The Pope and Mussolini (89 page)

2.
Ciano 2002, pp. 165–66.

3.
Baudrillart 1996, pp. 902–3.

4.
“Parole di Padre,” OR, 25 dicembre 1938, p. 1.

5.
Pacelli enlisted Montini to help him try to convince the pope. ASV, AESI, pos. 1063, fasc. 755, ff. 479r–479v, Tardini appunti, 24 dicembre 1938.

6.
At a meeting where Ciano communicated the Duce’s anger, Borgongini defended the pope. He blamed the recent tensions on Mussolini’s embrace of the Nazis, including the government’s inexplicable drive to undermine the concordat by banning mixed marriages. The pope, with his generous remarks about the Duce in his address to the cardinals, he said, was doing his part to restore the harmonious relations they all so desired. Now it was up to Mussolini to meet him halfway. ASV, ANI, pos. 24, fasc. 5, ff. 2r–6r, Borgongini to Pacelli, 28 dicembre 1938.

7.
Ciano 2002, p. 171 (January 1, 1939).

8.
François-Bonnet, December 31, 1938, quoted in De Felice 1981, pp. 571–72.

9.
Petacci 2010, pp. 445–46.

10.
Petacci 2011, pp. 21–35.

11.
Ciano 2002, p. 172 (January 2, 1939).

12.
DDI, series 8, vol. 11, n. 6, Pignatti a Ciano, 3 gennaio 1939. Also on January 3, Ciano and Mussolini met with the American ambassador to receive a proposal from President Roosevelt. In a letter dated December 7, Roosevelt asked the Duce to help deal with the humanitarian crisis created by the large numbers of Jews who were forced to leave their homes in Europe but had nowhere to go. Roosevelt proposed that Italy designate a region of Ethiopia to create a Jewish refuge.
Foreign Relations of the United States
, vol. 1, pp. 858–59, “President Roosevelt to the Chief of the Italian Government (Mussolini),” December 7, 1938; and ibid., pp. 859–60, “Memorandum Elaborating the Points Referred to in President Roosevelt’s Letter to the Chief of the Italian Government, December 7, 1938.” Mussolini responded that the Italian government, given its position with respect to the Jews, could not contemplate such a role, but he told Ambassador Phillips, somewhat playfully, that the United States had vast territories and asked why the United States did not allocate a region of its own to Europe’s Jewish refugees. DGFP, series D, vol. 4, n. 424, ambassador in Italy to foreign ministry, January 4, 1939; NARA, M1423, reel 1, Edward Reed, Rome, to secretary of state, January 6, 1939, no. 1238; DDI, series 8, vol. 11, n. 47, Vitetti ai Direttori Generali degli Affari Transoceanici, Roma, 11 gennaio 1939.

13.
DDI, series 8, vol. 11, n. 26, Pignatti a Ciano, 7 gennaio 1939; ASMAE, AISS, b. 95, fasc. 1, sf. 1, Pignatti, 7 gennaio 1939.

14.
Renato Moro (2005, pp. 51–55) offers an insightful analysis of how even Cardinal Schuster, the most notable critic among Italy’s cardinals and bishops of the Fascist regime’s embrace of the racial laws, retained his belief in the goodness of the Italian Fascist regime as such. The problem was the move by some Fascist currents to transform Italian Fascism by importing what he saw as the pagan ideology of the Nazis.

15.
Charles-Roux, in his report to the French foreign minister on the December 31, 1938, quoted from the previous day’s issue. MAEI, vol. 267, 152–53.

16.
The bishop’s sermon on the Jews was published in two parts in the Vatican daily: “Un’Omelia del vescovo di Cremona, La Chiesa e gli Ebrei,” OR, 15 gennaio 1939, p. 2; “L’Omelia del vescovo di Cremona, Perchè si accusa la Chiesa,” 16–17 gennaio 1939, p. 2. The version of the bishop’s Lenten sermon published in
L’Osservatore romano
seems to have been toned down by deleting the bishop’s phrase: “the Church has said nothing and done nothing to defend the Jews and Judaism.” For a discussion of these changes, see Binchy 1970, pp. 622–23, and Bocchini Camaiani 1989, pp. 62–63. Gallina (1979, pp. 523–24) reproduces a segment of the Cremona prefect’s January 8 report of the sermon to Buffarini, describing it as strongly backing the Fascist anti-Semitic campaign.

