Jan. 8, 1935 Völkischer Beobachter publishing Goebbels’ statement on the upcoming referendum in the Saar District:
In recent days nearly all the Catholic Bishops of the German Reich have issued proclamations about the Saar referendum, stating clearly that in the face of the upcoming decision in the Saar, so momentous for our Fatherland, no true German can be indifferent, and that German Catholics are obligated to stand up for the greatness, the welfare, and the peace of their German Fatherland.
Source: Hans Müller, Dokumente, pp. 330-331, reprinted from the Völkischer Beobachter.
Jan. 15, 1935 Pope Pius XI’s letter to Hitler, translated from the original German:
To the most honorable and illustrious
Herr Adolf Hitler,
Supreme Führer and Chancellor of the German Reich,
The most honorable and illustrious Pope Pius XI offers his greetings and well wishes.
For the informal transmittal of the official letter in which You [Du] recently put Us on notice that following the passing away of the outstanding and unforgettable Herr Paul von Beneckendorff und Hindenburg, by the law of August 1st of last year, the office of Reich President was consolidated into one with that of Reich Chancellor and You thereby became the Supreme Führer of the German Reich, We express to You Our grateful thanks. With joy We took note of the sentence in Your letter: “It lies very close to Your heart, that the ties that bind Germany with the Apostolic See might not only continue but be continually made closer.” Since now in fact a true peace between ecclesiastical and worldly authority contributes optimally to the well-being of the people, We will most eagerly strive that, after overcoming the still existing difficulties, so far as it is within Our power, Your desire for the common good will be crowned with auspicious success.
For that We implore Almighty God, that He may impart to You, most honorable and illustrious man, and to the whole German people, His efficacious help.
Given in Rome, at St. Peter’s, January 15th of the year MCMXXXV, in the thirteenth year of Our pontificate.
Pope Pius XI
Source: D. Albrecht, Note Exchange, vol. 3, p.73.
Jan. 1935 Excerpt from Dietrich von Hildebrand’s memoirs, starting with a question from Hildebrand to Cardinal Pacelli:
“Your Eminence, what will the future bring, how will matters unfold with National Socialism?” He answered: “It looks very serious, and it will get worse unless the moderate elements in National Socialism gain the upper hand.” At that I answered: “Don’t say that, Your Eminence! The moderate elements are the most dangerous. Far better the Rosenbergs, who take off the mask and openly display their absolute irreconcilability with the Christian faith, than those who confuse and entice Catholics by disguising their battle against Christ. It is not a question of moderate or radical – National Socialism is in its essence filled with the spirit of the Antichrist.” At that he said, “Yes, you’re right – racism and Christianity are absolutely irreconcilable, like fire and water. So there can be no peace, no bridge...”
Source: Dietrich von Hildebrand, Memoiren und Aufsätze gegen den Nationalsozialismus [Memoirs and Essays against National Socialism] (1994), p.121.
Feb. 2, 1935 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 1, p. 303-304:
Bishop Alois Hudal - Rome, Christendom and the German People. Innsbruck, Tyrolia-Publishing, 1935, octavo, 64 pages. Bishop Hudal, Rector of the German National Church of the Anima in Rome, publishes in this booklet some lectures that he gave at convocations, for the Görres-Society in Trier, for Catholic Action in Graz, and for German-speaking Catholics in Rome. He deals with a subject of current importance for Germans, namely love of fatherland and nation in harmony with the supranational universalism of the Catholic faith, contrary to the errors, misunderstandings, and exaggerations of nationalism and racism that are prevalent in the well-known neopagan currents of today’s Germany. His Excellency demonstrates eloquently through the history of the Church and the German people that, far from being in conflict, fidelity to Rome is really in perfect accord, in the conscience and heart of every German Catholic, with national consciousness and with love of the fatherland and the German people. Thus is presented explicitly and in detail the thesis that was implicit in the remarkable book by the same author, “German Culture in Italy,” which we treated at length in Civiltà Cattolica, Nov. 17, 1934, p.408.
Feb. 2, 1935 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 1, p.318:
Germany. Dr. Moesmer, president of the Marriage Law Session of the German Law Academy, gave a lecture in the Great Hall of the University of Munich on January 12th, explaining the grounds of future German marriage law. According to the new law, mixed marriages between racial Aryans and non-Aryans will not be allowed, nor marriages of persons afflicted with hereditary maladies or venereal diseases. The age for marriage will be raised to 23 years for men and 20 for women. Among the documents that must be presented will be an attestation of marriageable capacity and a racial certificate going back three generations. Divorce will be based on the principle of marital incompatibility, but will be possible also for hysteria, impotence or sterility. In certain cases, then, divorce will be “officially” permitted, upon request of the State Procurator.
Original document in Italian
Mar. 12, 1935 Cardinal Pacelli writes to Cardinal Schulte, calling the Nazis “false prophets with the pride of Lucifer” who are trying to create an opposition between “faithfulness to the Church and to the Fatherland.”
Source: Ronald Rychlak, Hitler, the War, and the Pope (2010), p.88, citing Volk, Akten Deutscher Bischöfe, vol. 2, pp. 114-117.
July 15-21, 1935 Der Stürmer, no. 29, third week of July; contents related to Catholic Church:
Page one: Photograph of a Stürmer display case in the City of Mainz, Germany; this relates to the Bishop of Mainz refusing a Catholic burial for deceased Nazi Gauleiter Peter Gemeinder, described in the article “Hatred Extending Beyond the Grave,” on page 5, above and below the swastika blessing photograph.
Page 3: “Priests and Pfaffen”
Priests are those “who feel inwardly compelled to stand by heavily burdened people in their sufferings and sorrows ... they even love their enemies ... Priests never point a finger at their fellow creatures, because they know that they themselves are only – human. Priests do not make common cause with Jews.”
Pfaffen are “people who want to appear better than they actually are. Pfaffen are hypocrites ... Pfaffen are men for whom the consecrated garb of the priesthood serves only to gratify their egotism ... Pfaffen are men who have no qualms about exalting the Jewish people as the people of God.”
Note: Pfaffen was used as a term of contempt toward priests in Germany long before the Nazi era, as seen for instance in the book Der Pfaffenspiegel [The Pfaffen-Mirror] from the mid-19th century.
Page 5: Photograph with caption, “An Archbishop Blesses the Swastika Banner: Before the Cathedral in Buenos Aires Archbishop Dr. Luis Copello blesses the swastika flag of the German Pilgrim Group, who came to the Eucharistic Congress in Argentina. This Ceremony was attended by the German Ambassador and the Argentine Foreign Minister”
Article above and below the photograph:
“Hatred Extending Beyond the Grave”
Many have already forgotten: when Gauleiter Peter Gemeinder died, the clergy of the Roman Catholic Church refused to give the Catholic Peter Gemeinder a church funeral. They refused to do it because the deceased was a National Socialist. Because he was a man who hated the crime of the post-War era that was brought about by the Jews and Jews’ lackeys, and fought so that things would become better. Because he was a person who honored Priests and hated Pfaffen. That is why a church funeral was denied to National Socialist Peter Gemeinder.
Hatred extending beyond the grave...
In the freestate of Danzig a Hitler Youth leader died. Because he was Catholic, his mother wanted to have him buried according to Catholic custom. The pastor refused to give the deceased Hitler Youth a church funeral, if his comrades were to be present. No Hitler Youth, whether Catholic or Protestant, may step into the cemetery or the church. No Hitler Youth flag may bedeck the bier of the dead comrade. If these demands were not satisfied, so wrote the pastor to the hard-pressed mother one day after the death of her son, then the burial could not take place.
Hatred extending beyond the grave...
Article to the right of the swastika blessing photograph:
“Who Governs Russia”
Excerpted from the anti-Jewish Belgian newspaper “L’Assaut” no. 18 of May 3, 1935
This question receives a categorical answer through the following enumeration of the approximately 550 upper and highest level officials of the Soviet paradise. There are 447 Jews without a fatherland, 30 Russians, 34 Latvians, 22 Armenians, 12 Germans, 3 Finns, 2 Poles, 1 Georgian, 1 Czech, 1 Hungarian.
These figures are excerpted from the official Russian daily press, such as Isvestia, Golos Truda and Rote Zeitung.
Aug. 1, 1935 Memorandum by Menshausen, Berlin, German Foreign Office, Berlin:
Subject: Defamation of the Pope
Yesterday evening the Nuncio delivered informally the attached brief note (footnote: no attachment found) with the remark that he was for the present disinclined to make a formal written protest, since he was convinced that the Foreign Office would want to act of its own accord to remove the picture of the pope with the “malicious graffiti” from the “Stürmer” display case at 86 Kurfürstenstrasse.
Source: German Foreign Office Archive, reprinted in D. Albrecht, Note Exchange, vol. 3, p.112.
Note: There are multiple instances of Nuncio Orsenigo submitting protests or otherwise writing about Nazi publications in the course of his work as Vatican Nuncio, including the Stürmer (May 5, 1934, Note Exchange vol. 3, pp. 24-25), Angriff [The Attack] (Sept. 2, 1935, Note Exchange vol. 3, p.120), Siegrune (Oct. 4, 1935, Note Exchange, vol. 3, p.130), and the SS weekly Das Schwarze Korps [The Black Corps] (Nov. 4, 1935, Note Exchange, vol. 3, p.138).
Aug. 3, 1935 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 3, pp. 295-299:
“Gold, Money and the Jews (H. Wast)”
Gold is the dominator of the world! This has been said and repeated through the centuries...
Vain lament! The dominion of gold is fatal, because it constitutes the only monetary basis in all the world, and money is necessary for commerce and all trade, without which there is no social life.
Its tyranny would only be shaken by devaluing it as the basis of money and reducing it to its own value as a metal in proportion to its real utility for human uses; taking away, in sum, its symbolic artificial value and giving its real value.
That was precisely the dream of a great humanist, great saint and great martyr of conscience, Thomas More. In Utopia he says that only human folly has attributed a value to gold for its rarity and not for its utility, which is much lower than that of iron; for this reason the citizens of Utopia, who have no money, do not use gold for anything noble or decent, such as ornaments and vessels for food and drink, for which they use instead glassware or pottery, but for the most sordid and vile vessels and for chains of those sentenced for crimes, and as a sign of opprobrium upon those who are publicly deemed infamous and must wear earrings, rings, bracelets, necklaces and crowns of gold. A worse devaluation cannot be imagined!
But that imagination of More is nothing but a satire of human folly and greed ...
Now we see a modern writer taking up and amplifying – most probably without ever having thought of the great work of his predecessor – the same dream of More: the devaluation of gold, in a manner better adapted to our times. The illustrious writer and prolific novelist Hugo Wast (footnote: literary pseudonym of Gustavo Martinez Zuviria, whose works we have spoken about many times in Civ. Catt. and purposefully in 1924, vol. 3, pp. 232 ff.), who has described so many times and in the most varied scenes, with picturesque palette and effective dramatic style, the life and customs of Argentina, has published in two volumes a novel (footnote: El Kahal, Oro), which is, in the language of today, “sensational”: a sort of modern “utopia.” He believes it possible, such is the vividness and verisimilitude of the details with which he describes it, intertwining the most recent events, such as the great Eucharistic Congress celebrated in Buenos Aires just a few months ago.
The thesis of the novel, in two parts, is the following:
The basis of money and thus of commerce and politics of the nations, in the whole world, is gold. Gold, for the most part, that is three-quarters, is hoarded and “controlled” by the Jews, who crave and seek to acquire the remaining fourth and so possess all the world’s gold. (footnote: As one of the proofs of this gathering of gold by the Jews, Wast, in the introduction to the first part of his novel, brings up the fact that, in Buenos Aires and in all the cities of Argentina, prominent signs are seen: “I buy gold.” “We buy gold.” “Gold, gold, gold, we pay the highest price.” Also in Rome and in other cities of Italy we see the same signs: “I buy gold.” “We buy gold ...”) So the Jews, the bosses who control the gold and thus the value of money, effectively control commerce and channel economic crises, actually guiding politics and deciding about war: everything in order to completely enslave Christians, destroy Christianity and establish Jewish world domination, which personifies their long-awaited “Messiah.” The present economic crisis is, in fact, according to Wast, the result of the Jewish hoarding of gold. To shake off this domination it is necessary to dethrone gold, “the only god of the Jews,” by devaluing it as the basis of money and reducing it to its industrial value, like all other metals. Down with gold, god of the Jews, bogus idol of the world! But how?
Here the fertile imagination of the novelist comes into play with a supposition, not far-fetched, which he presents powerfully with all the appearance of a real current event. The scene is set in the great metropolis of Buenos Aires, where the Jews, who numbered only 366 of 443,000 inhabitants in 1887, have grown so numerous (not specified precisely, because the last census did not take note of religion), increasing constantly, to the point that Wast claims Buenos Aires is the third city of the Jewish world after New York and Warsaw.
(footnote: According to statistics from the Encyclopedia Italiana, vol. XIII, Ebrei [Jews], p.328, in the Republic of Argentina, in 1924, there were about 100,000 Jews. Assuming all are in Buenos Aires, or at least the majority are, they must have almost tripled in number by today, so that Wast's assertion can be true. According to the Encyclopedia, there are 13 cities with more than 100,000 Jews: New York, more than a million and a half; Warsaw, 350,000; Chicago, 225; Budapest, 217; Vienna, 200; Moscow, perhaps 200; Philadelphia, 200; Odessa, 280; London, 175; Lodz, 150; Kiev, 140; Berlin, 115; Cleveland, 100. Thirty cities have more than 50,000 of them. In Italy, ther are 56,000 Jews; the major centers: Rome, 12,500; Mila, 7500; Trieste, 5700; Turin, 5200; Florence, 3300; Fiume, 2600; Genoa, 2500; Leghorn, 1800. We also read there: “It can be calculated that currently the total number of Jews in the world is more than 17 million, of which about 11 million are in Europe, 4.5 million in America, 800,000 in Asia, 500,000 in Africa, and 25,000 in Oceania. Toward the middle of the 18th century the total number was probably not more than 3 million, increasing to about 12 million in 1910.”)
They dominate because of the great Jewish bankers and the Synagogue with its Kahal, or supreme council, which maintains the unity of the Jews; so that even the richest among Christians are inevitably undermined by the usury of the Jews, the hoarding of gold and the holding of money.
... Both these characteristic rebels, powerfully sculpted by the literary style of Wast, are smitten by Grace, like Saul on the road to Damascus, at the great Eucharistic Congress, which our novelist, who was a spectator and a participant, depicts brilliantly, with the impact of a thunderbolt, as a great artist and a profound believer.
With the conversion of these two unique protagonists the novel worthily reaches its conclusion. It would have been more opportune, therefore, to omit the appendix on the “Antichrist” and some fantastic pseudo-prophecies...
This is not an antisemitic novel. Wast does not proclaim any crusade or any persecution against the Jews. It is much more a warning to Christians, especially those of Latin America: “That the Jew among you not mock you” (Par. 5, 81). It is a clear affirmation of living faith culminating in the memorable Eucharistic Congress, the richest thus far of the wonders of Grace of the true and only King of the world, Jesus Christ. In sum, if not a solution of economic questions, this is at least a balanced satire, not unworthy to stand in comparison with the Utopia of St. Thomas More.
Aug. 4, 1935 Excerpts of Goebbels’ speech in Essen, Germany:
... The National Socialist movement stands and will continue to stand on the foundation of a Positive Christianity. We wish and desire, however, that just as we are religiously for Positive Christianity, the Church must be politically for National Socialism. Lip service cannot suffice, we want service in deed. That churches still exist throughout Germany is thanks to the fact that we knocked out Bolshevism (thunderous applause). The Center Party was too weak to do it, and it really didn’t want to, because it felt it was more closely related to Bolshevism than to us. They should not think that we have so easily forgotten their past sins. We respect all religious convictions. To each his own! We will not tolerate a new Inquisition. We are not the sort to build pyres around a stake as in the Middle Ages. With us, each can become holy in his own way. Forming the youth in religiosity may be the business of the Church. Forming the youth politically is our business! ...
The youth belong to us, and we give them up to no one.
And a denominational press is superfluous (thunderous prolonged applause). We had 400 of our number give their lives to overcome the political parties’ disintegration of our Volk. What we have driven out by the front steps, are we now to let in through the back stairs? We will root out every form of enmity to the State, wherever it may show its face. We desire no Culture War. But we have the impression that there are certain cliques in former circles of the Center Party who would like to bring on a Culture War...
Source: Völkischer Beobachter, Aug. 5, 1935, reprinted in Müller, Dokumente, pp. 361-362.
Aug. 4, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Religious Situation in Germany: Observations and Clarifications”
This past July 7th His Excellency Dr. Frick, Interior Minister of the Reich, made official statements in Münster which our newspaper demonstrated in an article in the July 15-16 issue, “Concordat Questions in Germany,” to be irreconcilable with the Concordat concluded on July 20, 1933 between the Holy See and the German Reich.
Ten days later, the Prussian Press Office and the “German News Bureau” published a summary of a circular decree of His Excellency Mr. Göring, Minister President of Prussia and head of the Secret State Police, to the local governing authorities, which spoke of a supposed “political Catholicism” and exhorted them “to proceed with all legal means against those ecclesiastics who abuse their spiritual ministry for political ends.”
... From our point of view, for addressing today’s religious tension one could not find a more erroneous and fallacious formula than the pretended “political Catholicism.”
The Minister President of Prussia has declared that he is against a “Kulturkampf.” We are sad to say that the facts tell an entirely different story. The real situation is that the Bishops in Germany do not have the freedom to preach the Gospel or to apply it to the issues of the day, without subjecting themselves, under the decree in question, to penal sanctions...
Spiritual ministry in the churches and schools, in the associations and organizations, is subjected to continual hostile spying, which could not be more odious.
Under the circumstances, the Minister President’s declaration that he does not want a “Kulturkampf” lacks genuine meaning, and cannot, as might be the case in other circumstances, lull Catholics into complacency. “Kulturkampf” in Germany is no longer a danger for the future; thanks to Rosenberg and his fellows, it is a tragic reality in the present...
Aug. 17, 1935 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 3, pp. 426-431:
“The Religious Persecution in Germany”
The ordinary conditions of the Church, living and progressing in the midst of opposition and persecutions, has become worse in our times in many countries. Above all this is because modern persecutors, more than former ones, have come up with various political justifications ... Among these in the past century, for example ... were the famous ones in Germany under Bismarck, in the longlasting persecution against Catholics ... which was called “war of civilization or culture” or “Kulturkampf.” ...
Today ... vexations by the German government are multiplying and becoming worse every day towards Catholics ... extreme of a paganism ... defense of the government and the Nazi Party against its opponents and enemies.
Such is the sense, in spite of ... the article in L’Osservatore Romano on August 4, 1935, which reported ... the recent episodes of persecution...
The 7th of July His Excellency Dr. Frick, Reich Interior Minister, made an official declaration which our journal covered in the article “Concordat Questions in Germany,” showing that it was irreconcilable with the Concordat concluded on July 20, 1933 between the Holy See and the German Reich.
Ten days later, the Prussian Press Office and the “German News Bureau” published a circular decree of His Excellency Mr. Göring, Prussian Minister President and head of the Secret State Police, to the higher local authorities, which spoke of a supposed “political Catholicism” and called them “to proceed with all legal means against those ecclesiastics who abuse their spiritual ministry for political ends.”
... The decree gave the impression that it concerned a considerable number of members of the Catholic clergy who, under the Concordat, were guilty of abusing their spiritual character for political ends.
Aug. 1935 Bishop Hudal’s lectures in Salzburg as published in his book Der Vatikan und die Modernen Staaten (1935); excerpts:
[Flyleaf]: ... This new book by Bishop Dr. A. Hudal is a balance of the relationship between the non-Christian State leadership of the present time and Catholic Christianity. That is one side, the principal one, of this book; the other has a deliberate, reflective facet, which is dedicated to a unique examination of all the many difficult efforts to find the urgently needed modus vivendi between the despotic totalitarian claims of the States of today, and the unalterable demands of the Christian state of life.
[Text]: A mystical aura surrounds each Papal coronation in St. Peter’s, whose glorious liturgy reaches back in part to the early Middle Ages. It is a moment when the world-historic position of the Papacy on earth comes particularly into focus. It is that consecratory act, in which the most recent Cardinal-Deacon sets the Tiara on the head of the newly-elected with the words: “Receive the Tiara, bedecked with three crowns, and know that You are the Father of princes and kings, the ruler of the orbit of the earth, and the representative of our Savior on earth!” ... Will the modern cult of State and Nation, which is leading the world into an epochal cultural turning-point by its totalitarian claims and a myth of blood and race, recognize alongside itself another form of leadership which is not of this world, and which does not make claims upon the world in the manner of an anachronism or an institution from a long-gone era of history, but rather as the most living reality issuing forth from the character of Christianity and likewise a decisive voice? Shall Schiller’s words apply: “Even Rome in all its splendor is only rotten mould of the past”?
It is precisely the present that teaches us, however, that the position of Rome, unbeknownst to many hostile movements, is not in retreat, but rather on the point of a significant enhancement of power. From the Tiara shines forth, even today, an illustrious light into the world. In the midst of the chaos of post-War Europe, the Vatican has become the throne of the world. The light is not extinguished, as Nietzsche thought, rather it still glows, from a more elevated torch. In no other field does this Führer-role and cultural-religious worldly importance of the Church come so obviously to the fore as in those fourteen State treaties by which Rome is engaged to protect the rights of the Catholic Faith face-to-face with the modern concept of the State...
[Bishop Hudal goes into a lengthy analysis of the main features of the post-War Concordats, including those with Italy and Germany]
... The modern State, to the extent it has totalitarian claims, wants to build upon the concept of the Volksgemeinschaft (Volk community)...
