What do you think?
Rate this book
The Pope's Last Crusade: How an American Jesuit Helped Pope Pius XI's Campaign to Stop Hitler – The Shocking Vatican Story of Political Intrigue and a Daring Battle to Condemn the Third Reich
Drawing on untapped resources, exclusive interviews, and new archival research, The Pope’s Last Crusade by Peter Eisner is a thrilling narrative that sheds new light on Pope Pius XI’s valiant effort to condemn Nazism and the policies of the Third Reich—a crusade that might have changed the course of World War II. A shocking tale of intrigue and suspense, illustrated with sixteen pages of archival photos, The Pope’s Last How an American Jesuit Helped Pope Pius XI's Campaign to Stop Hitler illuminates this religious leader’s daring yet little-known campaign, a spiritual and political battle that would be derailed by Pius’s XIs death just a few months later. Peter Eisner reveals how Pius XI intended to unequivocally reject Nazism in one of the most unprecedented and progressive pronouncements ever issued by the Vatican, and how a group of conservative churchmen plotted to prevent it. For years, only parts of this story have been known. Eisner offers a new interpretation of this historic event and the powerful figures at its center in an essential work that provides thoughtful insight and raises controversial questions impacting our own time.
408 pages, Paperback
Published March 1, 2013
91 people are currently reading
797 people want to read
About the author
Peter Eisner
12 books59 followersPETER EISNER's newest book is MacArthur's Spies, a nonfiction account of American spies and guerrillas who challenged the Japanese occupation of the Philippines. He has served as deputy foreign editor and Washington, D.C, political editor with the Washington Post, foreign editor and senior foreign correspondent of Newsday, and bureau chief and correspondent for AP in the US and Latin America. Eisner is the former managing director of the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington-based watchdog organization. He is the author or coauthor of five previous books, including The Pope’s Last Crusade, The Italian Letter, and The Freedom Line, winner of the Christopher Award.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews
September 7, 2013
Sloppily researched; it's more about the story the author wanted to tell than actual history. Readers unfamiliar with the era are likely to be grossly misinformed.
Edit: Since discussed the book with a Jesuit priest of my acquaintance who had also read it, and he agreed with me that it was a poorly researched book that made a lot of unsubstantiated claims.
Second Edit: Since this book has been getting high ratings by readers, I should note that, for a book that claims to tell a story of "The Lost Encyclical" it's pretty fascinating how few quotes there are from the text in question-- perhaps, as inquisitive minds will later find out, the actual contents of the text does not support Eisner's claims.
Third Edit: There's also several pages near the end of the book dedicated to promoting unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that Pius XI fatal heart attack (it was his third) was actually an assassination. Does Eisner have any evidence? No, but he sure likes to spin the innuendo.
Edit: Since discussed the book with a Jesuit priest of my acquaintance who had also read it, and he agreed with me that it was a poorly researched book that made a lot of unsubstantiated claims.
Second Edit: Since this book has been getting high ratings by readers, I should note that, for a book that claims to tell a story of "The Lost Encyclical" it's pretty fascinating how few quotes there are from the text in question-- perhaps, as inquisitive minds will later find out, the actual contents of the text does not support Eisner's claims.
Third Edit: There's also several pages near the end of the book dedicated to promoting unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that Pius XI fatal heart attack (it was his third) was actually an assassination. Does Eisner have any evidence? No, but he sure likes to spin the innuendo.
March 19, 2013
The year was 1938. Hitler was in complete power, leading Nazi Germany on a campaign through Europe, to spread his views. In the Vatican, Pope Pius XI, who was slowly declining into failing health, sought the assistance of an American Jesuit Priest, John LaFarge. LaFarge was a scholar, whose expertise on racial injustices perfectly fit into the Church's views on the situation. His goal was to publicly denounce the Nazism and anti-Semitism that he feared would destroy the teachings of the church. Coming from the Pope, the highest leader of the Catholic Church, this condemnation of Hitler could potentially impact the views of other world leaders, and in turn, World War II itself.
Of course, this process was easier said than done. Pius XI found himself in the midst of an Italian government that seemed to be, whether out of fear or agreement, embracing Hitler's Germany. They even invited the leader to visit their country. Pius XI would have nothing to do with the fanfare of Hitler's arrival. Instead, he retreated to a private Vatican estate, outside of the city, in a quiet protest. Met by resistance from even members of his own church who would rather keep peace with Hitler than provoke him with a damning proclamation, Pius XI stuck to his guns, to denounce what he knew was wrong.
I've always been fascinated by the many pieces to the giant puzzle that is World War II. This time in our history seems to show the best and worst aspects of our world, and I think there are many things to be learned. I was unfamiliar with the story of Pope Pius XI, but with all of the recent actions taking place in the Vatican, it seemed like a good time to delve deeper into the church's history. I was immediately drawn to Pius's unassuming, humble ways. He really comes off as a kind of quiet force. This book gives interesting insights into the mysterious protocols and inevitable politics of the Vatican. Despite its rather brief length, the book is detailed, suspenseful account of this Pope's history making actions.
Of course, this process was easier said than done. Pius XI found himself in the midst of an Italian government that seemed to be, whether out of fear or agreement, embracing Hitler's Germany. They even invited the leader to visit their country. Pius XI would have nothing to do with the fanfare of Hitler's arrival. Instead, he retreated to a private Vatican estate, outside of the city, in a quiet protest. Met by resistance from even members of his own church who would rather keep peace with Hitler than provoke him with a damning proclamation, Pius XI stuck to his guns, to denounce what he knew was wrong.
I've always been fascinated by the many pieces to the giant puzzle that is World War II. This time in our history seems to show the best and worst aspects of our world, and I think there are many things to be learned. I was unfamiliar with the story of Pope Pius XI, but with all of the recent actions taking place in the Vatican, it seemed like a good time to delve deeper into the church's history. I was immediately drawn to Pius's unassuming, humble ways. He really comes off as a kind of quiet force. This book gives interesting insights into the mysterious protocols and inevitable politics of the Vatican. Despite its rather brief length, the book is detailed, suspenseful account of this Pope's history making actions.
