Posted on 04/20/2002 11:13:03 AM PDT by Romulus
Supporters of Pope Pius XII took a firm and impressive stand at a major Holocaust Conference, and in so doing, demonstrated that the debate on the wartime pontiff's role during the Holocaust may be shifting in his favor. On April 14-15, Millersville University, in Millersville, Pennsylvania, USA, hosted the Twenty Second Annual Conference on the Holocaust, which was devoted this year to the theme, "Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust." The Conference hosted lectures by a virtual Who's Who of the Popes supporters, detractors and those who fall somewhere in between. Among the presenters at Millersville were authors James Carroll (Constantine's Sword), Ronald Rychlak (Hitler, the War and the Pope), Susan Zuccotti (Under His Very Windows: The Vatican and the Holocaust in Italy), John Jay Hughes (Pontiffs: Popes Who Shaped History), J. Michael Phayer (The Catholic Church and the Holocaust, 1930-1965), John Morley (Vatican Diplomacy and the Jews During the Holocaust, 1939-1943), Stewart Stehlin (Weimar and the Vatican, 1918-1933), Jose Sanchez ( Pius XII and the Holocaust: Understanding the Holocaust), Sergio Minerbi (The Vatican and Zionism), John S. Conway (The Nazi Persecution of the Churches, 1933-1945) , German scholar Michael Feldkamp (Pius XII and Deutschland [Pius XII and Germany]), and Rabbi David Dalin (author of the watershed article, "Pope Pius XII and the Jews," published in The Weekly Standard). Ecumenical leaders Fr. John Pawlikowski, A. James Rudin and Seymour Reich were also in attendence and contributed to the debate.
A number of prominent philosophers and theologians also spoke, including Richard Rubinstein (Professor Emeritus of the University of Bridgeport) who opened the Conference with a startling--many said shocking--speech, saying of Pius XII: "The question is, whatever he did, did he regard the elimination of the Jews as a benefit, and the answer to that, I think, is yes." The statement was so wild, so beyond the pale that it created a backlash: no one else among the panelists (or in the audience) dared to defend it, and it badly damaged the authority of Pius XII's critics for the rest of the Conference. James Carroll was deeply critical of the Vatican's role during the Holocaust, and drew a connection between the current pedophilia scandals (involving homosexual priests) and the cause of Pope Pius XII. "The same people who want to canonize Pius XII are the same people who have covered up for these priests," he said.
But this charge was undermined by Carroll's own admission that many conservative Catholics who have a favorable opinion of Pius are equally horrified by the sexual scandals and cover-ups in the Church. Moreover, after it was pointed out to Carroll that many of the scholars in attendance who had a high opinion of Pius were neither Catholic nor conservative, he admitted that people of good will, from all different perspectives, can and do disagree about the wartime pontiff. As if to prove that point, David Dalin, a distinguished American Rabbi and historian, delivered an address which detailed the Pontiff's wartime assistance to Jews, the testimonies of those who worked with him and loved him, and described Pius's outspoken denunciation of Nazi atrocities (showing that they were clearly understood by both the Nazis, who hated them, and the Catholic rescuers, who were inspired by them). He ended by asserting that the Jewish leaders who hailed Pius XII both during the War, and at the end of his life, were objectively right, and that the Pontiff was indeed a "Righteous Gentile."
None of Dalin's fellow-panelists answered any of his major points, except for one minor challenge which questioned whether the Israeli Philharmonic actually honored Pius XII or the Italian people in general. (It turns out that Dalin is correct: the Philharmonic played a special Concert for Pius, on May 26, 1955, in gratitude "for the immense work of humane assistance taken by the Pontiff to save a great number of Jews during the Second World War," to quote "The Tablet" of London, July 30, 1955)
The debate became polemical when Susan Zuccotti assailed Jose Sanchez (for criticizing her) Ronald Rychlak (for using quotes from John XXIII and Paul VI in defense of Pius XII) and "Inside the Vatican" magazine (for publishing an article on the late Msgr. John Patrick-Carroll Abbing, whose rescue efforts on behalf of Jews she questioned).
Sanchez, who is considered a Pius XII moderate, and who delivered one of the best received speeches of the Conference, stated that when Pius XII's wartime actions are looked at "in context," his defenders have the stronger case. A disgruntled member of the audience, who obviously was on the side of the critics, asked Sanchez incredoulously, "Are you saying that if we examine all of Pius XII's activities in context, then we must all cast our lot with the defenders?"
Sanchez paused a moment and then delivered his answer: "Well, yes--that's exactly what I am saying." A moment later, he said he wasn't trying to be flippant but had reached his conclusion after condiderable study and reflection.
Rychlak took the high ground and treated Zuccotti's criticisms with humor; he pointed out that there is far more evidence than just the quotes Zuccotti cited to demonstrate that John XXIII and Paul VI both attributed Jewish rescue to Pius XII. He did not spend further time responding to her specific claims, since he has a major forthcoming article in "The Journal of Modern Italian Studies" (to appear in June) which does just that.
Instead, he delivered a speech entitled, "A Lawyer Looks at History," in which he demonstrated how the prosecuters of Pacelli withhold or manipulate evidence which would never be accepted in a court of Law. "If the charges now made against Pope Pius XII ever actually did reach a court, they would be thrown out for a lack of evidence," he said.