Today there are 40 million people in Europe who live in States where they represent a minority in contrast to the majority Volk of the State. Even if their rights are assured by special constitutional provisions, and sometimes also by the peace treaties, still these minorities live in various States under exceptional regulations that restrict their intellectual and economic development... (pp. 47-48)
... Wherever revolutions and government upheavals come to pass, Moscow has a hand in the act. It is the religious and moral dregs of Judaism, coming forth from Moscow today, that keep the Christian peoples of Europe in constant unrest, in order to prepare the way for the worldwide dominion of a race that has given mankind precious cultural values and outstanding personages, but which, as soon as it is loosened from its religious roots, must undermine every other cultural field... (p.82)
... As Catholics we want to see not only the dark side of present times, but also the light, and to thank God that we might be fighters for the Church Militant in a great era, in order to preserve the Christian West. Based on this consciousness, we want to believe with firm joyful agreement in the final victory of Christ. (p.85)
Sept. 1935 Special Edition of Der Stürmer; page one headlines and inside page excerpt:
Banner headline: “Murderers from the Beginning”
Subhead: “Jewish World-Bolshevism from Moses to the Comintern”
Inside page caption under photograph of Joseph Stalin: “The Non-Jew Stalin: Comes from Georgia. He is not the dictator of the Soviet Union. He is, just like Lenin, an instrument in the hand of the Jews. The daughter of the Jew Kaganovich is his wife.”
Caption under photograph of Lazar Kaganovich: “The Jew Kaganovich - The real dictator of the Soviet Union.”
Sept. 7, 1935 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 3, pp. 554-559:
News Chronicle (Germany): In our last issue we mentioned an escalation of Nazi totalitarianism against Catholic sentiment. The demonstrations in Münster did not remain isolated. Dr. Frick, the Reich Interior Minister, as noted, reiterating the idea expressed at the Congress of Münster, engaged the competent authorities to repress vigorously all movements against the sterilization law...
Also the struggle against the Jews is marked by a fresh outbreak of violent incidents. In Berlin, on July 16, a Swedish film of antisemitic bent was shown. Then, because there was a move among the Israelites to protest against the showing, the Nazi paper Angriff called upon Nazis to react forcefully against “Jewish arrogance.” The arrest of a soldier who had beaten a Jew was the occasion of a violent scuffle. Two thousand Nazis sought and obtained the release of the soldier. Then the demonstrators went to the Kurfurstendamm, devastated the Bristol Cafe, pounded the Jewish owner of another café with their fists and beat up some passersby who they thought were Israelites. Other antisemitic demonstrators were also in the area, for which they tried to cast the blame on provocations by the Jews; but it is to be remembered that Goebbels, the Reich Propaganda Minister, in official speeches he gave on June 29 at the Sport Palace and at Tempelhof, had ordered the strengthening of antisemitic action. And Goebbels’ delegate for vigilance over Jewish activity in the artistic-intellectual field, on August 7, upon being informed that the Jewish League, which heads the organizations of Israelite writers, artists, musicians and actors, has 30,000 members in Berlin alone, and that in Berlin and other cities of the Reich there are theaters managed by Jews, where it is exclusively Jewish artists who act on stage, announced that he would make sure that the audiences were composed exclusively of non-Aryans. In many places, signs are being posted that forbid access for Jews; many town mayors are promoting a boycott against those Germans who do business with Jews; and because hotels that are favored by a Jewish clientele are being threatened with closure, in some places hotel owners have decided not to admit Jews.
Sept. 13, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Hitler’s Proclamation at the Congress in Nuremberg”
Yesterday morning in the Luitpold Hall the Congress of the National Socialist Party was officially opened. The immense hall was filled with more than 15,000 persons from the Party’s organizations.
In the front row were the guests of honor, including Minister of War von Blomberg, the other ministers who are not members of the party, and foreign diplomats. Chancellor Hitler entered the hall, which was magnificently decorated in white, red and gold, accompanied by his staff, and went up on the stage to sit down with his lieutenant Rudolf Hess; the head of the SA, Victor Lutze; the head of the SS, Himmler; and the political head of the Franconia district, Julius Streicher. Immediately afterwards, the flags entered the hall, preceded by the “blood flag,” and the head of the SA, Lutze, read the list of the fallen Nazi Party members, while those present stood and raised their right arm.
Then Hitler’s lieutenant Rudolf Hess declared the opening of the Congress, giving a speech of welcome to the Chancellor. Hess recalled in his speech that the high point of the year was the re-establishment of the military freedom of Germany and alluded also to the new Bolshevik menace arising in the world from the latest Communist International Congress, affirming that Germany continues to be the strongest bulwark against the international expansion of Bolshevism.
Then Julius Streicher took the rostrum to welcome all the participants; and then the political leader of Bavaria, Wagner, went up to the podium to read the proclamation of the Leader.
Hitler began his proclamation, which we reported yesterday, recalling that the first Congress of the Party since its rise to power was focused on the achievement of victory, the second on the consolidation of power, and the third Congress is now on freedom. After mentioning the new positive results achieved in the struggle against unemployment, the Chancellor gave a pessimistic description of the world situation.
“National Socialists will understand me,” said the proclamation, “if I, at this solemn hour, ask them to look around at this vast world.
“The Marxist theorists who say ‘no more war’ are in fact themselves the greatest instrument for a future war. The apostles of reconciliation among peoples in practice actually fill the world with anxious hatreds and unfounded denigrations; the alliances for peace study the possibilities and methods for a future war.
“Germany can tranquilly assist in all this, resolved to be no longer a passive instrument in a game, as it has been until recently. For its security is not assured by means of treaties, pacts and accords of whatever nature, but by means of the real strength that resides in the people and in the Nation.
“Yet we feel all the more secure to the extent that neither the Government nor the German people want anything more than to live in peace and friendship with neighboring Nations.”
The German Army is the protector of the peaceful work of Germany.
Our party, continues the proclamation, is a “militant party,” because it will continue with greater vigor the struggle against its traditional enemies. These are: Jewish Marxism and parliamentary democracy, its ally the Catholic Center Party, which is pernicious from a political and moral point of view, and finally some incorrigible reactionary bourgeois elements.
The struggle against these forces will continue without vacillation or diminution.
The patience of the Government has been misunderstood by the Jews, and the National Socialist State will continue on its course to overcome this grave peril.
Hitler then criticized severely those priests who apply themselves to politics more than to pastoral care, also asserting it is a calumny to accuse National Socialism of conducting an anti-Christian struggle.
Finally, after touching upon on the necessity of reducing international debts as a contribution to solving the worldwide economic crisis, Hitler outlined the program for the next year. It consists of intensifying the struggle against unemployment, attending to the rebuilding of the German Army, and making Germany a home for peace and European culture. International Communism, concluded the proclamation, has declared to the world a new war of destruction. National Socialism has managed to grasp its glorious flag more firmly than ever and fight against its old enemy to defend the honor of Germany and to affirm its future life.
In the meeting of the cultural organizations, Rosenberg stated that an annual prize of 20 thousand Marks has been created “for art and science.” This year the prize has been awarded to poet Hans Johst and Professor Hans Guenther, noted for his “Racial science of the German people.”
Note: L’Osservatore Romano published the following commentary at the end of its report of Hitler’s proclamation:
If the transmission of these words is accurate, we do not know whether it is inexplicable that the dissolved Center Party was included among forces still operating in Germany, or whether it was confused with those that, because they profess principles opposed to Christian morality and to the social teaching of the Church, are pernicious “from a political and moral point of view” to the ordered life of the people. On the other hand, it is perhaps perfectly understandable that since it is now customary in Nazi circles to mention “those priests who apply themselves to politics more than pastoral care,” insofar as this is the only way to pretend the conflict with the Church in Germany is not an anti-Christian struggle, but simply political; while the activity of the clergy today in its sacred ministry, against hostile doctrines and laws, is not partisan, but is strictly in accord with the defense of Catholic dogmatic and moral principles, and with pastoral care.
Sept. 14, 1935 Goebbels’ speech against Jewish-Communism, as published Sept. 14 in the Völkischer Beobachter, pp. 1-4, contains the following themes:
Main headline: “Bolshevism: the Open Enemy of All Nations” (p.1)
Nazism has a world mission to fulfill against Bolshevism (p.2, col. 1)
Russia suffers under a Judeo-Marxist rule by force (p.4, col. 1)
Page 4 headline: “The Bolshevik International is in reality the Jewish International”; subheadline: “It is Jews who founded Marxism and who stand at its forefront in every country today. Bolshevism is brutal materialism based on the lowest, speculating instincts, fighting a battle against Western culture in the interests of international Jewry.” (p.4, col. 4-5)
Bolshevism is organized and led by Jews (p.4, col.5)
Lazar Moissewitsch Kaganovich, Stalin’s deputy and right hand man, will rule over the land of the Czars; his daughter, who will soon be 21, is now Stalin’s wife (p.4)
“The greatest service the Führer has given to mankind in the course of his German mission is to erect a dam against the advance of Bolshevism in Germany, against which the waves of this Asiatic-Jewish flood of filth have broken.” (p.4, col. 5)
Sept. 14, 1935 Nuncio Orsenigo’s communiqué of Sept. 14 to Cardinal Pacelli:
... I do not know whether Russian Bolshevism is the exclusive work of the Jews but here the way has been found to make this believed and to take measures in consequence against Jewry. If, as it seems, the Nazi government will have a long life, the Jews are destined to disappear from this nation...
Source: Peter Godman, Hitler and the Vatican (2004), p.80, quoting in translation from Vatican Secret Archives, AES, Germania, 1935, “Scatole,” fasc. 9a, 32-33.
Sept. 15, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Proceedings in Nuremberg: Three Other Hitler Speeches”
Dateline Berlin, Sept. 14, as reported:
Yesterday Chancellor Hitler spoke three times: to 100,000 leaders of the political associations of the Party, meeting on the Zeppelin field; to the delegates of the Nazi overseas organization; and to representatives of women’s organizations.
To the political leaders Hitler declared the solidarity that exists between the Leader and those who exercise leadership functions. Any type of effort to sew discord between the Führer and the leaders will be futile ... The struggle for power is not finished: on the contrary, the Nazi Party must continue the struggle to become more worthy every day of the mission it has assumed before the German people. The Nazi movement is destined to remain alive, because it has demonstrated its vitality in adverse times and its origins reside in enthusiasm and idealism, not in the cold calculations of reason. “When I began the struggle to conquer the powers, reason told me that the endeavor was impossible; but I did not arrive at anything less, because I believed I had discovered the pulse of the German people, and time proved that I had not been mistaken.” Then Hitler spoke about the German army, declaring that it does not pursue imperialistic goals, but only defensive goals for the existence and work of the German people. It does not exist to touch upon the freedom of other peoples, but to defend the freedom of Germany. At the end of the speech Dr. Ley shouted: “Adolf Hitler is Germany, Germany is Adolf Hitler: long live Adolf Hitler” the masses broke through the cordons, forcing those on automobiles with Hitler to walk on foot amidst incessant acclamations.
Speaking to the delegates of the Nazi overseas organization, Hitler, after listening to the greeting from leader of the movement, Bohle, directed his words to those present, exhorting them to feel part of the community of the German people, no matter when or where they are laboring, and to govern their conduct by Nazi principles. Today’s Germany represents a united people, to which Germans residing abroad should be proud to belong.
In the meeting of the women’s associations of the Party, Hitler rejected the accusation often leveled against Nazism, that it does not allow to women, in the life of the nation, as elevated a place as they occupy in other countries. Such an accusation is unfounded, because Nazism attributes a fundamental importance to women not only as mothers, but also as educators of future generations.
“Goebbels Against Communism”
Minister Goebbels also spoke at the Congress yesterday, refuting an article that appeared in a London newspaper under the title “Two Dictators,” in which a parallel was drawn between the Nazi and Soviet regimes. The minister emphasized the fundamental difference between Communism and Nazism, irreconcilable doctrines, the one destructive of culture and the other constructive and uplifting for higher national and social values. Then Goebbels gave a detailed presentation of the Communists’ methods and their results in the economic and social life of Russia, as well as the bloody battle that Nazism was obliged to sustain in order to prevent Communism from becoming established in Germany and transforming it into a danger and threat to Europe and the whole world. The minister denounced Judaism as the original cause of Bolshevism, demonstrating with citations and names that in all the countries where there are revolutionary disorders, the Communist tendency of the Jewish elements has played an important part in their preparation and their execution.
Sustaining its battle against Communism without ceasing and without compromise, Germany and its head are carrying out a mission for which all the nations should be grateful. The period of Communist revolution continues menacingly for all peoples. Without presuming to intrude in the internal politics of any country or to give counsel to any government, Germany is raising its voice of warning to all the nations against the gravity of the danger that Communism, of Jewish inspiration, represents for their culture and their existence.
Sept. 16-17, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano’s back page reported Hitler’s words on the occasion of the introduction of the Nuremberg Laws, followed by a detailed article-by-article summary of those laws:
“Hitler’s Speech Before the Reichstag”
“Statements about Peace - The Memel Question - Concerning the Jews - Three News Laws about the Flag, Citizenship and Race”
Dateline Nuremberg, Sept. 16
Yesterday morning the parade of the National Socialist formations, the SA, the SS, the sports detachments, aviators and automobile drivers took place in the Luitpold Arena. There were 116,000 persons present.
At 8 a.m. Chancellor Hitler arrived at the Arena and directed brief words to the Nazi formations to congratulate them for their fidelity and discipline demonstrated during the year, and to announce that during the Reichstag session, the flag of the movement that has given freedom to Germany will be the object of the highest honor that can possibly be conferred.
At midday commenced the passing in review of the various formations before Adolf Hitler, on a raised podium of honor in the plaza. The Chancellor participated while standing on his automobile, accompanied by his lieutenant, Hess, and General Goering.
The passing in review continued until three, the hour at which they were to gather in the Arena for a speech by the head of the Nazi Party press office, Dr. Dietrich, and other functionaries.
“The Extraordinary Session of the Reichstag”
Then in the evening, in the palace of the cultural association, the previously announced session of the Reichstag took place, carried out in the presence of the public and the journalists who were crowded into the designated stands. In addition to members of the Diplomatic Corps who participated in the Congress, there were Ministers Goebbels, Seldte, Schwerin-Krosig and others.
At 9 p.m., welcomed by vibrant demonstrations, Chancellor Hitler entered the hall, accompanied by the President of the Reichstag, General Goering. The latter opened the session, immediately yielding the floor to the Chancellor to read the statement of the Government.
Hitler began by saying that Nuremberg was chosen as the seat of the present session because the laws that the Reichstag will be called upon to approve are in intimate relationship with the the Nazi movement that holds its Congress in Nuremberg. This, with its development over time, has demonstrated the strength of the movement and the unity of the nation. Germany desires to be a sound Country and its institutions are in good order, whether as to domestic or foreign affairs. The responsibility of its leaders is thus all the greater. The only possible guide for our conduct and our greatness is our indestructible love of peace.
This declaration is necessary, Hitler continued, because certain of the international press want to accuse us of bad intentions, some toward France, others against Austria, yet others against Russia. But that is only to justify the coalitions that were deemed necessary. We will never act based on any proposal to move against anyone, but only according to the sense of responsibility that we have towards Germany. We have no desire to take a position on matters that do not concern us, nor do we want to get mixed up in them.
Hitler then moved on to examine the situation of Lithuania, stating that Germany follows with great interest what is happening in the territory of Memel, remembering that it was ripped away from Germany in what was supposed to be peacetime, with the League of Nations unable to do anything but guarantee a state of autonomy. The German population of Memel has been mistreated and persecuted for years. Its only fault is to be Germany and to want to continue to be such. Protests made to the guaranteeing powers have been ineffective up to now ... A nation of 75 million inhabitants has the right to at least as much respect as the arbiters of a people of two million.
Continuing his speech, Hitler said that the revolutionary maneuvers of international Communism will be fought in Germany by all possible means. It is a fact, moreover, that Communist agitators are almost all Jewish, just as it was a Jewish official in America who insulted the German flag and whose conduct was disavowed by the United States Government. In Germany there are increasing signs that reveal the effects of international Israelite agitation within the country, such that the Reich Government wants to try to find a solution that will permit, up to a certain point, the German people to co-exist with the Jewish people. If this effort should fail, it will be necessary to examine the situation anew.
Concluding his speech, Hitler had three legislative proposals read, one about the flag and two about the Jewish question, after which General Goering presented the proposals for the approval of the Reichstag, thanked the “Führer,” and noted the necessity of these decisive provisions.
“The New Laws”
The first of the three laws approved by the Reichstag provides as follows. Art. 1: the Reich colors are black, white and red. Art. 2: the national Reich flag is the swastika flag. This is also the merchant marine flag. Art. 3: the Führer and Chancellor will decide the form of the Reich war flag. Art. 4: the Interior Minister will issue regulations to implement this law.
The second carries the title: “Reich Citizenship Law.” Art. 1 provides that nationals shall be all persons who live under the protection of the German Reich and have particular obligations to it. By Art. 2, citizens are those nationals of German blood or kindred blood who by their conduct have shown their disposition toward loyal service to Reich and people. Art. 3: the right of citizenship is conferred by means of citizenship papers. Art. 4: Reich citizens are the only ones who enjoy fully the political rights recognized by law.
The third law is called: “Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honor.” It prohibits marriage between Jews and nationals of German or kindred blood. Such marriages are null and void, even if contracted abroad (Art. 1). Also prohibited (Art. 2) are extra-marital sexual relations between Jews and nationals of German or kindred blood. Jews (Art. 3) may not take into their service females of German or kindred blood under the age of 45. Jews may not display the national flag or colors: but they are authorized to display their own under the protection of the State. Male and female violators of Art. 1, and male violators of Art. 2, will be punished with incarceration. Violators of Articles 3 and 4 will be punished with a fine or incarceration up to one year.
Source: L’Osservatore Romano, September 16-17, 1935, page 6.
Note: The “Jewish official in America” was a magistrate judge in New York City, Judge Louis Brodsky. Several demonstrators who had torn a swastika flag off the German liner Bremen and thrown it into New York harbor were brought before him on criminal charges. He dismissed the charges on grounds that the flag was not a national flag but a political party flag that amounted to a “pirate flag.” The German Government protested, and U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull issued an official statement of regret.
L’Osservatore Romano also published the following notice in its September 16-17, 1935 issue, on page 6:
“The American Government and the ‘Bremen’ Incident”
Secretary of State Cordell Hull officially expressed the regret of the American Government for the remarks that Judge Brodsky made in pronouncing a sentence of dismissal for five defendants accused of desecrating the flag of the Bremen, remarks deemed offensive by the German Government. The communication was made to the German chargé d’affaires, noting that the American Government was not responsible, but also acknowledging that Judge Brodsky’s statement was ultra vires.
Sept. 16-17, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page 2:
“More on the Message of Nuremberg”
We have given a summary of Chancellor Hitler’s message to the Nuremberg Congress and have commented on the part of it that referred to conflict with the Church, to the extent that the relevant passage was communicated accurately.
We have now received the text of the speech. The Chancellor said precisely:
“The party has never intended and does not intend today to fight Christianity... Moreover, by signing a Concordat, we attempted to establish with the Catholic Church a lasting and useful relationship for both parties, which tried to annihilate the organized atheist movement and in that sense purified our entire life from elements that the Christian denominations have or should have fought. But the National Socialist State will not tolerate, under any circumstances, the making or continuing of the churches as a political instrument by any type of detour. There was a time when we fought the political clergy and drove them out of Parliament, when we did not have state power and the other side did. Today we have this power and can fight more easily for these principles. But we will never fight this battle against Christianity or against either of the two denominations. We will fight it to purify our public life from those priests who missed their calling and should have been politicians and not pastors of souls.”
As can be seen, our commentary does not need substantial modification, because our summary the day before yesterday was not substantially different from the text we print today. It still speaks of political priests; it repeats that religion, Christianity and the Concordat are not the motives or the objects of the current conflict: rather, it is only those priests who engage in politics. But the fact remains that so far no one has been able to show when or how, or by what “detour,” the Catholic Church is being made into, or continuing as, a political instrument; because no one has been able to show that the “politics” of which priests are accused is anything other than the teaching and defense of Catholic dogmatic and moral principles, pertaining to pastoral care; all of which are defined in the pastoral letter of the German Bishops’ Fulda Conference as “mixed questions” that relate to “provisions in the Reich Concordat for the peaceful collaboration of Church and State”; as with the activity, in the final analysis, of Catholic Action as recognized and guaranteed in the same Concordat ...
No one has ever been able to show precisely where clergy and Catholics are engaged in politics, except in the sphere proper to sacred ministry ...
It therefore seems necessary to decide once and for all to get rid of suspicions or else document the alleged political activity on the part of clergy and Catholics, or declare that those activities which are strictly inherent in the religious and moral mission of the Church are allowed by the same Concordat ...
The question would be cleared up once and for all. Because, with no evidence of party politics, it will be obvious that we are dealing not with actions but with what is inherent in religious life; so that the fight is against Christianity, “annihilating the Gospel.”
Sept. 18, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page 8:
“The Military Parade in Nuremberg”
Hitler speaks to the troops: “The stability of the Government is guaranteed forever”
Dateline Berlin, Sept. 17, as reported:
Yesterday evening, at the conclusion of the last day of the Nuremberg Congress, dedicated to the new German army, Chancellor Hitler spoke to the troops, saying that that the German people have made an act of indestructible faith, prepared to make every sacrifice in the certainty of continuing to keep the peace of the nation ...
After the speech the great military review took place ...
