivation to me looks ideologically motivated and intellectually flawed like those of the Marxists.