Pacelli reports to Gasparri about his trip to Berlin and negotiations about opening a Vatican Nunciature there; he also mentions the threatened dissolution of the Einwohnerwehr, which “has succeeded up to now in holding the Communists at bay - Jan. 4, 1920
Source: Timeline
Jan. 4, 1920 Pacelli reports to Gasparri about his trip to Berlin and negotiations about opening a Vatican Nunciature there; he also mentions the threatened dissolution of the Einwohnerwehr, which “has succeeded up to now in holding the Communists at bay.”
English translation of reportOn the same day, Pacelli sends Gasparri two cables about preservation of the Bavarian Legation to the Vatican and Pacelli's note to Hoffmann of Dec. 27th about Concordat negotiations
Jan. 4, 1920 Pacelli to Gasparri:
Returning last night from my trip to Berlin and Cologne, carried out per instructions of Your Most Reverend Eminence, I have the honor to report without delay about the outcome of the same.
In order to have upon my arrival in Berlin a prompt response to the questions that Your Eminence instructed me to handle with the Reich Government and that of Prussia, I deemed it opportune to make them known in advance by two letters sent by me to the Prussian Chargé d’Affaires, Count von Zech, respectively dated the 19th and 24th of December last year and for which I carry out my duty to send copies here enclosed (Attachments I and II). In this way the competent Authorities (who, especially here in Germany, before making a decision on an important matter, are always in the habit of requesting legal opinions, holding meetings, etc.) would have a way to examine it beforehand and I would not expose myself to the danger of spending considerable time uselessly in Berlin.
I further believe it my duty to add that in the two days of my stay in Berlin, the Government kept giving me much special attention. The evening of December 29, the Reich President, Mr. Ebert, held a dinner in my honor, attended by the Chancellor, various Ministers, Undersecretaries and officials of the State. Mr. Ebert (who was born a Catholic) welcomed me with the greatest cordiality. He told me that domestic conditions in Germany will tend to improve, albeit rather slowly, but that demands by the Entente could at any moment cast the Country into anarchy once again. In this regard the issue that most preoccupies the Government at this moment – apart from the threatened suppression of the civic guard or Einwohnerwehr, which has succeeded up to now in holding the Communists at bay – is the so-called Auslieferungsfrage [extradition issue], that is the extradition of persons demanded by the Entente. In Mr. Ebert’s judgment, it could cause a military revolt, which would provoke a reaction by the extreme leftwing parties with incalculable consequences; the Government would no longer be able to sustain itself and the Nation would fall into chaos. Germany has declared itself ready to have those guilty judged by German tribunals, where representatives of the Entente would also be allowed to take part in the proceeding, and it [the Government] is disposed in this regard to all possible concessions. When I reminded him that the Holy See had taken this question quite to heart, as demonstrated moreover in the magnificent articles appearing several months ago in Unità Cattolica, Mr. President charged me to ask the same Holy See to consider again an effort to forestall such a great danger. Mr. Ebert then spoke to me also about the proposed erection of a Reich Embassy at the Holy See. He confirmed to me that the Government already had such intentions, but that the proposal had remained suspended because, Bavaria wanting to maintain its Legation, Prussia also claimed an equal right, and it would have been impossible to have three representatives from Germany in Rome, being the Reich Ambassador, the Prussian Minister and the Bavarian Minister. Now, however, an agreement has been reached upon the following basis, already accepted by Mr. Hoffmann, in agreement with the heads of the various parties in Bavaria: The above-mentioned Embassy, to whose expenses Bavaria will not itself contribute, will be directly and immediately at the disposal of the Bavarian Government for handling its interests and for negotiations with the Holy See. To this end, it will receive its instructions directly from the Bavarian Government and will be bound to carry them out, with the Berlin Foreign Ministry excluded from any sort of intervention, and it will also send the related reports directly. Furthermore, the same Minister will give orders to the Embassy to transmit to the Bavarian Government copies of those reports sent to Berlin that concern the general situation or matters that have additional importance for Bavaria, as also to send the aforesaid Government reports, even when not requested, having any issue that may concern Bavarian interests. For Baron von Ritter, who would thus cease his functions as Minister to the Holy See, a convenient settlement would be made.
President Ebert also mentioned the Government’s desire for the correlative institution of an Apostolic Nunciature in Berlin; but I, not knowing in any way the intentions of the Holy See in this regard, abstained from any sort of statement in this matter. I recommended to him instead, by charge of the aforesaid Eminence Bertram, that Germany also make energetic steps for the restitution of the property of the Diocese of Breslau that has been occupied by Czecho-Slovakia.
The following day, December 30, I was offered a luncheon by the Imperial Chancellor, to which were equally invited various political personages, and that evening I left for Cologne, where I arrived the following morning towards 9:30.