April 30, 2017
Little remembered today, Pope Pius XI served between World War I and World War II and was an outspoken and controversial opponent of Hitler, Mussolini, Fascism and Communism. Pius unfortunately was a remote and detatched figure who had few friends. Many of the other cardinals and officials of the Vatican were not allied with his outspoken opposition to Hitler and Mussolini in the late 1930s. The Pope suffered from progressive health and heart problems later in his life and as his productivity declined, these other Vatican officials were able to delay information getting to him and failed to promptly and fully carry out his directives.
An American Jesuit priest named John LeFarge who was early advocate of American civil rights had written a book called Interracial Justice which came to the Pope's attention and by chance LaFarge was traveling near the Vatican. The Pope found out and met privately with LeFarge, directing him to draft a strong "encyclical" against anti-Semitism and against Hitler and to report back directly to him. LeFarge was overwhelmed and reported to his superior, Father Ledochowski, who did not share the Pope's views. LeFarge dutifully turned his draft in to his superior instead of meeting again directly with the Pope and Ledochowski kept it from the Pope for months, until the Pope literally was dying.
Because of the delay, Pope Pius XI never issued the encyclical, and he died literally a day before he had convened a meeting of bishops during which he was going to take matters into his own hands and read a letter denouncing what Hitler and Mussolini were doing. While the author seems to think the Pope's actions might have changed history, because it was very clear that Hitler did not want to directly confront Pius XI due to all the Catholics in Germany, it is hard to believe that another of a series of writings and denunications from the Pope would have in the end made a difference.
The next pope, the infamous Eugenio Pacelli became Pope Pius XII and failed to directly confront anti-sematism and Hitler the way his predecessor had. Under him the draft encyclical and Pius XI's letter never were officially issued and the full story of what had happened didn't come out until 1972. Father LeFarge went on to be a leader of the American Civil Rights movement appearing often with Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Pius XII was an imperious and controversial pope and upon his death in 1958 had to be replaced by the more down to earth John XXIII.
This is an important book that tells an important story that is little known and little remembered. I wish there was a more current and informative biography of Pope Pius XI. He sounds like a fascinating man who should be better known today. Interestingly, despite his efforts to stand up against Hitler and Mussolini and for the Jews, Pope Pius XI is one of the only 20th century Popes not yet considered for sainthood.
An American Jesuit priest named John LeFarge who was early advocate of American civil rights had written a book called Interracial Justice which came to the Pope's attention and by chance LaFarge was traveling near the Vatican. The Pope found out and met privately with LeFarge, directing him to draft a strong "encyclical" against anti-Semitism and against Hitler and to report back directly to him. LeFarge was overwhelmed and reported to his superior, Father Ledochowski, who did not share the Pope's views. LeFarge dutifully turned his draft in to his superior instead of meeting again directly with the Pope and Ledochowski kept it from the Pope for months, until the Pope literally was dying.
Because of the delay, Pope Pius XI never issued the encyclical, and he died literally a day before he had convened a meeting of bishops during which he was going to take matters into his own hands and read a letter denouncing what Hitler and Mussolini were doing. While the author seems to think the Pope's actions might have changed history, because it was very clear that Hitler did not want to directly confront Pius XI due to all the Catholics in Germany, it is hard to believe that another of a series of writings and denunications from the Pope would have in the end made a difference.
The next pope, the infamous Eugenio Pacelli became Pope Pius XII and failed to directly confront anti-sematism and Hitler the way his predecessor had. Under him the draft encyclical and Pius XI's letter never were officially issued and the full story of what had happened didn't come out until 1972. Father LeFarge went on to be a leader of the American Civil Rights movement appearing often with Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Pius XII was an imperious and controversial pope and upon his death in 1958 had to be replaced by the more down to earth John XXIII.
This is an important book that tells an important story that is little known and little remembered. I wish there was a more current and informative biography of Pope Pius XI. He sounds like a fascinating man who should be better known today. Interestingly, despite his efforts to stand up against Hitler and Mussolini and for the Jews, Pope Pius XI is one of the only 20th century Popes not yet considered for sainthood.
September 17, 2015
(July 1938, Paris) "As for Hitler, they explained to me, there was really nothing to worry about," LaFarge wrote. "Nous sommes si calme," people kept telling him. "But when you have heard people tell you four or five times a day how calm they are, you wonder just how deep is that tranquility?"
Peter Eisner
I think this story would fall under a "missed opportunity" of history.
Of course, intrigue and secrecy are the foundation for the lost encyclical of Pius XI. The characters of the title are Pope Pius XI and Fr John LaFarge. The moment in question is May 1938 through February 1939 when Hitler and Mussolini are still trying to solidify their alliance and the Western powers were still guessing at motives and formulating strategies.
Eisner does a good job of keeping the events straight in a chronological order as well as the five main characters that figure in this story in addition to the other historical figures. We have the outspoken Pope, who is elderly, already suffered a near-fatal heart attack, and is trying to find different outlets to get his message out to the wider world outside of Fascist Italy. He is surrounded by by others like Cardinal Pacelli, who is currently the Vatican Secretary of State and will later become Pope Pius XII. He is more diplomat in the vein of Neville Chamberlain than a spiritual figure. Also in a position of power, is the superior general of the Jesuit order, Wlodomir Ledochowski who comes from a noble family that had been connected with the Hapsburg court and seems to be the most murky character and to have ulterior motives to suppress the encyclical. We also have fellow Jesuit Gustav Gundlach who is a Vatican insider assigned by Ledochowski to "help" with the secret project. And lastly, we have Fr John LaFarge, the American priest who has been secretly summoned by the pope to draft the encyclical that linked anti-Semitism to racism ...
"He was to write a papal declaration such as never had been seen before, one that firmly and categorically represented the church's vision of the conflagration facing Europe. This would be the church's strongest statement ever, an encyclical that rejected anti-Semitism and the Nazi doctrine that espoused it. So doing, LaFarge would articulate church policy, and his thoughts and words about race and humanity would be inscribed in Catholic doctrine and would be parsed for guidance worldwide."
