In 1994, a parliamentary question was put to the then Minister for Justice, Mrs Máire Geoghegan Quinn (Galway West, Fianna Fáil) about the existence of the Official IRA. The minister answered that An Garda Síochána were satisfied they did exist. The deputy who asked the question was the then Fine Gael front bencher, Enda Kenny (Mayo West).
In recent weeks, The Irish Times highlighted correspondence unearthed in Berlin between the General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Ireland, Seán Garland, and the East German government. Mr Garland was looking for financial support for his party and he made clear in the letters what his fellow party members were consistently denying at the time. That the Official IRA not only existed, but contributed to the Workers' Party.
I recall this time very well. Workers' Party spokesmen hypocritically condemned the Provisional IRA and Sinn Féin while denying their own paramilitary wing existed. Those who questioned this were treated as cranks. Few journalists made a point of highlighting reports of continued Official IRA activity. Vincent Browne was one of the very few who did so (at great personal risk) and he is also one of the few journalists to ask about the relationship of two of Mr Kenny's cabinet appointees to this body.
Many members of the Workers' Party did not have a clear picture of what the Official IRA were up to in the 1980s. It is hard to credit that this was true of serving Workers' Party T.D.s such as Pat Rabitte and Éamon Gilmore (both of whom had been activists in the Party since the days it was known as Official Sinn Féin), but this may have been the case. What these two men were not blind to was their party's relationship with totalitarian regimes behind the Iron Curtain and elsewhere. This is altogether a more serious issue than the Official IRA and raises questions about the ministers' views on human rights.
Civil war within while face massacre without
At present, the Labour Party is facing an electoral massacre and behind the scenes there appears to be a battle royal between Old Labour types and ex-Democratic Left members. The principal target of the former Democratic Left grouping's anger is the Labour Party chairman, Colm Keaveney (Galway East). Deputy Keaveney has already challenged the leadership consensus on a few issues. One of the most noticeable was the closure of the Irish Embassy to the Holy See.
At the time of the last general election, Labour made all sorts of promises about keeping the public sector intact. The Labour Party leader, Deputy Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour, before that Democratic Left, before that the Workers' Party, before that Sinn Féin the Workers' Party, before that Official Sinn Féin) became Minister for Foreign Affairs. The department gave him proposals to save money by cutting back on staff in the various Irish legations overseas. This plan did not involve closing any embassys or consulates. The department is aware that when diplomatic missions are closed, there are significant costs in re-opening them. The new minister came up with his own plan, which involved closing three embassys – the Holy See, Iran and Timor Leste. There was no trade function connected to the Holy See, he said. If trade was the only reason, there was no reason to close the Iranian embassy given the very favourable trade balance between Ireland and Iran. There are many reasons to keep all three embassys open: as long as the Church maintains its presence in education and healthcare in Ireland, the state requires a mission to the Holy See; that most of us have no great sympathy for the current regime in Iran is a very good argument for maintaining an embassy there; and what sort of message regarding human rights does closing the Timor Leste embassy send out?
The announcement regarding the Holy See embassy was preceded by Mr Kenny's infamous “elitist, narcissistic and dysfunctional” speech about the Vatican. This was not a Labour Party initiative and if Deputy Kenny sings about praise he received from many parish priests, God help them, he had no answer for the detailed rebuttal of the speech by the Holy See. One wonders if it was the Association of Catholic Priests that drives policy here? Be that as it may, the government were forced to back-track on the embassy issue and are now pleading economic circumstances to get the Vatican allow them open an office for the Embassy to the Holy See separate from the Embassy to Italy in the Villa Spada complex. Hard to be sympathetic to people who shot themselves in the foot.
There is no doubt that the government are facing serious challenges on the economic front and that difficult decisions have to be taken. Both Fine Gael and Labour should have been aware of that prior to the 2011 General Election when they made promises they knew they could not keep. The two parties also made promises which could not be mutually accomodated in a programme for government. In the situation Education Minister Ruairí Quinn (Dublin South-East) finds himself, he cynically masks the wholesale cuts he is making in services by cheerleading the voices for secularism in education, going back on some of the reasonable comments he made on the rights of Catholic parents while in opposition. Mr Quinn, of course, was in Labour all along. But one does suspect someone who was a Vladimir Illyich Lenin lookalike in his younger years. Seriously though, some of Deputy Quinn's rants would not be too foreign to the Orange thugs who chased his father and uncle out of Newry in the 1920s.