17.
Bocci 2003, pp. 501–5. That Farinacci would think to call on the influential Gemelli for the task of demonstrating strong Church support for the anti-Semitic campaign was not surprising. The gist of what Gemelli said in Bologna was taken from his much-publicized recent opening address for the 1938–39 academic year at the Catholic University of Milan. Not only did he blast the “Judaic-Mason cabals” as the enemy, but his panegyric to Mussolini could scarcely have been more enthusiastic: “We must form the new Italian, the Italian of the era of Mussolini, these ‘youths of Mussolini’ as they have been called, capable of putting down the book to take up the rifle to serve the Fatherland as soldiers.” Published in Gemelli’s journal,
Vita e pensiero
15, n.1, pp. 5–12, 1939, discussed in Bocchini Camaiani 1989, p. 48n14. Gemelli’s views of the Jews were very much in line with those of the Jesuit general and
La Civiltà cattolica
. From the time he founded the Catholic University, he periodically raged against the Jews. Just a few months before his Bologna speech, he wrote to a friend that Western democracy was a smoke screen being manipulated by a “Jewish Masonic” conspiracy. Bocci 2003, p. 523n14.
   Gemelli was a holy terror, as he was the first to admit. He had willed the Catholic University into creation, fought for it, and regarded it as his own fiefdom. In doing so, he had gotten the strong support of both the pope and the Fascist authorities. “I have many defects,” he told an audience in 1931. “I recognize them all. I am violent, a bully, muddleheaded.” But God, he went on to say, knew how to use people’s defects for His own ends. “To make a university it takes a man like me. Even a tyrant.” Cosmacini 1985, p. 203.
   Gemelli’s anti-Semitic rant, giving timely support to Farinacci’s efforts to show that the regime’s anti-Semitic laws were in keeping with Church teachings, may have been even more squalid. There is some evidence that, in doing Farinacci’s wishes, he hoped to be appointed to the Italian Academy, Italy’s most prestigious honorary academic society. If so, Farinacci fulfilled his part of the bargain. On March 19 he urged Mussolini to appoint Gemelli to the Academy. Farinacci was convinced that Gemelli would soon be made a cardinal, and to have someone who was “truly our man” so close to the new pontiff would, he told the Duce, be most useful. ACS, CR, b. 44, n. 033912, Farinacci a Mussolini, 19 marzo 1939. Mussolini responded that “the time is not mature” and did not make the appointment. Nor was Gemelli appointed a cardinal. For a discussion of this episode, see Bocci 2003, pp. 506–8.

18.
MAEI, vol. 267, 158–59, Charles-Roux à Georges Bonnet, 19 janvier 1939.

19.
ACS, MI, FP “Gemelli,” informatore n. 390 (=Arrigo Pozzi), “Gli umori del nuovo papa verso padre Gemelli. Una scena pietosa con Pio XI,” Milano, 10 marzo 1939.

20.
In the first weeks of 1939,
La Civiltà cattolica
also ran an article renewing the charge that the Masons were the great foe of Christian civilization, allied with “cosmopolitan Judaism, which has no allegiance to any country.” Antonio Messineo, “L’internazionalismo cosmopolita e l’essere nazionale,” CC 1939 I, pp. 7–20, cited in Vian 2011, pp. 131–32.

21.
Venini 2004, p. 251. Venini makes no mention of any friction between the pope and Gemelli.

22.
Riccardi 1996, p. 536. Italy had 274 dioceses, each headed by a bishop or archbishop.

23.
Pignatti, informed of this exchange by Pacelli, immediately reported it to Ciano with a request that the two meet to discuss it. ASMAE, AISS, b. 101, fasc. 1, Pignatti a Ciano, 11 gennaio 1939.

24.
Monsignor Montini, knowing how sensitive Mussolini was to reports of papal unhappiness with the Italian government, sent Pignatti a copy of the Vatican newspaper. But Pignatti was not pleased and told him that the subject was not one that should be dealt with humorously. The Vatican should have issued a formal denial instead. ASMAE, APSS, b. 44, fasc. 2, Pignatti a Ciano, 11 gennaio 1939. From January 11 to 14 both Ciano and Mussolini were distracted by a visit to Rome by the British prime minister and foreign minister. DBFP, 1919–39, series 3, vol. 3, n. 500, pp. 517–30, R 431/1/22, “Conversations between British and Italian Ministers, Rome, January 11–14, 1939,” and n. 502, pp. 531–540, R 546/1/22, “The Earl of Perth (Rome) to Viscount Halifax (Received January 23),” January 19, 1939. The two British visitors had a brief audience with the pope on January 13. Chamberlain described the pope as “in fairly good health.” “British Statesmen Confer with Pope,” NYT, January 14, 1939, p. 5.