Peter Eisner
I think this story would fall under a "missed opportunity" of history.
Of course, intrigue and secrecy are the foundation for the lost encyclical of Pius XI. The characters of the title are Pope Pius XI and Fr John LaFarge. The moment in question is May 1938 through February 1939 when Hitler and Mussolini are still trying to solidify their alliance and the Western powers were still guessing at motives and formulating strategies.
Eisner does a good job of keeping the events straight in a chronological order as well as the five main characters that figure in this story in addition to the other historical figures. We have the outspoken Pope, who is elderly, already suffered a near-fatal heart attack, and is trying to find different outlets to get his message out to the wider world outside of Fascist Italy. He is surrounded by by others like Cardinal Pacelli, who is currently the Vatican Secretary of State and will later become Pope Pius XII. He is more diplomat in the vein of Neville Chamberlain than a spiritual figure. Also in a position of power, is the superior general of the Jesuit order, Wlodomir Ledochowski who comes from a noble family that had been connected with the Hapsburg court and seems to be the most murky character and to have ulterior motives to suppress the encyclical. We also have fellow Jesuit Gustav Gundlach who is a Vatican insider assigned by Ledochowski to "help" with the secret project. And lastly, we have Fr John LaFarge, the American priest who has been secretly summoned by the pope to draft the encyclical that linked anti-Semitism to racism ...
"He was to write a papal declaration such as never had been seen before, one that firmly and categorically represented the church's vision of the conflagration facing Europe. This would be the church's strongest statement ever, an encyclical that rejected anti-Semitism and the Nazi doctrine that espoused it. So doing, LaFarge would articulate church policy, and his thoughts and words about race and humanity would be inscribed in Catholic doctrine and would be parsed for guidance worldwide."
May 2, 2013
I won Peter Eisner’s The Pope’s Last Crusade: How an American Jesuit Helped Pope Pius Xi’s Campaign to Stop Hitler, as a Goodread's Giveaways. Eisner introduces us to the Jesuit John LaFarge. An American Jesuit who dedicated his life to racial justice and the pursuit of equality for all.
The book read more like a series of newspaper articles, but clearly details the political intrigue behind the Vatican walls. Pope Pius XI was a staunch enemy of Hitler, Mussolini and all their anti-Semitic policies. Yet, within Pius’s inner circle, we learn of the attempts to stonewall the ailing pope and the release of an encyclical denouncing the Nazi and Fascist policies.
Enter John LaFarge, a Jesuit true to the definition of humility. Eisner’s depiction of LaFarge would make the reader believe the American Jesuit was a true hero lost to history. The first few chapters created a sensationalism surrounding LaFarge as if he would be the savior of Pius’s cause. Eisner seems to reach for a story that doesn’t appear fully researched.
Eisner attempts to provide insight into the key players surrounding the events of this would-be encyclical. Of particular interest is Pius XI’s successor, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli and the Jesuit Superior General Wlodimir Ledochowski. The conservative Pacelli is the key player other than the pope himself. Eisner’s depiction of Pacelli appears inflated at times and may not give the reader an accurate depiction of the future Pope Pius XII. Eisner reaches conclusions regarding how Pacelli would react to events based on past behavior. The research doesn’t appear complete enough to support such conclusions.
Historical figures like Hitler, Mussolini, and Franklin Roosevelt are secondary to the reader, but integral to understanding the historical importance of what Pope Pius XI was attempting. Eisner’s work makes the reader wonder how different our history would be had the Vatican’s role prior to and during the Second World been different.
The book read more like a series of newspaper articles, but clearly details the political intrigue behind the Vatican walls. Pope Pius XI was a staunch enemy of Hitler, Mussolini and all their anti-Semitic policies. Yet, within Pius’s inner circle, we learn of the attempts to stonewall the ailing pope and the release of an encyclical denouncing the Nazi and Fascist policies.
Enter John LaFarge, a Jesuit true to the definition of humility. Eisner’s depiction of LaFarge would make the reader believe the American Jesuit was a true hero lost to history. The first few chapters created a sensationalism surrounding LaFarge as if he would be the savior of Pius’s cause. Eisner seems to reach for a story that doesn’t appear fully researched.
Eisner attempts to provide insight into the key players surrounding the events of this would-be encyclical. Of particular interest is Pius XI’s successor, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli and the Jesuit Superior General Wlodimir Ledochowski. The conservative Pacelli is the key player other than the pope himself. Eisner’s depiction of Pacelli appears inflated at times and may not give the reader an accurate depiction of the future Pope Pius XII. Eisner reaches conclusions regarding how Pacelli would react to events based on past behavior. The research doesn’t appear complete enough to support such conclusions.
Historical figures like Hitler, Mussolini, and Franklin Roosevelt are secondary to the reader, but integral to understanding the historical importance of what Pope Pius XI was attempting. Eisner’s work makes the reader wonder how different our history would be had the Vatican’s role prior to and during the Second World been different.
June 2, 2013
A well researched, very interesting book about the last days of Pope PiusXI and his campaign against Mussolini and Hitler and their policies of hate and racisism against the Jews. Pius had selected and American Jesuit who had already written extensively about racisism in the American South where he spent his early career working with the poor in southern Maryland. Pius arrange to meet him in secret while Fr.LaFarge was traveling in Europe for America Magazine published by the Jesuits.The Pope indicated he wanted to publish an encyclical which would firmly lay out the Church's position on the policies of Facisism and Nazism. Fr La Farge was assisted by Fr.Gundlach,a German Jesuit who had more experience liturgical language.
The Pope had requested that it be brought to hum personally on completion but Fr. Lafarge's health was suffering and one of his brother's was ill so he handed it to his immediate superior, the head of the Jesuits in Rome. Unfortunately, he was not in favor of the Pope's strong language against the forces at work in Europe and held onto the document. He may not have been alone in his sentiments since the Vatican Secretary of State was Eugenio Pacelli who later became Pius XII. Having spent a number of years in Germany, he was the consummate diplomat, the exact opposite of the forceful PiusXI.
The document was finally given to the Pope but his health was deteriorating and they essentially waited him out. He had planned a big meeting of bishops and died the day before it was to take place.