Sting of a dying wasp
As Labour's support collapses in the polls, civil war continues within the party . Deputy Gilmore did consider expelling Deputy Keaveney from the party, but has apparently dropped the plan. It makes little difference. Labour had the opportunity of being the main opposition party last year with a good chance of leading government after the next election. Fortunately for the rest of us, they were too greedy. They wanted cabinet seats immediately. Which leaves us with another problem. The sting of a dying wasp is very dangerous.
Labour have swallowed the climate of cut backs which Fine Gael have demanded (though it is true that on their own, Fine Gael would have devestated the public sector). There has to be a quid pro quo in the matter. In this regard, the horrid spectre of abortion has raised its head. Labour has a policy, not shared by everyone in the party, of legislating for the X-case; Fine Gael gave a pretty unequivocal commitment not to. I gather the wording was that of the present Minister for the Environment, Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny) who was Fine Gael's Director of Elections at the time.
After the election, Fine Gael already backtracked by setting up an expert group with a clear pro-abortion bias rather than the promised all party Oireachtas committee. Then the Minister for Health, Dr James Reilly (Dublin North) announced six governments had failed to legislate for the X case, and this would not be the seventh to do so. This in itself was not a problem. The issues were somewhat obscured by the so-called Children's Rights Referendum which registered a low turnout and low margin after a campaign in which the government was found to be in breach of the law. The referendum took place a couple of days after Barack Obama won a second term in the White House. Then the Savita Halappanavar case hit the headlines. One has every sympathy for Mrs Halappanavar, her widower and their family, but abortion is a red herring in the case. The woman was suffering from septicaemia and E-coli at the time of her death and an abortion would not have made any difference. However, an impression was created which gave the government an opportunity to move quickly on the matter.
Whip your people into line
There are Fine Gael deputies with misgivings about X-case legislation. In this case the problem appears to be a commitment given by Enda Kenny to the Labour Party on the matter. We all know how much Deputy Kenny's promises are worth, but this is exceptional. The Labour T.D. Anne Ferris (Wicklow) foolishly went on radio to say Deputy Gilmore told Mr Kenny that he had to whip his people into line on the matter. This should be something to make any committed Fine Gael member writhe in anger, but this does not appear to have happened. What is wrong with a party which was overbrimming with confidence at the time of the last election, especially when the threats are coming from another party that is facing electoral oblivion in the polls and are in no position to make demands about anything.
Abortion is the most obnoxious of a basket of issues which the former Irish cheerleaders of the Stasi and KGB want. Fine Gael are showing themselves to have no backbone in the matter. Both deserve the wrath of the electorate, but I rather fear the larger party in government will survive with a slap on the wrist. Which means had Enda Kenny any guts, he could refuse Labour's demands and call their bluff. But it seems he has more courage towards his own backbenchers than with the Labour Party, led as it is by members of the former Official Sinn Féin.
The Brandsma Review is a bi-monthly magazine of broadly conservative Catholic opinion in Ireland named for the Dutch Carmelite martyr Blessed Titus Brandsma. As our masthead states: Pro Vita, Pro Ecclesia Dei et Pro Hibernia.
Saturday, 26 January 2013
Wednesday, 23 January 2013
Miner, Journalist, Martyr: Blessed Nikolaus Gross
MINER, JOURNALIST, MARTYR: BLESSED
NIKOLAUS GROSS
By PEADAR LAIGHLÉIS
Oboedire oportet Deo magis quam hominibus.
(Acts V, 29)
I WAS RECENTLY in Frankfurt Airport and called
into Terminal 1’s Orthodox Chapel. I saw one icon
of a young man wearing a white medical coat over a
grey Wehrmacht uniform, holding a white rose in his
hand. This is St Alexander Schmorell, the German
Russian Orthodox member of the White Rose resistance
group who was canonised as a martyr by the
Russian Orthodox Church Abroad on February 5,
2012. I asked myself how likely was it for the
Catholic White Rose members, Willi Graf, Christoph
Probst and Dr Kurt Huber, to find their causes
advanced for sainthood. For the same reason, one
might ask the same of the Catholics involved in the
July 20 conspiracy, such as Colonel Claus Schenk
Count von Stauffenberg.
