To Mr. Bill O'Reilly:

I hope you will be interested in the attached research on "Pope Pius XII and the New York Times." My most recent book, Did Pius XII Help the Jews? will be released in June 2007.

My association with The New York Times goes back many years. In 1975, when my book, Philip Mazzei: Jefferson's "Zealous Whig" was printed for the New Jersey Bicentennial Commission, I was a professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University. The Public Relations Office sent an interview, "Special to The New York Times," with a photograph. Interestingly, both were accepted and the article appeared in the Sunday edition, December 7, 1975.

This was the beginning of nationwide publicity. Describing Mazzei's relationship with some of the leaders of the American Revolution, it noted that John Adams wrote to Jefferson in 1780, stating that Mazzei was "a zealous defender of our affairs." In 1800, Italian newspapers labeled him "one of the most zealous actors in the American Revolution." After Mazzei's death in 1816, Jefferson wrote: "An intimacy of 40 years has proven to me his great worth...his early and zealous cooperation in the establishment of our independence having acquired for him a great degree of favor."

This research lasted about ten years and has been recognized internationally. Jeffersonian scholar Dumas Malone wrote to me (April 14, 1976): "Philip Mazzei's work on the United States, published in French while his friend Jefferson was minister to France, was one of the best of its time on its subject...." In The New York Times (May 30, 1976), Fred Ferretti wrote: "Philip Mazzei: Jefferson's "Zealous Whig" is a highly literate translation of the works of the pamphleteer who, writing under the name of Furioso, exhorted the Colonies early on to sever their ties with England...." I received grants to continue this work. Since 1960, my publications in the USA and in Italy consist of fifty books and hundreds of articles.

However, since 1995, my research has been on Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. The New York Times editorial, March 18, 1998, stated: "A full exploration of Pope Pius XII's conduct is needed. He did not encourage Catholics to defy Nazi orders." And, three days later, Peter Steinfels wrote; "The Vatican Document skirts the issue of the Pope's silence!" The allegations that followed on April 26, 1998, in The New York Times magazine article, "John Paul's Jewish Dilemma," maligned the character of both Pius XII and John Paul II, offended Catholics, and denigrated our Faith.

In fact, I was described as "a faithful remnant." Why? Because I had written many "pro-Pius letters to the editor"-none of which were ever published! Was I insulted? No. Sometimes, remnants are useful! Besides, I've had other titles. In 1957, I was called "The Independent Nun." Throughout the years, among other titles, were: "The Literary Nun, The Flying Nun, The Whirlwind Nun, The Feisty Nun"... but none pleases me more than the title-"Defender of Pius XII."

Sincerely.

Professor Margherita Marchione, Ph.D., Professor Emerita

The New York Times gives valuable, historical information about the Church, the Jews, and the Nazis during World War II. It provides a portrait of the contemporary scene and is conveniently found on microfilm in major libraries and universities.

The New York Times reported on September 16, 1939 that "Vatican circles took the unusual step today of calling attention to the Catholic persecution in Germany by permitting L'Osservatore Romano, its official organ, to comment critically on a Stefani News Agency dispatch from Berlin excusing German measures." ¹

The front page caption of the New York Times was in very large print: "Pope Condemns Dictators, Treaty Violators, Racism; Urges Restoring of Poland." The Pope's entire encyclical was printed on pages 8 and 9. Journalist Herbert L. Matthews wrote: "A powerful attack on totalitarianism and the evils which he considers it has brought on the world was made by Pope Pius XII in his first encyclical, issued today from his Summer villa at Castelgandolfo. In this document he raises the banner of Christianity against totalitarian paganism, which idolizes purely human values, and against atheism which denies the existence of God."²

In his Easter sermon Pius XII deplored the breaking of pledged word: "How is peace possible," he asked, "if pacts solemnly sanctioned and the plighted word have lost that security and value which are the indispensable bases of reciprocal confidence and without which ardently desired disarmament, both material and moral, becomes with each passing day less possible of realization?" His homily showed great balance and calm judicial judgment. His reproach may be presumed to have been directed against the totalitarian States, but he made it clear that he did not consider the other side free from blame for the unrest that at present was agitating the world. Peace is impossible without justice and justice requires, among other things, "that those goods and riches which God has showered upon the world for the benefit of his children be conveniently distributed." ³

