Your recap is seriously flawed.
Nah, it's just the same creative use of chronology that allows David Dalin to try to influence the Vatican to recognize Israel in 1994 by publishing a book defending Pius XII in 2005.
I mean, what difference does the sequence of events make when you're on a mission to "expose the Papacy"?
That is absolutely false. Pacelli wanted a Concordat with the previous chancellors of the Weimar Republic but they refused him. Pacelli found in Hitler a man who was willing to give him the concordat that he wanted but his predecessors had refused. Passage of the Enabling Act and dissolution of the Catholic Center Party were the preconditions for Hitler's signature on the Concordat, and Pacelli got his protege Monsignor Kass to make it happen so that the Concordat could happen.
Here is how one reviewer says it:
"In the 1930s this allegedly brilliant diplomat was outfoxed and outmanoeuvred by the Nazis at every turn. Obsessed with securing Concordat-style treaties with nation-states along the lines of the Lateran treaties signed with Mussolini in 1929, Pacelli destroyed the Catholic Centre Party in Germany, the only real opposition to Hitler after 1933 and the significant opposition to the Enabling Act of 1933 that gave the Führer dictatorial powers. Pacelli ordered the Centre Party to dissolve itself, as this was Hitler's condition for signing a Concordat. The Catholic Church in Germany was gagged by the Vatican, forbidden to comment on political affairs. Hitler was able to turn his attention to the Jews with his flank secured and could boast that the Concordat proved that Nazism was the standard-bearer of Christianity against atheistic communism."
It is history. Face it. Everybody who examines the facts knows it to be true.
Soon after his promotion as Secretariat of State in 1930, Pacelli began negotiations with Germany regarding the Concordat which has sparked much controversy over the years pertaining to the motives of the Vatican.
Pacelli - Concordat Negotiations With Germany
Plenty of time now isn't there?
Note: This is a large Adobe document. If you are interested in the pertinent chapter it would be wise to search on a key sentence contained in my excerpt. (If you don't have Adobe Acrobat and/or know how to use it I can't help you.) :-) Plenty of time now isn't there?
I'm well aware of the chronology, but apparently "your recap is seriously flawed." At least according to the guy who wrote "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich." --
"Its five brief paragraphs took the power of legislation, including control of the Reich budget, approval of treaties with foreign states and the initiating of constitutional amendments, away from Parliament and handed it over to the Reich cabinet for a period of four years. Moreover the act stipulated that the laws enacted by the cabinet were to be drafted by the Chancellor and 'might deviate from the constitution.'"... "It was this Enabling Act alone which formed the legal basis for Hitler's dictatorship. From March 23, 1933, Hitler was the dictator of the Reich, freed of any restraints by parliament or, for all practical purposes, by the weary old President [Hindenburg]." -- William L. Shirer, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. A History of Nazi Germany" (New York, Fawcett: 1950, 1962)"For example Pacelli negotiated a Concordat with Nazi Germany. As part of that deal, the huge Center Party (the Catholic party) reversed its long-term opposition to the Nazis. As late as March 5, 1933, the eve of the last democratic elections, the former Chancellor and Parliamentary leader of the Catholic Center Party, Heinrich Bruening, proclaimed that his party would resist any overthrow of the constitution and urged President Hindenburg "to protect the oppressed against the oppressors."...
I guess Shirer doesn't know what he's talking about either.