Late in the evening in the Luitpold Arena, the Congress closed with a new speech in which the Führer traced the history of the German people ... the National Socialist Party, to which alone Germany owes its salvation. Hitler said that for all Germans it is an imperative necessity to recognize blindly and without any reservations, the authority of the National Socialist Party ...
It is not a matter of discussing questions of infallibility: the party requires that the people subordinate their will ... In the face of the indestructible principle of obedience, all must obey. Concluding, the Chancellor declared his unchanging solidarity with the party, which guarantees eternally the stability of the Government and people of the Reich.
Sept. 18, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page 8:
“The Swastika Flag on the German Merchant Marine Fleet”
The head of German navigation and state counselor, Essberger, ordered that starting today the entire German merchant marine fleet will adopt the swastika flag.
Aboard all ships anchored in port, the solemn ceremony of the changing of the flag was conducted.
Original document in Italian
Sept. 18, 1935 Völkisch Observer’s lead article saying Catholic associations in Germany are under the control of Moscow:
Banner headline, page one: “Moscow Speaks of an Established Front of Unity with German Catholic Youth”
Subheads: “The Führer Clarifies the Roles of Party and State” - “The Party is the Führer, and the Führer is the Party!” - “The Red ‘Trojan Horse’ and the Catholic Organizations”
Source: Völkischer Beobachter, North German Edition, Berlin, Sept. 18, 1935, p.1.
L’Osservatore Romano’s five articles in the week of Sept. 18-25, 1935 about the implementation and effect of the Nuremberg Laws on the flag, citizenship, and marriages with Jews:
Sept. 19, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, back page:
“International Consequences of the New German Laws on Marriage”
Dateline Amsterdam, Sept. 18
The German law on the protection “of German blood and honor,” which prohibits marriage between Aryans and Jews, has consequences also in Holland. In fact, in virtue of the treaty of June 12, 1912, a marriage cannot be entered between German subjects of non-Aryan origin and those of Dutch Aryan origin, and vice versa...
Original document in Italian
Sept. 20, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“New Regulations for the Reich Flag”
Dateline Berlin, Sept. 19
For the implementation of the law enacted by the Reichstag for the new flag, the Interior Ministry has issued regulations for the hoisting on public buildings of the only permitted flag, that with the swastika, it now being prohibited to fly the old black-white-red flag ... Municipalities can fly local flags next to the Reich flag.
Original document in Italian
Sept. 21, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Jews in the Reich Considered as Foreigners”
Dateline Berlin, Sept. 20
Commenting on the recently promulgated laws, the Nazi Party press writes that relations between Germany and the Jews require a special agreement given the position that they occupy in the midst of the German people. They are visitors in Germany like other foreigners, but they are special visitors, because they have no Fatherland. Numerically they constitute a minority, but one which does not come within the concept of an established minority under international law: with the result that, while they are conceded an equality of rights with other minorities, the Jews will have only the rights of foreign residents in Germany.
Original document in Italian
Sept. 24, 1935 Excerpt from Bishop Hudal’s book The Vatican and Modern States, p.82:
Wherever revolutions and governmental upheavals come to pass, Moscow has a hand in the act. It is the religious and moral dregs of Judaism, coming forth from Moscow today, that keep the Christian peoples of Europe in constant unrest, in order to prepare the way for the worldwide dominion of a race that has given mankind precious cultural values and outstanding personages, but which, as soon as it is loosened from its religious roots, must undermine every other cultural field.
Ueberall, wo Revolten und staatliche Umwälzungen sich vollziehen, hat Moskau die Hand im Spiel. Es ist der religiöse und sittliche Auswurf des Judentums, der heute von Moskau aus die christlichen Völker Europas in ständiger Unruhe hält, um der Weltherrschaft einer Rasse die Wege zu bereiten, die der Menschheit wertvolle Kulturgüter und hervorragende Persönlichkeiten geschenkt hat, die aber, sobald sie religiös entwurzelt ist, jeden anderen Kulturkreis zersetzen muss.
Source: Bishop Alois Hudal, Der Vatikan und die Modernen Staaten (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1935)(internal date of Sept. 24, 1935 in book)
Sept. 26, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The New Laws of the Reich Explained to Nazi Leaders”
Dateline Berlin, Sept. 25
The “Nazi Party Post” reports: “Yesterday another conference of Party leaders was convened in Munich to make known the latest arrangements concerning the new laws as to citizenship in the Reich.
After a presentation by Dr. Wagner on the ideological basis of the new decrees, Chancellor Hitler took the floor to point out the fundamental aspects of the problem under consideration. The meeting concluded with the words of Deputy Hess, who saluted the Fuhrer, extolling the work realized with the new decrees.
Original document in Italian
Oct. 5, 1935 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 4, pp. 81-82, on the Nazi Party Congress:
III. Foreign News
1. GERMANY. Congress at Nuremberg. Chancellor’s Speeches. The religious question...
1. (Germany). The Nazi Party Congress opened on the morning of September 11 in the Luitpold Hall in Nuremberg. Chancellor Hitler, after reviewing the positive results recently achieved by the Nazi regime, described the sad state of world politics, shaken by unrest and insecurity. But Germany is experiencing tranquility in all this, with security that comes not by means of treaties, pacts and agreements, but by means of the vital force that is in the people and nation. The Party will continue with increased vigor the fight against its enemies: Jewish Marxism and parliamentary democracy, the pernicious Catholic Center Party ...
As to the religious question, the Chancellor declared: The Party has never intended, and does not intend, to oppose Christianity...
L’Osservatore Romano (16-17 Sept), commenting on this speech, noted:
“There continues to be talk about the politics of priests: it is repeated that religion, Christianity, the Concordat, are not the reason or the object of the current conflict: rather it is those individuals, those priests, who engage in politics. But in fact no one has ever been able to demonstrate when and how ... no one has ever been able to prove that the “politics” of which priests are accused is anything but the teaching and defense of Catholic dogmatic and moral principles ...”
The pastoral letter, mentioned in L’Osservatore Romano, addressed to German Catholics by 26 bishops at the end of August at the annual bishops’ conference at Fulda, around the tomb of St. Boniface, with clear and authoritative accents, together with paternal charity, showed the true state of the “religious question” in Germany, where “the enemies of the Christian faith and the Catholic Church have become legion,” and despite their divisions, they are united in their battle against the substance and fundamentals of the Christian religion.
Therefore the faithful need to “be constant in the faith,” to listen to the word of God ... The faith is the basis of the moral order of the world ... The Kingdom of God must be realized also in the life of society: “one cannot be a Christian at home, in his room, and out in public be a pagan.” There is a battle against “political Catholicism”; but what does this term mean? ... And the bishops recall the Concordat, which “assures the public exercise of the Catholic religion,” which establishes “the peaceful collaboration between Church and State” in the questions of schools and the rights of marriage. In the Concordat, the German Government guaranteed “with the word of honor and with the signature” the preservation and further institution of Catholic denominational schools. The bishops concluded: “Be patient in troubles and persevering in prayer! We are in prayer for our Church. But we are in great prayer for our people and our Fatherland.”
Chancellor Hitler gave three other speeches at Nuremberg ...
Nov. 17, 1935 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Application of the German Laws on Citizenship - Dismissal of the Jews”
Dateline Berlin, Nov. 16
Yesterday the Reich Government issued the first decrees for the application of the laws on Reich citizenship and the laws on the protection of German blood and honor, approved by the Reich Parliament in the session held on September 15 in Nuremberg during the Party Congress.
Until the promulgation of new regulations on citizenship identity cards, those nationals of German blood who had the right to vote for the Reichstag, as of the time the law on citizenship went into effect, will be provisionally considered citizens, as well as those on whom the Reich Interior Minister, with the consent of the Deputy Führer, confers provisional rights of Reich citizenship.
A Jew cannot be a Reich citizen and has no right to vote on political matters nor to hold public office. All Jewish public servants will be dismissed at the end of the year and as retirees will receive the normal pensions allotted to all those who fought at the front during the World War, whether in the German army or in allied armies. The second decree specifies the criteria of Jewishness, amplifying the provisions contained in the bill of September 15.
Original document in Italian
Dec. 25, 1935 Christmas Day news item in L’Osservatore Romano, page 8:
“Antisemitic Laws Approved by a Jew”
Dateline Berlin, Dec. 24
The Nuremberg Laws will introduce a new era in the history of the Jewish people and will delineate a clear line of demarcation between the two peoples that live together, according to a statement to the Angriff by Mr. George Kareski, appointed director of the Jewish cultural association of Germany with the consent of the political police. Kareski approves the Nuremberg Laws and the schools and theaters reserved to the Jews. It is believed that the prohibition of mixed marriages will further the maintenance of Jewish family traditions.
It is expected that the Jewish community of Berlin will organize a petition against Kareski.
Note: The Angriff [“the Attack”] was a Nazi newspaper published in Berlin, founded and supervised by Nazi propaganda chief Goebbels.
Original document in Italian
Feb. 6, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“New Objectives of Soviet Foreign Policy”Diane7
(G.G.) – Two sinister figures of propaganda of hatred have traversed Europe in recent days, holding meetings and political discussions in London and Paris: the commissar for foreign affairs, Litvinov, and the field marshal of the red army, Tucaschevski...
Feb. 23, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 8:
“Antisemitic Speech by Goebbels”Diane7
Dateline: Berlin, Feb. 22
Yesterday at the municipal hall in Magdeburg, Minister Goebbels spoke before eight thousand persons. The speech was broadcast by radio into other halls, where the listeners were numbered at twenty-five thousand. With impressive words, Goebbels spoke of the world enemy, the Jew, who a few days ago leveled a revolver against a representative of National Socialism.
“I deplore the foreign press that supports the point of view that the guilty one is not the assassin, but the one assassinated.”
The events in South America, the churches burned down in Spain, are warning lights that show where the promoting of such Jewish intrigue reaches. By contrast, the minister emphasized the order currently existing in Germany. (Minister Goebbels, evidently, leaves aside the juridical order).
March 17, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Germany conditionally accepts the invitation to participate in the meeting of the Council: Reconstruction”Diane7
The signatory Powers to the Locarno Pact have judged that Germany has violated it.
Germany has justified the militarization of the Rhineland by the necessity of affirming its equality of rights with other Nations and standing up against the Franco-Soviet Pact, which would be in its turn an irreconcilable violation of the Locarno Pact and a threat to the Reich, from which, notwithstanding any other commitment, arises the natural right of defense.
In the polemics that whirl around these days in parliamentary debates, in diplomatic conferences, in the press, the reply has been the upholding of the inviolability of Treaties; denying that the Franco-Soviet Pact violated the Locarno Pact and was directed against Germany, since Germany was invited to participate in it. As for equality of rights, for any alleged harm, for any natural right of defense, before unilateral action there is the obligation, agreed at Locarno, to resort to the League of Nations.
We are facing the essential question of the most grave international crisis of today. On the one hand, Treaties and Pacts that peoples and governments deem inviolable by the fact itself that both sides signed it; on the other hand, claims from the great war that other peoples and governments then have not renounced despite agreements that have been drawn up; considering rights and interests of Nations assalus pubblica, suprema lex [Latin: public safety is the supreme law] in the face of anything else.
We note how incontrovertible it is that the civil co-existence of peoples under international law cannot prescind from a foundation, from an inviolable norm, and that respect for it by all must mean for all the commonsalus pubblica, that is the common supreme lex.
In the public law concerning this foundation and this norm is the law guaranteeing the sovereignty of the State. In international law a pact can only be guaranteed by ironclad reciprocal fidelity. There cannot be seen, there does not exist, another principle or another force that can assure justice, inspire and regulate conduct, give stability to international life, constitute the safeguarding of civilization and the ubi consistam [Latin: essence] of its secure development and progress.
“Fundamentum autem est justitiae fides, id est dictorum conventorumque constantia et veritas.” [Latin: Fidelity to justice is fundamental, moreover, that is, constancy and truth for promises and agreements.] From ancient Rome to the great war, history confirms the irreplaceable sagacity of these words. Benedict XV, in the face of a sanguinary reality, to redeem the future of humanity from it, translated the passage from De Officiis, in his famous Note: “And first of all, the fundamental point must be to uphold the moral force of law”: the fidelity that serves for treaties and for arbitrations.
It is true. For we are always among men. Injustice, evil, inequity can always be insinuated even into civil peace agreements. The laws as well, and the tribunals, are unfortunately not exempt from this. But that does not mean that it is licit to rebel against a law or a judgment; it does not mean that this other way would be more certain or less pernicious; above all, that in the triumph of justice, by the means of justice, we should have confidence.
We think therefore that the greatest benefit for peace above all, for the aspirations of peoples themselves, consists in the re-establishment among the Powers and thus in the conscience of the Nations, so profoundly disturbed in these recent times, of the sense of fidelity; consisting in removing the sad persuasion that, despairing of the sanctity of signed treaties, can only rest if armed; that considers war to be inevitable; so that preparing for it is an obligation and necessity for all.
We think this all the more with the great expansion of disagreements, disputes and conflicts of today, and the strengthening of the peril for all of a doctrine and a praxis that is the negation, the “opposite,” of religion and Christian civilization, and thus of order and of civil society in the world: the expansion and strengthening of Communism, which for its ferociously materialistic conception of life, has precisely and unfortunately, everything to gain from the weakening in this life of virtues, of moral institutions; from the dissolution of all sentiment and all constraint of faithful solidarity.
June 19, 1936 Excerpt from Bishop Hudal's book The Foundations of National Socialism presented in pre-publication form to Hitler on this date:
As Christians and Catholics, we have not the slightest reason to defend that Jewry which, after the World War, seized hold of the leadership of the worker masses under the banner of Marxism, and misused that leadership richly enough for their own selfish ends; yet, only because we condemn every injustice, we avoid any generalization, as if in history it is only Judaism that has been responsible for social and political abuses. (pp. 92-93)
Sept. 9, 1936 Hitler’s speech to the Nazi Party Congress (headlines and excerpts):
“The Führer’s Speech”
Who indeed will doubt it still today, that we no longer live at the eve, but rather in the midst, of one of the greatest conflicts that has ever haunted humanity? ...
“Freedom and Community” ... We all know that it is the goal of Bolshevism to root out the existing racially organic leadership of the peoples and thereby subject the Aryan peoples to foreign Jewish elements. Therein lies the basis of the international character of this problem.
Just as in Russia 98 percent of the entire current leadership of the Soviet and commune republics is in the hands of Jews, none of whom were ever farmers or workers, but simply over-educated parasitic world intellectuals who needed to feed off other peoples, so we are experiencing in recent weeks, as Marxism in Spain begins to rage, the same process of striking down and rooting out the racially appropriate völkisch and governmental leadership in Spain, by means of Jewry, partly native there and partly coming from other countries...
“The Highest Communal Achievement of Humanity is Culture” ...
“Culture is the Essential Expression of Political Leadership” ...
“The Will to Idealism” ...
“New Authority or Destruction” ...
“The Laws of National Socialist Art” ... Diane7Diane7Diane7
German original, published in Völkischer Beobachter, Sept. 11, 1936, page 4 - page 5 - page 6
Sept. 10, 1936 Goebbels’ speech to the Nazi Party Congress (headlines and excerpts):
“Bolshevism must be annihilated, if Europe is to be healthy again!” ...
What goes by the name of Bolshevism has absolutely nothing to do with what we are accustomed to understand generally as idea and ideology. What it is really about is a pathological, criminal insanity, provably invented and led by Jews with the goal of destroying the peoples of European civilization and establishing an international Jewish world dominion over them. Bolshevism could only come forth from the Jewish brain ...
The bourgeoisie is powerless in the face of Bolshevism in all countries and completely disunited in the struggle against it...
“The System of Bolshevistic Propaganda” ...
“Jewry and Bolshevism” ...
“Bolshevism’s Fraud on the Workers” ...
“The Bloody Terror of Bolshevism” ... When I raised a warning voice last year at the Nuremberg Party Congress about the likely foreseeable effects of the Seventh Comintern Congress of July 25th to August 21st 1935, the world exhibited only silence and ignorance toward my warning...
“Spain as Beacon”
Nothing, however, gives us better graphic instruction, nothing could more profoundly convince us, of the gravity of the decisions of the Seventh World Congress, than the bloody and shocking events in Spain. They represent the word for word carrying out of the orders that were given there...
The world press finally had to report, indeed, about the inhuman horrors that the Spanish Marxists committed under orders from their foreign leaders...
The details that have reached us about the murders of priests and rapes of nuns are unimaginable. Some examples: the Archbishop of Tarragona and the Bishop of Lerida were murdered ...
That is the true face of Bolshevistic atheism, which dares, in other countries, to profess its readiness to cooperate with the churches. The picture of the bodies of nuns ripped out from their cloister in Barcelona is a symbol of the violation of everything holy by Bolshevism... That is what the true face of Bolshevism looks like!
Who bears the guilt for what is going on in Spain, as an ideological and practical matter?
All these events represent nothing other than the decisions made in Moscow.
For their implementation, the Bolshevistic Jew Bela Kun, the “Murderer of Hungary,” was sent to Spain...
“National Socialism as the Rampart against the Red Storm” ...
“The Red Army” ... Diane7Diane7Diane7
German original, published in Völkischer Beobachter, Sept. 11, 1936, page 6 - page 7 - page 8
Oct. 3, 1936 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 4, pp. 37-46:
“The Jewish Question”
Two facts that may seem contradictory are both verified by the Jews scattered through the modern world: their dominion over money and their preponderance in Socialism and Communism.
The one appears favorable to property rights and the conservative spirit, the other evidently contrary.
“The spirit of the Jew is dual: it is mystical and it is positive,” says one of them, Bernard Lazare, who explains: “On the one hand, the Jews have been among the founders of industrial finance capitalism and have collaborated actively in the maximal concentration of capital, which certainly will facilitate their socialization; on the other hand, they among the most ardent adversaries of capital. To the Jew who rakes in the gold, son of the exile, of Talmudism, of persecutions, is contrasted the revolutionary Jew, son of the Biblical and prophetic tradition. Each Rothschild is reciprocated by a Marx and a Lassalle; the struggle for money, by the struggle against money; and the cosmopolitanism of the agitators becomes proletarian and revolutionary internationalism.” [footnote 1: Léon de Poncins, La mystérieuse Internationale juive, Paris, G. Beauchesne, 1936, p. 179. – Of this recent work and another, preceding it by several years, by P. Bonsirven, S.J. (whom we have cited earlier), we make use primarily, because both, founded on the testimonies of the Jews themselves, deal up close with the same question that we here want to expound objectively in its essential elements. As to exaggerations and aberrations on the same question, see: “The Jewish Question and National Socialist Antisemitism”. Civiltà Cattolica 1934, IV, 126.] Jewish domination of finance is well known to all, but de Poncins goes to lengths to demonstrate it with many testimonies by the Jews themselves, quotations from whom compose almost all of his book. From the emancipation of the Jews , in the French Revolution, to today, “in one century, they have become the masters of money, and with the money they have subjected to their dominion, they have become the masters of the world.” It is Lazare himself who says this.
The Jewish preponderance in Socialism and Communist is also well known. De Poncins demonstrates it point by point with facts, from the two “Red prophets,” Karl Marx and Ferdinand Lassalle, the patriarchs of Socialism and Communism, both Jews, to the more recent revolutionary capos, all Jews, of modern Socialism and Communism.
In Russia, Lenin’s comrades: Trotski, Sverdlov, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Uriski, Sokolnidov, and the organizers of the slaughter of the Imperial family, Yurovski and Golostcheguine at the orders of Sverdlov. In Hungary, Bela Kun, Tibor Szamuely and the gang leaders of the bloody Bolshevism. In Germany, the directors of “Spartacism”: Liebknecht, rosa Luxemburg, Kurt Eisner, Eugen Levine; a Jew, Parvus Helphand, supported by a semi-Jew, Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg, procured from Ludendorff the safe passage of Lenin into Russia. In Austria, the Socialist capos: Victor and Frederick Adler, Julius Deutsch and Otto Bauer. In France, Leon Blum, capo of French Socialism, who currently governs France. In Spain, devastated by the Communists, the absolute boss of Madrid, as the newspapers report, is Heinz Neumann, ex-capo of the German Communist Party, from a rich Hebrew family in Berlin, who escaped Germany after the advent of Hitler.
This dual aspect, apparently contradictory, co-exists in Judaism, and is self-consciously deliberate. Walter Rathenau, Jew, great magnate of finance and industry, man of State well known in the Kaiser’s imperial court, died in 1922, confessed that, as in the span of a hundred years the revolution in the West, the French one of 1789, had overturned the world everywhere, so the revolution in the East (that is the Jewish one) will be completed in a century: “After our planet, during the course of various centuries, built, assembled, conserved, preserved and accumulated material and intellectual treasures to serve the pleasure of the few, I see coming the century of demolitions, destructions, dispersion, return to barbarism… [ellipsis in original] At the beginning of the war I had written: “Ruins behind us and ruins ahead of us; we are a race of transition, destined to be fertilizer, unworthy of the harvest.”...
How to explain this bond between finance and revolution? De Poncins proposes three reasons that, if not the full explanation, cast it nonetheless in a certain light: 1st There is a similar mentality between Socialism and modern capitalism, since both are founded upon a materialistic economic conception of the world, of Jewish-Puritan origin. 2nd The capitalists are of two sorts: proprietors of land and industry on the one hand, and on the other hand profiteers who live by speculation. Social disorder, fatal to the first, is for the second an occasion for profit. 3rd Socialism is not always an end in itself, and can be a weapon and a means of destruction that favors the designs of international finance.
The Jews are rich, but it is a richness different from that of other men ...