Pius XII spoke about the dignity of work: "How may peace be had while so many thousands of men lack work-honest work, which not only maintains life for individuals and their families but represents, furthermore, a necessary and decorous explanation of the complex energies nature has exercised, study of which has endowed and honored the dignity of the human person?.... When the arms of violence are substituted for the scepter of justice, no one need marvel at the appearance on the horizon of the gloomy forebodings of war instead of the longed-for dawn of peace."⁴

According to the New York Times, months before World War II, Pope Pius XII invited the Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers of five European countries (Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy and Poland) to confer in Vatican City.⁵ He suggested that the meeting be held as soon as possible. He would open the first session in person and would put his palace and staff at the disposal of the plenipotentiaries. He would take no part personally but would be at the disposal of the conference through his Secretary of State as counselor and conciliator if needed. He further suggested that the aim of the conference would be to settle amicably the German-Polish dispute and eventually to begin the settlement of other problems. The article, by Jules Sauerwein, concluded: "Until now the Pope's proposal has been kept closely secret. That he has made it, is a mark of his high intelligence and exceptional courage. He believes it his duty to make this proposal so as to save Europe from war, even though he is not sure he will succeed." ⁶

The New York Times editorial evaluated the political situation: "As Cardinal Pacelli, Pope Pius XII showed himself to be so devoted a friend of peace and so tireless an emisssary of better understanding that it is wholly natural that he should now seek to use the authority of his great office to avert the threat of war in Europe.

In the Sunday issue of the New York Times, Herbert L. Matthews stated that "in relation to the present situation, for the Catholic Church, in throwing its spiritual force on the side of peace, is merely exercising its traditonal role....The fact that Pope Pius stepped in so soon after his election and in such relatively open fashion would seem to demonstrate that he regards the situation most seriously....Pius XII can work only through normal diplomatic channels, which is to say through his nuncios and apostolic delegates or trusted envoys in various countries. ...If armed conflict does come to Europe, none will be able to say the Vatican has not done everything possible to prevent it."⁷ On September 16, 1939, the New York Times reported that "Vatican circles took the unusual step today of calling attention to the Catholic persecution in Germany by permitting L'Osservatore Romano, its official organ, to comment critically on a Stefani News Agency dispatch from Berlin excusing German measures." ⁸

The New York Times reported that on March 14, 1940, the Pope defended the Jews in Germany and Poland, and that German Foreign Secretary von Ribbentrop left the audience "downcast." The Times called the visit "Hitler's Canossa," a reference to Emperior Henry IV humbling himself before Pope Gregory VII.

Louis Finkelstein-Provost of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America-referring to the Christian churches that offered resistance to the Third Reich, stated: "No keener rebuke has come to Nazism than from Pope Pius XI and his successor, Pope Pius XII." In a letter to the editor, Finkelstein wrote: "Jewish tradition, like Christian religious tradition, demands that in the face of evil we should renounce before we denounce, that before we demand the purification of others we should cleanse ourselves. In the midst of unprecedented horrors the Jews of Poland followed this tradition in proclaiming a special fast and singing the penitential hymns prescribed for such days, asking forgiveness for their own sins. This is not simple submission to evil. On the contrary, it is resistance to evil with the greatest possible hope of ultimate effectiveness.

"It is our constant prayer that the efforts of the enemies of religion to create dissension between the various denominations will fail and that following the teachings of our respective faiths we will be able to make a real contribution to the preservation of our liberty and of civilization. In expressing this hope we do not conceive of the possibility of reducing all religions to simple universalism. On the contrary, we should each strengthen his own tradition. This involves not opposition but cooperation, not the spread of hostility and recrimination but the increase of abiding affection. This attitude toward the current emergency in American life is the fruit of the religious experience of the ages." ⁹

Finkelstein's parents survived the Holocaust, but other family members were exterminated. He strongly maintains that aspects of the "Holocaust Industry" defame the dead of the death camps by insisting on "compensation" for survivors.

