Later, she travelled to Rome, still dressed as a man, and became so celebrated for her intellect that when in 855 Pope Leo IV died, she was enthusiastically elected as Pope John VIII.

Image via Wikipedia

Her papal reign proved a great success, except for one catastrophic mistake. She fell in love with her valet – a mistake made in private, but whose outcome would soon become only too public. One day, two years after becoming pope, she was leading a procession through Rome, from St Peter’s basilica to the Lateran palace, surrounded by throngs of excited people. The route between the Colosseum and St Clement’s church led down a narrow alley and it was here that suddenly, to the spectators’ dismay, the pope collapsed on the ground, evidently in great pain.

To their even greater horror, however, when attendants rushed to the pope’s aid, ‘he’ was revealed to be a ‘she’: the pope was a woman! More than that, she was in the act of giving birth! Aghast at the sight of such cumulative heresy, the frenzied crowd dragged Joan and her new-born child away and stoned them to death.

For centuries afterwards, the alley where this dreadful expose had occurred was avoided by papal processions and the ceremonial enthronement of new popes gained a bizarre and novel custom. Before the pope was throned, he had to sit upon a special marble chair with a hole in its seat, the sella stercoraria, and be examined by physicians to ensure that he was truly a man. When they had confirmed that he was, a deacon would shout to the crowd, ‘Habet!’ (‘He has!’), and all the crowd would rejoice, exclaiming ‘Deo gratias!’.

As for John VIII, or Pope Joan, all trace to his/her brief pontificate were erased from Church records by moving forward the enthronement date of the replacement, Benedict III, to 855. And when another pope called John was enthroned several year later, he took Joan’s title of John VIII. Even a bust entitled ‘John VIII, a woman from England’, housed in Siena cathedral, was renamed ‘Pope Zachary’ by Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605).

Her scandalous history does occur in the medieval chronicles of Anastasius the Librarian, Marianus Scotus and Sigebert de Gemblours, among others. Many Protestant writers also publicized it during the 16th century, in a bid to malign the papacy. Ironically, it was the extensive treatise of Calvinist historian David Blondel in 1647 which finally confirmed that the entire history of Pope Joan was without foundation. Indeed, even its presence within the above-noted medieval works appears to have been a perfidious insertion by later writers.

In The Female Pope, Rosemary and Darroll Pardoe speculate that the Pope Joan myth was inspired by a real but equally unusual person – Nicetas, a eunuch Patriarch in Constantinople. His story may have been willfully modified by papal opposition in the mendicant orders, to draw attention to the intense corruption in the papacy at that time and in the process spawned a persistent if fallacious female pretender.

Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli, was born on 2 March, 1876, in Rome to an aristocratic family with strong ties to the Vatican. It was originally intended that he should be a lawyer and he did indeed gain a doctorate in law but he never practised his profession instead choosing a career in the priesthood. It was not a decision that disappointed his family whose connections, along with his legal training, would help facilitate a rapid and predictable rise through the Catholic hierarchy. He was ordained a priest on Easter Sunday, 2 April,  1899, and little did he know that he had set out on the road to being the most controversial Pope in the history of the Pontificate.

The newly ordained Father Pacelli spent little time tending to the needs of his flock, for he was from the start a Vatican high-flyer. In 1901, he entered the Department of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs where he helped to codify Canon Law. But his time spent as an administrator dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s of catholic minutiae was short-lived. He very soon became an effective trouble-shooter for the Vatican travelling the World as the representative of the Pope abroad. Over the next 30 years he would become Archbishop, Cardinal, Papal Nuncio and Secretary of State for the Vatican, all in fairly short order.

Cardinal Pacelli’s life as a Man of God was spent in the realm of politics. In 1929, he helped to negotiate the Lateran Treaty which re-established the Catholic Church in Italy which in turn endorsed the fascist regime of Benito Mussolini providing it with the moral legitimacy it had previously lacked. Similarly, he negotiated a Concordat with Nazi Germany that whilst providing protection for Catholic associations and publications and guaranteeing the continuation of Catholic education also saw the dissolution of the Catholic Centre Party, the only strong focal point of traditional conservative opposition to the Nazi regime. This was just a part of a long history Pacelli had of negotiating with fascists. He also established a Concordat with the clerico-fascist regime of Engelbert Dollfuss in Austria and was a vocal supporter of General Franco in Spain. But all this was to pale into insignificance alongside his tenure as Pope during the dark days of World War II.

