Author: Julian Schvindlerman
My Personal Expectation with this Book ( Basically why I Picked it up.): I
actually bought this book at my local
super market and I was drawn to it like a moth to a flam, when I saw on the cover, that who seems to be Benedict XVI standing
at the Western Wall/ Wailing Wall and I read the title and I thought to myself "oh boy" I'm a Catholic and I know the my Church hasn't been to best of friend's to
the Jewish People, so it's another book which will make me question my faith, yupy. and I must add I always wanted to read in detail the role
of the Vatican during the second world war, which played a questionable
balancing act.
Central Thymes
and Concepts, that interested me as the reader:
The Jewish State was born in 1948 but It took the Vatican 45 years to establish diplomatic ties when 1994 the two States established diplomatic relations.
Author
establishes that the Shoa is the culmination of 16 centuries of Christian
intolerance,and after
that Catholic Church has tried to Christianize the Shoa,
presenting the religious institution was also a victim evading its responsibility.
The Jewish State was born in 1948 but It took the Vatican 45 years to establish diplomatic ties when 1994 the two States established diplomatic relations.
The book
comes out swinging establishing that founding fathers of the Church demonized the Jewish people, forgetting
that Jesus and his apostils were Jewish the Torah was the base of their
teachings.
But the crucifixion
of Christ became the base of the accusation against the Jewish people by the
Christians, new testament presents the Jewish people as Jesus s killer.
For the author Christianity
never tried to replace the Jewish people as the chosen ones in the eyes of God,
but established themselves directly and exclusively as the new chosen ones.
The term Zionism was coined
in 1885 by Nathan Birnbaum, basically establishing that the Jewish people were a minority in exile, that felt
disenchantment with nationalist movements
of the nineteenth century and in the uncomfortable
because they could find their place in Europe. They were a people that had a
national and religious identity but were far away from their homeland.
The
Dreyfus case, in France that was a turning point for many Jewish people
establishing the new mindset that they
would never stop being outsiders, Alfred Dreyfus was high ranked military officer who was accused
of treason for spying for the Germans
and was stripped of all of his merits and sent to prison, but was really being
discriminated because he was Jewish. This case polarized the French people especially
it Jewish community that found there place in the country questioned. Over time
there was a strong debate all over Europe between the secular and emancipated
Jews and nationalist, but the push for a home land grew stronger. Honestly I had never heard of this case till I read about
it in this book, then it started to pop up all over the place in my studies.
The Balfour declaration 1917, is where the British establish the possibility of creating a national homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine, and they had been toying with the idea for a long time back in 1905 they offered to establish a Jewish homeland in the territory of what is now Uganda. Now especial important to know this because it debunks Anti-Semitic idiots that argue that some group of ultra powerful Jewish people caused the Second World War so they could create the Israel, when the birth of Israel was a very long evolution that started after the first world war. The book establishes that before and during the second world war, even though the British played a fundamental role in the creation in creating of the Jewish State they valued more there alliance the Arabs, and wanted to create a bi national State with a Arab majority.
Now the British establish the possibility of creating a national homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine, and they had been toying with the idea for a long time, all the back in 1905 they offered to establish a Jewish homeland in the territory of what is now Uganda. Now especial important to know this because it debunks Anti-Semitic idiots that argue that some group of ultra powerful Jewish people caused the Second World War so they could create the State of Israel, when the birth of Israel was a very long evolution that that really started to take shape after the first world war. But the book establishes that before and during the second world war, even though the British played a fundamental role in the creation in creating of the Jewish State they valued more there alliance the Arabs, and wanted to create a bi national State with a Arab majority.
Author establishes that during the XIX century the Vatican was a enemy of nationalism and Judaism (¿?¿, to my knowledge the Church never explicitly had a policy agianst the Jewish people and the book can't seem to find one but the book uses the word enemy with out citing where they get it), so the combination of the two in Zionism would inevitably attracted their attention. Now Church itself was in crisis the French revolution of 1789, gave birth to many political movements the openly clashed with the Church was literally losing territories left and right. The Pope's had a hard time in accepting modernity and liberalism, to the point that the Pope Pio IX declared himself infallible, appealed to dogma to confront basically the world( I must acknowledge this is a real good point) , while Garibaldi finishing his unification of Italy Pio IX auto exiled himself in the Vatican, the next three Popes : Leon XIII, Pio X and Benedict XV, where prisoners of the Vatican till Pio XI made a deal with Mussolini, in the form of the treaty of Letran, which gave birth to the State of the Vatican in 1929.