Also in 1940, the New York Times editorialized: "If the Pope in his Christmas message had intended to condemn Hitler's system, he could not have done it more effectively than by describing the 'moral order' which must govern human society. The Pontiff pointed out that the foundation of the moral order is trust, 'Fidelity in the observance of pacts.' Without trust-and this war has demonstrated the truth of his words-the coexistence of powerful and weak peoples is impossible. The moral order cannot be based on hatred, on the principle that 'might makes right,' on 'economic maladjustment,' on 'the spirit of cold egoism' which leads to the violation of the sovereignty of states and the liberty of their citizens. The moral order, in a word, is in complete contradiction to Hitler's order." ¹⁰

An article by Anne O'Hare McCormick clearly demonstrates what was at stake: "The present war is fought for many ends. It is fought on various fronts with new methods. In a way, it is a war too big to fight, at least with military weapons, for the reason that its fundamental issue cannot be resolved on a battlefield, and everybody knows it. In the broadest sense it is a religious issue, and perhaps that is why the Pope has put his finger on it more surely than any secular statesman. The central theme of his long encyclical is the function of the State in the modern world, and that is the crux of the struggle of our time. The dictatorship of today is not simply a form of government; it is a form of life, a usurpation of every human and divine right, a growth of power so abnormal that it is like a tumor pressing on the whole social body and preventing other nations from functioning naturally." ¹¹

Reporter Anne O'Hare McCormick wrote: "The Bishops have taken the unusual step of circulating among the people the official protest they have addressed to the Government.... This confirms that the Catholic Church has followed the Jews as the scapegoat of the Nazis." ¹²

Also on June 10, 1942 Anne O'Hare McCormick summarized the protest against the Nazis by the Churches of Europe in her weekly column Abroad: "When the history of this new Reign of Terror is written, it will appear that the strongest centers of opposition to the claims of the God-State were not universities, trades unions, political parties, courts or organized business. In Germany and the occupied countries the institution that stands up most stoutly against the pretensions of the Nazi New Order is the church. The Protestant pastors of Norway dared to go on strike rather than accept orders from Quisling [Nazi head of the government]. The [Catholic] Primates of Holland and Belgium have defied the Nazi authorities as boldly as Cardinal Mercier did in the last war. Resistance to the collaborationists in France has been nourished by the parish priests, whose influence among their people has never been so strong, according to all reports, as it is today. Judging from the open resistance offered by the churches in Hitler's Europe, one might infer that of all human freedoms, freedom of conscience is the most cherished.

The record shows that, on June 10, 1942, the New York Times again noted that the August 3, 1940 pastoral letter by the Catholic bishops of the Netherlands, secretly prepared and sent to all parishes, was read from every Catholic pulpit. Archbishop de Jong was the force behind the condemnation of Nazi policies, and forbade Catholics from joining any Nazi organization, without the explicit denial of Nazi ideology, under pain of being refused the sacraments. In 1941, the bishops issued another protest: "We raise our voices in protest against the injustice inflicted upon tens of thousands-to force them to accept a conception of life which is contrary to their religious convictions." ¹³

According to the New York Times, Catholic and Protestant leaders protested against the maltreatment of Jews: "Some of their remarks have scarcely been veiled." ¹⁴ Noted, too, were the efforts by the Church to save the Jews in France: "Many Catholic leaders in unoccupied France are sheltering children of Jews, and their defiance of orders to surrender them has brought about an open rift between the Vichy government and priests."¹⁵ In Belgium, a priest was shot for having hidden 100 Jewish children.16 Letters and protests by the Catholic bishops in occupied France, were read from Church pulpits urging Catholics to help persecuted Jews. These protests created a "difficult situation" for the Vichy government: "It is semi-officially reported from Vatican sources that Pope Pius, through the Nuncio in Vichy, has sent to Marshal Pétain a personal message in which he intimated his approval of the initiative of the French Cardinals and Bishops on behalf of the Jews and foreigners being handed over to the Germans. It is understood the Pope asked the French Chief of State to intervene." ¹⁷

When 13,000 Jews were rounded up on July 16, 1942, the French bishops issued a joint protest. At the direction of Pope Pius XII, the protests from French bishops were broadcast and discussed for several days on Vatican Radio. This angered Pierre Laval who reaffirmed his decision to cooperate in the deportation of all non-French Jews to Germany. Archbishop Saliège instructed priests "to protest most vehemently from the pulpit against the deportation of the Jews." His pastoral letter stated: "There is a Christian morality that confers rights and imposes duties. ...The Jews are our brothers. They belong to mankind. No Christian can dare forget that!" L'Osservatore Romano praised Saliège as a hero of Christian courage.