However, the Church is extremely prudent about
whom she venerates as martyrs among political
activists and conspirators, even among those who
oppose a regime as evil as the Third Reich. For all
that, many Germans and other Europeans have been
beatified and even canonised for their stand against
National Socialism. Most are familiar with Ss
Maximilian Kolbe and Edith Stein. Our last issue had
my predecessor outline the martyrdom of Blessed
Titus Brandsma, the Dutch Carmelite academic and
journalist for whom this Review is named. In early
issues, Blessed Franz Jägerstätter, the Austrian conscientious
objector was described in these pages.
Blessed Titus and Blessed Franz present contrasts
among the vast gallery of ordinary Catholics—clergy,
religious and laity—who opposed Hitler. One was a
university rector who was close enough to the Dutch
Bishops to have an input into the drafting of the
Bishops’ pastoral letter on Nazi racial policies. The
other was a married Franciscan tertiary, a peasant
with little education and a wild background who
served as a church sacristan. Blessed Franz opposed
the Anschluss in 1938 and was guillotined for refusing
to serve in the Wehrmacht as a combatant.
Blessed Franz was born in Sankt Radegund, close to
Hitler’s birthplace in Braunau am Inn and not distant
from Pope Benedict XVI’s birthplace in Marktl on
the other side of the border.
Nikolaus Groß (given in English as Gross) is less
well known. Nikolaus was born in Niederwenigen
(now Hattigen) near Essen (Diocese of Essen) in the
Ruhr District on September 30, 1898. His father was
a miner. Nikolaus attended the local Catholic primary
school between 1905 and 1912 and then went to work
in the mines himself, spending five years underground.
He used his limited spare time to study and in
1917, he joined the Gewerkverein Christlicher
Bergarbeiter (Christian Miners’ Union). In 1918, he
became a member of the Centre Party. The following
year, he entered the Antonius Knappenverein (St
Anthony Miners’ Association). At the age of 22, he
was youth secretary for the Christian Miners’ Union,
soon after he was assistant editor of Bergknappe
(“The Miner”). His organisation work as a trade
unionist brought him as far as Silesia. He married
Elisabeth Koch, who was also a native of
Niederwenigen and together, they had seven children.
One of his greatest concerns was the education and
religious formation of his family, something he
described in a pamphlet Sieben um einen Tisch
(“Seven around one Table”).
Moral dimension
At the beginning of 1927, he became assistant editor
of the Westdeutschen Arbeiterzeitung (“Western
German Workers’ Paper”), the publication of the
Katholishen Arbeiter-Bewegung (KAB or Catholic
Workers’ Movement). Soon afterward, he became
editor-in-chief. He saw his duty to give Catholic
workers guidance regarding society and the world of
work, but it became clearer to him that political and
social questions involved a moral dimension and
demanded a spiritual contribution. In this, he followed
the ideas of the 19th Century Bishop of Mainz,
Wilhelm Emmanuel Baron von Ketteler (1811-77).
Ketteler, known as the “Workers’ Bishop”, believed
that reform of society must be preceded by reform of
attitude. In Nikolaus Groß’ own day, Ketteler’s grand
nephew was Blessed Clemens August Cardinal Count
von Galen, Bishop of Münster.
From 1929, Nikolaus Groß was based in Ketteler
House in Cologne and he already formed a clear opinion
of the rising National Socialist German Workers’
Party. Since 1927, he had co-operated closely with
figures such as Mgr Otto Müller, Bernhard Letterhaus
and Jakob Kaiser, who would become leading figures
in the resistance movement many years later. Groß
saw Nazism as political immaturity and absence of
discernment. He believed the success of the Nazis to
be a temporary glitch that would fail as soon as
Germany returned to normal politics. He showed this
by pointing to the lack of ideas emanating from the
National Socialists and the refusal of Hitler to answer
questions of policy while pursuing unlimited power.
Groß supported Heinrich Brünning’s (Chancellor
1930-32; Centre Party) policy of attempting to integrate
the Nazis into political and constitutional office
in the hope of diluting their ideological edge. It is
only in retrospect, we see this to have been illusory.