Pacelli took the name Piux II and unfortunately he and the Church's silence regarding the extinction of the Jews is what people today remember.
The Pope had requested that it be brought to hum personally on completion but Fr. Lafarge's health was suffering and one of his brother's was ill so he handed it to his immediate superior, the head of the Jesuits in Rome. Unfortunately, he was not in favor of the Pope's strong language against the forces at work in Europe and held onto the document. He may not have been alone in his sentiments since the Vatican Secretary of State was Eugenio Pacelli who later became Pius XII. Having spent a number of years in Germany, he was the consummate diplomat, the exact opposite of the forceful PiusXI.
The document was finally given to the Pope but his health was deteriorating and they essentially waited him out. He had planned a big meeting of bishops and died the day before it was to take place.
Pacelli took the name Piux II and unfortunately he and the Church's silence regarding the extinction of the Jews is what people today remember.
October 11, 2013
I love a good spy story ...especially when it is alleged to be true. And as fellow reviewer, Ian, points out below in his comments, you're wise to NEVER forget that this is an author's interpretation of a complex issue in our past ...not documented history. One could argue that this book is much like Dan Brown's fictional novels.
The Catholic Church and its Pope during the 15 years that Hitler and His Nazis ravaged Europe and North Africa are regularly still criticized for not doing much to counter the human carnage.
As an historian, Mr. Eisner never gave me any documentation to support the facts and innuendos recounted in this book so I could discover if the Papacy and some of its senior staff were actually heroes, as implied in "Pope's Last Crusade" ...NOT quiet collaborators for appalling political reasons.
GaryFPatton
(2013-09-21)
The Catholic Church and its Pope during the 15 years that Hitler and His Nazis ravaged Europe and North Africa are regularly still criticized for not doing much to counter the human carnage.
As an historian, Mr. Eisner never gave me any documentation to support the facts and innuendos recounted in this book so I could discover if the Papacy and some of its senior staff were actually heroes, as implied in "Pope's Last Crusade" ...NOT quiet collaborators for appalling political reasons.
GaryFPatton
(2013-09-21)
April 19, 2013
It read well, but could get repetitive at times. It was odd that the never-published encyclical was said to be the "first" blast at Nazism & anti-Semitism, at the same time to be reading of the pope's radio addresses and other public statements covering the same topics.
Cardinal Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) comes out looking poorly, as a Vatican insider who slow-rolled the Pope's statements in the interest of preserving the Church.
Cardinal Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) comes out looking poorly, as a Vatican insider who slow-rolled the Pope's statements in the interest of preserving the Church.
December 17, 2020
What might have been if Pope Pius XI had lived a little longer..... a fascinating story.
July 27, 2022
Nazi-Church-relations are one of my pet projects, so I had hopes about this book. Instead, it ended up being one of my bigger disappointments from this year. It's crafting a narrative and it's neither subtle nor organic about it, and while it clears up some myths, it buys into others. If you only have one book to read on this particular topic, don't read this one.
The main problem, to me, was that Eisner tried too hard to have the good guys and the bad guys, as if this was a movie and not a history book. You cannot write history entirely without heroes, villains and saints. At least in your reader's mind, some people will fulfill some of these roles. Could anyone read a true history of the My Lai Massacre and not think Hugh Thompson Jr. was a hero in this story? Can someone doubt Charles Manson was a villain in any story one might tell of him? Morality is written in the fabric of reality, no amount of true or pretended objectivity can mask that.
That said, this book is bordering on manipulative in how it establishes its heroes, its villains and its unwitting pawns. It's the kind of book where one person "chuckles heartily" or "smiles softly", while another "snickers" and "sneers".
Eisner tries his best to rehabilitate Pope Pius XI in the eyes of his reader, and I value the effort and find it done well. A Pope whose encyclica was banned in Germany and whose death was welcomed by the German and the Italian leadership alike probably wasn't a meek bystander. Mit Brennender Sorge was a comprehensive and powerful refutation of Nazi ideology, not some toothless pronounciation.
With LaFarge, it becomes forced. His political efforts against racism are often mentioned and applauded, which I understand, but then maybe the book should've been about his work in America, because as far as the German theatre goes, he didn't achieve much. That he submitted the draft him and Gundlach wrote to the Jesuit Superior General, Wlodimir Ledochowski, doomed it to the status of a historical footnote. He had his reasons, of course: Jesuit obedience, and the fact he desperately wanted to be back in America to attend his brother's funeral. The fact still stands he violated a direct order from the Pope in not submitting his draft in person.
The excerpts from the draft written by him didn't impress me too much, either. His rhetoric clouds more than it clarifies and he goes on tangents that weaken rather than strengthen his case. The document lacks focus. Is it important that racial differences are environmental rather than genetic? Perhaps, but if racial differences are only quantitative and statistical rather than qualitative and essential, then it ultimately does not matter. The Catholic Church teaches authoritatively on theology, ethics and metaphysics, but not science. Founding an ethical statement on science that is far from undisputed may weaken it, even if the scientific premises are in truth only supporting arguments. A more sophisticated reader, even if he's wrong, might asszme your case is not strong enough to do without the superfluous argument. (On a sidenote, the idea that supposed racial differences are merely environmental has been defended very well in The Legacy of Malthus.)
I mentioned Gundlach, LaFarges co-author. He's portrayed in a largely positive light, but not before his dry, pedantic style is criticized. Others would call that style scholastic, perhaps. It's the style used by Summa Theologica and the Nicomachean Ethics, and can anyone doubt these books are among the most influential of all time? An incendiary statement does not lose all its force because it sacrifices beauty to precision.
Ledochowski is written almost like a straight villain, a man on an appeasement course with the Nazis. To a contemporary, it was perfectly reasonable to see the communists as more dangerous than the Nazis. The Nazis persecuted unwelcome priests, but they didn't pose with dead nuns. The Spanish communists did. The Great Terror was already fulfilled when the Nazis rolled out their first campaigns of outright extermination. Furthermore, the usual course for radical regimes is to soften up and compromise once they get into power, and we only know from hindsight the Nazis were different. There was also the very real danger that attacking the Nazis would've led to open persecution. All of this Eisner acknowledges, but he doesn't use it to mount a defense of Ledochowski.