In France, special efforts were made to protect an estimated 7,000 Jewish children. A force of Protestant and Catholic social workers broke into a prison in Lyons and "kidnapped" ninety children who were being held with their parents for deportation. The parents were deported the next day; the children were sheltered in religious institutions under the protection of Cardinal Pierre Gerlier with the assistance of Father Pierre Chaillet, a member of the cardinal's staff. When the Cardinal refused to surrender the children, Chaillet was arrested and sent to a "mental hospital" for three months.

In an editorial dated August 28, 1942, The California Jewish Voice called Pius XII "a spiritual ally" because he "linked his name with the multitude who are horrified by the Axis inhumanity." The Jewish Chronicle (London) reported that "Catholic priests have taken a leading part in hiding hunted Jews, and sheltering the children of those who are under arrest or have been deported to Germany."

On September 4, 1942, the Canadian Jewish Chronicle, referring to Vichy leader Pierre Laval, ran this headline: "Laval Spurns Pope: 25,000 Jews in France Arrested for Deportation." Four days later, according to the Geneva Tribune, Vichy ordered the French press to ignore the Pope's protest concerning the deportation of Jews, but word spread rapidly about the courageous attitude of members of the French resistance, who knew that they had the blessing of Rome.

On April 16, 1943, the Australian Jewish News ran an article quoting Cardinal Gerlier who stated that he was simply obeying Pius XII's instruction to oppose anti-Semitism.

The New York Times was quick to applaud the Pope. "This Christmas," the Times wrote, "more than ever he is a lonely voice crying out of the silence of a continent.... No Christmas sermon reaches a larger congregation than the message Pope Pius XII addresses to a war-torn world at this season." The Times understood what the Pope said, whom and what he condemned, even if the proper names were not pronounced: "But just because the Pope speaks to and in some sense for all the peoples at war, the clear stand he takes on the fundamental issues of the conflict has greater weight and authority. When a leader bound impartially to nations on both sides condemns as heresy the new form of national state which subordinates everything to itself; when he declares that whoever wants peace must protect against 'arbitrary attacks' the 'juridical safety of individuals'; when he assails violent occupation of territory, the exile and persecution of human beings for no reasons other than race or political opinion; when he says that people must fight for a just and decent peace, a 'total peace'-the 'impartial' judgment is like a verdict in a high court of justice." The editor ends, echoing the Pope's words that these new states "must refuse that the state should make of individuals a herd of whom the state disposes as if they were lifeless things."¹⁸

For over seventy years, the Communist regime persecuted the Catholic Church in Russia. After the 1917 revolution, of the more than three hundred churches, there were only two. Over 20,000,000 faithful perished-priests, nuns, religious and laity.

Both Hitler and Stalin blamed the Pope and the Catholic Church as responsible for the war and for the sufferings of millions, including Jews and Catholics. These accusations were repeated by both Nazis and Communists during the remaining years of the war in an attempt to weaken the loyalty of the peoples of Europe to Pius XII and the Roman Catholic Church. This is the origin of the numerous unfounded accusations about the "silence" of Pius XII, as reported by the Times, which are repeated even today.

McCormick stated that the Pope was credited with having saved Rome: "But this is not the only cause for the popularity of Pius XII. During the nine months between the armistice and the entry into Rome, the Vatican was a refuge for thousands of fugitives from the Nazi-Fascist reign of terror. Jews received first priority-Italian Jews and Jews who escaped here from Germany and other occupied countries-but all the hunted found sanctuary in the Vatican and its hundreds of convents and monasteries in the Rome region. What the Pope did was to create an attitude in favor of the persecuted and hunted that the city was quick to adopt, so that hiding someone 'on the run' became the thing to do. This secret sharing of danger cleared away Fascism more effectively than an official purge. The Vatican is still sheltering refugees. Almost 100,000 homeless persons from the war zone and devastated areas are fed there every day."¹⁹

While Jews-charged with being the cause of every evil in the Reich-were Hitler's immediate target for persecution and extermination, it is clear from reading the German dictator's writings or listening to his speeches that he pursued a systematic and tireless war against the Roman Catholic Church throughout the war years.