"Inside the Vatican" will publish a forthcoming article which will cover the Millersville Conference in depth, and give a detailed reply to Zuccotti's criticisms. But for now, it must be said: Dr. Zuccotti made a serious (but no doubt unintentional) error when she denied that Msgr. Carroll-Abbing ever wrote about his rescue efforts on behalf of Jews in his memoirs, "But for the Grace of God" (Delacorte Press, 1965). In fact, Carroll-Abbing, who was in Rome during the German occupation, writes that after the Nazis rounded up Rome's Jews in October of 1943, "I went back to my desk that October morning and wondered why my colleague, Monsignor Vitucci, had not yet put in an appearance. It was one o'clock before he did arrive and he was visibly agitated.
"On entering the convent of Our Lady of Sion that morning to say Mass he had found the place in an uproar. A crowd of Jewish women and their children had sought refuge there from the round-up and were in a state bordering on hysteria. Some of them had their menfolk taken away; others did not know where their husbands and sons had gone to seek a hiding-place.
"Almost immediately, word came from the Vatican that, because of the emergency, nuns would be allowed to give hospitality in their convents to Jewish men as well as their families....With each day that passed, Monsignor Vitucci [Carroll-Abbing's assistant] and I found ourselves becoming increasingly involved in the problems of the hideaways. The word had passed from one good sister to another, from one convent to another. Soon we were in touch with many of the more than a hundred and fifty religious institutions that were sheltering Jews." (emphasis added, p.56)
The issue of the Vatican's sealed Archives and the recent Jewish-Catholic panel (now-defunct) which studied the wartime role of Pius XII was also discussed. Seymour Reich, one of the two coordinators of the Pius XII study group, expressed his view (shared by everyone at the Conference) that the Holy See should open up its wartime archives as soon as possible. To his credit, he accepted some responsibility over the failure of the Pius XII study group which, he acknowledged, had leaked sensitive information, and ended in discord. But he thought the whole affair, in its own way, drew attention to the importance of the Vatican archives and may have played a part in the Vatican's recent announcement that it will release new archival material beginning in 2003.
John Conway seconded Reich's desire to see all the relevant archives, but defended the Vatican's archival policies and politely questioned the conduct and competency of certain members of the disbanded study group. He also emphasized that most historians have never even heard of, much less read, the enormously important 12 volumes of "Acts and Documents of the Holy See Relating to the Second World War," which have already been published. Fr. Hughes gave a strong address explaining the difficulties of cataloguing and releasing the Vatican's archives, which contain millions of documents and need to be meticulously analyzed and organized before they are released. He pointed out that many countries, including our own, have kept many of their archives sealed, and that these will remain sealed long after the Vatican opens theirs.
Hughes effectively demolished the arguments of those who claim that the Vatican is hiding incriminating documents, and made a stirring call for mutual respect among scholars and the Holy See as they move forward in pursuit of historical truth.
Particularly impressive was Dr. Michael Fedkamp of Germany, who sytematically refuted the thesis embraced by John Cornwell (author of Hitler's Pope) and other extreme critics, who accuse Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pius XII) of engaging in reactionary policies, as Pius XI's Secretary of State, which enabled Hitler to aquire power. As Feldkamp proved, citing unimpeachable evidence from German and Church archives, there is not a shred of truth to these charges, and that, if anything, Pacelli was a moderate realist who was open to progressive thinking, and always pursued a path compatible with an honorable Christian conscience.
By the end of the two day affair, the extreme and bitter comments made by Rubenstein and Carroll were largely forgotten, and the supporters of Pius XII came out ahead, as intelligent and well-informed scholars who had solid reasons for their views.
Fr. Morley ended the conference with a note of grace, by calling for moderation, sensitivity and humility among the practicioners of historical research.
The Conference was put together by Dr. Jack Fischel, Chair of the History Department at Millersville University, and Director of Millersville's annual Holocaust Conference, who won high marks from all involved.
The woman is most definitely NOT the Church. Let's read the verse again...
I saw a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head...
If she was described purely as having twelve stars, you might be able to make a case because of the tie-in with the apostles. But God also describes her with the Sun and the moon. This identifies her as ISRAEL, because of Jospeh's dream about his family -- the FAMILY OF JACOB, who BECAME the nation of Israel. From Genesis 37...
9 Then Joseph had another dream and told his brothers about it. "Listen to this dream," he said. "The sun, moon, and eleven stars bowed low before me!" 10 This time he told his father (Jacob) as well as his brothers, and his father rebuked him. "What do you mean?" his father asked. "Will your mother, your brothers, and I actually come and bow before you?" 11But while his brothers were jealous of Joseph, his father gave it some thought and wondered what it all meant.
If you want to say the woman is the Church you MUST account for the sun and the moon. The only other time in the Bible we see this allusion to the sun moon and twelve stars is in describing the Family of Jacob = Israel.
Tipoff # 2, the woman is PREGNANT. The Church is always depicted as the Virgin Bride of Christ -- NEVER depicted as pregnant.
Tipoff # 3, (Rev 12 vs 5) -- She gave birth to a boy who was to rule all nations with an iron rod...
The Church DID NOT "give birth" to Jesus Christ. (On the contrary, it was quite the other way around!)
Also, Chuck, you didn't answer my other questions to you from # 79.
Pretty good, Chuck! God bless ya, buddy! :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.