Saint Maximilian Kolbe, anti-Semitism and the Jews
Saint Maximilian Kolbe is the famous 'Saint of Auschwitz' and one of the principle Catholic victims of the Third Reich. Kolbe features prominently in many Catholic texts which tell the story of the Church during the Second World War. (1)
He is also a controversial figure, because he believed in the truth of the Protocols of Zion, (2) and wrote articles denouncing 'international Zionism' as behind the 'criminal mafia' of Freemasonry. (3)
Naturally this has led to Kolbe being repeatedly denounced as an 'evil anti-Semite' by jews. (4)
However there have been a lot of arguments made by apologists for - as well as historians of - the Catholic Church against Kolbe being in anti-Semitic. In this article I will examine these claims that Kolbe was not an anti-Semite and the evidence behind them.
Firstly we have the assertion by Warren Green and Daniel Schafly that:
‘From these records it is clear that the Jewish question played a very minor role in Kolbe’s thought and work. Of his 1,006 extant letters and 396 other writings (newspaper and magazine articles, spiritual conference, etc.), only thirty-one refer to Jews and Judaism. Their content is overwhelmingly spiritual and apostolic with few comments of any kind on contemporary political, social, economic, or other secular concerns.’ (5)
This is an obviously false assertion based on the presumption that anyone who adheres to an anti-jewish position would write obsessively about them (i.e., it assumes that criticism of jews and Judaism is symptomatic of mental illness). Of course Kolbe wrote primarily about political, social, economic and other secular concerns, because that is what he mainly dealing with as the head of a large religious community of 762 friars by 1938. (6)
If we were to apply Schafly and Green's argument regarding Kolbe to say Martin Luther – who was famously and ardently anti-jewish – then it could held that because Luther only devoted four of his works to attacking jews (7) within the 75 volumes of his known works. Then it therefore means that Luther didn't have strident anti-jewish opinions, but yet he clearly did.
In the same way the lack of volume of an individual's literary output on jews is simply irrelevant when discussing whether they are anti-Semitic or not.
We next find Green and Schalfy asserting as follows:
'As Mr. Gross mentions, Father Kolbe’s main interest was his missionary work, in Kolbe’s words, “to seek the conversion of sinners, heretics, schismatics, Jews, etc., and, especially, Masons.” In this effort, “zeal” was always to be tempered by “prudence” and by respect for the individual. In 1926, he wrote that “Jesus died for each one of us without distinction, and that each of us, also each Jew, is always unworthy and is the son of our common heavenly mother” (Scritti, III, pp. 256-257).
‘Father Kolbe did, however, accept uncritically the picture of a Zionist-Jewish-Masonic conspiracy presented in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, a work widely circulated in the Poland of his day. Thus, several of his mentions of Jews speak approvingly of the Protocols, and, as in the quote cited by Mr. Gross, one can find such phrases as “Jewish-Masonic conspiracy,” “cruel clique of Jews,” and “their work (the Talmud) which breathes hatred against Christ and the Christians.”’
‘Yet, as on other issues, he warned against translating this image into social, political, or economic activism. Thus, in the admonition to his collaborators to which Mr. Gross is apparently referring, Father Kolbe states “speaking of the Jews, I would devote great attention not to stir up accidentally nor to intensify to a greater degree the hatred of our readers against them, who are already so ill-disposed or sometimes downright hostile in their confrontations” (letter to Father Marian Wojcik, editor of the Rycerz Niepokalanej, the monthly devotional magazine founded by Kolbe, Scritti, II, p. 183). Similarly, in a letter to his religious superior, Father Anselm Kubit written June 22, 1937, Father Kolbe describes a certain Monsignor Trzeciak as a “fiery anti-Semite to the point of being a chauvinist. Thus, the Maly Dziennik (a religious daily also founded by Kolbe) cannot follow his line and not all of his writings can find a place in the columns of the Maly Dziennik (Scritti, II, p. 323). Even in the 1939 article cited by Mr. Gross, Father Kolbe, after presenting the picture of a Jewish-Masonic conspiracy, goes on to state that “true scoundrels, those of evil intent, who sin with full awareness are relatively few.” Urging his readers to respond in a spirit of love and concern, he asks, “how can you not extend a hand to those people?” (Scritti, III, pp. 548-550).' (8)
Once again we can see that Green and Schafly are arguing in bad faith here. They are claiming that because Kolbe wanted to convert jews (among others) to Roman Catholicism it therefore follows that he was not anti-jewish.
This is absurd because Green and Schafly are not differentiating between anti-Semitism (i.e., anti-jewish ideas based on biology/race) and anti-Judaism (opposition to and criticism of jews as a religious group). Thus while anti-Semitism was officially banned (if unofficially tolerated) by the Church; opposition to Judaism was most certainly not.
Kolbe clearly evidences from his writings that he is not anti-Semitic in the proper sense of the term, because he wanted to show the jewish people the error of their ways and convert them to Roman Catholicism. He does not oppose jews based on their status as a biological group or race, but rather on the basis that they are not Christian and are disproportionately active and responsible for anti-Christian activities, ideas and policies.
Two similar contemporary examples of this distinction are Father Denis Fahey and Monsignor Ernest Jouin.
Fahey was a senior Irish priest and theologian active from the 1920s to the 1950s. He wrote a great deal about Catholic social doctrine and like Kolbe openly attacked jews and Freemasons in his writings, while also believing in the authenticity of the Protocols of Zion.
His anti-jewish and theological works (which contain a significant amount of anti-jewish statements and arguments) were authorized by the Catholic Church. The Church saw no issue or doctrinal error in what he wrote.
Jouin was a French priest active in early 20th century France; who specialized in anti-jewish and anti-Masonic texts and edited the prestigious Catholic periodical 'Revue internationale des sociétés secrètes'. He was, like Fahey, permitted by the Church authorities to write this type of material and was even honoured with the title of Monsignor by Pope Pius XI for his scholarly efforts to expose and document the 'Judeo-Masonic conspiracy' against the Church.
Both Fahey and Jouin are routinely referred to as having been anti-Semitic today, but this - as with Kolbe – is incorrect, because while they all attacked jews and their influence in print. They did so on the basis that the jews were animated by evil deriving from their religious error not because they were biological enemies of European or Christians.
Thus they were opposed to Judaism, but not anti-Semitic.
Moving on to Green and Schafly's next point. They write that:
'The real test of Father Kolbe’s alleged anti-Semitism came at the outbreak of World War II when thousands of refugees were driven by the Nazis from western Poland. Numerous Polish witnesses have testified how Father Kolbe, himself just released from two-and-one-half months of German imprisonment and torture, sheltered all he could at his friary of Niepokalanow near Warsaw, without distinguishing between German or Pole, Christian or Jew (Polish estimates of the number of Jews cared for at Niepokalanow range from several hundred to more than two thousand). The refugees, Jews included, were given food, fuel, and clothing, and the sick were treated in the friary hospital. Kolbe frequently visited and consoled the refugees, without distinction of nationality or religion, even organizing a special New Year’s party for the Jews to balance the Christmas celebration for the Christians. Of particular note is the testimony of Rosalis Kobla, who lived near the friary. “When Jews came to me asking for a piece of bread, I asked Father Maximilian if I could give it to them in good conscience, and he answered me, ‘Yes, it is necessary to do this because all men are our brothers’ ” (Patavina, Seu Cracovien, pp. 389-390). Brother Juwentyn Mlodozeniec, who was at Niepokalanow at the time, quotes a certain Madame Zajac, a delegate of the Jewish refugees, as saying “in the name of all the Jews present here, we want to express our warm and sincere thanks to Father Maximilian and all his brothers” (I Knew Blessed Maximilian Kolbe, Washington, NJ: AMI Press, 1979, p. 53).’ (9)
Similarly in 1983 Eugene Fisher, then Executive Director of National Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Catholic-Jewish Relations, claimed that: 'the documentary record of Father Kolbe’s writings and actions belies the charge of anti-Semitism. He cited writings in which Father Kolbe repudiated anti-Semitism, and he noted that an estimated 1,500-2,000 Jewish refugees were harbored at the beginning of World War 11 in the monastery Father Kolbe founded and headed in Poland.’ (10)
In addition Becky Ready at EWTN writes:
'Giertych defends Maximilian in other ways, contending it was Christian zeal, not base prejudice, that characterized his relations with the Jews. "Father Kolbe was certainly not an enemy of the Jews as such, and in particular was anything but a "racial" or "zoological" anti-Semite. He saw in the Jews souls created by God, for which he prayed continually and whom he sought to help when they were in need."’
‘Perhaps Marytown's Kolbean scholar, Fr. Bernard Geiger, summarizes the argument best when he analyzed the charges at the time of the canonization. In "Kolbe an 'Anti-Semite'?" published in the Immaculata, March 1983, Father Bernard says, "Would an anti-Semite urge a woman of the neighborhood to help the war-impoverished Jews who came begging at her door? A somewhat anti-Semitic woman had actually asked Father Kolbe whether it was 'all right' to do this. Kolbe patiently reassured her, responding: ‘Indeed we must do it because every man is our brother.’
"Would an anti-Semite have graciously welcomed 1500 Jewish refugees into his friary, shared his living space and meager food supplies with them, gone out begging additional supplies for them from the neighborhood, and thoughtfully organized a New Year's party for them to cheer them up? Kolbe and his friars did.
"Would an anti-Semite have befriended a 13 year old Jewish boy in the genocidal, anti-Semitic atmosphere of Auschwitz, taken him into his arms like a mother hen, wiped away his tears, shared his food with him, restored his faith in God? Kolbe did."
Concludes Fr. Bernard, "For those willing to look at it, the evidence against Kolbe's anti-Semitism is decisive."’ (11)
Within these three fairly lengthy quotations we see the consistent themed argument combined with the common fallacy of begging the question that once again confuses anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism. The authors all assume that being a critic of Judaism makes you anti-Semitic, but, as I have explained above, this simply isn't true.
This confusion on the part of authors above means that all three immediately try to rationalize and explain Kolbe's 'anti-Semitism' away. They do this by predictably referencing Kolbe's opposition to the Third Reich, how he 'saved jews' from the SS and died at Auschwitz during the 'Holocaust'.
In the first instance the 'Holocaust' had – according to the orthodox account anyway – not even been decided upon by the German authorities at the time that Kolbe died in an alleged 'starvation bunker' at Auschwitz. (12)
In the second; Kolbe's opposition to the Third Reich seems to have been rooted in the strident nationalism exhibited by the 'conservative and reactionary' (13) Roman Catholic Church establishment in Poland.
This is suggested by the fact that Kolbe's monastery was allied with the nationalist political party Oboz Narodo Radykaly (the 'National Radical Camp') and the organizations even published a joint newspaper . (14) In addition to the fact that Kolbe was offered German citizenship (his father was German) after Poland had surrendered and he refused it. (15)
We can thus start to see Kolbe in a very different light to his portrayal by many Catholic sources. Kolbe is less a martyr to Christian 'opposition to the Third Reich', but rather more a fanatically Catholic Polish nationalist who also worked for the early Polish resistance as a radio broadcaster and was quickly picked up as an 'enemy of the state' by the Gestapo. (16)
Getting back to the three authors quoted; in the third instance the authors bring out the jews that Kolbe 'saved', but forget to mention that his motivation for doing so is almost certainly to have been to convert them to Roman Catholicism. (17)
It is worth noting that this kind of motivation has long been considered to be 'anti-Semitic' by jewish authors and thinkers. Since they view it as a deliberate attempt to either force or utilize circumstances to get jews to convert to Christianity and thus 'destroy the jewish people' by assimilation.
Of all the apologists for Kolbe's alleged 'anti-Semitism': the most absurd is his best known biographer Diana Dewar.
Dewar claims that Kolbe 'couldn't read everything' put out by his publishing house, (18) which forgets that as the editor-in-chief Kolbe had the responsibility for all the content regardless of whether he had read it or not. I also rather think we may presume that – given his other remarks – that Kolbe was quite happy with publishing anti-jewish content as long as it conformed to Catholic doctrinal orthodoxy.
She also rightly asserts that Kolbe was away from Poland to perform missionary work in China, Japan and India between 1930 and 1936. During which time his monastery aligned itself with the nationalist and anti-jewish political party: the National Radical Camp. (19)
Dewar however doesn't mention that Kolbe did absolutely nothing to sever the connection when he was back in charge of the monastery from 1936 to 1939. Therefore we may reasonably assume that Kolbe at least had no concerns about the Catholic orthodoxy of the National Radical Camp's views and at most that Kolbe was an active supporter of the party.
The evidence, as before stated, seems to suggest the latter not the former.
Dewar also claims – apparently without a source – that the amount of 'anti-Semitic content' put out by Kolbe's publishing house was 'less than normal' in Poland at the time. (20)
I do not know if this is true, but even if it is: it has absolutely no bearing on whether Kolbe was anti-Semitic or not.