Father Joseph Bonsirven, S.J., a specialist in Jewish matters, in a work where he expounds objectively, and indeed with benevolence and the spirit of Christian charity, the Judaism of the diaspora, explains differently the financial predominance and the notable participation of the Jews in modern revolutions: the one with their superiority in commercial aptitude, the other with their unfulfilled aspirations, but as profiteers, not as authors or inspirers of any revolution.
“It is generally to be observed,” he says, “that the success of the Jew, merchant and worker, is due in part to his ... [footnote 1: Joseph Bonsirven, Sur les ruines du Temple, Paris, Bernard Grasset, 1928, p. 325.]
As to the other predominance, says Father Bonsirven: “... Jewish Messianism must inevitably culminate in the revolutionary spirit, which is the spirit of the Torah and of the prophets and Socialists; are not the great prophets of Socialism and of collectivism Jews? ...
Thus, no matter how it is explained, the two facts remain clear and proven, the capitalist finance predominance and the revolutionary Communist predominance, if not of all the Jewish people, certainly of the portion of them that stand out. Therefore, if not all, not a few of the Jews constitute a grave and permanent danger to society.
What will be the practical solution? Up to now absolutely none has been found, neither definitive nor satisfactory. De Poncins, in his conclusion, says that all the solutions proposed up to now boil down in substance to three: Zionism, assimilation, the ghetto.
Assimilation would be the perfect solution, if it were possible, as happened with all the barbaric peoples that invaded the Roman Empire.
Long experience has proven that assimilation is impossible, and moreover is rejected with horror by the immense majority of the Jews. “The Jews are Jews; they want to remain Jews; always, everywhere, even despite themselves, they remain Jews,” says one of them quoted by de Poncins (p. 262).
Zionism seems a satisfactory solution, but does not appear attainable. First, because the Arabs … Second, because the poor land of Palestine cannot support and feed a population of millions of inhabitants … Third and primarily, because the European and American Jews do not want to ...
Nec tecum, nec sine te! [Latin: Neither with you nor without you!] Really, the church, in the entire medieval era, always prevented any persecution of the Jews ...
Also today a way has to be found to render them harmless, by means more adapted to modern conditions, excluding, it is understood, any persecutions. It may appear that Zionism could be understood as this modern solution, if Zionism could be established and last … [ellipsis in original] At least, says Poncins, Zionism would serve to prove the existence of the Jewish nation, and to constrain the Jews to stop their pretension of double nationality. In the Treaty of Versailles it a special protection was obtained for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, a protection masquerading under the formula of “Minority Rights,” and at the same time the recognition of a Jewish State in Palestine. This existence of Jewish nationality was at the same time affirmed and denied to the extent of Jewish interests. If the existence of a Jewish nation is officially recognized in Palestine, then the Jews of the entire world must be treated as citizens of the Zionist State. But they continue essentially to preserve the privilege of their double nationality and profit from all the rights of citizens of the countries where they reside. It suffices that this equivocal position cease.
... the Zionists are cordially hated ...
Thus the Jewish question appears to de Poncins, at present, unsolvable ...
... The decisive struggle of life and death, for the modern world, remains, and is already begun and underway, between destructive Communism and Catholicism, the sole force of order and upbuilding that stands on its feet in the world...
Italian original: pages 37 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 - 44 - 45 - 46
Oct. 3, 1936 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 4, p.83:
III. News from Abroad
1. Germany. Nazi Congress in Nuremberg. Message of the Chancellor. Conscription for a two-year term. 2. Switzerland. The World Congress of Youth for Peace...
1. (Germany). Of extraordinary importance and foreboding significance is the eighth Nazi Congress held in Nuremberg from September 9 to 14, to which an Italian delegation was also sent, presided over by Hon. Parini. The dominant themes of the assembly from its opening were the affirmations of military force, hostility against Bolshevism and the necessity of destroying it.
At the opening ceremony in the Luitpold Hall, Minister Hess gave the greeting to the assembly and in particular to the heads of the army.
Germany, he said, forms a bloc against Bolshevism, which is tirelessly advancing its forces to carry out world revolution and destroy Western Civilization. For years Germany has been raising its voice of warning, and today Europe is witnessing the Spanish conflagration that is casting its sinister light on the entire continent. We know Bolshevism, and what is happening in Spain does not surprise us. The fanatical rage, burning people alive, crucifying children, the destruction of the treasures of an ancient civilization, all this is standard Bolshevik practice, and how it was done there can be repeated elsewhere. But Bolshevism also uses deceptive tactics, and we see the fruit of that in certain Countries where civil populations sympathize with the bloody criminals of Spain and thus some Governments do not know how to enforce observance of the neutrality obligations they themselves have proposed. Then where populations regard Communism with indifference, Bolshevism introduces the “popular fronts,” real Trojan horses that serve to mask its true intentions and threaten the peace of the world.
Then addressing the Italian delegation: “We greet the delegates of those peoples who want to establish a great European solidarity against Bolshevism, and in a particular way the representatives to the Congress from that which is the most powerful anti-Bolshevik organization, the Italian Fascist Party.” These words were received with great acclamation of agreement: the delegates, rising to their feet and giving the Roman salute, provoking new applause from the assembly.
After the Minister’s speech, the Message from the Chancellor was read. In it, after having recalled the works already accomplished by the party, the economic situation was explained: he affirmed the proposition of improving the conditions of the classes of people: the Government wants a populous Germany and is resolved to continue its demographic policy.
To give work to everyone, he has studied how raw materials can be produced domestically, and for this purpose a plan has been made by which, within four years, Germany can be completely independent of foreign countries for all raw materials that German science, technology and industry are able to produce. The carrying out of this work is already underway. It requires the nation’s disciplined coordination: it is a matter of its life and its freedom. But this does not mean that Germany can renounce its claims to its colonies, because the German people have the same right to life as other peoples.
The message concluded with the absolute guarantee of social peace assured by the party. Germany wants to live in peace and friendship with all those who want peace, but is resolved to defend proudly its freedom. Stormy times are coming. “While Governments are speaking of non-interference, the Hebrew revolutionary headquarters is preparing the world revolution with indefatigable tenacity.” We have no fear of Bolshevism, but we do not close our eyes to the peril. This is the reason for the military measures adopted by the Reich. Conscription for two-year terms will be implemented immediately. The Nazi Government can call the nation to this sacrifice, because its members wore the uniform in the Great War and have been fighting against Bolshevism for 14 years.
The last day was dedicated to demonstrations by the Armed Forces, with military combat exercises between armored cars and anti-aircraft batteries against squadrons of airplanes on the Zeppelin Field, followed by the grand parade and finally the national anthem.
The Congress closed on the evening of the 14th with a solemn assembly in the Luitpold Arena, and the Chancellor gave an important speech again there, emphasizing first of all the profound transformation undergone by Germany. The Nazi State was intended to restore its honor and its parity: and it has done so. In the future, if the world will respect our rights, we are disposed to respect the rights of others. Others may prohibit Nazism in their countries as we prohibit democracy in Germany: we have known democracy and that is why we detest it. Bolshevism cannot deny that in Russia 98 percent of the governing positions are in the hands of Hebrews, who are not however proletarians, while at the head of the Reich is a man who twenty-five years ago was a worker. The events in Spain show that Bolshevism is a regime of violence and barbarism.
2. (Switzerland). The joyful holidays of September were studiously chosen by disguised emissaries of the Jews from Moscow for putting on their clever social farces. The first theater was Geneva, where from August 31 to September 6 the fantastic World Congress of Youth for Peace was held. Organized by the General Secretariat of the Federation of League of Nations Societies, it gathered in its sessions 500 delegates and several hundred observers. In the front row were the delegates of the Communist Youth International with those of the Soviet delegation and the Spanish Popular Front, and those again fraternally united with the German Jews and Communists. The French delegation were almost all members of the Popular Front: the other delegations, including some Italian anti-patriots, varied more or less from dark red to bright red. Some groups of Christians silently made objections to the organizers’ game.
However, the insolence of this brutal mob was disturbed by the presence of the Bulgarian and Hungarian delegations, and by that of two Swiss who were representatives of the group Spirito, and even more by a young Belgian painter, Antonio Alard, who came on his own account and who, with ability and frankness, knew how to take on the mob and smash to pieces their utopias. These were the only ones to proclaim the absurdity of any collaborations with the bandits of civil war, who are fighting against religion in the U.S.S.R., Mexico and Spain.
But all was in vain. Supported by the favor of those who were directing the Congress, the reds succeeded in evading the questions under discussion and attaining their goal. The Congress will have thus served not peace, but rather the reinforcement of ties for the International Popular Front.
Oct. 4, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 8:
“Arrest of Polish Communists”Diane7
The Polish police have arrested in Warsaw 40 Jewish Communist participants in a secret meeting under the pretext of a banquet on the occasion of a Israelite holiday. Among them were numerous Communist agitators known to the police.
Oct. 28, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Eighteen Communist Leaders Arrested in Warsaw”Diane7
Dateline: Warsaw, Oct. 27
Polish political authorities are continuing their energetic action directed at putting down subversive activity encouraged by Moscow. In Warsaw, after intense investigations, the police, during the night, surprised a meeting of the leaders of the central committee of the Polish Communist party, proceeding to arrest eighteen leaders, almost all Jews, and to seize a huge amount of materials and incriminating documents.
On the same page:
“An Official Comment of the Reich About Italian-German Conversations”
Dateline: Berlin, Oct. 27
Among the comments published in Berlin newspapers following the official communiqué and the statements made by Italian Minister Count Ciano before departing Munich for Rome, that of the Diplomatic-Political Correspondence merits particular emphasis. In accordance with the reconstructive policy followed by the two Countries, it says, the conversations were not based on an egoistic or narrow point of view, but were conducted from a completely European perspective. The exchange of German-Italian views had the purpose of resolving everything that is necessary in the interest of a true European peace. The realization of these purposes seems all the more important to the extent the League of Nations, in its structure and current operations, proves to be ever more incapable of fulfilling the mission incumbent upon it, contributing instead to aggravating the situation, acknowledging that its own principles are being abused.
The understanding reached between Germany and Italy concerning the issue of the Danube shows that it is perfectly possible to obtain appropriate solutions, so long as good will prevails and special demands are renounced. Naturally, then, the exchange of views between two States like Germany and Italy had to extend to the Spanish events and the Bolshevik peril. In every State that wants to be considered as a civilized nation of Europe, there must be unreserved approval for the moral recognition of the struggle of the Spanish people against Bolshevik destruction. The new affirmation of the policy of non-intervention and the statements made by Ciano show how Germany and Italy have no other desire than to see Spain become again in concert with European nations, with absolute integrity of its nation and its colonies ...
Immediately following article:
“The Flight of the Zeppelin”
Dateline: Hamburg, Oct. 3
At 8:00 this morning the “Graf Zeppelin,” returning from South America, was about 600 kilometers off the Cape Verde islands.
At the same time, the “Hindenburg,” returning from the United States, was near the Isle of Wight.
Oct. 30, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Protest Against the Arrival of Jews in South Africa”Diane7
Dateline: Capetown, Oct. 29
Two thousand demonstrators answered the invitation of the nationalist movement of South Africa yesterday and gathered to protest the arrival of the ship Stuttgart with 450 Jewish emigrants on board, who were arriving before the new immigration law enters into effect.
Leaflets were distributed that said: “These Jews are coming to take the bread of the sons of South Africa. Think of the thousands of whites in South Africa who are struck with dire poverty. Each year the Jews send, thanks to the sweat and tears of South African workers, 140,000 pounds sterling overseas to finance the plans of the Jews in all the world. Africa for the South Africans and the money of the nation for the population of South Africa!”
The crowd waited in vain for the arrival of the steamer, delayed by a storm.
About 100 persons were present for the arrival that came nine hours later than expected.
Nov. 4, 1936 Cardinal Faulhaber’s report to Cardinal Pacelli:
Dated: Nov. 4/5, 1936
Re: Strictly confidential report about the discussion with Herr Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler at the Obersalzburg on November 4, 1936, 11:00 to 14:00 hours.
The visit with the Führer was, in the final phase, prepared by Herr Apostolic Nuncio Orsenigo and Herr State Secretary Lammers, who, after the telephonic arrangements made the day before, and my three hour trip on the Reich Autobahn, was waiting for me at the foot of the Obersalzberg, and brought me in his car up the steep road to the Führer’s remote retreat. The discussion, for which only Herr Reich Minister Rudolf Hess was present as a third party, lasted three hours: For the first hour only the Führer spoke, frankly, confidentially, agreeably, sometimes temperamentally. For the second hour I could answer the Führer’s train of thought almost without interruption and bring up my own points; in the third hour there was an increasingly tense dialogue. The discussion closed with a half-hour luncheon in a niche of the dining room, with a view of the snow-covered Alps, which today, after a long period of rain, broke out in bright sunshine.
Herr Reich Chancellor began: Many of his statements would not meet with my agreement, but it must be said with complete openness how things are, and a resolution must be arrived at, “positive or negative.” The first theme was the foreign policy danger of Bolshevism. If the fall of Madrid does not succeed in giving the Reds in Catalonia a devastating blow (I must handle some aspects of this question confidentially), then each success of Bolshevism will bring further violent movements; first in France, where everything has been prepared by the policy of Léon Blum, then in Czechoslovakia, in Poland and other states. This is not pessimism. He has already often been a prophet. The Catholic Church may not deceive itself about this: If National Socialism does not become the lord over Bolshevism, then Christianity and the Church are finished in Europe. Bolshevism is just as much the mortal enemy of the Church as of Fascism. Unfortunately the Center Party committed the crime and tangled up everything. The people had to think that things were not so bad with Communism if the Center Party priests went along with it. He had good information about how the subhumans, egged on by Jews, are wreaking havoc like beasts in Spain ... [ellipsis by L. Volk, ed.] He will not let the historic hour pass by.
For the sake of summarizing, I am placing here the answer I later gave him to these basic thoughts: That does not come off to me as pessimism, Herr Reich Chancellor, that was all said in a deeply moving way, only without the details, in your great speech at the Party Congress in Nuremberg, in part openly, in part between the lines. Pope Pius XI, in his speech of February 1930 and this year in the speech to the Spanish refugees, identified Bolshevism as the mortal enemy of all Christian civilization, and the Fulda Bishops Conference expressed themselves likewise in their pastoral letter this year and in previous proclamations. While the Führer’s speech at Nuremberg set forth the general cultural and economic effects of Bolshevism with an impressive cadence of thoughts (it can only tear down, it is led by Jews, it destroys the economy of every people), the Holy Father’s speech, given on the same day, identified atheism, Godlessness, and hostility to God as the root and innermost essence of Bolshevism. It is a pity that the Pope’s speech and the proclamations of the Bishops were not allowed to be disseminated in German newspapers or in the form of brochures.
[footnote by L. Volk, ed.: Pius XI’s referenced “speeches” were a letter of Feb. 2, 1930 to the Vicar General of Rome, AAS 22 (1930), pp. 89-93, and an address at Castel Gandolfo on Sept. 14, 1936, AAS 28 (1936), pp. 373-381.]
I was an auricular witness when Pope Pius XI, in an open Consistory in 1933, openly called the Reich Chancellor of the German Reich the first statesman who candidly and in line with Him, the Pope, had recognized the Bolshevik peril. (I was able to give specific citations, because I had naturally prepared on this point).
You can imagine, Herr Reich Chancellor, how painful it must have been for us Catholics to hear and read the untruths that are still being disseminated today in German newspapers and talks at schools: “The Pope is still standing in league with Moscow, he is even thinking of concluding a Concordat with Moscow, that is why he remained silent at first about the atrocities in Spain, and they are still hoping that Bolshevism will annihilate the Third Reich.” In my Pontifical address in 1936, I cited Osservatore Romano, that is, an official statement, to identify this fairy tale about a Concordat with Moscow being in the works as the “height of unscrupulous inventive artifice.” Nonetheless the Schwarze Korps [Blackshirt Corps: SS newspaper] recycled these lies with reference to a newspaper article in Prague entitled: “Herr Cardinal - who is lying.” I looked into the matter and established: The writer of the article in the Deutschen Presse [German Press] in Prague, with the pseudonym of Roland, was an emigrant and, as he himself declared, a fanatical opponent of National Socialism, who based on the Moscow-friendly mindset in Prague had expressed as a private view the opinion that hatred of religion is no longer so bad today as it was in the beginning, and the Schwarze Korps was prepared to throw up this falsification by an emigrant as against the official statement of the Vatican newspaper.
for myself, I confirm the fact that at the Catholic Congress in Salzburg in 1921 I spoke these words: “The peoples die with Bolshevism,” which is “the deepest mortal wound of our era.” On the same occasion I repulsed the frightful phrase: “Better Bolshevism than Catholicism.” In 1922 I identified the Marxist Revolution of 1918 and 1919 as “perjury and high treason,” and despite all threats did not take back these words. Shortly after that, there appeared the first posters of the early Nazis with the appeal “Against the November Criminals.” In February 1930 I gave a special sermon about the “Struggle of Bolshevism against God and all Religion.” All of this is not backdated to the years 1921, 1922, 1930; it can be read in my books. (For the first time here in this report I will add: Rufenden Stimmen, pp. 14-25, 378, 383, 470). Even if somewhere a priest in the west of the Reich or a priest in Bohemia or, as Herr Reich Chancellor says, priests in Catalonia, say conciliatory things about Bolshevism - there will always be some going off the tracks - I can assure you, Herr Reich Chancellor, that all the German Bishops and all officials in the Church are convinced that Bolshevism can only bring chaos and ruin to religious life, and that all of them are ready, with ecclesiastical means, without getting mixed up in politics, to fight against it.
The second theme of the Führer was National Socialism and the Church. In that the Führer spoke only of the Catholic Church. He said things have changed in the Church over time: the question whether the world was created in 6 days or 6 million years, whether the sun orbits around the earth, the invasion by the Huns, the Reformation, the French Revolution ... [ellipsis by L. Volk, ed.] So the Church must give up its struggle against our racial legislation, “which concerns absolutely scientific research.” These laws are still being preached against constantly from the pulpit. He has files on his desk about 380 (370?) complaints against clergy who have made hostile statements against the new State. The Center Party priests cannot get over the fact that Nazism has succeeded and has accomplished such a great deal. Christianity was inextricably bound to our Volk and western civilization by a thousand year history. Not everything can be called good of the what came to pass in these 1900 years, as in the history of the German Kaisers with the Popes, but Christianity thereby became a great power. If the Church now continues a hostile stance toward Nazism and carries on the struggle, then Nazism would have to finish things without the Church. They tell him: We can do what we want, the Church cannot be reconciled with, it struggled against us before our seizure of power and still does it today despite the danger that widespread elements will turn away from the Church. If the Church would only just give up the struggle out of tactical considerations! In comparison to the great goal that the Führer has gotten behind, to smash down Bolshevism and make the German Volk auspicious, everything else is really a small and laughable bagatelle.
My answer: Herr Reich Chancellor, I am shocked that you are talking of a “struggle” by the Church against Nazism and of an “irreconcilable” position of the Church. The German Bishops, from the time of your first speech to the Reichstag, in which you spoke of Concordat-peace with the Church, have withdrawn their previous warnings and declared themselves in a solemn joint declaration (I did not have the precise date in my mind) to be ready for peaceful cooperation with the New Reich, and time and again the German Bishops have warned their clergy to refrain from all political escapades and to keep their tongues under control even in private discussions. They keep bringing up the warnings of the Church before the seizure of power. The warnings from that time had to do with utterances and events that were incompatible with Church dogma and Christian moral teaching, and as to those the Bishops had a duty to speak. But I can confirm that according to an official survey in Bavaria, not one single person was denied a Church burial in those years for reason of being a National Socialist. Herr Reich Chancellor spoke of the “eternal changes” in the Church. The dogmas of the Church have not changed. Herr Reich Chancellor spoke of a peace “out of tactical considerations.” For us there is nothing tactical in this question, but rather dogmatic moral considerations. You, as the sovereign of the German Reich, are for us the God-given authority, the rightful authority, to whom we owe, in conscience, respect and obedience. Herr Reich Chancellor has so clearly said that disrespect of governmental authority shakes up respect for all authority. I believe that the concept of authority is not emphasized in any other religious society as strongly as it is in the Catholic Church. Frankly, if your administrative authorities or laws violate dogma or the moral law, that is, violate our consciences, then we must be allowed to speak out as the responsible heralds of the moral law. We respect the great goals of your policy, but the disturbances of the peace between State and Church still do not involve just trivialities and bagatelles. Might I be allowed to point out three matters that are increasingly disturbing the peace, or, as you say, increasingly signifying struggle against the State:
1. The German Faith Movement of Stuttgart. The Führer waved that off with a forceful gesture: “The Party has nothing to do with that.”...
A second disturbance of the peace is the ways and means that the struggle about the schools is being waged: The denominational school is being sidelined by the use of pressure ...
A third disturbance of domestic political peace is the prohibition of double membership in the workers associations, the youth associations, and in most recent times also for the women teachers associations and even for the religious teaching orders...
Over and again Herr Reich Chancellor turned the discussion back with raised voice to the “Struggle of the Church against the racial laws of the Third Reich.” ... he stated: We want to protect the German Volk from such hereditarily disposed criminals as are wreaking havoc in Spain. “I perceive that to be the will of God.” The healthy want to have only a few children, and so should the sick have a heap of children? The operation is really simple and does not make people incapable of work and marriage, and now the Church is leaving us in the lurch...
As a sign of his readiness to “put the past behind” and make peace, the Führer twice raised the matter of the trials of the members of religious orders. “I have given instructions,” he said with emphasis, “that the news reports about these trials will be discontinued.”...