Pope Pius XI, died on 10 February, 1939, and Cardinal Pacelli was the obvious choice as his successor, and had indeed been the preferred choice of the dying Pope himself. Thought of as more worldly than most of his rivals and with world war looming the Conclave of Cardinals that had gathered to elect the new Pope opted for the pragmatist over the more faith driven. He may have lacked the spiritual grounding of his rivals but it was thought his experience in the world of politics and his diplomatic cachet would be priceless in what was obviously going to be a difficult time for the Church. On 2 March, 1939, Eugenio Pacelli was elected Pope Pius XII.

The Pope and the Holocaust

Pope Pius XII, knew from the start the probable fate of the Jews. He knew from experience the values of the Nazi regime in Germany. On 14 March, 1937, the previous Pope, Pius XI, had ordered that the Papal Encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge (With Burning Concern) be read out in all Catholic Churches in Germany. It openly condemned a Nazi ideology which exalted one race over all others. It stated that any notion of racial superiority was incompatible with Christian teachings. This encyclical has been much lauded as the only time a major institution (and not just a religious one) stood up and roundly condemned Nazi racial policies, and having in large part been drafted by Cardinal Pacelli, it has often been used in his defence. But nowhere in its pages does it openly condemn anti-Semitism. Indeed, its primary concern was not racialism at all but Nazi paganism which elevated the State above God as the supreme power on earth.

Early in the Summer of 1940, Isaac Herzog, the Chief Rabbi of Palestine had begged the Pope to intervene on behalf of the Jews of Lithuania who were at the time being murdered by Nazi Einsatzgruppen (extermination squads). In response to his request the Pope telephoned the German Foreign Secetary von Ribbentrop, an old friend, to voice his concerns, but no formal protest was lodged. When Philippe Petain, President of the recently formed Vichy regime in France, asked the Vatican if it objected to proposed anti-Jewish laws. Pius was quick to make it clear that the Church condemned anti-Semitism but then added the rider that the legislation did not conflict with Catholic teachings.

In April,1941, Pius granted a private audience to Ante Pavelic, President of the Nazi Puppet Government in Croatia, a murderous regime, so murderous in fact that even the Nazi’s felt compelled to intervene to curtail some of its excesses. It was Pavelic’s stated aim to convert, expel, or exterminate all Jews, Serbs and Gypsies in Croatia, and as many as 700,000 were murdered. Pius never even as much as condemned the forced conversions, done in his name and for the Church over which he presided. In 1945, fleeing the Soviet advance Pavelic holed up in Rome where he was given shelter by leading catholics. Provided with a passport by the Vatican he was smuggled out of Italy to Argentina, just like many other Nazi’s who escaped justice via the Catholic ratline.

Similarly, the clerico-fascist regime of Josef Tiso in Slovakia was overwhelmingly endorsed by the Catholic hierarchy. In 1942, under German pressure it began to deport its Jews. As a Catholic State with direct ties to the Vatican, Pius felt obliged to intervene. By October, 1942, the deportations had ceased but by this time 58,000, or 75% of the total, had already been murdered. But it was an example of what direct action on the part of the Church might have achieved. In April, 1947, Josef Tiso was hanged for war crimes still wearing his clerical robes.

In October, 1941, Pius was asked by the American representative to the Vatican to openly condemn the atrocities against the Jews. His reply was that the Church wished to remain neutral. Again, in January, 1943, the President of the Polish Government in exile, Wladyslaw Raczkiewicz, asked the Pope to condemn the atrocities in Poland, again he refused.  When Mussolini, under German pressure, began to round up the Jews in Rome ready for deportation to Concentration Camps in the East, the Pope wrung his hands and did nothing.

Pope Pius XII, has many supporters and apologists who would rush to his defence. It is said that on hearing of the full horror of the holocaust he wept, and that he did much on a personal level to help those fleeing from tyranny, providing them with practical aid and financial assistance. that he established safe-houses, organised escape routes and gathered valuable intelligence. But it is not as a man but as a Pope that he must be judged. Some might say he preserved the integrity of the Church when its very continued existence was in peril. But then what use is a Church that turns a blind eye to mass-murder? In the final analysis, we have to judge: was Pope Pius XII, a man who did his best in impossible circumstances? Or was he, as the British Government described him in 1941, the greatest moral coward of our times?

The recently departed Pope John Paul II, just prior to his death began the process that will lead to Pius XII becoming a Saint.     

The Germans and Italians had not reached the level of political development that their neighbors had attained at this time. This was die to some antecedent events that could be traced as far back as 850 A.D.

After Charlemagne’s empire broke up late n the ninth century, Germany was composed of a group of independent tribes in the eastern Franklands. These tribes developed a language that separated them from their cousins in the western Franklands (France).