Nationalism had taken 100% of its territories, but Jewish nationalism presented a singular problem on a theological and political level, the return of the Jewish people to their homeland went against dogma that they were punished and dispersed for not recognizing Jesus as the son of God, but the book completely omits that this was a shared point of view with many Christian denominations not only to the Catholic Church. But the fact that they were going to establish themselves in the. Now for the Vatican Holy land in Jewish hand meant another loss not only territorial but spiritual.
When Theodor Herzl the founder of World Zionist Organization meets with
Pope Pio X, the pontiff establish his position relative to The creation of a
Jewish State saying: we cannot help this movement. We cannot stop Jewish people
from going to Jerusalem, but we cannot ever approve it. The land of Jerusalem,
even if it was not always sacred, it is sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ.
As head of the Church I cannot say anything different the Jewish people have
not recognized our savior, there for we will not recognize the Jewish People's
nation, not even in the form of secular State.
Benedict
XV had a different vision compared Pio X, he sustained the need of the
reconstruction of Judea, implicitly recognizing the link between the Jewish
people and the holy land, and saying that they would be good neighbors .
Nazi paganism tried to
undermined the Catholics authority, position on who can be baptized, marriage
and who is Catholic, was a major menace to the racists beliefs of the Nazi's.
When
Hitler visited Rome to meet with Mussolini, protocol establishes that he should
have requested a audience with the Pope which he didn't, which was a political
slap in the face for the Vatican.
Pope XII
had a strong interest that the German people he didn't want them to be treated
like criminals, and felt it was needed to exonerate them so he opposed the United
States plans to purge the Nazi influence in
its society, to pave the way for a western style democracy, but this
plan had the obligation the each citizen had the obligation to fill a form
explaining what they had done politically during the war, that were. Check by
the US authorities, to see if they had to be
tried to the tribunals , and what the German Catholic Church did was
emitting certificates that validated the innocents of these people. Author also
accuses that Mexico, Cuba and Argentina
(No mention of Brazil) were pressured by
the Vatican to hide the War criminals, and the author affirm that Peron
actually didn't have problems to receive them painting him as a straight up
anti Semitic, historically isn't the case.
During
the Second Vatican Concilium, proceeded by John XXIII produced
the declaration Nostra Aetate that marked a theological change to the
Church's dogma towards the Jewish people relieving them the guilt of Christ's
death from then and now ( it's sort of more complicated than that, but it's what you
can infer from the original text).
The book
presents the reader with the official teachings of the Church which
establishes that Christian sinners are more culpable than the Jewish people
that are responsible for Jesus's death. It sort of funny that it not in the
debate of this book that the Jewish people were partially responsible Jesus's, the
Romans were the just as or even more responsible, one must not forget that crucifixion was a Roman
form of exetution/punishment.
In 1993
in a dual declaration between Israel and the Vatican, the church promises to
actively fight anti-Semitism.
In the
year 2000 the Pope visited Israel and at the Wailing Wall John Paul II inserted
a note asking for forgiveness from the Jewish people.
Pope receives
Kurt Josef Waldhein the president of
Austria, who had a shadowy past with the Nazi's and was suspect to have comited
crimes during the war, but for the author for the Vatican it was more of a priority to maintain good relations
with the most Catholic nation in Europe ( author exaggerates his point, Poland
is the most Catholic Nation of Europe) over being respectful to the victims of
the Shoa. A year later John Paul visited
Waldhein in Austria and in 1994 made him a Papal Knight, for his efforts in
fomenting peace. Honestly I don't understand what drove the Pope on this issue becuase the man was pretty cuestionable.
The fact
that Benedict XVI lifted the ex-communion of four Lefebvrits bishops, had
been excommunicated by John Paul in 1998 being part of the ultra
conservative priest Fraternity of Saint Pio X, that opposed the second Vatican
Concilium, caused unrest in the Jewish community, because for example one of their more prominent members Richard Williamson was openly anti-Semitic and didn't believe that the Holocaust
took place, defined the Jewish people as the enemies of Christ.
John Paul
II definitively establishes the political and theological acceptance of the
Jewish State.