An American rebuttal of these charges was swiftly made by Monsignor Fulton J. Sheen on the same day the Izvestia article appeared. He stated that the report was an attempt to confuse the political atmosphere in Europe in preparation for a separate peace by Moscow with the German Army after the expected overthrow of Hitler. Sheen predicted an alliance between Communist Russia and the Nazis, minus Hitler, for the "bolshevization" of Europe, and declared that the Izvestia article was designed to help destroy religion as the one great obstacle to the achievement of this objective. "The Vatican within the last six months has been called Communist by the Nazis, Nazist by the Communists, and anti-Fascists by the Fascists. And they all mean the same thing, namely, the Vatican is opposed to every anti-religious ideology."²⁰

Sheen observed that Russia's plans were to control Europe after the war. The only outspoken obstacle to Russia's plan in Europe was the Catholic Church. He continued: "As Soviet Russia has already served notice that America and Great Britian may not interfere in the question of Poland, so now it serves notice on religion that it may not interfere in the question of Europe."²¹

The first attacks claiming that the Church had endorsed silently the atrocities of the Nazis came from Communist Russia. Soon to control Poland, and other vast areas in Eastern Europe, Russia saw the need to break the loyalty to the Pope of Catholic majorities in those countries. The plan was a simple one: convince all that the Pope supported the hated Nazis during the war, and, therefore, neither he nor the Church could be trusted after the war. The destruction of the Church would leave the field wide open for Russian influence and control.

The New York Times published an angry editorial: "Of all the incendiary literary bombs manufactured in Moscow…and thrown with such light-hearted recklessness into the unity of the Allied nations, none is likely to do greater damage than Izvestia's unjust and intemperate attack upon the Vatican as 'pro-Fascist.'

"The Vatican is a neutral state," the editor continued, "with which Russia's two allies, the United States and Great Britain have 'confident relations.' They have no doubt where the real sympathy of the Vatican lies in this struggle. They recognized the inescapable neutrality of the Pope's position; but they have had no difficulty in finding in his eloquent declarations clear evidence of his detestation for those who have violated the rights of the little nations, who have committed bestial acts from one end of Europe to the other, and who have attempted to elevate the dogma of totalitarianism to the dignity of a new religion. Izvestia's attack is damaging to unity on which victory depends."²²

The Church and the Vatican were in the way of Russia's plans for an easy territorial conquest. Not simply because the Catholic Church was so strong in those countries, but because the Pope publicly opposed Soviet aggression and unconditional surrender for Germany. The reasons are not because of any alleged pro-German sentiments on the part of Pope Pius XII or of the Church. He opposed unconditional surrender on principles of Christian mercy. An eye for an eye had been replaced by Christian forgiveness, and the Pontiff applied this, not only to personal relationships, but also to the relationship of one state to another, one government to another: Christian morality was to form the basis for international law and relationships-a truly new world order after the war. He was opposed because of this, especially by Russia.

On August 21, 1944, Anne O'Hare McCormick commented: "The idea that the Pope does not want a complete and decisive victory is erroneous. What concerns him is the policy to be pursued by the victors after the decision has been won. As a spiritual ruler he can hardly be expected to take the same view as the military and political leaders."²³

In an article by Herbert L. Matthews, "Stalin's Hand Seen in Vatican Attack," appearing on February 12, it was reported that the Vatican had reacted to the attacks by Moscow. The Italian newspaper Quotidiano, an organ of Catholic Action, reported that Moscow attacked the Vatican because the Roman Catholic Church stood for liberty against dictatorship. The Times commented that "the fact that this attack came from the Patriarch and was addressed to the peoples of the world gives it a more serious aspect than the recent accusations in the Russian newspaper Pravda..." The Quotidiano continued: "The Church of Rome in Poland, Czechoslovakia, and the Balkans represents freedom of spirit. It represents an obstacle to dictatorship. Hence it must be fought. Moscow intends to make use of 'her' church for gigantic imperialistic aims."²⁴

The Vatican continued to swipe at Communism. In January, 1945, L'Osservatore Romano issued a strongly worded condemnation of Communism to clarify that Communism and Catholicism were incompatible. The reason for the repeated condemnation was that the Catholic Communist Party in Italy, then renamed the Left Party, while its platform and ideology were Marxist, claimed to represent Christian principles and sought Catholic membership. The Vatican was justifiably anxious about the growth of Communism in post-war Italy and Europe.²⁵