Germany had an elected king; but he was merely a feudal lord who led other feudal lords. Italy, part of which had also belonged to Charlemagne’s empire, was in a similar feudal state.

Like the rest of the rulers in other kingdoms, the monarchs of Germany tried to adopt a centralized authority over the other groups. They successfully repulsed the invading  Hungarian and Slavic Tribes, a development that led many German nobles to finally pledge allegiance to their king.

In 900 A.D., Henry the Fowler, a Saxon, became king of the eastern Franklands. Henry was able to persuade the different Germanic tribes to unite under his leadership. The tribal leaders accepted Henry, on condition that they could switch allegiance to a more powerful lord if circumstances warranted, and that they would be allowed to strengthen their own groups.

Henry’s kingdom attained recognition under the leadership of his son, Otto the Great. Otto defeated the Hungarians in the battle of Lechfeld in 955 A.D and was acknowledge as the most powerful king in the region. However, still dissatisfied with his accomplishments, he proceeded to Italy and persuaded the Pope to proclaim him emperor in 962. Since the Germans considered themselves heirs to the glory of the Roman Empire, Otto thought of himself as the successor of the Roman Caesars. He started calling his kingdom the “Holy Roman Empire”.

This Holy Roman Empire, as many historians have noted, was neither holy nor an empire. Otto was deluding himself when he was crowded emperor. His kingdom was composed of feudal states that were independent of his control. Many of them are city-states -as in case of Italy- which did not recognize any supreme ruler. The power of the emperor was virtually nil, and his scope of authority was limited to a small area. In truth, power rested in the Electors, a group of seven vassals whose task was to appoint the emperor.

Though Otto was an emperor only in name, he inspired his successors to dream of an empire ruled by Germany. Frederick Barbarossa, founder of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, tried to bring Germany and Italy together under one empire. In 1155, he had himself crowned as emperor in Rome. His reign lasted only up to 1190, when the Italian city-states revolted with the help of the Pope.

Germany did not succeeded in developing a strong kingdom similar to England and France  because the German rulers failed to strengthen their kingdoms first before venturing into other conquests. Their frequent intrusions on Italy also prevented the Italians from developing their own unified kingdom. It was only in 1820 that a single ruler governed the Germanic states and Italian city-states.

The Papal States and the city-states of Naples, Sicily, Milan, Florence, and Genoa flourished in Italy. Each state had its own government, and its own army. These city-states would have their own contributions to history. They would be the setting of the Renaissance period.

Luther also saw how the church was using various money schemes to make the poor pay for the various programs in the church, the selling of church office positions, corrupt officials and poor bible teachings. He also believed in the conviction of his own sins and the redemption by God’s grace that is freely offered to everyone through Jesus’s death on the cross. Martin Luther wanted to open the Bible to the common people, thus he translated the bible into German and through the use of the printing press, spread it throughout Europe. His translation of the bible into the common language reflected on this idea that the teachings of the Church should be based on the Bible and the people should know the Bible, instead of repeating something traditional every Sunday. The church was too slow to respond to Luther and this gave him more legitimacy to speak out against the Church. An open debate between a Papal Representative and Luther in 1591 led to the public break between Luther and the Church, which led to his punishment and excommunication from the Church.

Within a few years, the German rulers sided with Luther as they saw an opportunity to break from the control of Rome and seize control of Church assets. The spread of Lutheranism was rapid throughout Germany, the Baltic States and northeastern Europe and became known as the Protestant Reformation – a real break from the Catholic Church. With Luther opening the door, many other theologians emerged who openly declared various theological differences from the Church, such as John Calvin and set off a frenzy of new theological ideas. Calvin, more specifically differed in that, he argued that we were all pre-destined by God, that churches should be more independent and the worship services should be simple. From the start of the Protestant Reformation in 1519, it led to increased tensions between Catholic nations and those nations that embraced Protestant beliefs. Wars in the name of religion ravaged Europe until 1648 when a peace was reached upon and the European rulers began to favor more tolerant societies.

The Catholic Reformation or the Counter Reformation, are the terms used to describe the slow reaction of the church to Martin Luther and his objects to the Church practices and began in 1545. The Counter Reformation sought to “re- Christianize” Europe under Rome through a series of clerical reforms. It oversaw the creation of new orders within the Church such as the Jesuits by Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556). The Counter Reformation called for more frequent masses, more respect to Virgin Mary and more orders created especially among the nuns and the women in the church. The Counter Reformation strongly defended the Catholic faith while addressed Luther’s objections such as corruption in clergy and the selling of indulgences. The Protestant Reformation and Counter Reformation changed the entire course of Western Civilization and marked the beginning of a secular society that was forming in Europe.