25.
In the Christmas issue of
The New York Times
, a front-page headline read, “Pius XI Deplores Fascist Hostility, Reveals Incidents” (December 25, 1938, p. 1). The article is not entirely accurate, as most papers in the United States, France, and Britain were eager to portray the pope as an implacable foe of the racial laws and of the Fascist regime, eliding the distinctions that were actually being made in the pope’s protests.

26.
DDI, series 8, vol. 11, n. 56, Pignatti a Ciano, 14 gennaio 1939.

27.
On the nineteenth, Borgongini asked Buffarini, Mussolini’s undersecretary for internal affairs, how the government planned to mark the tenth anniversary. The Fascist leader snapped, “How should we celebrate given this state of affairs?” But when the nuncio pointed out how much joy the Conciliation had produced among the Italians a decade earlier, and how they were certain to expect a major celebration, Buffarini admitted, “Yes, yes, you’re right, we have to do something.” ASV, ANI, pos. 24, fasc. 14, ff. 174r–177r, Borgongini a Pacelli, 19 gennaio 1939.

28.
These events are recorded in Tardini’s account: ASV, AESS, pos. 576, fasc. 607, ff. 15r–15v, 17r.

29.
Sale 2009, p. 45.

30.
How the original draft, along with the work that Rosa had done on it in the previous several weeks, got back to Ledóchowski, we do not know. Father Rosa may well have told the secret to his successor as journal editor, and in that case he would certainly have gathered up the material immediately to send to Ledóchowski. If not, the Jesuit general, on hearing of Rosa’s death, must have sent word to bring it to him.

31.
Sale 2009, pp. 45–47. Father Sale, who first reported the existence of this correspondence in his 2009 book, defends Ledóchowski and Rosa from the charge of trying to prevent the pope from issuing an encyclical denouncing racism and anti-Semitism. He argues (Sale 2009, p. 47) that their problem with the draft was that LaFarge, being unfamiliar with the peculiar style of papal encyclicals, had not followed the proper form. That this was their main concern is very difficult to believe.

32.
“Un’Omelia dell’E.mo Patriarca di Venezia,” OR, 19 gennaio 1939, p. 2.

33.
ASMAE, AISS, b. 102, “Notizia fiduciaria,” Roma, 19 gennaio 1939.

34.
DDI, series 8, vol. 11, n. 102, Pignatti a Bastianini, 24 gennaio 1939.

35.
ASV, AESS, pos. 576, fasc. 607, ff. 22r–23v, Tardini appunti, 22 gennaio and 1 febbraio 1939.

36.
Ciano 2002, p. 184 (February 1, 1939).

37.
Mussolini communicated this via Pignatti. ASMAE, AISS, b. 101, Pignatti a Ciano, n. 414/133, 3 febbraio 1939. Pacelli’s account of the meeting is found in ASV, AESS, pos. 576, fasc. 607, f. 19r, 3 febbario 1939.

38.
ASV, AESS, pos. 576, fasc. 607, f. 20r, 4 febbraio 1939.

39.
“If, despite your presence in St. Peter’s,” Pignatti advised Ciano, “the pope still gives vent to his ill temper, the Catholic world and all right-thinking people cannot but take note of the correctness of the royal government even if the pope responded rudely.” ASMAE, AISS, b. 101, Pignatti a Ciano, n. 439/144, 4 febbraio 1939.

40.
Bottai 2001, p. 141.

41.
ASV, AESS, pos. 576, fasc. 607, f. 21r, 6 febbario 1939. Charles-Roux provided his reflections on the decision to send Ciano in his February 8 report to Paris. MAEI, vol. 267, 165–66.

42.
Papin 1977, p. 49.

43.
Confalonieri 1957, pp. 385–86.

44.
Tardini recorded the pope’s words. ASV, AESS, pos. 576, fasc. 607, f. 102r.