I'm not familiar with Ledochowski, I should add. I don't know his real motives in suppressing the draft. Perhaps he had better reasons than Eisner gives him credit for. All I know is that no effort is made here to portray him as anything other than a villain.
When it comes to Pope Pius XII, I'd say there are true distortions. He's portrayed as Pius Xi's weak successor, who lost courage as soon as he became Pope. I don't think his Summi Pontificatus or his Christmas Address of 1942 are mentioned at all, and that he housed or aided many thousands of Jews is delegated to a sidenote. That he played a major role in ending Aktion T4 is used in the context of his supposed passivity in the face of antisemitism, as if the extermination of the disabled or, for that matter, the war with all its atrocities, were only the background of the Holocaust. Nevermind that the Nazis killed even more Slavs than Jews. Nevermind Eisners case that the Pope could've stopped the Holocaust in its tracks is only tentatively put forward because he knows it's based on speculation. Did endless papal statements against war prevent its outbreak? No, because the Nazis were dedicated to such a policy.
Two and a half stars from me, rounded up because this book tells a more truthful story than the common narrative that the Church collaborated with the Nazis. Still, as I said, a disappointment.
The main problem, to me, was that Eisner tried too hard to have the good guys and the bad guys, as if this was a movie and not a history book. You cannot write history entirely without heroes, villains and saints. At least in your reader's mind, some people will fulfill some of these roles. Could anyone read a true history of the My Lai Massacre and not think Hugh Thompson Jr. was a hero in this story? Can someone doubt Charles Manson was a villain in any story one might tell of him? Morality is written in the fabric of reality, no amount of true or pretended objectivity can mask that.
That said, this book is bordering on manipulative in how it establishes its heroes, its villains and its unwitting pawns. It's the kind of book where one person "chuckles heartily" or "smiles softly", while another "snickers" and "sneers".
Eisner tries his best to rehabilitate Pope Pius XI in the eyes of his reader, and I value the effort and find it done well. A Pope whose encyclica was banned in Germany and whose death was welcomed by the German and the Italian leadership alike probably wasn't a meek bystander. Mit Brennender Sorge was a comprehensive and powerful refutation of Nazi ideology, not some toothless pronounciation.
With LaFarge, it becomes forced. His political efforts against racism are often mentioned and applauded, which I understand, but then maybe the book should've been about his work in America, because as far as the German theatre goes, he didn't achieve much. That he submitted the draft him and Gundlach wrote to the Jesuit Superior General, Wlodimir Ledochowski, doomed it to the status of a historical footnote. He had his reasons, of course: Jesuit obedience, and the fact he desperately wanted to be back in America to attend his brother's funeral. The fact still stands he violated a direct order from the Pope in not submitting his draft in person.
The excerpts from the draft written by him didn't impress me too much, either. His rhetoric clouds more than it clarifies and he goes on tangents that weaken rather than strengthen his case. The document lacks focus. Is it important that racial differences are environmental rather than genetic? Perhaps, but if racial differences are only quantitative and statistical rather than qualitative and essential, then it ultimately does not matter. The Catholic Church teaches authoritatively on theology, ethics and metaphysics, but not science. Founding an ethical statement on science that is far from undisputed may weaken it, even if the scientific premises are in truth only supporting arguments. A more sophisticated reader, even if he's wrong, might asszme your case is not strong enough to do without the superfluous argument. (On a sidenote, the idea that supposed racial differences are merely environmental has been defended very well in The Legacy of Malthus.)
I mentioned Gundlach, LaFarges co-author. He's portrayed in a largely positive light, but not before his dry, pedantic style is criticized. Others would call that style scholastic, perhaps. It's the style used by Summa Theologica and the Nicomachean Ethics, and can anyone doubt these books are among the most influential of all time? An incendiary statement does not lose all its force because it sacrifices beauty to precision.
Ledochowski is written almost like a straight villain, a man on an appeasement course with the Nazis. To a contemporary, it was perfectly reasonable to see the communists as more dangerous than the Nazis. The Nazis persecuted unwelcome priests, but they didn't pose with dead nuns. The Spanish communists did. The Great Terror was already fulfilled when the Nazis rolled out their first campaigns of outright extermination. Furthermore, the usual course for radical regimes is to soften up and compromise once they get into power, and we only know from hindsight the Nazis were different. There was also the very real danger that attacking the Nazis would've led to open persecution. All of this Eisner acknowledges, but he doesn't use it to mount a defense of Ledochowski.
I'm not familiar with Ledochowski, I should add. I don't know his real motives in suppressing the draft. Perhaps he had better reasons than Eisner gives him credit for. All I know is that no effort is made here to portray him as anything other than a villain.
When it comes to Pope Pius XII, I'd say there are true distortions. He's portrayed as Pius Xi's weak successor, who lost courage as soon as he became Pope. I don't think his Summi Pontificatus or his Christmas Address of 1942 are mentioned at all, and that he housed or aided many thousands of Jews is delegated to a sidenote. That he played a major role in ending Aktion T4 is used in the context of his supposed passivity in the face of antisemitism, as if the extermination of the disabled or, for that matter, the war with all its atrocities, were only the background of the Holocaust. Nevermind that the Nazis killed even more Slavs than Jews. Nevermind Eisners case that the Pope could've stopped the Holocaust in its tracks is only tentatively put forward because he knows it's based on speculation. Did endless papal statements against war prevent its outbreak? No, because the Nazis were dedicated to such a policy.
Two and a half stars from me, rounded up because this book tells a more truthful story than the common narrative that the Church collaborated with the Nazis. Still, as I said, a disappointment.
November 30, 2025
John LaFarge was the unassuming and scholarly Jesuit Editor of America magazine during pre-World War II years. America, published in New York, was read by Catholics worldwide for its reporting on issues and events important to Catholics. It appears it was also read by Achilles Ratti, Pope Pius XI, a mountaineer of reknown andan outspoken critic of Adolph Hitler and Nazism at time when the Vatican timidly tip toed around Nazism and the Vatican' political relations with Germany and Italy.