The Good and Interesting stuff that I didn't know that blew my mind:
- Not much is known about the relationship between the early Church and the people of Jewish faith the book mentions the first direct contact with Pope Sylvester I during the IV century.
-
I found this fascinating that the singe of the cross that Christians habitually do, actually comes from a Jewish practice much the same but it wasn't a crosses but the T for Torah. When Christians adopted this custom rabbinical Judaism abandoned it.
- Author mentions that in 1939 Hitler receives Khalid Beg al-Qarqani personal representative of the Saudi monarch , where he was informed of the German policy to expel the Jewish people, and he replied satisfactorily tell the Adolf that the prophet had done the same.
- Interesting
to see very the complex web relations
that the Vatican had during the first decades of the XX century.
- Studding whole the debate of the creation of Israel, one can really see the exclusive and excluding nature that religions. For example The author cites a church official defending the position against the creation of a Jewish State arguing that it is more sacred for Christians than for Jews.
- Interesting
to see very the complex web relations
that the Vatican had during the first decades of the XX century.
The Bad:
- It takes the book 125 page to get into the main topic.
- Book bombards you with information with little analysis, it shows you that the writer get lazy at moments and just wants to add pages to the book.
-
The book makes the accurate observation that the Vatican actually is two distinct entities: one is the State of the Vatican City and the other is the Holy Sea, now that the first is a purely political and administrative entity while the second dedicates itself to the moral and spiritual activities, and both are the ruled by the Pope. Now the author at moments get these two entities mixed up at moments when reclaiming certain moral obligations referred to certain international political issues related to Israel.
- The author does presents the Arabs in a real bad light any time he can, objectivity goes out the window when this subject pops up.
- Author comes out swinging establishing that Europe during that time of
the Second World War had a Catholic
majority?¿?¿ ( note the author doesn't give any statistics to prove that affirmation,
I would say it had a Christian
majority). The Nazi's where born and educated like Catholics, the
genocide was planned by Catholic and executed in Catholic lands ( again
to my knowledge even thought Germany had and has an important Catholic population
it considered a Protestant country, so Christians planned and executed the Shoa,
not exclusively Catholics.
Pope XII had a strong interest that the German people he didn't want them to be treated like criminals, and felt it was needed to exonerate them so he opposed the United States plans to purge the Nazi influence in its society, to pave the way for a western style democracy, but this plan had the obligation the each citizen had the obligation to fill a form explaining what they had done politically during the war, that were. Check by the US authorities, to see if they had to be tried to the tribunals , and what the German Catholic Church did was emitting certificates that validated the innocents of these people. Author also accuses that Mexico, Cuba and Argentina (No mention of Brazil) were pressured by the Vatican to hide the War criminals, and the author affirm that Peron actually didn't have problems to receive them painting him as a straight up anti Semitic, historically isn't the case.Book has issues differentiating Christians in general and Catholics.Book really goes the extra mile in nitpicking, for example the book's criticisms Benedict XVI when he made a reference towards the Holocaust saying in English which isn't his mother tongue that millions of Jewish people were killed during the Shao, so the author has an issue with the word killed, instead of murdered and that he didn't say 6 million, but in the same statement he said that their suffering cannot be ever denied or reduced, so from my point of view it's a idiomatic issues not a explicit political omittion. But like that there are many cases where the author interpretation is to inclined to find any error that the book losses objectivity.
The
Debatable:
In 1929
in the Lateran Treaty is where Italy
recognizes the Vatican as a independent State, so following the sub title of
this book officially the book should start from this point, because you
it would cover the Shoa and the evolution and birth of Israel as a State in 1948, but the book goes way back to the early days
of Christianity all the way up to the twentieth century, I enjoyed all the extra info but it's
not contemplated by the title, and the author dwells a lot here.
·
The
author does presents the Arabs in a real bad light any time he can, with some
stinging historical facts like there was a Nazi presence in Palestine, they had
their offices in Haifa, and they incited Arabs to cause trouble, contraband weapons and
sabotage British activities. Then book also mentions that in 1939 Hitler receives
Khalid Beg al-Qarqani personal representative of the Saudi monarch , where he
was informed of the German policy to expel the Jewish people, and he replied satisfactorily tell the Adolf that the
prophet had done the same.
The 29 of November of
1947 the UN established the partition of Palestine in to two States, one for
the Jewish people and one for the Arabs, the Arabs immediately responded in
attacking.