On February 9, 1945, and for some time thereafter, Moscow launched a series of attacks on the Pope. The bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, gathered with their newly-elected patriarch, Alexis, to broadcast a statement by Moscow radio accusing Pope Pius XII of condoning Fascism by attempting to excuse Germany for its crimes. The Vatican, so the argument ran, was attempting to absolve Hitler and Germany "who drenched all Europe in the blood of innocent victims," and to continue Fascism in Europe. The statement said that the Russian Orthodox Church was conferring its blessings "both on the arms that are now winning liberty from the Hitler tyranny for all peoples and on the great leaders of progressive humanity in the post-war organization of the world which will be theirs to undertake."²⁶

In the midst of these European attacks against the Church by the Soviet Union, The Protestant, a New York periodical, published a declaration issued by 1,600 Protestant ministers and religious leaders in America, stating that the Vatican should not have any influence in the post-war deliberations, "since the papacy has thrown its weight into the present human struggle on the side of the enemies of democracy."²⁷ Addressed to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin, the petition repeated what would become standard misrepresentations of the Pope's actions during the war, demanding that no religious body, especially not the Vatican, have any part in the post-war deliberations.²⁸

Other than the Izvestia articles, this is the first time such accusations appeared. A similar action against the Church had been taken following World War I. The usual anti-Catholic rhetoric of nineteenth century America was repeated then and now, as the second war came to a close.

The Soviet attacks, employing the Russian Orthodox Church to keep the Vatican out of the peace talks, could only have enhanced Russia's position at the table, since, without the Vatican's voice, Stalin could press his demands without much opposition. The traditional anti-Catholic bias of Protestant America unwittingly cooperated with Russia, lending its weight to the same goal, resurrecting all the old Anglo-American anti-popery rhetoric in their petition to the Big Three. The American Protestant intervention raised another element, the Jewish claims to Palestine and the Vatican's lack of support for such a proposal. One of the signatories of the Protestant document wrote: "These are national, not ecclesiastical claims," and the Vatican should be kept out of the discussions.²⁹

Another Russian attack on the Pope was issued February 10, 1945, by the former Russian ambassador to Rome, Boris Stein, who claimed that the Vatican was a "tremendous danger to world peace and post-war security." The Vatican had never been a purely religious institution, he charged, and favored only the winning side in war.³⁰

C. L. Salzberger, the former publisher of the Times rightly observed, "The Soviet attitude toward the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church in general strikes most Americans as rather amazingly caustic and perhaps somewhat ludicrous when one considers that this is the largest state in the world and Vatican City is the smallest." He reported the contents of an article published in the Communist Party magazine, Bolshevik, which made fantastic claims about the Vatican having marshaled the world's Catholics into an immense international army financed by unlimited funds, guided by the bishops and clergy who served as Vatican spies around the globe. The Pope was not neutral, the false argument ran, but had intervened in purely political affairs, especially by his support for the Fascist and Nazi governments. The Bolshevik claimed that the present Pope, a friend of Germany, approved of Hitler and his policies.³¹ The Times, here and whenever these false charges were made against the Pope throughout the war, decried these Russian accusations as pure fantasy.

Historians continue to probe the character of Pope Pius XII. What did he know about the Holocaust and when did he know it? Was his caution warranted? How many lives-Jewish and Christian-did he save by relying on diplomacy rather than moral rhetoric? According to Kenneth L. Woodward, "Such questions require care in using archives, intellectual skill in interpreting documents and dispassionate judgment in assessing the peculiar circumstances of European politics in the dark age of Adolf Hitler."³²

There is a current campaign underway to vilify Pope Pius XII, to divide Catholics, and to undermine papal authority. Catholics must confront the unjust and vindictive attacks on Pius XII, aimed at eventually silencing the strong moral voice of the Church in the person of the Vicar of Christ.

In his monograph, "Pius XII and the Jews: the War Years as reported by the New York Times," Stephen M. DiGiovanni includes specific quotes in support of the rational conclusion that Pius XII was not "silent" and provides additional incontrovertible proof of the historic truth.

DiGiovanni justly states: "Pius XII's work to save the Jews against Hitler and Stalin and their systematic debasement of the human person as slave of the totalitarian state, is one of the greatest and most heroic works in the history of the Church. It is an understandable tragedy that he is attacked by the media as a means of undermining the Church's credibility in the modern 'global' society. The Church is in the way, just as it was in the way of Hitler and Stalin."³³