LaFarge had written an important work on racism in America, based largely on his experiences as a parish priest in St. Mary's County, Maryland, a work that was read with great interest by the Pope, who believed it was his duty to promulgate an unwavering and powerful statement against anti-Semitism, Adoph Hitler, and the alliance that Mussolini had formed with Hitler. The Vatican Secretary of State at the time, Eugenio Pacelli who would become Pope after Ratti's death, feared speaking out against Hitler because of uncertainty surrounding the enforcement of the Concordats with Germany finally ratified in the late 1920s by the Vatican.
Pius XI read LaFarge's arranged a secretive and private meeting with LaFarge, outside the knowledge of the Vatican Secretary of State and anyone else in the Vatican bureaucracy. Pius directed LaFarge to pen an encylical opposing anti Semitism and Hitler in the strongest possible language and to do so privately, secretly, and quickly.
Pius' views opposing Hitler and anti Semitism were the strongest seen in the Vatican, conflicting with the views held byPacelli (later, after Ratti's death, to become Pope Pius XII). Pius correctly believed that racism and anti Semitism were threats that would eventually engulf Catholics in German occupied lands and worldwide. Pius told LaFarge that no one other than LaFarge, the Pope, and the 2 assistants who LaFarge would name and swear to secrecy, were to know about his work.
LaFarge was an obedient Jesuit. He understood the importance of his vows and he arranged through the Jesuit Provincial General, known as the Black Pope for the influence wield by the Jesuit Provincial General in Vatican politics, a man named Wlodimir Ledochowski to work do his work in Paris together with 2 other Jesuit scholars.
From the beginning Ledochowski acted to scupper the publication of the Encylcal because of his ambivalence toward Hitler and his opposition to Communism and because, sadly, Ledochowski fairly could be considered an anti-Semite himself. He also, in a manner that was Machiavellian in conception, scope and implementation acted to ensure that LaFarge's final product was given to him for delivery to the Pope--something Pius wanted to avoid by having LaFarge deliver it personally--and to delay its delivery in the belief that the Pope would succumb to heart disease before the encyclical was ever published to the world.
Ledochowski's deceit prevailed and the important worked entrusted by the Pope to LaFarge, a genuinely good person knows as Uncle John to the Jesuits at his provicial house in New York City, was never published.
When he succeeded Ratti as Pope Pius XII, Pacelli, the Secretary of State under Ratti, destroyed all copies of the Encyclical penned by LaFarge and the Church's strong voice opposing Hitler, Mussolini, and the Nazis was lost forever. Some believe to this day that the Church abided evil by not speaking out more forcefully against Hitler, bu in fact the Church's voice was silenced by 2 important prelates with influence in the power structure of the Vatican.
The author bases the story on an after dinner conversation LaFarge had with some of the younger Jesuits on America's staff, a conversation that held the other Jesuits spellbound for hours. It was a story never told before by LaFarge or anyone else, including Grundlach, his Jesuit contemporary who assisted him in the writing and repeatedly admoinished LaFarge to deliver the Encyclical personally to Pius XI, as the Pope directed LaFarge.
It is a story well told with important lessons about where duty to a larger good begins and obedience as an unnecessary restaint ends or should end.
SECOND READING: After reading this work a second time, I have to conclude that LaFarge's meekness and timidly permitted Lechandowski's deceit to prevent Pius XII's proposed encylclical to be published. LaFarge, a good and decent man obedient to his superiors and beloved by younger priests, was repeatedly urged by one of his collaborators in drafting the encyclical that Lechandowski was operating to prevent the encylical's publication. Father Grundlach urged LaFarge to go directly to the Pope with the draft but LaFarge was focused on returning to the US and consoling his family over the death of an elder brother and particularly sensitive to skirting his Jesuit superior, the nefarious Lechandowski.
I also came to a conclusion that is, more or less speculation, that Eugenio Pacelli, then Vatican Secretary of State and later Pope Pius XII acted hand in glove with Lechandowski to hide LaFarge's draft encyclical from Pius XI. I am persuaded by Pacelli's casual attitude toward LaFarge's engagement to draft the encyclical, even though Pacelli was well-known to believe that Hitler and Mussolini, because they opposed communism, were best left to their own devices even though Hitler had already begun his rampage through Europe.
LaFarge had written an important work on racism in America, based largely on his experiences as a parish priest in St. Mary's County, Maryland, a work that was read with great interest by the Pope, who believed it was his duty to promulgate an unwavering and powerful statement against anti-Semitism, Adoph Hitler, and the alliance that Mussolini had formed with Hitler. The Vatican Secretary of State at the time, Eugenio Pacelli who would become Pope after Ratti's death, feared speaking out against Hitler because of uncertainty surrounding the enforcement of the Concordats with Germany finally ratified in the late 1920s by the Vatican.
Pius XI read LaFarge's arranged a secretive and private meeting with LaFarge, outside the knowledge of the Vatican Secretary of State and anyone else in the Vatican bureaucracy. Pius directed LaFarge to pen an encylical opposing anti Semitism and Hitler in the strongest possible language and to do so privately, secretly, and quickly.
Pius' views opposing Hitler and anti Semitism were the strongest seen in the Vatican, conflicting with the views held byPacelli (later, after Ratti's death, to become Pope Pius XII). Pius correctly believed that racism and anti Semitism were threats that would eventually engulf Catholics in German occupied lands and worldwide. Pius told LaFarge that no one other than LaFarge, the Pope, and the 2 assistants who LaFarge would name and swear to secrecy, were to know about his work.
LaFarge was an obedient Jesuit. He understood the importance of his vows and he arranged through the Jesuit Provincial General, known as the Black Pope for the influence wield by the Jesuit Provincial General in Vatican politics, a man named Wlodimir Ledochowski to work do his work in Paris together with 2 other Jesuit scholars.