Way where Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess or Joseph
Goebbels never excommunicated? So look
up and could find anything on the subject but I can say they were not model
Catholics at all, Hitler even though
born Catholic he wasn't a practicing Catholic, Himmler also born Catholic and while a Nazi he wanted to replace Christianity
with pagan beliefs that he shared with Hitler. Goebbels also born Catholic
clashed openly with Church officials to reduce the influence of the Catholic
church in Germany. Even thought the author is right about their religion they
by far not representative of their faith because they openly opposed the
Church.
Me Pio XI
personally despised anti-Semitism, and is cited in saying : aren't we all
Semitic. But when Kristallnatch came around he didn't condemn it publicly. In
1939 Pio XII became the new head of the Church,
and author mention that he never used the Jewish or Judaism and he didn't sign
the Allies Declaration against the Jewish
extermination in 1942.In a radio transmission the 24 of December 1942 in
his sermon he did make a brief mention to the Holocaust without explicitly
mention the Jewish people. He only referenced the Holocaust publicly two other
times. Now the author will establish that during the SWII the Vatican
prioritized it material interest over its moral obligations, the Pope acted
like a politician than a moral leader. What motivated Pio XII to be mediator of
the post war peace, protect the integrity of Vatican city, fear of losing
German Catholics and indifference towards the Jewish people in general. From my
point of view if the Pope would have protested head on against the Axis, the Vatican
would be only a memory now, and heads of
State normally try not to put gigantic bulleyes on their territories, we know
that Hitler had no sympathy for the Catholic Church. I think the Pope chose the
lesser of two colossal evils, the man was back against the wall, but until the Vatican open it Archives of that time we will note know the whole story off what made him do what he did.
We know and the book also explains the Church took in Jewish people on the run, even the papal residency of
Castel Gandolfo and the Vatican itself they, he even used his own room. But the author
sustains it wasn't a established Church policy, he didn't order it there is no
written evidence. We history give us are certain individuals in the Church like
Angelo Roncalli, Giuseppe Burzio, Andrea Cassulo... that played a very
important role in saving Jewish lives, but it was always as a personal issue.
Now Pio XII post war image was good, even some Jewish politicians
praised his actions during the Shoa, the author of the book establishes that soft position of some key Jewish political figure
is because they didn't want to start a fight with the Catholic Church, and they
need to work with them to resolve many of their post war problems, like finding
many Jewish or fens that ended up in The care of Catholic families or
institutions. So the author establishes that it ok that Jewish political
figures can be pragmatic but not the Catholic church this moral double standard
will persist during the rest of the book. Note I think it was totally logical
what these Jewish leaders did even if they had a bone to pick with the Pope.
From the
author's point of view the Beatification of Pio XII is a way to try to auto
absolve the Church itself from it actions during the war, while Beatification
of Pio IX from a Jewish perspective was questionable
that wasn't to kind to the Jewish population in Rome. But Beatification of
Edith Stein a nun that died in Auschwitz that was born Jewish, this provoked
the Israeli ambassador to formally protest the election. Choosing of a
Jewish apostate was considered religiously offensive, while the Church wanted
to portray her as a model of conciliation between faiths.
.
Author doesn't like the parallelism
the John Paul II does between the Jewish lives lost in Auschwitz and the crucifixion
of Christ, presenting the Jewish people as means to clean the sins of man, but
from my point of view the Pope is
elevating the Jewish people in religious and historic level for his flock to
understand this communities importance, the concpt of never again is very
present in the discourse of both sides.
When the
book mentions the historically Christians viewed the fall of the Jewish people
and the destruction of the temple as a sign that God had abandon the Jewish
people, but this is over simplifying the first Christian viewed themselves as
Jewish, they distanced themselves for political reasons to evade the wraith of
Rome after the Zealot revolt (Reza Aslan's Zealot he covers this moment in history very well).
Overall:
In
1994 the Vatican and Israel establish diplomatic ties the book actually should start from this
point on or change the title like "Roman Catholic Church and its
relationship with the Jewish People" this adjusts itself much better for
what we get in the book. Also the book
uses the term Rome and Jerusalem ¿why?, does the Vatican recognize Jerusalem as
Israel's capital?
This book
has it's faults and I had to fact check a ton of stuff and there is more to go,
I enjoyed it and it has a interesting perspective so I'll give it 6 out of 10