The Führer: “Without faith in God people cannot exist. The soldier who lies under artillery bombardment for 3 or 4 days needs a religious foothold. Godlessness is emptiness.” I responded: “The glorious acknowledgement of God that the Führer set forth on various occasions and precisely in solemn speeches, just this summer in the concluding speech at the Party Congress in Nuremberg and on the Bückeberg, avowals that one seeks in vain to find from the mouth of a Léon Blum, as in his spiritually vacuous answer to the Nuremberg speech, or from other statesmen, have certainly made a deep impression in the world. Exactly in this question of faith in God and religion, the Church can help the State and support souls based on primordial powers... The Führer with rising voice: The thousand-year Christian past cannot simply be erased from the history of the German Volk. He had separated himself from Ludendorff because his wife thought Nazism should found a new religion. “I have always and again told my Party leaders, I do not want to play the role of religious reformer. I do not want to do it and I will not do it.” For the same reason he had separated himself from Artur Dinter and von Reventlow.
In the middle of this the Führer began to speak about the Myth by Alfred Rosenberg. A faith in the hearts of the Volk cannot be overcome just by a myth. If he had only chosen a different title! It was only when the Bavarian Bishops Conference warned about the book and then finally the Church placed the book on the Index, that editions of the book began to multiply rapidly so that the book was selling in the hundreds of thousands. Even with that, there aren’t 10,000 people in Germany who understand this book. This opinion stands in contrast to the facts that even before the Church’s prohibition, Rosenberg’s Myth was made a foundation of the entire school curriculum and that, as Herr Bishop of Berlin already said to Herr Reich Chancellor, the Myth was already disseminated in huge numbers among the people before the condemnation via the Index.
In some connection or other, I don’t know any more exactly what, I remarked: An institution like the Catholic Church that has 1900 years of history behind it naturally has more time for human shortsightedness and weakness to come to the fore among its officials than an ideology that has only been around for a few years. In another connection I asked whether the priests who struggle against Bolshevism together with the State authorities are not also mixing in politics and thus should be considered to be violating the Concordat. Of that Herr Reich Chancellor may be certain. Even if he has 380 cases of irresponsible or misunderstood turns of phrase by priests in his files, the clergy as a whole know that if Bolshevism becomes lord over our people, Church life also, like all fields of life, would be thrown into complete chaos.
Toward the end of the third hour, Herr Reich Chancellor summed it all up: “Consider, Herr Cardinal, and talk with the other ‘Leaders of the Church,’ about the way in which you will support the great mission of Nazism to not let Bolshevism become lord, and how you want to come into a peaceful relationship with the State. Either Nazism and the Church will triumph together or they will both perish. I tell you: I will remove from the table all the little things that disturb peaceful cooperation, like the trials against the monks, or the German Faith Movement. I do not want to engage in any horse trading. You know that I am the enemy of compromises, but this will be a final effort.” The Bishops will thus have to make certain offers, be it in the form of a new pastoral letter or in the form of a new speech, before Bishop Hudal comes to be named court theologian of the Party. I did not say any word that could restrict the German Bishops in their freedom of decision.
During the exchange, the Führer conducted himself with an imposing confidence as he also does in his major speeches, among the ranks of statesmen, and that gives him the advantage that, as soon as an issue is brought up, he can be done with it in a word: “That is really just a triviality.” Even to the Party leaders he is always saying: “Just stick to the major objectives and do not work for the present day, but for the future.” The Führer has command of the diplomatic and social forms more like a born sovereign has command of them. He does not let matters take their course as governments did in the time of parliamentary debating; he stands up to them. He develops his thoughts emotionally and yet noticeably with self-control. At the same time he can become totally solemn and almost soft, as in these words: “The individual is nothing. The individual will die. Cardinal Faulhaber will die, Alfred Rosenberg will die, Adolf Hitler will die. That is why one becomes interiorly humble before God.” The Reich Chancellor lives undoubtedly in faith in God. He recognizes Christianity as the master builder of western civilization (rather than Chamberlain as such). Less clear is the picture of the Catholic Church in his mind as divine foundation, with its independent divine mission alongside the State, with its immutable dogmas, with its historical and cultural greatness.
At the beginning of the discussion a thunderstorm was gathering, as if severe weather was about to be unleashed. Although the discussion went very noisily several times, in the second and even more in the third hour it arrived increasingly at a peaceful terminus. Just as in the 28th Psalm: First a storm over Lebanon, then at the conclusion: Dominus benedicet populo suo in pace. [God blesses his people with peace] At the table there was conversation about the economic condition of the people, in which the Führer possessed astonishing command of details and at which I was allowed to make some suggestions. Naturally I have recounted my own words in more detail in this report than the words of the Führer. Yet I believe I have not left out any essential concepts from what he said.
M. Cardinal Faulhaber
Source: L. Volk, Faulhaber Papers, vol. 2, pp. 184-194, reprinting a German typed carbon copy from folder no. 8203 of Nachlass Faulhaber at the Munich Archdiocesan Archive.
Nov. 7, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Communists in Romania”Diane7
Dateline: Bucharest, Nov. 6 p.m.
The lawyer Radu Alteanu, member of the radical zaranista party, was arrested today in Kronstadt. In his home was found voluminous correspondence with French communists. At the same time Communist cells were uncovered in Jassy, Kishenew and Czernovitz. In each one of these cities from 40 to 50 persons were arrested. The majority of the arrestees are Jewish.
On the same page:
“On the Sidelines of a Trial”
Dateline: Berlin, Nov. 6
Since, taking as a pretext the assassination trial against the Jew David Frankfurter, the Israelite press of the whole world and especially the worldwide Jewish League for defense against antisemitism, is attacking Hitler, Swiss newspapers are criticizing this attitude.
Thus the liberal Bern Bund, speaking of the new antisemitic laws in Germany and recalling the last speech by Goebbels in the Sports Palace, affirms that it understands very well how Germany does not want to be occupied with such base intrigues.
The article then points out the excesses of this irresponsible international literature, recalling that the emigrant German Jew Emil Ludwig Cohn was involved in the assassination of Gustloff.
This article shows that Switzerland has no interest that is being abused in the Frankfurter trial.
Nov. 10, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“A Speech by Hitler in Munich: For three and a half years German factories have worked day and night for the defense of the Country”
Dateline: Munich, Nov. 9
“On the vigil of the celebration of the thirteenth anniversary of the day on which National Socialist pioneers carried out their failed attempt to overturn the Bavarian government and re-establish the honor and self-respect of the Fatherland, lost by the defeat in the world war, Hitler addressed a speech to the old guard in the historic Buergerbraeu, where the party had met before carrying out its first audacious attempt to take over power...”
Nov. 10, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Anti-Bolshevik Demonstration in Bucharest”
Dateline: Berlin, Nov. 9, p.m.
As reported from Bucharest:
The Romanian Capital had its historic day yesterday. More than one hundred thousand persons marched in an imposing procession, for six hours, with the head of the Christian-Social Party, Professor Cuza, the old leader of antisemitism, and with Octavian Goga. More than two thousand vans and innumerable farmers’ wagons transported the adherents of the nationalist movement into the capital. At the head of the deputations of 71 districts marched the youth organizations in blue shirts with swastika armbands, the women dressed in national costumes or blue blouses, and thousands and thousands of workers with brains and brawn. With arms raised, they marched carrying the blue flag with the gold cross at the peak. Signs carried in procession showed the close union of the nationalist movement with King Carol and declared war on Communism, false democracy and Judaism. The broad Via Bratianu was full of thousands of citizens who applauded cordially for the parade that proceeded totally without incident and in perfect order.
Speaking to the demonstrators at the end of the parade, Goga emphasized the necessity of domestic reform, reminding that Bolshevism is the most grave danger for humanity and declaring that Romanian nationalists are determined not to serve as the vanguard of Communism by cooperating with the U.S.S.R. or concluding a treaty with the French Government of the Popular Front.
Nov. 13, 1936 L’Osservatore Romano, page 2:
“Concerning a Book”
From various quarters we have been asked if the recent publication of the book “The Foundations of National Socialism” by John Gunther Publishing in Leipzig and Vienna was done with the prior agreement of the Holy See, since this rumor has spread.
Our information requires us to respond in the negative, in accordance with what the author himself said to an Austrian news agency: his book was not inspired by anyone and he was not officially commissioned to write it.
Note: This notice appeared several days after Cardinal Faulhaber wrote to Cardinal Pacelli, reporting on his three-hour meeting with Hitler, and urging Pacelli that something must be done before Bishop Hudal is declared the “court theologian” of the Nazi Party. See Cardinal Pacelli’s reply to Faulhaber of November 16, 1936 in L. Volk, ed., Akten Kardinal von Faulhabers [Faulhaber Papers], vol. 2, pp. 196-197 (“With respect to a passage in your report about this subject, allow me most devotedly to point out, that according to a notice published in the L’Osservatore Romano, the Holy See stands thoroughly removed from a certain publication of the Titular Bishop of Ela.”)
The article about Hungary, Jews, and Communism on the same page 2 of L’Osservatore Romano on Nov. 13, 1937 reads as follows in translation:
“Violent Antisemitic Demonstrations in Budapest”
Dateline: Budapest, Nov. 12
Antisemitic demonstrations by university students continued unabated yesterday and culminated in a crowd of about 300 students overwhelming the police guard that had been posted around university buildings, battering down the door of the Philosophy Department, and forcibly removing all Jewish students from the halls. The police succeeded in preventing other attempts to break into other departments.
The crowd, massed in the streets, demonstrated against the Jewish press of Budapest while singing antisemitic songs. Squads of mounted police had to disperse the demonstrators time after time. Badges of the Hungarian nationalist movement were distributed, and anti-Bolshevik placards were carried in the streets, the result of the Communist agitation having Jewish characteristics. The students of the university requested a “week without Jews.”
Commenting on the situation, the government newspaper Esti Uysag said it is no wonder that Jews and Communists are inseparably united in Hungary, because in recent months all Communist agitation has been done by Jews.
Dec. 24, 1936 Christmas Eve pastoral letter of the German Bishops, excerpt praising Hitler and pledging support of the Church:
“The Weapons of the Church against Bolshevism”
Dear Faithful! Führer and Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler sighted the onmarch of Bolshevism from far off and directed his faculties and concerns to ward off this monstrous danger from our German people and all of Western civilization. The German Bishops consider it our duty to support the supreme head of the German Reich in this defensive struggle with all the means at our disposal from our sanctuary. As certainly as the Bolshevik mortal enemy of the governmental order is equally and even primarily the gravedigger of religious culture, and directs his first attacks always against the servants and sanctuaries of Church life, as the events in Spain are demonstrating anew, as certainly as this is also a matter of life or death for the ecclesiastical order, just so certainly has cooperation in the warding off of this satanic power also become a religious and Church task of our time.
Source: Reprinted in Volk, Faulhaber Papers, vol. 2, pp. 244-252. German original, p.245:
“Die Waffen der Kirche gegen den Bolschewismus”
Geliebte Diözesanen! Der Führer und Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler hat den Anmarsch des Bolschewismus von weitem gesichtet und sein Sinnen und Sorgen darauf gerichtet, diese ungeheure Gefahr von unserm deutschen Volk und dem gesamten Abendland abzuwehren. Die deutschen Bischöfe halten es für ihre Pflicht, das Oberhaupt des deutschen Reiches in diesem Abwehrkampf mit allen Mitteln zu unterstützen, die ihnen aus dem Heiligtum zur Verfügung stehen. So gewiss der bolschewistische Todfeind der staatlichen Ordnung zugleich und sogar in erster Linie Totengräber der religiösen Kultur ist und seine ersten Angriffe immer gegen die Diener und Heiligtümer des kirchlichen Lebens richtet, wie die Vorgänge in Spanien aufs neue beweisen, so gewiss es sich also um Sein oder Nichtsein auch der kirchlichen Ordnung handelt, so gewiss ist die Mitarbeit an der Abwehr dieser satanischen Macht auch ein religiöse und kirchliche Zeitaufgabe geworden.
German historian Gerhard Besier describes the cover letter Cardinal Faulhaber sent to Hitler on December 30, 1936 with this pastoral letter, in which Faulhaber referred to “our agreement” in their meeting of early November 1936 and wrote further: “The new pastoral letter in the New Year will sound like a trumpet, and even abroad they will be unable to ignore this unanimous confession of the German Bishops to the Führer and his mission in world history, his defence against Bolshevism.” Besier, p.163, quoting in translation from Volk, Faulhaber Papers, vol. 2, p.261-262.
Dec. 30, 1936 Faulhaber to Hitler:
Most Illustrious Herr Führer and Reich Chancellor!
I have the honor to submit the Pastoral Letter of the German Bishops, which I initiated in light of our discussion of November 4th and which will be read aloud to the people next Sunday, January 3rd in all the Catholic Churches of the Reich as the unanimous admonition of all 23 German Bishops and 3 Diocesan Administrators. The Pastoral Letter appeared two months after our discussion because I, consistent with our agreement, first had to obtain the concurrence of each individual Bishop to the text of the Pastoral Letter, and because a Pastoral Letter following immediately after our discussion would have appeared a command performance, which would have weakened its impact on the people and would have diminished respect for both parties. Now the Pastoral Letter will ring in the new year like a trumpet, and even in foreign lands, this unanimous acknowledgement by the German Bishops of the Führer and his internationally historical work, his defense against Bolshevism, will be impossible to ignore.
Unfortunately, precisely during the weeks in which I conducted the preparatory negotiations with the Lord Bishops, more things came to pass that gave the Bishops deepest concern, further attacks against the legally guaranteed cooperation of the Church in the school, further de-Christianization efforts of the State youth organization, further resignations from the Church by those in high positions. The Bishops had to mention these concerns in the Pastoral Letter, in order to remain truthful and not fall into the un-German role of Byzantine yes-men. We honor the great goal of our Führer, the defense against Bolshevism, but we cannot consider domestic policies that drive our people forward toward de-Christianization to be a trivial and peripheral matter. It remains to be hoped that the negotiations that are to be taken up again in mid-January in the Cabinet Ministry for Churches after a long pause will bring resolution and domestic peace in these disputed issues.
As a forerunner of this joint German Pastoral Letter, the Bavarian Bishops had a Pastoral Letter read aloud from all the pulpits of their Dioceses on December 13th, which said: “The Führer may be assured that we Bishops support him in every way with moral means in his internationally historic defensive struggle against Bolshevism.” This Pastoral Letter was banned and confiscated on December 19th by the Cabinet Ministry for Church Affairs.
I thank you yet again, esteemed Herr Reich Chancellor, for the discussion conducted on November 4th in manly German frankness. I stand at your service for further discussions. I know what a burden of work rests upon you at precisely this time and I expect no answer to this cover letter. May Providence indeed continue to hold sway over your work!
In respect and esteem,
Source: Munich Archdiocesan Archive, Nachlass Faulhaber, File No. 8200, reprinted in Volk, Faulhaber Papers, vol. 2, pp. 261-262.
Jan. 23, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Hitler Will Make Important Statements to the Reichstag about the International Order”Diane7
It is reported by good sources that the speech that Hitler will deliver to the Reichstag on January 30 will be important and include statements both on domestic policy and international policy...
“The Movement of the ‘Blue Cross’ in Hungary”
Also in Hungary, a new group has been formed that rather resembles a monarchist movement. The “Blue Cross Movement,” as the new party is called, met publicly for the first time on Thursday in Budapest. The motto of the new movement is “struggle against Bolshevism,” and it will be particularly oriented toward Christian youth of the Christian-Nationalist parties.
The group will also fight against the Jews and Jewish influence in public life, the abuses of capitalism and large estates.
Jan. 31, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Religious Situation in Germany: An Eloquent Document”Diane7
After the declarations at Fulda about the schools, which demonstrated yet again the extremely grave concerns of the German Bishops and indicated the bounds of this new conflict, in the sad situation of the Church in Germany, a new document gives it an indisputable confirmation.
Reading it, the reader should bear in mind the attacks of the National Socialist press on the Bishops. The defense of the Christian school conducted apostolically, according to this press, is only an activity of opposition to the regime, a political action, a threat to that spiritual unity of Germany which the Fatherland needs...
Jan. 31, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Today’s Reichstag Session: The Directions of German Policy in Hitler’s Speech”
Dateline: Berlin, Jan. 30 p.m.
An atmosphere of intense expectation characterized the day in which the people of the Third Reich solemnly celebrated the coming to power of National Socialism. Toward mid-day all the shops and all public and private buildings began to close, in preparation for listening to the speech that Hitler would give before the Deputies meeting in the former Kroll Opera House.
The only exception was the plaza opposite the Reichstag, where, despite the biting cold, which hundreds of coal fires placed in the middle served only to mitigate a little, tens of thousands of persons were gathered in the hope of seeing Hitler and his lieutenants as they passed by. As the automobile approached in which Hitler was riding, strong applause arose from the multitude. Then Hitler entered the Reichstag, and all those present stood as one, saluting with the Hitler salute...
At 1:20 p.m. the Führer Chancellor began to speak ...
In the first part of his speech, Hitler reviewed the progress accomplished by the German people in the past four years, in “its energetic struggle to regain the position to which it is entitled by its history and its national civilization.”
Economic Independence ...
In this regard the Führer alluded to the observations made recently in the House of Commons by Foreign Minister Eden, and emphasized the need to correct the erroneous concepts contained therein, that Germany has any intention of isolating itself from other nations, of treating the rest of the world with indifference, or of not taking into account the common needs of humanity.
Refuting the assertions made by Eden, Hitler emphasized that in recent years Germany has improved its political relations with numerous Countries, and has established very close relations with various States...
The accord with Japan to combat the subversive activity of the Comintern shows that Germany is not following a policy of self-isolation...
The Chancellor made three concrete proposals for the limitation of armaments, but completely made a stand of clear rejection of concluding alliances by means of which the gigantic power of Russia would be thrown into the arena of Central Europe, which would make the armaments of the Red Army the measure of other nations’ essential military force.
Then mentioning Spain, Hitler said that Germany has no other interest than that of cultivating economic relations and not colonial aspirations...
A series of proposals
Finally, Hitler enumerated the points that, as it seems to him, constitute the means to arrive at the pacification not only of Europe, but of the world.
... (6) tranquility among nations is possible only if there is a stop to the continuous agitation of irresponsible international groups that deliberately poison public opinion; (7) the attempt at a body of rules for Europe will only be fruitful within reasonable limits; (8) European peace will be served if the treatment of minorities forced to live abroad is guided by mutual considerations of justified national pride. This will bring a diminution of the tension between neighboring States whose political boundaries do not correspond with boundaries of race.
Feb. 2, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“International Comments on Hitler’s Speech” ...Diane7
“Impressions in the Reich”
... The Voelkischer Beobachter gives particular importance to the words replying to Eden in regard to anti-Bolshevism, pointing out the merit of Germany’s realistic policy that fully confronts the Bolshevik peril that menaces Europe.
Feb. 4, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Innovations in the Reich Government ... Germany Denies Rumors of its Participation in a Disarmament Conference ...”Diane7
“New Center of Bolshevik Propaganda in Kaunas”
Dateline: Warsaw, Feb. 3
According to reports from Moscow to the local press, the Comintern is currently considering the possibility of establishing in Kaunas, Lithuania, a third center of Communist propaganda for Germany. As is well known, two other centers are actively functioning in Prague and Amsterdam. It is further reported that the directors of the third international hope that, given the verifiable improvement in relations with Lithuania, the activity of Communist agents will become much easier in this new center of propaganda for Germany.
“The Trial of Germans in Moscow” ...
“The Reich’s Point of View on the Colonial Problem”
According to the Reuters news agency, Germans are convinced that Hitler will obtain not only the return of a single colony, but the restitution of all the German colonies in their entirety.
Official circles are naturally more guarded in discussion of the question. But a German who occupies an important position defined in the following way what he considers to be the Government’s point of view: Hitler repudiated this past Saturday the shame of German responsibility for the war. It follows that the confiscation of the colonies by France, Japan and the British dominions after the war was nothing other than an act of robbery. Germany today is strong once again, and it demands the restitution of what legally belongs to it...
Feb. 5, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Problems of European Reorganization: Perspectives from London: Examination of a Speech by Hitler ...”Diane7
... the issue of Anglo-German relations came into discussion during the session of the House of Commons, as various Members of Parliament questioned the Foreign Minister at length for precise clarification as to what attitude the British Government intends to assume and maintain toward Nazi Germany in the wake of the recent speech by Chancellor Hitler.
In particular, some Members wanted to know whether the Government would take under consideration the possibility of restoring some colonial territories that formerly were German and now are under a mandate, as an integral part of a general systematization of European relations, which should be centered at Geneva and which presupposes the acceptance of Germany into the heart of the League of Nations.
“The Activity of Communism” ...
Feb. 7, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Struggle Against Communism: A Speech by Goebbels in Hamburg”Diane7
Dateline: Berlin, Feb. 6
Minister Goebbels gave a speech in Hamburg, where he dealt with domestic policy and made some comments about foreign policy.
He said it is essential to save western civilization from the peril represented by Asiatic-Jewish Bolshevism. No State should close its eyes in the face of this peril.
Thus German policy, as it was propounded by Hitler in his last speech, should be seen in a generally constructive outline. The world must understand that Germany is a great Power and that in Europe there is only one great enemy, Bolshevism, which aims at chaos and destruction.
Feb. 24, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Middle Eastern Politics and Reality in Palestine – Statistics of the Disorders – Economic Prosperity and Expensive Necessities of Life – The Ideals of the Zionists – The Fateful Work of Bolshevism”Diane7
Dateline: Jerusalem, Feb. 17 (Fidelis, our correspondant)
A volume has come out, by the Jewish Agency, summarizing the balance sheet of the six-month revolt by the Arabs of Palestine from April to October of last year.