From the beginning Ledochowski acted to scupper the publication of the Encylcal because of his ambivalence toward Hitler and his opposition to Communism and because, sadly, Ledochowski fairly could be considered an anti-Semite himself. He also, in a manner that was Machiavellian in conception, scope and implementation acted to ensure that LaFarge's final product was given to him for delivery to the Pope--something Pius wanted to avoid by having LaFarge deliver it personally--and to delay its delivery in the belief that the Pope would succumb to heart disease before the encyclical was ever published to the world.
Ledochowski's deceit prevailed and the important worked entrusted by the Pope to LaFarge, a genuinely good person knows as Uncle John to the Jesuits at his provicial house in New York City, was never published.
When he succeeded Ratti as Pope Pius XII, Pacelli, the Secretary of State under Ratti, destroyed all copies of the Encyclical penned by LaFarge and the Church's strong voice opposing Hitler, Mussolini, and the Nazis was lost forever. Some believe to this day that the Church abided evil by not speaking out more forcefully against Hitler, bu in fact the Church's voice was silenced by 2 important prelates with influence in the power structure of the Vatican.
The author bases the story on an after dinner conversation LaFarge had with some of the younger Jesuits on America's staff, a conversation that held the other Jesuits spellbound for hours. It was a story never told before by LaFarge or anyone else, including Grundlach, his Jesuit contemporary who assisted him in the writing and repeatedly admoinished LaFarge to deliver the Encyclical personally to Pius XI, as the Pope directed LaFarge.
It is a story well told with important lessons about where duty to a larger good begins and obedience as an unnecessary restaint ends or should end.
SECOND READING: After reading this work a second time, I have to conclude that LaFarge's meekness and timidly permitted Lechandowski's deceit to prevent Pius XII's proposed encylclical to be published. LaFarge, a good and decent man obedient to his superiors and beloved by younger priests, was repeatedly urged by one of his collaborators in drafting the encyclical that Lechandowski was operating to prevent the encylical's publication. Father Grundlach urged LaFarge to go directly to the Pope with the draft but LaFarge was focused on returning to the US and consoling his family over the death of an elder brother and particularly sensitive to skirting his Jesuit superior, the nefarious Lechandowski.
I also came to a conclusion that is, more or less speculation, that Eugenio Pacelli, then Vatican Secretary of State and later Pope Pius XII acted hand in glove with Lechandowski to hide LaFarge's draft encyclical from Pius XI. I am persuaded by Pacelli's casual attitude toward LaFarge's engagement to draft the encyclical, even though Pacelli was well-known to believe that Hitler and Mussolini, because they opposed communism, were best left to their own devices even though Hitler had already begun his rampage through Europe.
August 28, 2018
”He would regret his hasty decision to leave Rome for years afterward and the rest of his life.” (p 131)
I include the above quote to show what the writing in The Pope’s Last Crusade is like. When author Peter Eisner is not repeating himself in the same sentence, he repeats a few pages later - sometimes using the same words. I lost track of the number of times I was told that Pius XI was once a famous mountain climber. There are also simple factual errors such as stating that there were seven popes elected in the 20th century when there were eight. Eisner has apparently forgotten Benedict XV (1914 - 1922). Where is his editor in all this? Not doing his job or being totally ignored?
Besides the troubling issue with the actual writing, the other problem with the book is its simplistic presentation. While there is little doubt that Pius XI was disillusioned with Mussolini and was a staunch foe of Fascism by 1938, it was not always so as the book implies. The relationship between the two men was more complex and had deteriorated over time but that is a depth of exploration ignored here. (The Pope and Mussolini by David I Kurtzer does a far better job examining it.) Instead, we get some odd tangential anecdotes thrown in: a paragraph for Pacelli’s self-description when he was 13; a page for a car accident in which Pacelli was not seriously hurt nor did it stop him from going on holiday. Fr. John LaFarge, the American of the sub-title, sounds like an interesting man that would be a worthy subject for a biography - one other than this mess.
Lots of quotes but, ultimately, little substance.
I include the above quote to show what the writing in The Pope’s Last Crusade is like. When author Peter Eisner is not repeating himself in the same sentence, he repeats a few pages later - sometimes using the same words. I lost track of the number of times I was told that Pius XI was once a famous mountain climber. There are also simple factual errors such as stating that there were seven popes elected in the 20th century when there were eight. Eisner has apparently forgotten Benedict XV (1914 - 1922). Where is his editor in all this? Not doing his job or being totally ignored?
Besides the troubling issue with the actual writing, the other problem with the book is its simplistic presentation. While there is little doubt that Pius XI was disillusioned with Mussolini and was a staunch foe of Fascism by 1938, it was not always so as the book implies. The relationship between the two men was more complex and had deteriorated over time but that is a depth of exploration ignored here. (The Pope and Mussolini by David I Kurtzer does a far better job examining it.) Instead, we get some odd tangential anecdotes thrown in: a paragraph for Pacelli’s self-description when he was 13; a page for a car accident in which Pacelli was not seriously hurt nor did it stop him from going on holiday. Fr. John LaFarge, the American of the sub-title, sounds like an interesting man that would be a worthy subject for a biography - one other than this mess.
Lots of quotes but, ultimately, little substance.
May 31, 2013
What intrigued me to read this book was the title "American Jesuit helped Pius XI Crusade to stop Hitler" Even though I am a Catholic, I know Pius XII was the pope during WWII and I knew nothing about Pius XI. It was a very good read and really gave me pause to wonder what would have happened if Pius XI had lived and published the encyclical that he had the Jesuit,John LaFarge, write secretly condemning in no uncertain terms Hitler and Mussolini. He died in 1939 and realized the evil and inevitablity of a war. It was eye-opening for me.
November 16, 2014
A bit of background to the Pope Pius XI that is interesting. The story can be interpreted that both Pope Pius XI and John LaFarge were not as committed to producing / publishing the encyclical as the author would like us to believe.
This story takes some big leaps to clear up what can only be described as complicated. What effect on WW2 / Hitler the encyclical would have had is debatable; in my opinion it will not have mattered especially after 'giving' Sudetenland to Hitler.
In hindsight...