I celebrated Holy Mass in the Chapel of the Seminary, where I was staying, then went at 11:30 to the Cathedral, where I was solemnly received by the entire Metropolitan Chapter, and after having prayed in front of the Blessed Sacrament Altar, I was taken, always accompanied by the Most Reverend Canons, into the Chapter Hall. The Responsible, Monsignor Middendorf, commenced with suitable words of greeting and obsequy toward the Representative of the Holy Father, and then I gave a speech in German, which I hereby enclose in Italian translation (Attachment IV). In it, after giving the obligatory tribute of homage to the memory of the deceased Most Eminent Cardinal von Hartmann and describing the current state of relations between Church and State in Germany, I explained to the Chapter how, it being necessary to provide solicitously and in the best possible way for this most important Archepiscopal Church, the Holy See had permitted that the election by the Chapter would take place this time under the norms of the Bull De Salute Animarum and the Letter Quod de Fidelium, but with the express proviso, already accepted by the Government of Berlin, that this cannot constitute a precedent for the definitive resolution of the question, adding that the Holy See reserves to itself to subject to benevolent examination the privilege of election exercised up to now by the same Chapter. I indicated finally that the Holy Father would be prove most appreciative if the votes of the Chapter members were cast for the Bishop of Paderborn, a Prelate also most acceptable to the Government, and whose praises I sang. It seemed to me opportune and respectful to express in the mild form of a desire of the August Pontiff the order contained in the venerated cable no. 209, that is to say, the Chapter “this time shall postulate (or elect) the Bishop of Paderborn.” Despite that, this communication aroused a lively discussion, during which, as the result of questions repeatedly directed to me, I viewed myself as required to make it delicately understood that the aforesaid desire had in itself the force of a command. The Canons raised difficulties not only as to principle, in that their election, if restricted to a single name, would not be fully free, but also, and primarily, as to and against the person of Monsignor Schulte, as a persona non grata. To the objections of principle, I resonded that the adopted provision had been provoked by the current extraordinary circumstances which were amply described by me; that the Holy See, in permitting the election, had already given proof of its benevolence toward the Chapter, to which, at least for a majority (as the Canons themselves affirmed), the appointment directly by the Holy See itself would be considered even less acceptable; and that finally the Chapter members, freely participating, as devoted sons of the Apostolic See, to an August Desire of His Holiness, having freely elected the one indicated by the Vicar of Jesus Chrsit, could have complete assurance believing this in conscience to be the most worthy act of the office of the Pastors of the illustrious Archdiocese of Cologne.
As to the person of the Bishop of Paderborn, I asked if there were serious well-founded objections. In reality, however, only two doubts were expressed, 1st, about his health; but I could respond, having learned from Most Eminent Bertram, that the Holy Father had already received information in that regard indicating it was more a matter of somewhat delicate health than of real sickness; 2nd, about his favor with the Volksverein [für das katholische Deutschland]; but I replied that the aforesaid Bishop is of sound doctrine and highly devoted to the Holy See (which all acknowledged), and had thus undoubtedly acted toward this Association, as also toward the interconfessional syndicates, in a manner responsive to pontifical directives and to his dignity as Archbishop. In any event I said to the Canons, to give them the necessary time and calm, that they could have longer to reflect upon the serious issue and that the next day a new audience would be held; a proposal that was accepted with satisfaction. Nonetheless already that evening, the above-mentioned Responsible and the Vicar of the Chapter, Monsignor Vogt, came to me to communicate officially to me in the name of the Chapter that the election of Monsignor Schulte was assured in homage to the pontifical desire (since otherwise he would not have been elected), and that moreover I had been able to convince the electors there were not any serious difficulties against this choice. Mons. Middendorf indicated to me also that ...
Source: Italian original and German summary can be accessed at the www.Pacelli-Edition.de, Document No. 1007 online searchable database, a project of the University of Münster, Germany, in cooperation with the German Historical Institute in Rome and the Vatican Secret Archives; it is financed by the German Research Foundation.
Jan. 4, 1920 Pacelli to Gasparri:
Having returned last night from Berlin and Cologne, I have carried out everything according to the instructions of Your Reverend Eminence that I found in cables 275 and 276 [of Jan. 2, 1920]. Please assure the Archbishop of Munich that I spoke immediately with the Vicar General, who will act in the manner suggested. In Berlin I had it confirmed that already for some time there has been thought of establishing a new Embassy to the Holy See but that the proposal then remained suspended because Bavaria wanted to preserve its Legation also Prussia claimed the same right and it would thus be impossible to have three German Representatives. But now the Government of Bavaria, in agreement with party leaders, has subscribed to the proposal of a single Embassy, with the condition that it serve also to handle the interests of Bavaria and that the Bavarian Government be able to send instructions directly to the Ambassador and receive Reports without the intermediation of the Foreign Ministry in Berlin.
It is not improbable that Bavaria, renewing insistently the preservation of its own Legation, will impede anew the creation of the [German] Embassy. Pacelli
Source: Pacell-Edition.de, Dokt. No. 8598
Jan. 4, 1920 Pacelli to Gasparri:
Re: Note Sent to the Bavarian Government
Most Reverend Eminence,
I am carrying out my duty to report to Your Most Reverend Eminence that, before my departure for Berlin, I also sent the Bavarian Government a Note dated December 27th in conformity with the general instructions imparted to me by Your Eminence’s venerated Dispatch No. 99630 of Dec. 6th and with the subsequent cable No. 210. This direct communication with Mr. Hoffmann seemed necessary to me, both because the said Government would be displeased to receive it via Berlin, and because the relations between Church and State in Bavaria have a particular character because of the Concordat of 1817, which moreover has already been violated in several important points, as I had the honor to explain in my respectful Report No. 14369 of October 6, 1919.
In transmitting now here-enclosed to Your Eminence a copy of the said Note in Italian translation (to which up to now I have not received a reply), I humbly bow to kiss the Sacred Purple ...
Source: Pacelli-Edition.de, Dokt. No. 1144