The chart of its statistics, concerning the activity of violence and terrorism in the half year under examination, provides the following very eloquent figures: “Jews who were massacred numbered 82, while 9 others died as the result of causes directly connected to the disturbances. Those injured amounted to 405...
Among the Arabs there were also to be lamented 305 episodes of terrorism by their co-religionists...
There has been such a fuss in recent years about the so-called economic prosperity of Palestine, that it has succeeded in transforming it, in the eyes of public opinion worldwide, into a sort of myth...
The Arab press is returning with particular insistence to the threat of Bolshevism in Palestine and is openly placing the responsibility upon the directors of Zionism.
... the weekly “Palestine and Transjordan,” edited by the Secretary of the Arab Supreme Committee, devotes a long article to the peril of Jewish Communism in Palestine...
Also the Jewish press, while coming from a different perspective, denounces the perils of religious agnosticism and Bolshevism among Zionists in Palestine...
March 14, 1937 Excerpt from Mit Brennender Sorge, para. 43:
No one would think of laying an obstacle in the path of the youth of Germany that should lead them to the realization of a true Volksgemeinschaft, the fostering of a noble love of freedom, and steadfast loyalty toward the Fatherland.
Note: Volksgemeinschaft denoted community and solidarity of the German Volk. An essential aspect of Volksgemeinschaft in Nazi Germany was that it excluded Jews. The Nazis proclaimed in their founding Party platform in 1920 that “no Jew can be a member of the Volk.” (Platform point no. 4).
German historians have observed that Volksgemeinschaft was a central concept of Hitler’s worldview. E.g., Michael Wildt, “Die Ungleichheit des Volkes” [“The Inequality of Peoples”], in Wildt and Frank Bajohr, eds., Volksgemeinschaft (2009).
German youth, to whom the above passage was addressed, were aware of the meaning of Volksgemeinschaft. E.g., Baldur von Schirach, Die Hitler-Jugend [The Hitler Youth] (1934), pp. 76, 191.
English translation of same passage from Vatican website (para. 34 in the Vatican's English version):
No one would think of preventing young Germans establishing a true ethnical community in a noble love of freedom and loyalty to their country.
Note: The paragraph numbering is different between the Vatican's English translation and the Vatican's German original.
Excerpt from Mit Brennender Sorge, para. 51:
Then the day will come when, in place of the premature victory songs of the enemies of Christ, from the hearts and from the lips of Christ's faithful the Te Deum of liberation will rise up to heaven; a Te Deum of gratitude to the Almighty; a Te Deum of joy that the German Volk, even in its currently wayward members, has trodden the path of religious returning home, that it, in faith purified by suffering, again bends the knee before the king of time and eternity Jesus Christ, and that it is preparing itself, in struggle [Kampf] against the deniers and destroyers of the Christian West, in harmony with all well-intentioned other peoples, to fulfill the calling that the plans of the Eternal assign to it.
Compare English translation/paraphrase from Vatican website (para. 42 in the Vatican's English version):
The day will come when the Te Deum of liberation will succeed to the premature hymns of the enemies of Christ: Te Deum of triumph and joy and gratitude, as the German people return to religion, bend the knee before Christ, and arming themselves against the enemies of God, again resume the task God has laid upon them.
March 19, 1937 Excerpts from Pope Pius XI’s encyclical against Atheistic Communism:
Paragraph no. 5. “...In fact, the most persistent enemies of the Church, who from Moscow are directing the struggle against Christian civilization, themselves bear witness, by their unceasing attacks in word and act, that even to this hour the Papacy has continued faithfully to protect the sanctuary of the Christian religion, and that it has called public attention to the perils of Communism more frequently and more effectively than any other public authority on earth.”
6. “... Our words are now receiving sorry confirmation from the spectacle of the bitter fruits of subversive ideas, which We foresaw and foretold, and which are in fact multiplying fearfully in the countries already stricken, or threatening every other country of the world.”
24. “In making these observations it is no part of Our intention to condemn en masse the peoples of the Soviet Union. For them We cherish the warmest paternal affection. We are well aware that not a few of them groan beneath the yoke imposed on them by men who in very large part are strangers to the real interests of the country.”
58. “... Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever.”
Apr. 14, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“From Oligarcy to Dictatorship in Russia ... The Semitic Question and German-Soviet Relations”Diane7
... The evolution of Soviet politics, beyond having the characteristic of tending toward a dictatorial-military State with the renunciation of integral socialization, has other aspects not less worthy of comment.
The demise of the Leninist oligarchy has also produced the demise of the large part of the semitic element that characterized the old guard. Stalin is a Caucasian, and the affirmation of his dictatorial supremacy is accompanied by a progressive elimination of the Jewish element from positions of power: some observers have even come to consider Stalin’s action as a veiled form of antisemitism. In reality, the antisemitic motive never surfaces in recent trials, and it can therefore be maintained that the persecution against Lenin’s old guard has been conducted by Stalin out of motives of jealousy for power and not for racial or religious motives. There is confirmation of this in the fact that Soviet foreign policy is currently guided by an element that is in great predominance Jewish.
The semitic question in regard to Soviet policy is a considerable matter in relation to the antagonism between Berlin and Moscow. The French press considers the supposed antisemitism of Moscow to be one of the reasons apt to attenuate the German-Soviet contrast, a contrast that is to be considered all the more reducible in the event that German policy comes under the influence of Ludendorff and the Reich Army, a portion of which is not against a rapprochement with Moscow...
Apr. 15, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one, top center:
“Bishop Hudal speaks in Vienna on ‘Nietzsche and Today’s World’” (By telegraph from our correspondent)Diane7
Dateline: Vienna, Apr. 14
His Excellency Mons. Luigi Hudal, Titular Bishop of Ela and Rector of the National German Institute of St. Mary of the Anima, gave a lecture yesterday evening, Tuesday, at the Kulturbund. [Culture League]
The great hall, nobly appointed, was crowded with a highly select audience, which made a worthy crown for the representatives of the Austrian Federal Government.
In addition to some notable ecclesiastics, those present included high personages of the laity belonging to the highest intellectual classes of the capital.
The lecture, magistrally delivered and followed with strong interest, dealt with the theme: “Nietzsche and Today’s World.”
The most excellent orator retraced the intellectual foundations of the “Weltanschauung” [ideology or worldview] of Nietzsche, an atheist movement pervaded by hatred against Christianity and directed toward struggle against Rome and the negation of the idea of a Christian State.
These fundamental notions would be implemented today by Bolshevism in Russia and a movement formed in Germany.
Bishop Hudal then went on to analyze at length the “Deutsche Glaubensbewegung” [German Faith Movement], which is nothing other than the religious Spartacist movement of the Third Reich and the intellectual bridge to Russian Bolshevism, differing from it not in the theoretical field but only in its practical method. Moreover, the “Glaubensbewegung,” the orator added, is not purely German.
Beginning towards the conclusion of his speech, Bishop Hudal traced a clear picture of the task that pertains to Austria.
Its mission is essentially religious and consists in the safeguarding of the union of Christianity in the name of Rome and of German-ness for the entire German people.
The victory of the religiously sound part of the German people – concluded the most excellent orator amidst applause – will be a necessity for the whole of Europe.
Apr. 18, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Catholic Press Exposition (hours from 9 to 1 and from 3 to 6): The finale-cycle of Lectures and Conferences”
As we have announced, this evening at 5pm begins that cycle of Lectures and Conferences which will crown the World Exhibition with a great display of Catholic journalism, through the work of the principal Countries and Authorities exhibiting.
With the Lecture that Bishop Hudal will deliver this evening on the periodical Catholic press in Austria, fifteen Conferences are on the program, all at the Exhibition Hall...
Articles on L’Osservatore Romano’s front page during the preceding week about Hudal’s role include:
Apr. 17, 1937:
“At the Catholic Press Exhibition”
... For tomorrow, Saturday evening, the Lectures and Conferences, offered for April and May, begin with a lecture by His Excellency Bishop Hudal on the periodical Catholic press in Austria. It will take place at 5pm and will represent a prime affirmation of the opportune initiative welcomed everywhere with strong sympathy. Ecclesiastical and lay personalities have already announced their participation, as have student youths and many associates.
Apr. 16, 1937, top of page one:
“At the Catholic Press Exhibition (hours from 9 to 1 and from 3 to 6): The Opening of the Lectures and Conferences”
As we have announced, this coming Saturday evening, at 5pm, is the opening of the series of Lectures and Conferences, organized by the Governing Committee in cooperation with the Committee for Events during the Exposition, in which various Authorities and Exhibiting Committees will display not only their contribution to the grand opening, but also the activities that individual religious or national works are carrying out in favor of, and by means of, the press.
The opening will therefore take place with the illustration of the organization and development of the Austrian Catholic press. The President of the Committee will speak opening words, and then the much-expected lecture of Bishop Hudal will be held...
Apr. 14, 1937, page one:
“At the Catholic Press Exhibition (hours from 9 to 1 and from 3 to 6)”
... Preparations are commencing for the Lectures and Conferences that will go on in the Great Hall and the Cinemagraphic Hall.
This week will be distinguished with the Lecture by His Excellency Bishop Hudal, Saturday at 5pm; and Sunday morning by the collective visit of the Roman Congregations...
Apr. 13, 1937, page one:
“At the Catholic Press Exhibition (hours from 9 to 1 and from 3 to 6)”
The announcement of the lectures and conferences that will highlight this final period in the life of the Exposition has been received with much sympathy, if we should judge from the requests for programs and tickets made to the Secretary of the Committee for Events and Meetings, which presides over the arrangements for the interesting gatherings.
The entire program will be made known as soon as possible. It will be inaugurated, as has been announced, with the Lecture by His Excellency Bishop Hudal on next Saturday evening at 5pm on the “Catholic periodical press in Austria.”...
Apr. 11, 1937, page one:
“At the Catholic Press Exhibition (hours from 9 to 1 and from 3 to 6)”
The announced series of Conferences and Lectures, which will be held at the Exposition, on the press apostolate of the Authorities and Religious Orders and of Catholics in various Countries, will be inaugurated next Saturday, April 17, at 5pm sharp.
Speaking will be His Excellency Bishop Luigi Hudal, Titular Bishop of Ela, on: “The periodical Catholic press in Austria,” thus highlighting one of the most extensive, most organized, and most productive activities in the field of Catholic journalism...
Apr. 20, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“Germany and Russia: Categorical strong denials in the Reich press to rumors of a rapprochement”Diane7
Dateline: Berlin, Apr. 19
The Voelkischer Beobachter, observing how certain organs of the foreign press continue to report news of a supposed intention on the part of Germany to make peace with the Soviets, writes that these false reports have the goal, among other things, of impressing the Baltic States and Poland to reawaken in themselves distrust toward the policy of the government in Berlin, accused of fickleness.
In the face of these accusations, the newspaper explains the reasons that have prompted Germany to pursue the policy it has applied in regard to the States of Eastern Europe and especially Poland. It mentions the reasons that have led to rapprochement with this latter country and affirms that the attitude of Germany has been hostile in an absolute way to Soviet Russia from the moment in which Moscow affirmed the predominance of the Soviets. This hostility – continues the newspaper – is based upon the consideration that according to National Socialist Germany, the power of Soviet Russia up to this time is at the orders of international Bolshevism and always ready to support revolutionary maneuvers of Communism in all the States of the world. Russia is not a State that can be measured along the lines of international norms, because it is the starting point of a movement of an international character, the goal of which is that of destroying and annihilating European culture.
Of this threat, Germany has taken account in time: it does not want think like the other European countries that consider all States along the same lines and are ready to change with maximum readiness the contracting parties with whom they conclude treaties of assistance and non-aggression, like pieces on a chessboard...
May 12, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Jews and the Universities in Germany: How the New Regulation is Assessed”
Dateline: Berlin, May 11
The decision of Reich Education Minister Rust to no longer allow Jews to receive degrees in German universities has provoked a certain emotion in Jewish circles of Berlin.
The Jüdische Rundschau [Jewish Review], Zionist newspaper of Berlin, observes that the new measure annuls at a single blow one of the essential achievements of the German Jews: free access to the universities. The review observes that the title of doctor has been considered by numerous Jews as “part of their surname” and indeed as “a name.” Since, from the coming to power of National Socialism, the number of German Jews enrolled in the universities has become practically insignificant, Rust’s ordinance has especially theoretical importance.”
Article alongside the above article: “Ministers and Diplomats Received by Hitler” ...
May 23, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“From Germany: After the Encyclical ‘Mit Brennender Sorge’”Diane7
C.P. reports that the Gestapo has searched, by orders from on high, eighteen Catholic publishing houses that, by commission from their respective Bishops, had printed the Encyclical on the religious situation in Germany. Included among these publishing houses are indeed some of longstanding and widespread reputation, like the Regensburg Publishing House of Munich and the Bachem Publishing House of Cologne...
June 5, 1937 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. II, pp. 418-431:
“The Jewish Question and Zionism”Diane7Diane7
The Jewish question has just been definitely and clearly explained by the illustrious English Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc in the following terms: It is an evident fact in the history of the past two thousand years that “the Hebrews themselves have maintained, by the special action of Providence or by a biological or social law unknown to us, an irreducible entity and likewise an obvious differentiation in the societies in which they ceaselessly move.” [footnote 1: Hilaire Belloc, The Hebrews, trans. by A. Marioli, Milan, “Vita e Pensiero,” 1934.] And it is a further evident fact that the Hebrews are a disruptive element by their spirit of domination and their revolutionary preponderance. [footnote 2: See “La Questione giudaica,” Civiltà Cattolica, 1936, IV, p. 44.] Judaism is compared by Belloc to a foreign body that produces irritation and causes reactions in the organism into which it has penetrated.
The question is about finding most appropriate way to remove the irritation and return the social organism to lasting equilibrium and calm. The solution can only be provided in two ways: either elimination or segregation. Elimination can be achieved in three ways: either in a definitely hostile manner, that is, by destruction; or in an also hostile but less cruel manner, by expulsion; or in an amicable and agreeable manner, by assimilation. Of these three ways, the first two are contrary to Christian charity and to natural law itself; the third has historically proven unattainable. Segregation can be achieved in a hostile manner or in an amicable manner. In the hostile manner, by not taking account of the conditions of the foreign element, but only those of the invaded organism and its advantages. This way does not conform to charity and, moreover, does not resolve disagreements where they are causing the irritation. The amicable way takes full account of the element to be segregated, as a segregated element, seeking the best welfare of both parties. In place of the word segregation, with its humiliating sense (like the old ghetto), Belloc would substitute the word identity, to signify a civil and charitable accommodation, which he espouses throughout his book, deeming it the only practical and effective means to a solution of the Jewish question, and excluding Zionism as theoretically and practically inappropriate.
Other Catholic writers take various points of view. As we explained in our cited article, according to Leo de Poncins, Zionism would be a satisfactory solution in theory, but it is unattainable in practice. It would mix together Belloc’s elimination and peaceful segregation. It might lead to a neat clarification of the juridical situation of the Jews, removing the misunderstanding and double game of the double nationality they enjoy at present. With the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine, all the Jews scattered throughout the world would have to choose definitively between citizenship in the Zionist State and citizenship in the State in which they were born and now are. Only in that way – say the non-Hebrews who favor Zionism – would the Jews cease to be a perturbatory element like the other foreigners in the States where they are guests.
This is the opinion ardently proposed by Prof. De Vries, a Catholic like Belloc, who, in a recently published book [footnote 1: H. De Vries de Heekelingen, Israel, son passé, son avenir [Israel, Its Past, Its Future]...], seeks to demonstrate the practical possibility of establishing a Zionist State in Palestine, for only in Zionism does he see the full and definitive solution to the Jewish question.
At the start of his book, in expounding, in summary, the history of the people of Israel of the diaspora, he observes how antisemitism has always had the same sequence of events in every era and with all the peoples, of whatever religion and civilization, where the Jews have gone. The sequence of events has developed in five stages. First, the Jews are received in a population that has no prejudices against them. Second, they are tolerated, or even enjoy favorable treatment where their situation is consolidated. Third, they increase in wealth, especially indeed on account of their know how. But there begins to awaken against them, among the people, a sentiment of envy and aversion. Fourth follows a period of opposition and struggle, with interludes of calm; the popular irritation is generally contained by the clergy and the government. Fifth, the people, exasperated, burst the restraints and explode in open hostility against the Jews, who are exterminated or expelled via ... [ellipsis in original] And the five-stage cycle begins anew in another country.
De Vries does not note any exceptions to this constantly recurring sequence. We believe that at least one should be made for the Papal States, precisely for the prudent discipline and just Christian moderation that were able to be constantly maintained under the eyes of the Pope, in the juridical and civil conditions of the Jews and in their relations with Christians. This was recognized by the Jews themselves, who did not lament of their general conditions under the Pope as much as those in whatever other State.
Like de Poncins, De Vries also treats at length with the dual Jewish predominance in capitalism and in the revolutionary spirit of Communism, where the Jews are a continual ferment of dissolution for western civilization, which is for the most part Christian. He also gives the same quotation from the Jew Bernard Lazare: “On the one hand, the Jews collaborate in the maximal concentration of capital, which certainly facilitates their socialization; on the other hand, they are among the most ardent adversaries of capitalism” (Civiltà Cattolica, 1936, 4, p.37). We recall de Poncins’ explanation of this seeming contradiction. De Vries gives another, based on a most important confession of the Jew who is the patriarch of Socialism, Karl Marx. He wrote to his co-religionist Baruch Lévy, prefiguring the universal republic: “In this new organization of humanity, the children of Israel, now dispersed over the whole face of the world, will become, without opposition, the governing element everywhere, especially if they succeed in imposing upon the worker masses the permanent leadership by some of their number. The governments of the nations forming the Universal Republic will all pass effortlessly into the hands of the Israelites, by means of the victory of the proletariat. Then private property will be able to be abolished by the rulers from the Jewish race, who will administer everywhere the public fortune. Thus the promise of the Talmud will be fulfilled, that when the times of the Messiah come, the Jews will have under lock and key the property of all the peoples of the world.” To this quotation, certainly of great significative importance, De Vries adds the reflection that, therefore, by the confession of Socialism’s patriarch himself, Socialism is not directed to the elevation of the proletariat, but to the supreme and absolute dominion of the Jewish race over the entire world. The workers are thus for Marx the instrument by which the Jews must be served to become the masters of the world to administer all the goods of the earth: Socialist or Communist revolution is the most direct and sure way to the entire concentration of capital in the hand of the Jews, constituting a form of State super-capitalism, as Hon. Mussolini acutely said. [footnote 1: Speech of Nov. 1, 1936 in Milan (Civilità Cattolica, 1936, 4, 345).]
In light of this statement, says De Vries, we better understand the double game of the Jews concerning capitalism. This double game of the Jewish people, creators and at the same time destroyers of the capitalist system, is sometimes attributed by some to a perfidious diabolical plan; that is, the Jews had first created capitalism, knowing well that it would throw the world into inextricable difficulties, from which they would they profit by subjugating the world. That would be giving the Jews too much credit, says De Vries, who adds his more obvious explanation, consistent with the Jewish character, both utilitarian and mystical (as the Jew Lazare himself confesses): “The Jew, creator of the capitalist system, found in it the means to enrich himself and to impoverish the non-Jews. The Jew, demolisher of the capitalist system, does this not to enrich himself personally, but to enrich collective Jewry and to raise his people to the position of world domination” (p.105)
To conquer and dominate the world, Jewry makes use of the two most effective powers for dominating the world: one of them material, gold, which at present is the supreme master of the world, and the other an ideal, internationalism. As to gold, they already have the great part of it in their hands. There remains to be hoarded by all internationalism. The Jew is by nature internationalist and cosmopolitan. Internationalist, because his messianic dream to dominate the world cannot be reconciled with nationalisms; cosmopolitan, because, by reason of his adaptability, he can establish himself anywhere, and is at home anywhere. The irresistible tendency of internationalism has driven him to create an international language. The Jew Zamenhoff is the author of Esperanto, the international language that has had little success up to now. But a language particular to the Jews has been formed in all the nations, Yiddish (a German dialect with many added Hebrew and Slavic words, written with Hebrew letters), which, notwithstanding Hebrew, became the national language in Palestine, remains the international Jewish language, in which quite a lot of newspapers are published in various parts of the world.
Beyond internationalism of the proletariat of Jewish creation, as is well known, the Jews, with a shrewd eye to profit, insinuate themselves into all the international organizations, especially in two, Masonry and the League of Nations. If they were not founded by Jews, Masonry and the League of Nations have certainly been promoted passionately by the Jews, of which De Vries gives ample testimony. Israel Zangwill presents the League of Nations, as above, “essentially of Jewish inspiration.” As to Masonry, the preponderance of the Jews there is little known, whatever may be the measure in which they influence the League of Nations.
Whether or not one is aware of the system of Jewish capitalism, first the impoverishment of non-Jews and then the subjugation of the world, the fact always remains, known to all, of the aspiration of the Jewish spirit to a temporal messianism of world domination, whether it be by means of gold or whether it be by means of Communist world revolution, however one wishes to explain the connection of capitalism with the revolutionary spirit in the Jewish soul. And it remains equally clear and obvious that this Jewish mentality is a permanent danger for the world, up to when it remains such.
One needs to find a way to change this evil mentality. If it could only be changed by absorption and assimilation; but this has proven impossible by the experience of all the past centuries, and it is rejected resolutely by the Jews; if only it could be restrained with the “ghetto,” that is with juridical and coercive restrictions, without persecutions, in a manner appropriate to our times; if it could be in part mitigated or in a certain way placated by Zionism, but also this way appears not attainable.
Zionism in Palestine.
But Zionism appears attainable to De Vries. After having given in summary the history of Zionism, before and after the founder of modern Zionism, Theodor Herzl, he describes the notable success of the Jewish colonies established in Palestine after the Balfour Declaration, which granted the existence of a “national homeland” in Palestine. The colonization was founded not upon commerce, but upon agriculture, which gave excellent results in the production of grain, cereals, rice plantations, and in the production of milk and eggs. Also industry was much advanced with the production of electric energy and the manufacture of chemical products; the circulation of automobiles increased. Education was promoted: 96 per cent of Jewish children went to school, for the most part Zionist ones, where the official language is Hebrew: a Hebrew university was inaugurated in 1925. The more important fact is the creation of a new entirely Jewish city, Tel Aviv, next to Jaffa, in a place where, twenty years before, there was nothing but arid sand dunes. It extends along the shore for six kilometers; from 550 inhabitants in 1911 it has grown to 130,000 in 1935. At present there are about 350,000 Jews in Palestine, 26 per cent, that is more than a fourth of the entire population, which stands at 1,350,000. After the entirely Jewish city of Tel Aviv, with 130,000 Jews and 500 non-Jews, comes Jerusalem with 70,000 Jews and 40,000 non-Jews, then Haifa with 40,000 Jews and 40,000 non-Jews, Jaffa with 16,000 Jews and 50,000 non-Jews, Tiberias with 7,500 Jews and 3,500 non-Jews, Safed with 2,000 Jews and 7,000 non-Jews.
The Guide to the New Palestine, published each year by the “Zionist Information Office, in its ninth edition, 1936-1937 (year 5696 of the Jewish era) gave the following statistics (from 1935): 174 agricultural colonies with 71,963 inhabitants; 3,900 factories and artisan workshops with 24,000 workers. These numbers show that in Palestine the Jew is transformed into a farmer and an artisan, far removed from the merchant and speculator type...
The above-mentioned colonization continues to expand: the Jews already occupy the best lands of Palestine: the plains of Sharon, Haifa, Jezreel and a great part of Esdrelon, and are beginning to invade the mountains. The Arabs are not resisting the temptation to sell their lands, especially those that are infertile and arid, at prices five or six times more than what they could have dreamed of. And proceeding methodically, according to an established plan: first ...
Thus the technical organization and financial organization of Zionism are shown to be well established, and give reason that they should last, if it is thought that the Israelite people of ancient times were truly primarily agricultural. But, will they be able to overcome the grave difficulties?
De Vries, fixated on the idea that Zionism would resolve the Jewish question, after trying to argue and demonstrate the possibilities of accomplishing it, goes on to dispel the grave objections to the contrary. And first: is it possible that two thirds, or least a majority of the 17 million Jews dispersed in the world, would succeed in establishing themselves in Palestine? Granted that the time of Jewish immigration has experienced the benefit of great expansion of lands, it can be foreseen that at least half of Palestine (whose total surface area is 2,615,800 hectares) will be able to be systematically cultivated and give place for several million immigrants. Then if Tranjordan is added, which is now closed to Jewish immigration, De Vries concludes: “At the present it can be shown that Palestine with Transjordan will be able to receive at least half, if not two thirds of the Jews of the diaspora, and that the neighboring countries, especially Syria and Mesopotamia, will offer great possibilities to Jews desiring to settle near their fatherland.” (p. 223)
As to the currently insurmountable political difficulties, De Vries is free to leave its solution to the future: just as after the Great War the map of Europe was changed, so it will be possible for the future of Palestine and the surrounding countries... [ellipsis in the original] The political question remains very complex. [footnote 1: “Zionism,” writes P. Bonsirven, “is founded upon a double equivocation, an original equivocation of which it cannot be free and which inevitably brings recurring conflicts. In 1918, England, with self-interested goals, promised in the name of the Allies, on the one hand to the Arabs the creation of a great empire comprising the Turkish possessions in the Near East, and on the other hand to the Jews the establishment of a “home,” in the same territory in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration, in its original design, corresponds to the idea launched by Theodor Herzl, of a Jewish State with “autonomous Jewish control,” and to the “new political existence of the ancient nation of Israel,” the pretension of Max Nordau, who pledged the “reconstruction of Palestine as the national home of the Jewish people”; but in the corrected formulation, only conceded “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”; thus only the right to found Jewish institutions. That notwithstanding, the Zionists strive for a progressive actualization of their desired goal: “a true Jewish State.” (Etudes, Feb. 20, 1937, p. 515). On the other hand, Zionism is considered as an enterprise of the British Empire and a new font of conflict in the Mediterranean. Paolo Orano has recently published a book, Gli Ebrei in Italia (Rome: Pinciana, 1937), which makes a very strong indictment of the Hebrew-British Zionist movement, and demands that the Jews of Italy declare against Zionism if they do not want to cause an antisemitism that until now has been alien to the moderation of the Italians.]
And the opposition of the Arabs? This opposition did not originate from economic reasons. The Arabs benefit much from the sale of their lands and in every way are advantaged by the improvements in cultivation and industry that the Jews have done and are doing. The Arabs are opposed for nationalistic reasons. These could be calmed by actualizing, as intended by many Jews, not a Jewish State, but a Palestinian State, inhabited by Arabs and Jews, who are both of the Semitic race. Emir Faisal, then King of Iraq, wrote to Prof. Frankfurter of Harvard University in the United States: “ We feel that Arabs and Jews are cousins racially. We Arabs, especially those who are educated, regard sympathetically the Zionist movement. We want to work together for a Near-East that is reformed and reinvigorated; our two movements are complementary. Neither ourselves nor the Jews are able, alone, to arrive at full success.” This is recounted by De Vries (p. 229).
Recent news from Jerusalem reports: “Meanwhile there is talk of a new proposal to resolve the Arab-Hebrew dispute in Palestine. The Arabs and the Hebrews should learn to know each other better by the end of the years of elementary school, by making compulsory for all the study of the two respective maternal languages. This arrangement would continue also into the adult world with the composition of mixed organizations for workers and bi-national Chambers of Commerce. Finally there would be instituted two associations, one Hebrew and the other Arab, which would form a type of Palestinian parliament, in which the two organizations would have the same rights.” (Osservatore Romano, Jan. 17, 1937, p. 6)...
Vladimir Jabotinsky, head of the “revisionist” party that propounds an integral Zionism and represents the group of Jews who are most combative and least inclined to make compromises with the Arabs, recently said to the Royal Commission of Inquiry that the White Book of 1922 does not exclude “the possibility of transforming Palestine into a majority Israelite country” and that “with the Balfour Declaration there was an intension to form an Israelite majority, to which should follow the establishment of their own State for the chosen people.” Moreover, “that the Government of Jerusalem has not observed the terms of the Mandate,” which has given rise to the recent disorders in the Holy Land. Therefore: “To remedy this situation, a regime of colonization needs to be introduced to accelerate the implementation of the Mandate. This regime must include agrarian reform, modification of the customs and fiscal systems, transformation of the civil administration, opening of the gates of Trans-Jordan to Hebrew immigration, creation of an Israelite army within the framework of the British Imperial armed forces, and formation of Hebrew units in the police service. This regime would have to be brought to completion within a ten-year program, during which there should be a million and a half Hebrews entering the country. Any compromise, such as the federalization of Palestine and the parity of the two semitic races in the proposed Legislative Council, would only bring more grave dangers.” (Osservatore Romano, March 5, 1937).
These statements are substantially the same as those made by Jabotinsky in January 1936 and reported by De Vries (p. 201-203), who is persuaded that implementing Jabotinsky’s principles would bring the definitive solution for the Jewish problem, and could be received joyfully both by Jews and non-Jews.
Rebirth and liberation
Anyway, there still remain various unknowns. Two, primarily. Even if a Zionist State is attained, will the Jews abandon their Messianic aspiration to dominate the world and along with it their double capitalistic and revolutionary preponderance? Will not the Zionist State perhaps be a new and stronger stimulus and support for their innate Messianic aspiration and their double preponderance?
Moreover, what will be the attitude of the Christians in seeing the Holy Places in the hands and under the dominion of the Jews? And indeed the attitude of the Muslims themselves, who also hold these Places in veneration? Belloc calls this a most serious aspect of the question, the religious aspect, from which he prescinds in his treatment restricted to the political aspect alone, and concludes: “… If they think that religious sentiments have now decreased in the modern world or that they have weakened, that is a terrible delusion.” (p. 188-189).
And this failure of recognition is all the more grave to the extent that rationalist and laicist currents prevail in Zionism, as well as the Communist current. There are at present in Palestine various Communist Jewish colonies in which property is in common, as we have mentioned above. A visitor to some of these colonies last year, 1936, asked a young Jew who was acting as his guide whether there are synagogues, religious practices and religious instruction, and he responded: We are areligious; if anyone wants to say his prayers, no one prevents him, but there are no religious practices done communally. We do not teach religion to the children; when they grow up they will choose what they want; it suffices to leave them in perfect freedom.
We have described objectively the state and the principal conditions of Zionism, whereby it is deduced that Zionism is not attainable, or at least neither soon nor easily, and anyway no solution appears, neither a secure one nor a full one to the Jewish question. We will see another time what can be the true solution.
Italian originaDiane7ges 419
pages 420-421 (Marx-Lévy leDiane7Diane7Diane7Diane7Diane7Diane7Diane7Diane7
pages 422 - 423 - 424 - 425 - 426 - 427 - 428 - 429 - 430 - 431
An online edition of De Vries’ book quoting the Marx-Lévy letter, bearing the same publication year as the book’s first edition, 1937, includes the following errata notice following the title page and before the introduction: On page 104, substitute Baruch Lévy for Marx, and Marx for Baruch Lévy. See H. De Vries de Heekelingen, Israël: Son Passé, Son Avenir (Paris: Perrin, 1937), accessible online at Histoire E-Book (last accessed April 12, 2016).
Thus an easily detectible falsehood, namely the claim that such a letter was written by Marx, was quickly replaced by the non-verifiable falsehood that the letter was written by Lévy. Lévy was either a fictitious or unknown person, thus ensuring that his putative authorship could not be definitively disproven.
June 17, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“From Germany: A Speech By Bishop Berning Against the Campaign of Trials”Diane7
Dateline: Lucerne, June
The Bishop of Osnabrück, His Excellency Monsignor Berning, preached to a numerous pilgrim group of Catholic men and youth convened at the Sanctuary of Mariano di Rulle, exhorting his listeners to remain faithful to the Catholic religion, to the Catholic Church, to the Catholic school, shaming all the contrary currents of the present time. He deplored in this circumstance the violent attacks by the press and the organs directed by the State and the party against the German clergy.
“More terrible for the Church than any persecution from outside,” said the Bishop, “is the felony by her own sons. Doubly terrible, if the traitors were charged, by election or by sacrament, to give testimony to Christ by an immaculate life. No one suffers more than the Church from the guilt of her ministers and no one condemns it more than she with the maximum severity...
June 18, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“From Germany: Numbers and Quality”Diane7
A letter from L’Italia of June 13th, concerning the trials underway in Germany, especially against lay members of some Religious Congregations, highlights some considerations expounded by Benedictine Abbot Don Placido Glogger of Augusta, in the last issue of the Klerusblatt [Clergy Paper] of the Archdiocese of Munich.
After having established that the majority of the trials in question concern Congregations composed of religious laity, employed in teaching and helping the sick, Don Glogger recalls that in recent decades, to meet the needs for numbers in recent foundations or to fill the vacancies produced by the war, there was not enough strictness in the selection of candidates, while people were received instead with great trustful facility...
June 22, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“A Protest by His Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop of Cologne”Diane7
Dateline: Cologne, June 18
His Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop of Cologne has sent His Excellency the Interior Minister of the Reich and Prussia a formal protest against the arbitrary search and removal of documents from his Vicariate General by the Secret Police...
July 3, 1937 Civiltà Cattolica, vol. 3, pp. 27-39:
“The Jewish Question and the Catholic Apostolate”
The Church has always worked for the conversion of the Jews, from the beginning, according to the precept of the Savior to his Apostles: “Go first of all to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 10:6); and after his resurrection: “You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea, in Samaria and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Thus, the first Christians were converted Jews, and the Apostles, including the Apostle to the Gentiles, wherever they went, directed their preaching first to their brothers of Israel. In its early times the Church adopted two means: conversion and special treatment for the Jews, of which the oldest that remain to us are the “Dialogue with Trifone” of S. Justin (circa 155) and the “adversus Judaeos” of Tertullian (at the beginning of the third century)...
Charity, while awaiting their conversion with prayer and with the apostolate in the more appropriate modern form, procures a rapprochement and an agreement, which paves the way to a peaceful civil co-existence between Christians and Jews and at the same time a larger number of conversions. At the same time, prudence limits these relations, in a manner to remove any danger for Christians and stem the dual disruptive Jewish preponderances, the materialist-financial preponderance and the revolutionary preponderance, without resorting to antisemitism. Any form of antisemitism is condemned by the Church, and it suffices to recognize that it is not acceptable for the great part of civil nations, which, even if they do not profess it explicitly, still preserve not a few principles of Christian civilization inherited from preceding generations. Policy will be able to pursue the solution, if not definitive, at least provisional, of the Jewish question, all more quickly and all the more broadly and lastingly, to the extent it is inspired more by Christian charity and prudence.
Italian original: pages 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 39
Aug. 10, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Person and Works of Father Mayer objectively illuminated in the Munich trial (from our correspondent)”Diane7
Dateline: Munich, August
We have already reported extensively on the arrest of the famous Munich preacher, Father Robert Mayer, S.J., sentenced on July 23rd to six months incarceration, but nevertheless released in freedom immediately thereafter.
As his case concerns a vital issue of principle, we consider it opportune to give some details about his trial and above all to reproduce that part of Father Mayer’s speech before his judges that concerns precisely this issue.
The famous trial before the Special Tribunal was begun on July 22nd, and the charges of indictment against the accused centered around these three points of his preaching: the struggle against the confessional school, the struggle against publishing in the German press about the morality trials, the struggle against National Socialism and against Nazi literature...
Aug. 17, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Towards the Nuremberg Congress: Predictions of fighting - The preparation of the press - The neo-pagan ‘breach’ - Significant intemperance”Diane7
Dateline: Zurich, August
The Congress of National Socialist workers in Nuremberg is expected to be the probable occasion of new revelations about the attitude of the party in the religious struggle.
Various rumors are circulating. Intervention of authorities into the Religious Orders is mentioned, as well as a type of plebiscite about religious unity, formulated in such a way that the response can only be favorable to the struggle against Christianity, foreign religion contrary to Germanic traditions, and obstacles to the unity of the German people...
Aug. 21, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“From Germany: Cardinal Faulhaber to ‘The Tablet’”Diane7
Dateline: London, August
The London Catholic weekly The Tablet has published the following interview by a distinguished correspondent of an American newspaper who recently returned from a fact-finding trip in Germany.
Cardinal Faulhaber spoke of this time of unclear agreement in which one has to live and be on watch with all prudence:
“I knew,” said His Eminence, “that secret agents were trying to provoke our clerics and that untimely action by us would have given a pretext for taking even more grave measures against priests and the Church. But now, truly, the time has come to speak. That which is called ‘Kulturkampf’ has entered into a new phase and has the goal of nothing less than the complete destruction of the Catholic Church in Germany. Have we not heard from the mouth of the more influential National Socialists that the Church must be considered as the most dangerous enemy of the State? The Church and no more Marxism and Bolshevism are the ‘public enemies.’ It is certainly a sorrowful time for us.”
The Cardinal recalled the signing of the Concordat, July 20, 1933, the treaty for which Chancellor Hitler himself had taken the initiative.
Undoubtedly, a rupture can come about, but, even then, religious life will continue invincible.
“Priests will not die of hunger if state subsidies are denied; but the public powers will then quickly notice that the work of restoration of the past years has been in vain, because the demise of spiritual authority is an ineluctable cause of weakness for the State.”
His Eminence spoke then with great admiration of the Holy Father’s Encyclical and especially of the final words of that marvelous document: “He (God) is Our witness that We have no greater desire than the restoration of a true peace between Church and State in Germany. But if, without any fault of Ours, this peace does not come, the Church of God will defend her rights and freedom in the name of the Almighty whose arm indeed now is not shortened.”
Dateline: Paris, August
Under the auspices of the “Legion of Christ,” a protest aginst the anti-religious persecutions that have been occurring in Germany has been signed by about 70 thousand Brazilian Catholics and presented to the Reich’s Ambassador in Rio de Janeiro... Diane7
Sept. 8, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Opening of the National Socialist Congress in Nuremberg”Diane7
Dateline: Nuremberg, Sept. 7
Yesterday afternoon Chancellor Hitler arrived in Nuremberg, accompanied by his General Staff and by enthusiastic popular demonstrations, to proceed today to open the National Socialist Congress.
Yesterday evening, then, the Chancellor, accompanied by his Lieutenant, Minister Hess, was welcomed by the supreme authorities of the State and the Party and the Diplomatic Corps, and was received in the Great Hall of Nuremberg City and then later attended a gala spectacle at the Opera House.
This morning, in the Luitpold Hall, an immense arena holding 60,000 persons, the Congress was opened by a speech by Minister Hess, who began by recalling the memory of those fallen for Germany, whose names were read out by the Head of the SA, Lutze.
Adolf Wagner then read the Chancellor’s proclamation, which began with a retrospective summary of the National Socialist movement during the past ten years and continued by pointing out the goals of the annual Party Congress. These goals are to make an accounting of the past year and make known that must be accomplished, in a particular way for the moral education of new members of the party, as well as for all the general population.
A sole question dominates our economic life, continued the proclamation, and has been a preoccupation for several years. It is the difficulty of reforming our agricultural production.
The arable land of a Germany deprived of its colonies is too small to guarantee food for the future in a secure manner without worries among our people. Therefore, in our economic poverty, regaining the colonies is justified, and the position taken by the other Powers concerning this revendication is simply incomprehensible.
Continuing, the proclamation emphasizes the need to assure the recruitment of leaders well prepared to serve the nation and then a confrontation between the National Socialist organization and that of Bolshevism. In vigorous terms, it criticizes the Soviets for having obscured the true social problems and for having eliminated the intellectual personalities of the Country and substituting parasites in their place.
The proclamation then treats the friendship between Germany and Italy, which it calls “an element of security in Europe in the face of chaotic insanity,” adding that no one will be able to ignore this community in the future and no one will be able to violate this common will. “Our accord with Japan,” it then says, “likewise has the purpose of remaining united in defense against all aggression upon the civilized world that today can be taking place in Spain, tomorrow in the east, and the day after tomorrow in other places. We hope that the other Powers will also understand these signs of the times and will come to reinforce this combined front of reason, of protecting peace and our civilization.”
Sept. 9, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Congress in Nuremberg”Diane7
The activities of the Congress continued at 8:30 pm with a session examining cultural problems. The ministers and all the major German directors were present.
Rosenberg spoke first - according to information from the Stefani agency - then Minister Goebbels, to give national awards conferred by the Government.
The first was awarded to Alfred Rosenberg for his work of disseminating and directing National Socialist culture; the second was divided between two surgeons, August Bier and Fernand Sauerbruck, and the third to the explorer Wilhelm Filcchner.
Chancellor Hitler then took the floor to conclude the ceremony, speaking of the artistic originality and creation. He announced two major initiatives for the expansion of theater in Germany and, moreover, the creation of new architectural works that will document the contemporary history of the Reich.
Various exhibitions were opened on the occasion of this Congress. One of these is dedicated to the City of Nuremberg, to its past, to its current problems, accompanied by abundant photographic materials; another highlights what has been done by the National Socialist regime for the education of women.
A premier showing was given for the documentary war film entitled: “Impresa Michael.”
Afterwards a group of leaders of youth organizations of General Franco’s Spain and of Falangists was received by leaders of the Hitler Youth.
Sept. 10, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The exalted social action of Holy Father Pius XI in a speech by the Archbishop of Detroit”Diane7
Sept. 10, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Congress in Nuremberg”Diane7
Dateline: Nuremberg, Sept. 9
Yesterday, on the third day of the National Socialist Congress, a great assembly took place, of soldiers of labor who passed in review before Chancellor Hitler on the Zeppelin Plaza.
Then the Congress took up its agenda in the Luitpoldhalle, in the presence of the Chancellor and the high officials of the Reich. Dr. Rosenberg spoke to the Congress members.
Then, this morning, a ceremony took place for the laying of the first stone of a large new Sports Stadium. First the head of the SA, Lutze, spoke, and then Chancellor Hitler spoke a few words exalting the significance of the ceremony.
Yesterday a delegation from the Government of France arrived.
Diplomats, ministers and directors of National Socialist organizations visited at length yesterday the anti-Bolshevik exhibition in Nuremberg, which is divided into two well-known sections: the German part and the Italian part.
Sept. 11, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Congress in Nuremberg”Diane7
The Stefani News Agency reports from Nuremberg that the Minister of Propaganda, Dr. Goebbels, spoke at the National Socialist Party Congress on “The Truth about Spain,” stating that the nationalist movement is a movement of liberation for all the people against the revolutionary organization of the Communist Party commanded by Moscow, while the Comintern up to 1935 wanted “Spain to be a theater of experimentation for the expansion of Communist territory into all of Europe.” The speaker, after having declared “that it cannot be tolerated, for any reason, that the Communist International create a new base of operation in Western Europe for the purpose of threatening the whole rest of the Continent,” said that “Italy’s and Germany’s recognition of the national Spanish Government must consider be considered as something more than a simple diplomatic act.” With a broad critique of the situation, Dr. Goebbels concluded with an appeal to the civil population to support the great struggle to preserve Europe from disaster.
The head of the Reich’s National Socialist press office, Dietrich, then spoke about freedom of the press and its organization.
The same Agency assures that Undersecretary Bastianini was received todday by Reich Foreign Minister Baron von Neurath and then by Hitler’s Lieutenant Minister Hess at the Deutscher Hof. Tomorrow morning the Italian Delegation will be presented to the Chancellor.
This Friday evening will take place in Nuremberg an assembly of the directors of the National Socialist Party, in the course of which Chancellor Hitler will give a speech.
Sept. 12, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“At the Nuremberg Congress”Diane7
Dateline: Nuremberg, Sept. 11
Yesterday evening, at the conclusion of the fourth day of the National Socialist Congress in Nuremberg, Chancellor Hitler held a reception for the members of the Diplomatic Corps, presenting to those he singled out, in a short speech of thanks for the "great annual festival of the German people” and then gave the publicized speech to the political leaders and directors, gathered in numbers of 150,000.
Recalling the struggle the Party sustained in coming to power in Germany, Hitler denounced Communism as disruptive in the world, but destined to be smashed by solidarity of the National Socialist movement.
The Chancellor then added that Germany is now “an element of tranquility, a factor of security and thus indeed a guarantor of peace,” and, mentioning Italy, said that it is fortunate for Europe to have another Power, at midday, sound in the defense of peace.
Finally, the further work and achievements proposed by National Socialism were displayed, insisting again on the desire for peace that animates every German citizen.
Sept. 14, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“At the Nuremberg Congress”Diane7
Dateline: Nuremberg, Sept. 13
On Saturday and Sunday, demonstrations continued as planned by the intense program of the National Socialist Congress. The Stefani agency reports, in fact, taht Chancellor Hitler spoke Saturday at the large assembly of Hitler Youth with 50,000 members present. Saying that the demonstration was taking place under a sky full of threatening clouds, he said perhaps it was good this way, “because we are training you not for sunny days, but for stormy ones.”
At the Pavilion for the Congress, the great assembly of the Labor Front opened with a speech by Dr. Ley, followed by Gen. Goering and then Hitler.
Then, yesterday, the SS and SA procession took place in the Luitpold Arena, with 100,000 soldiers presented to the Chancellor by Commandante Lutze.
On the same day, Hitler received a group of journalists, conversing with them and responding to the questions they posed. Concerning the upcoming the Head of the Italian Government, he said, “There is no need to keep laboring under an illusion. We do not want to do harm to anyone, and we are in position not to fear that others would do harm to us.”
Continuing with information from Stefani, Chancellor Hitler spoke at length about the colonial problem. The world, he said in essence, does not want to understand that it is absolutely absurd to leave Germany without colonies. Why must all other States have colonies and not Germany? Germany too has the right and the need to have a basis of raw materials that are necessary for its industrial production.
The colonial problem, according to Hitler, must be resolved in one way or another. “Just as Germany resolved the issue of parity, it is certain to be able to resolve the colonial issue as well. But there is no need to think immediately of a war. The colonial issue is not an issue of war or peace. It is a call to reason, adding that it is sure to end triumphantly.”
Sept. 15, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“After the Nuremberg Congress”Diane7
The big demonstration of German National Socialism in Nuremberg has now ended. In various circles, it was expected that there would be progress at such a symbolic occasion for the purpose of reducing the current tension – not to use a stronger expression – in the relations between Church and State, which are approaching a dramatic break that would demolish, by a unilateral fait accompli, the last bridges that still exist, by virtue of the Concordat, between the two Powers in Germany.
Such an expectation has not been confirmed by the visible propensity of the Congress. Though with an extremely aggressive literature, and the usual rhetoric indeed of highly positioned personalities, it may have appeared likely before the Congress – at least to those who were not aware of what was going on behind the scenes – the prognosis of imminent forceful blows; instead, for reasons the examination of which can be reserved for another occasion, in the Congress itself it has been possible to feel the influence of a certain governing rule, according to whose tactical plans it did not seem useful to disturb the Nuremberg Convention with a decisive move in the struggle against Christianity and the Church.
Unfortunately, however, anyone who would like to draw optimistic conclusions from this for the future development of relations between Church and State in Germany, would show that he has not drawn any profit from the teachings and the experience of the past four years. The relative moderation, explainable by the complexity of the current situation, in the public oratory of Nuremberg, cannot – and we attest this with sorrow – live down the fact that the hidden and open struggle against the Church and against the rights guaranteed to her in a solemn Concordat continues unabated. Obvious proofs of this, among many other things, are the continuing crescendo of a press that is ever more immoderate and, to say the least, indecorous, and the recent anti-Concordat regulations concerning religious instruction, by which it is removed from its competent authorities, namely the clergy, or the clergy is required to renew and reform the catechism “in a National Socialist sense,” which, as the result of declarations made by its most authoritative interpreters, means the negation of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith.
Moreover, the Nuremberg Congress indeed showed that the process of penetration into the National Socialist movement by neo-paganism of a “Nordic” stamp is in continuing progress, and that the official representatives of the movement are not only not opposed to this penetration, but, in favoring it and promoting its expansion, allow ever more to fall by the wayside those tactical considerations that they had followed for a certain time. Thus, when the Holy See in the past, whether by Diplomatic Note or by direct conversations, initiated discussion about the struggle against Christianity proclaimed in theory and inspired in fact by Rosenberg, it repeatedly received the assurance, in writing and verbally, that his writings were a private work for which the Reich Government assumed no responsibility. Indeed, high government representatives did not hesitate to express in unequivocal terms their judgment of the lack of any scientific merit and value in Rosenberg’s well-known book. That, however, did not prevent official propaganda and the imposition of Rosenberg’s ideology from taking on ever greater proportions, so that it became the foundation of all courses for teachers employed by the State and the party, so that it made its entry into the State schools, so that the “Myth of the 20th Century” was enclosed inside the first stone of the great edifice of Nuremberg, and that in this manner, by facts so obvious, the declarations and assurances of the Reich Government came to be devalued. And as if this series of facts still needed a crowning symbol and symptom to open the eyes of those who found it more comfortable to keep them closed, it came to pass in Nuremberg that the highest national recognition was conferred upon Alfred Rosenberg. This solemn proclamation of Rosenberg not as “poet” but as “prophet laureate” of National Socialist thought and of the National Socialist State is a fact whose symbolic significance undoes the double game that has been played for years in the dissemination of the official position of National Socialism toward Christianity and the Church. In light of these facts, whoever recalls the Encyclical “Mit Brennender Sorge” and the capital importance it attributed, in the interest of true peace between Church and State, to the dissolution of the fatal union of State powers with forces hostile to Christianity, can understand how perilous is the path that the cultural development of Germany is beginning to take, after the direction of the State has declared itself so fully and solemnly in the highest degree of sympathy with the literary production of Rosenberg.
We are very sorry to have to attest how such an identification tends to suppress the necessary conditions and suppositions for that religious pacification to which the Holy See has sincerely aspired and still aspires in the interest of the German people itself, and renders vacuous any assertions of a benevolent attitude toward Christianity. Thus, for example, when one reads in the Nuremberg speeches the truly stupefying affirmation that the National Socialist revolution “has not harmed a hair of a single ecclesiastic,” as if the actual events in Germany have not been sufficiently sorrowful – not to compare them to the bloody facts of Red Spain – one comes to make the observation that every revolution has its successive phases. Also in Spain the anti-religious book was the conscious or unconscious precursor of the later atrocities. Anyone familiar with the anti-clerical Spanish press before 1936 sees today with terrible clarity what sanguinary fruit it has yielded. But who can guarantee to today’s rulers in Germany that the seed of hatred and of denigration of everything sacred, which is developing ever more powerfully under the eyes of the Authorities, will not also produce in German soil, fruit that must instill dread in every true friend of the German people and its future?
Sept. 15, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“At the Nuremberg Congress”Diane7
Dateline: Nuremberg, Sept. 14
After the military review occurred yesterday afternoon, Chancellor Hitler closed the events of the National Socialist Congress in Nuremberg by delivering the previously announced political speech.
According to the Stefani News Agency, the Chancellor began by speaking of Bolshevism, noting the seriousness of the threat that it brings against civilization and against the very existence of peoples, and, therefore, the need for Europe to be immunized, indeed since the destinies of the various States are each bound to the others. Touching then upon the Jewish problem, Hitler passed on to deal with Spain, declaring that it is an absurdity to affirm that the Bolshevik oppressors there are the incumbents holding lawful power whereby the nation of Spain would be a revolutionary Spain. He added that, just as England and France do not want a shift in the balance of power toward the German or Italian side, so Germany does not want a shift in this balance in the form of an increase of Bolshevik influence. Just as in England and France there are worries that Spain could be occupied by Italy or Germany, so in the Reich there is worry over the possibility that it could be conquered by Soviet Russia.
Given then that “a shift in the balance in favor of Bolshevism would be identified with an economic catastrophe in all of Europe,” and that “Germany has a real, serious interest that the Bolshevik plague not expand through Europe,” the Chancellor spoke of France. “With the nation of France,” he said, “we have had many disagreements in the course of history. But in a certain way we belong to the great family of European peoples. Therefore I believe that we National Socialists do not have any interest in seeing any of the true civilized Nations of Europe disappear. We have every reason not only to abhor this, but on the contrary to love each other as neighbors, Nation to Nation. In this European community, Bolshevism is an absolutely foreign body.”
Reaching the conclusion, Hitler observed that Germany does not want to be isolated and is not isolated either politically or economically. On the contrary, it seeks the cooperation of all States that have the goal of European solidarity, but only categorically refuses to be placed on the same level with those who want the destruction of Europe; “Moscow remains Moscow,” concluded the Chancellor, “and Germany, thanks be to God, remains Germany.”
Sept. 29, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Visit to Berlin by the Italian Head of Government”Diane7
Dateline: Berlin, Sept. 27, night
The Head of the Italian Government arrived from Essen at 5:30 p.m. and was met at the station, decked out with the Italian and German colors, by the Führer, by Ministers of the Reich, and by all the public authorities, civil and military, while various formations rendered honors.
The procession from the station to the Hindenburg Palace went for fifteen kilometers, amidst interruptions by the applauding people, in streets that were decorated and beflagged.
The Chancellor left his guest in the apartment assigned to him and returned to the Wilhelmplatz, where His Excellency Mussolini joined him at 8 p.m. to participate in the official banquet, in which two hundred invitees took part.
As the tables were cleared, toasts were exchanged, in which the solid Italian-German friendship was reaffirmed, and in which Germany’s welcome to the Head of the Italian Government was given unanimous emphasis, and commitments were made to general international understanding, as the friendship between the two peoples does not intend to be an exclusive bloc, but a collaborative force with all other nations of good will. The Führer expressed the most cordial wishes for the King of Italy and Emperor of Ethiopia.
After the meal there followed a musical concert, in which artists of the Theater of the Opera performed.
The city was magnificently illuminated.
Sept. 30, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page 6:
“The Italian Head of Government in Berlin”Diane7
Dateline: Berlin, Sept. 28, night
Yesterday morning the Head of the Italian Government visited the Italian Embassy, the House of Fascism, and was the guest of Minister Goering at lunch...
After a greeting by Minister Goebbels, who announced that a million listeners were present in the stadium and the vicinity, and another two million in the Via Triumphalis where loudspeakers transmitted the stages of the ceremony, the Chancellor spoke, noting the importance of the demonstration that “what is signified most profoundly is the sincere desire to guarantee to our Countries that peace which ... is the result of a conscientious defense of our national, spiritual, material and cultural values and elements.”...
The Head of the Italian Government spoke immediately after, reaffirming the historic parallelism between the two nations that came into freedom in the same century ...
He concluded by affirming that in Italy and Germany there exists no dictatorship, that the powers rest on a popular consensus so vast that nowhere else than these regimes are there so grand and authentic democracies currently in the world; meanwhile elsewhere “the immortal principles” are exalted, of domination by money, by sects, by political competitors...
Oct. 6, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Christianity and Nazism in a Scholastic Regulation”Diane7
Dateline: Zurich, Oct. 4
(C.P.) - The Ministry of Popular Culture for Thuringia recently published a new curriculum plan for teaching religion in the schools, all the more symptomatic as the same Ministry in its region is the precursor for general regulations.
This regulation establishes: 1. The selection of materials and the method of instruction must place emphasis on the virile and combattive character of Christianity. 2. Materials and instruction must tend to create an intimate contact between Christ and German National Socialist man, in a way that in itself results in a vital force for fulfillment of duty toward the fatherland, toward the people and the Führer. 3. The religion schedule must be specially adapted to the holiday schedule in order to open the whole mind to the revelation of God in Christ in the German nation and fatherland. In the program of this holiday schedule, appropriate passages of Sacred Scripture are to be included, as well as the best German choral songs and the best works of German religious artists. 4. The teacher shall choose from these passages and special songs, those that are to be committed to memory. 5. Religious instruction must always be in accordance with the German calendar year.
This applies to the primary schools. For the middle schools and high schools, the Thuringian Cabinet Ministry has ordered that from now on the Old Testament must be omitted entirely, as well as Israelitic religious history and the other themes of the Old Testament. Jesus Christ must be described as antisemitic. The fifth year of elementary school will deal with the theme: “Jesus’ struggle against Jewish egotism and for a kingdom of love, honor, purity, and strength.” The sixth year will focus on “Jesus’ struggle against Judaism and against the clericalism represented by the Pharisees and priests.”
Aside from so monstrous a metamorphosis by which the Redeemer of all men becomes racist and anti-clerical, precisely against those for whom He suffered, according to His teaching, His prophecy, and His example, these scholastic norms will be at the ready to be taken up by all those who maintain that Christianity no longer gives a virile and combattive character, that God is revealed in the German nation and only in the fatherland of blood and race, that the law of love is no longer associated with the law of honor; that a faith that admits original sin is vile and cowardly, never pure and strong.
Nov. 7, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“Italy Joins the Pact Against International Communism”Diane7
(From our correspondents and radio reports)
This morning at 11:00 in Rome, Italian Foreign Minister Ciano, Reich Extraordinary Ambassador von Ribbentrop and Japanese Ambassador Hotta signed the text of the following agreement:
; “The Italian Government, the Government of the German Reich and the Imperial Government of Japan, considering that the Communist International continues to place the civilized world in constant peril in the West and in the Orient, disturbing and destroying peace and order there; convinced that only a close collaboration among all States interested in the maintenance of peace and order can limit and remove this peril; considering that Italy – which, with the advent of the Fascist Regime, has combatted this peril with inflexible determination and has eliminated the Communist International within its territory – has decided to close ranks against the common enemy, together with Germany and Japan, which, for their part, are animated by the same will to defend against the Communist International; in conformity with Article 2 of the Pact against the Communist International concluded in Berlin on November 25, 1936 between Germany and Japan; have agreed as follows: ...
Nov. 9, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, Nov. 8-9 issue, page one:
“After the Anti-Communist Pact”Diane7
On the occasion of the signing of the anti-Communist accord, deliberately in Rome this past Saturday, telegrams of congratulations for the future of the accord were exchanged among the Heads of the three participating Governments.
Commenting on this accord, the Daily Telegraph writes that no one can contest the exalted nature of the statement made by Ribbentrop, according to which the pact is an event that has a truly historic importance.
The Jour confirms that the anti-Communist pact of Rome has a worldwide importance and furnishes a new proof of the energy and dynamism of the three great totalitarian States, contrary to the democratic States that pursue an incoherent policy.
The Asahi of Tokyo observes it is natural that the three Countries, exposed to the same peril, would conclude the Pact, and says to consider that this will press other countries, especially small European countries, to participate in the anti-Communist Pact, since all the nations of the world will be obligated to declare their position without duplicity either against or for the Soviets.
“The tragic balance sheet of twenty years of Bolshevism: Three million killed and dozens of millions dead from hardship”
On the occasion of the anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution, German newspapers are publishing a balance sheet of the disastrous conditions of Russia and the terror that has reigned there in the past twenty years...
“Petition of the citizens of the Canton of Zurich against Communism”...
“The hammer and sickle are symbols of slavery and death”
Dateline: Filadelfia [sic], Nov. 8
The Philadelphia Inquirer highlights how the 20th anniversary of Communism finds Russia in the grip of the most violent and brutal purging that the country has ever had, at the end of which its peasants have been reduced to famine or are dying of hardships...
Dec. 25, 1937 L’Osservatore Romano, page one:
“The Exalted, Heartfelt Words of the Holy Father on the Persecution that Afflicts the Church”
“Intrepid Defense of the Truth”
The Holy Father began by saying that it is always particularly beautiful, this joyful Christmas audience; beautiful, joyful, great indeed, for the majesty that the Sacred College and the Roman Prelature confer upon it; and in this year even more beautiful, joyful and great, not only for the imposing number and representation of the components of the Sacred College, but also since the Roman Prelature added to the representation of the multiplicity of the Pontifical Family with its most exalted exponents…
The Supreme Pontiff wanted to state the sad, most painful fact of the religious persecution in Germany: since, said the Holy Father, we want to give things their right name, since it does not have to be repeated by Us what ancient history said in a determinative moment: Vera etiam rerum perdidimus nomina.
No, continued His Holiness, by the grace of God, we have not lost these names: we want to clarify things with their names. In Germany there is in fact religious persecution. For some time it has been said, it has been made to be believed, that there is no persecution: but we know that there is, and a grave one; indeed, there has seldom been a persecution so grave, so fearful, so distressing; and so sad in its most profound effects. It is a persecution for which is lacking neither the prevailing of force, nor the pressure of threats, nor deceptions of guile and sham.
The August Pontiff would not have wanted to treat so sad a matter: but he wanted to add this relief for those who have need, since no one can doubt that in speaking of such grave matters, which touch so closely upon His responsibilities, the Vicar of Jesus Christ could appear less informed or say one thing for another.
The Holy Father then passed on to the second point, to the question of merit and principle, still under the same issue, and also connected to the first word, and still concerning Germany. I know that in Germany, and it has often been repeated abroad and repeated in accentuated colors, that the Pope has been and still is such a friend of Germany. In fact, few Countries have known such good of His Holiness as Germany … there are many that He has admired: not only because they came to Him as pilgrims, but because he knew them in their home; in their library, in their great institutes, in their great cities.
Hence it is sad, doubly sad for the Supreme Pontiff to have to recall how in this Country the truth is violated … but that he regards in a way so very grave that it touches what He has most at heart; that for which he invests all His responsibility before God and before man, both the Catholic Hierarchy, the Catholic Religion, the Holy Church of God, that the divine goodness has confided to the care of His Vicar on earth.
It is said that the Catholic Religion is no longer Catholic, but is political, and this pretext is taken up, this entitlement to justify the persecution, as if it is not a persecution, but, so to speak, a defensive maneuver. Those most beloved sons shared and are sharing with the Father the realization of those who traffic in the same accusation made against Our Lord when he was brought before Pilate, when everyone accused him of doing politics: of being a usurper, a conspirator against the political empire, an enemy of Caesar. And Pilate showed, in a first time, that he did not understand the spirit of the matter, or at least pretended not to have understood, and thus his question: So, are you a king? That is, have you come to overturn things, like a great political leader, one who stirs up politically the empire of Caesar? And the Lord, in His divine calm, responded with the affirmation: My kingdom is not of his world. It is not of this world that you thought or seemed to think. If my kingdom were of this world, my people would have taken up arms to come to my aid.
This – continued His Holiness – We too can say. If We are doing politics as We are charged, as is attributed to Us, then this is to speak of rearmaments, and of war, that would then be a position for Us, to the extent it is small and exiguous, even for Us. No, the Supreme Pontiff does not have need of going there: My kingdom is not of this world. The Pope does not do politics: He does not live, does not work, to do politics, but to give testimony to the truth, to teach the truth: this truth that the world so little appreciates, which is cared for so little, while all the rest is cared for, precisely like Pilate who did not expect an answer to his question: what is truth?
The Supreme Pontiff wanted to say and repeat and protest on high in the face of the whole world: We do not do politics; on the contrary, just to return to the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, if that were the case, Our people – and in all the world We have Our people: dearest sons, devoted faithful, believers, adorers of God – would be seen aiding Us. Well then, no one of Our sons scattered around the world, not one believes that We are doing politics; when everyone sees instead and continually confirms that We are doing religion, and do not want to do anything else.
Certainly, added the Holy Father, concerning this it must be affirmed that the simple citizen must conform his own civic life to the law of God, of Jesus Christ; is this to do religion or politics? Certainly not politics.
We desire then – continued the Holy Father – that also in civic life, in human and social life, there always be respect for the rights of God that are also the rights of the soul. And this, said the Holy Father, is what we have always exclusively done. If others have thought otherwise and said otherwise, that is contrary to the truth. And it is what profoundly saddens the Supreme Pontiff: the casting of this complex accusation of abusing religion – one of the worst thoughts that can come into the human mind – the accusation of abusing religion for a political purpose; the hurling, to use the true word, of this calumny against so many of His venerable brothers in the Episcopate, against authoritative members of the Sacred College, against so many priests, against so many of the good faithful, whose only concern is to obey the law of God, to make known this divine law, to do good Christian works, and thus, obviously, works of the best citizens, who are conscious of being responsible also in these civic and social obligations not only before men, but before God himself.
The Holy Father therefore declared that His protest could not be either more explicit or more exalted in the face of the whole world: We do Religion, we do not do politics: everyone knows it, everyone sees it who wants to see.
Go to Overview-Contents
Published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License by Stephen H. Galebach. Non-commercial reproduction, use and sharing of the Timeline and linked Translations and Notes are permitted, provided attribution is given to the author and a hyperlink is made to the Timeline.