This story takes some big leaps to clear up what can only be described as complicated. What effect on WW2 / Hitler the encyclical would have had is debatable; in my opinion it will not have mattered especially after 'giving' Sudetenland to Hitler.
In hindsight...
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 22, 2015
At the very least, the title is misleading. The book describes a request made by Pope Pius XI to write an encyclical against racism. The context is certainly interesting but I think "crusade" and "campaign" grossly overstate the Vatican's efforts to combat Nazism leading up to WWII. As a result this reads like a weak apologia for the action, or inaction, taken by the Vatican during this period. Oh, and the encyclical was written but never published, due to active suppression by powerful prelates in the Vatican.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 24, 2015
On the eve of World War II Pope Pius XI was about the only head of state to challenge Hilter's treatment of the Jews and his move for territorial dominance. The pope commissioned an American Jesuit priest, Father John LaFarge, to write an encyclical for him on human rights. This is the story of Father LaFarge's efforts to compose the document and the pope's struggle against anti-semitism despite obstacles placed in their paths by Church officals.
July 9, 2013
I received this book through Goodreads First Reads giveaway.
A non-fiction that reads like a novel. Is it religion or politics? The year 1938, Pope Pius XI had the courage to express his views against Hilter and Nazism...not everyone in the Vatican agreed with him. Some even went so far as to go against his instructions or wishes. A good read!
A non-fiction that reads like a novel. Is it religion or politics? The year 1938, Pope Pius XI had the courage to express his views against Hilter and Nazism...not everyone in the Vatican agreed with him. Some even went so far as to go against his instructions or wishes. A good read!
June 30, 2013
Very well researched and presented. This book focuses on Pope Pious XI and John LaFarge and the encyclical that could have changed the course of history had it been published. I received a copy through Goodreads First Reads.
May 10, 2021
Would not recommend. The author clearly started with an agenda, and contorts historical facts to fit it. There are some mildly interesting tidbits, but the overwhelming majority of the book is just the author picking up historical scraps and twisting them to suit his purposes.
May 19, 2013
I received a copy of this book through a goodreads giveaway. It was truly a masterfully written book. Extremely informative and yet very enjoyable to read. Definitely one I would recommend!
March 23, 2013
good book, I loved learning about this little discussed aspect of WW2. As a former catholic and history buff I found it interesting and an easy read
May 2, 2013
A ggod companion book to In the garden of the Beasts. And new understanding of Pope Pius XI and that era of pre WWII.
May 28, 2013
Very interesting book....lots of questions regarding the catholic Church in WWII. Hopefully many things will become clear after 2015 when more files become open.
July 15, 2019
While I generally.like this type of book, I gave up.on it.
October 1, 2017
The Pope's Last Crusade is rather short, but well researched and well written. I do believe that the title is somewhat misleading, but that would be a spoiler. The book is a fascinating look into the inner workings of the Vatican with all its rivalry and intrigue, and a very good look at an overlooked Pope. It is always a pleasure to learn about how Pius XI stood up to Hitler and Mussolini at great personal risk. It was disappointing to see the way some around the Pope, including the future Pius XII, worked to undermine his opposition to Hitler and fascism and how they were ultimately successful in that goal. In the epilogue, there was some discussion about what the motivation might have been and whether it was justified. I will end this with two quotes. The first is Pius XII, the second is Joseph Hurley (who was banished from the Vatican after saying it).
You must not forget, dear friend, that there are millions of Catholics in the German army. Would you like to place them in the middle of a conflict of conscience?" Pius XII
We have sympathy for the pacifists, but they are wrong. No word in the Gospel or in papal teaching suggests that justice should go undefended, that it is not worth dying for... The Church is no conscientious objector." Joseph Hurley
November 25, 2023
An interesting read. As WWII begins and prosecution of the Jews in Germany and Italy ramps up, Pope Pius XI directs a young Jesuit priest to write an encyclical condemning what was happening. It becomes quite frustrating for the reader watching the intrigue at the Vatican to make sure that the encyclical is never published.
On a quite different subject, Emma Gavazzi has researched and written a fascinating tale of Civil War heroics. The Book is Gallantry and Resilience: The Chronicles of James B. Thompson. Gavazzi weaves Thompson's real life exploits into a tale that is almost impossible to put down. Thompson is a hero who deserves to be remembered and Gavazzi makes sure it done right.
On a quite different subject, Emma Gavazzi has researched and written a fascinating tale of Civil War heroics. The Book is Gallantry and Resilience: The Chronicles of James B. Thompson. Gavazzi weaves Thompson's real life exploits into a tale that is almost impossible to put down. Thompson is a hero who deserves to be remembered and Gavazzi makes sure it done right.
August 18, 2023
This was an interesting book, and a subject I did not know a thing about. Pope Pius XI was the head of the Catholic Church on the eve of WW2. He was staunchly opposed to racism, and antisemitism. Pius was outspoken against Mussolini and Italian fascism as well as the rise of Nazism in Europe. He realized that the rise of the Nazis was the more pressing issue over the rise of Bolshevism in Russia. Also at play were Vatican politics and factions. In cooperation with an American Jesuit priest, he tried to warn his countrymen and his flock of the dangerous times they lived in.
May 24, 2018
Most of us don’t know this story because the efforts described were ultimately unsuccessful. But that doesn’t diminish the courage of those involved, and is an important part of history that needs to be told— that at moments of crisis, there were those willing to speak out against hatred and evil.
Apparently, it’s a lesson we need to keep learning...
Apparently, it’s a lesson we need to keep learning...
March 1, 2023
Very much enjoyed reading about Pope Pius XI and his campaign against Hitler and Mussolini. A lot of this history I was not aware of. Disappointing that Pius XI died one day too early. Disappointing that Pius XII did not follow in the previous Pope's footsteps. The whole world might have been a better place for it. Too many politics in the church.
November 8, 2024
Pope Pius XI was against Nazis and the antisemitism of the 1930’s. However the church hierarchy thought communism was a bigger threat and successfully stopped the Pope from issuing an encyclical on antisemitism. He died before encyclical was issued. The next pope took efforts to make sure it was never issued. This book looks at the politics of the Catholic Church in the 1930’s
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews