Oh, what logical fallacy would that be, by name?
That Pius XII achieved more than anyone else is sufficient proof of his actions.
That is not "proven" See Zuccotti site, this thread.
And if it were proven, it still doesn't even address the question of whether or not he contributed to the Churches long-standing anti-jewish doctrine, which he did as cited.
Your long string of dates and events proves nothing in themselves. For example, for the opening of Dachau to be relevant, it would have to be shown that: 1 - it was a widely known event 2 - its ultimate purpose was widely known 3 - Pius XII knew this purpose 4 - And still, Pacelli signed the Concordant knowing that purpose 5 - Rome knew the Concordat forced them to acquiese to that purpose. You can't, so that the event, while ultimately horrible, is irrelevant. Same for all the others.
Oh, give it a rest, the handwriting was plainly on the wall for all to see long before 1939, or 1941, or whenever you jokers think you can claim that the Holocaust suddenly sprang unbidden from Hitler's brow.
Moot point. The Catholic Centrists didn't exist.
And, as of the agreement, forbidden to recur. From which lesson what will the average german catholic citizen have learned about the Holy See's opinion of mounting political opposition to the Reich?
Sorry. Can you point out where the money exchange occurred?
No. Just as I can't tell you where or how the central bank sends money to it's member banks.
That the CC was precluded from political activities is important why?
I assume you're kidding--unless you think murdering 6 million jews was an apolitical act.
Similar restrictions exist in the United States.
And what a comfort that is.
The Holy See was also explicitly forbidding its clergy from being Nazis.
But did not forbid them to hand over church birth and marriage records to the SS, --that would have been a political act--forbidden by the Protocols.