If you speak about something less than other people: does that mean you don't oppose it?
No: it just means you speak about it less and are probably primarily interested in other issues.
Dewar buttresses her claims by citing the verbatim comments of various Catholic friars who knew Kolbe in the 1930s. While reading these we must remember that they are 'memories' of occurrences some forty to fifty years previous. So are likely to be tainted with false memories and post-war propaganda/group think.
After all can you remember the exact detail of conversations that you had with friends two or three years ago?
Probably not.
One Brother Hieronim told her that 'Kolbe summoned and rebuked journalists for anti-Semitic articles'. (21) This is quite possible of course, but if Kolbe had had such an issue with 'anti-Semitic articles'. Then one wonders why he was still publishing them at all?
The likeliest explanation for this is that some of the journalists associated with his publications had strayed beyond the realms of Catholic doctrinal orthodoxy into actual anti-Semitism. Thus Kolbe sought to correct their theological error by summoning and then rebuking them.
Brother Correlius necessarily suggests that Kolbe believed that jews were superior in intelligence and ability to Poles whom Kolbe wanted to behave more like the jews. (22)
This is possible I suppose, but is once again probably a mistaken remembrance of Kolbe remarking about the industrial and commercial power of the jews in Poland as Father John Burdyszek more clearly remembers. (23)
Brother Correlius' testimony and Father Burdyszek's unintentional correction of it is symptomatic of much of the literature around Kolbe's anti-Semitism. In so far as it is a mix of misrepresented and badly remembered details that are then spun into a narrative of Kolbe being a friend to the jews by Catholic apologists.
The evidence as we have seen does not support the argument Kolbe's Catholic apologists, but nor does it support the claim of jews that he was anti-Semitic. He was certainly opposed to Judaism and viewed jews as being the central power behind Freemasonry, but at the same time he defined jewishness purely on a religious basis.
This is why he assisted jews fleeing from the German authorities, but also roundly condemned jews as dangerous subversives following a false anti-Christian religion in his published works.
While Kolbe has to regarded as an anti-Semite in terms of the colloquial usage. He was not an anti-Semite if we use the correct academic definition of the term.
All that said Kolbe was certainly no friend of the jews and fought them with all his energy, but he was also a strident Polish nationalist, which was in the end his ultimate undoing.
References
(1) For example Bert Ghezzi, 2000, ‘Voices of the Saints: A 365-Day Journey with Our Spiritual Companions’, 1st Edition, Loyola Press: Chicago; John Vidmar O.P., 2005, ‘The Catholic Church Through the Ages: A History’, 1st Edition, Paulist Press: Mahwah
(2) http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.734696
(3) https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1983/04/14/kolbe-anti-semitism-2/
(4) Ibid.; http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.734696
(5) https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1983/04/14/kolbe-anti-semitism-2/
(6) Ghezzi, Op. Cit., p. 718
(7) H. G. Haile, 1980, 'Luther: A Biography', 1st Edition, Sheldon Press: London, p. 289 lists these as 'Against the Sabbatarians', 'On the Jews and Their Lies', 'The Shem-Hamphoras' and 'David's Last Word'.
(8) https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1983/04/14/kolbe-anti-semitism-2/
(9) Ibid.
(10) https://www.jta.org/archive/scholars-reject-charge-st-maximilian-was-anti-semitic
(11) https://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/KOLANTI.HTM
(12) I have my own issues with this claim as it based purely on eyewitness testimony after the Second World War. The eyewitness testimony is also contradictory of the 'starvation bunker' claim as German soldiers are said by the same witnesses to bring Kolbe his meals. Kolbe being put on basic rations in an isolation cell where he dies from either the cold (it was winter after all) or some other health complication(s) seems more probable. I will be addressing the death of Kolbe in a separate article.
(13) Diana Dewar, 1982, 'Saint of Auschwitz: The Story of Maksymilian Kolbe', 1st Edition, Darton, Longman and Todd: London, pp. 8-9
(14) http://fsspx.asia/en/news-events/news/maximilian-kolbe-biography
(15) Ghezzi, Op. Cit., p. 718
(16) http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Kolbe.html
(17) Cf. Kolbe's comments quoted at: http://www.traditioninaction.org/History/G_010_Kobe_Jewsl.html
(18) Dewar, Op. Cit., p. 7
(19) Ibid.
(20) Ibid., p. 10
(21) Ibid., p. 8
(22) Ibid.
(23) Ibid.