The princes of the Church were more eager to curry his favor. "Hitler knows how to guide the ship," announced Monsignor Ludwig Kaas, leader of the recently outlawed Catholic Party after an audience with the Pope. "Even before he became Chancellor I met him frequently and was greatly impressed by his clear thinking, by his way of facing realities while upholding his ideals, which are noble. . . . It matters little who rules so long as order is maintained." Pius XI subscribed to the same principles, as was proved on July 20 when a concordat between the Vatican and Hitler was signed. The Church agreed to keep priests and religion out of politics while Hitler, among other things, granted complete freedom to confessional schools throughout the country, a notable victory for German Catholics. His Holiness welcomed Hitler's representative, Franz von Papen, "most graciously and remarked how pleased he was that the German Government now had at it's head a man uncompromisingly opposed to Communism and Russian nihilism in all its forms."
1940
Oster found a valuable recruit in a Munich lawyer, Josef Muller, who had detested Hitler for years. Muller--a devout Catholic--made a clandestine trip to Rome early that October with the connivance of Oster, his object to discover if the British were prepared to make peace with an anti-Nazi regime. He met Pius XII and found him willing to act as an intermediary. The Pope's secretary sounded out the British minister and was informed that Great Britain was not adverse to making a "soft peace" with an anti-Hitler Germany.
Muller was empowered to take this information orally back to Germany but begged for something in writing that would prove to the Abwehr and military commanders that this peace proposal was authorized by the Holy Father himself. Surprisingly, the Vatican agreed and a letter was written by the Pope's private secretary outlining the main bases for peace with England.
The Oster group was cheered. Of all their attempts to make contact with the West, this was the most promising. Perhaps the Pope's promise of participation would at last induce Brauchitsch to take an active part in the conspiracy.
1941
The Pope's attitude was not at all vague. While taking no definite stand on the German invasion, he made it clear that he backed the Nazi fight against Bolshevism, describing it as "high-minded gallantry in defense of the foundations of Christian culture." A number of German bishops, predictably, openly supported the attack. One called it "a European crusade," a mission similar to that of the Teutonic Knights. He exhorted all Catholics to fight for "a victory that will allow Europe to breathe freely again and will promise all nations a new future."
1943
Early that June Pius XII secretly addressed the Sacred College of Cardinals on the extermination of the Jews. "Every word We address to the competent authority on this subject, and all Our public utterances," he said in explanation of his reluctance to express more open condemnation, "have to be carefully weighed and measured by Us in the interests of the victims themselves, les, contrary to Our intentions, We make their situation worse and harder to bear." He did not add that another reason for proceeding cautiously was that he regarded Bolshevism as a far greater danger than Nazism.
The position of the Holy See was deplorable but it was an offense of omission rather than commission. The Church, under the Pope's guidance, had already saved the lives of more Jews than all other churches, religious institutions, and rescue organizations combined, and was presently hiding thousands of Jews in monasteries, convents, and Vatican city itself.
"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so," Hitler told Gerhard Engel, one of his generals, in 1941.My first effort to investigate the Hitler quote failed to generate a definitive source. Later posts in that thread attributed the quote to the Toland work, which prompted me to look deeper into Toland's work, which in turn led to this thread.
Soviet Communism is EQUALLY responsible, with the Nazi Party, for World War 2.
Soviet Communism is responsible for far more misery, death and genocide than Hilter’s Nazi Party.
The Catholic Church SAVED LIVES and hid more Jews, from the Nazi death camps, than any other nonmilitary organization on Earth!
Everything I’ve read (and “The World at War” documentary I’m watching now) says that the Catholic Church (as well as other Christian denominations in Germany) did NOT play ball with Hitler. They in fact made efforts to resist the NAZIs (who made strong attempts to bring religion under their control in Germany, not because they were believers, but because they felt it could be used as another tool to control the German people.)
Umm, the comparison isn't all that far off. OTOH, it also isn't inherently all that complimentary, at least in my opinion.
The rest of the story: Cardinal Innitzer issued a statement strongly supportive of the Anschluss. For that, he was called to Rome, where he was chewed out by both Cardinal Pacelli (the future Pius XII) and the Pope. He had to issue a clarification, indicating that in no way did the Austrian bishops approve of any action violating divine law.
This was in March/April. In October, he gave a sermon to young people in which he said, "There is only one Führer: Jesus Christ". In retaliation, some Hitler Youth and SA thugs invaded his residence and trashed it.
But you don't do your homework to justify Toland's interpretation before posting them.
Here is what he says about Hitler and the church:
"My own recollections can be summed up in a few sentences: as long as I knew Adolf Hitler I never remember his going to church. He knew that I used to go every Sunday with my parents, and accepted this fact. He never tried to persuade me not to go, though he said occasionally that he couldn't understand me -- his mother was also a religious woman, but nevertheless he would not let her drag him to church. Moreover he made these comments only by the way, with a certain tolerance and patience, which was not usual with him. But in this case, apparently, he was not even interested in imposing his own idea. I cannot remember that, when he used to meet me at the close of the Sunday service, he ever made any derogatory remarks about this Sunday churchgoing, or behaved improperly. To my astonishment, he never made this an occasion for an argument."
At the end of Kubizek's book he talks about his interrogations by US forces after WWII:
"In the beginning I was often questioned, first in Eferding, then in Gmunden. These interrogations all ran on the same lines; something like:
"You are a friend of Adolf Hitler's?"
"Yes."
"Since when?"
"Since 1904."
"What do you mean by that? At that time he was nobody."
"Nevertheless, I was his friend."
"How could you be his friend when he was still a nobody?"
An American officer of the Central Intelligence Corps asked: "So you are a friend of Adolf Hitler's.
What did you get out of it?"
"Nothing."
"But you admit that you were his friend. Did he give you money?"
"No."
"Or food?"
"Neither."
"A car, a house?"
"Not that either."
"Did he introduce you to beautiful women?"
"Nor that."
"Did he receive you again, later on?"
"Yes."
"Did you see him often?"
"Occasionally."
"How did you manage to see him?"
"I just went to him."
"So you were with him. Really? Quite close?"
"Yes, quite close."
"Alone?"
"Alone."
"Without any guard?"
"Without any guard."
"So you could have killed him?"
"Yes, I could have."
"And why didn't you kill him?"
"Because he was my friend."
More interesting in my mind is who voted for Hitler, thereby giving him the power to murder populations of innocents.