For all that, Groß opposed Nazism. He identified
with the left of the Centre Party (still present in the
post-war CDU/CSU). Pointing out the developing
relationship between Hitler and the industrialists
while the former was appealing to the working class,
he said: “This is a pretty division of power: the
National Socialists dominate politics, the entrepreneurs
the economy. The worker is a carrier donkey for
both.” On the incompatibility of Nazism and
Catholicism, he wrote: “We reject National Socialism
as Catholic workers, not only on political and economic
grounds, but decisively and resolutely on our
religious and cultural position.” He had already
described the Nazi Party as the “Mortal enemy of the
present State”, so it is not very surprising that Robert
Ley, leader of the Deutschen Arbeiterfront (German
Workers’ Front) described the Westdeutsche
Arbeiterzeitung as hostile to the state after 1933.
Obey God more than men
After the Concordat between the Reich and the
Catholic Church in 1933, the Westdeutsche
Arbeiterzeitung was renamed Kettelerwacht at the
urging of Bishop Berning of Osnabrück. Nikolaus
Groß had to adapt to the new regime and attempt to
write between the lines following a three-week ban
on the newspaper. His first priority as a trade unionist
and journalist was to maintain the Church’s autonomy.
The newspaper was permanently banned in
November 1938. The reason seems to have been an
understated comparison between National Socialism
and Bolshevism:
It cannot be said of either world view with the same
right that the life of mankind was worthy to be lived and
meaningful to the end if everyone would follow it.
From then on, Groß had to work through producing
pamphlets and speaking personally in attempt to
immunise his readers against Nazism. Nikolaus Groß
was no orator; he had had to work very hard to obtain
the learning he had. However, circumstances transformed
him into a persuasive speaker. Henceforth, he
was part of the growing resistance to Hitler within
Germany, on the simple conviction that one must
obey God more than men.
Active resistance
Mgr Otto Müller, Bernhard Letterhaus and
Nikolaus Groß formed the leadership of the Cologne
Circle, a network of Catholic opponents of Nazism in
the Rhineland and Westphalia. The group had been
evolving towards active resistance for some time.
Groß established contact with the more extensive
Kreisau Circle through the academic Father Alfred
Delp SJ. More importantly, links were forged with the
Berlin resistance group around Carl Goerdeler.
Though there were differences between the Kreisau
and Berlin circles, at this point the Cologne Circle
were integrated into a comprehensive web of German
opposition that ran from Protestant and Catholic conservatives,
aristocrats, the military, liberals, trade
unionists, social democrats and communists.
Members of the various groups took risks to perform
dozens of functions to enable to the network to continue
to exist.
From 1940, Nikolaus Groß experienced arrests,
interrogations and house searches. He made every
effort to continue his work. He wrote two pamphlets,
“Is Germany Lost?” and “The Great Tasks”, which
ultimately fell into the hands of the Gestapo. The conscription
of Letterhaus increased Groß’ work in
Düssseldorf but also meant that the Cologne Circle
had regular contact with Goerdeler. Groß spent this
time considering his position and the relationship
between his faith and the political milieu. In 1943 he
put together his personal Profession of Faith. To
select a quote: “If it is demanded of us to do something
which goes against God or the Faith, not only
may we, but we must refuse this obedience. For
God’s Law always stands higher than man’s law.”
The next question was whether it could at times permissible
to take active steps to subvert the authority
of the regime.
Church on trial for treason
The day before the assassination attempt on Hitler
on July 20, 1944, Mgr Caspar Schulte of the
Paderborn Diocese spoke with Groß, saying “Herr
Groß, remember that you have seven children. I have
no family for which I am responsible. It’s a matter of
your life.” Groß answered: “If we do not risk our
lives today, how then do we want one day to justify
ourselves before God and our people?” Nikolaus
Groß was arrested on August 12, 1944, and imprisoned
in Berlin. His wife visited him twice and saw
signs of torture on his hands and arms. His letters
from prison to his wife and children request their
prayers but also show one who was himself in constant
prayer. On January 15, 1945, he was sentenced
to death by Roland Freisler, President of the People’s
Court, with the words: “He swam in treason and now
he must drown”. Freisler’s trials of Groß, Mgr
Müller, Father Delp and other representatives of the
Kreisau Circle was an attempt to convict the Church
herself of treason. He was executed on 23 January
1945, following which he was cremated and his ashes
were scattered over a sewage farm.
One may reject the notion of tyrannocide if one
imagines John Wilkes Booth hovering over Abraham
Lincoln in Ford Theatre in Washington in 1865 and
crying “Sic semper tyrannis”. The July 20 plot was
altogether different. It was a conspiracy to displace
one of the most evil tyrants ever to take power in
world history. Many hundreds of considerate and
thoughtful people came to this conclusion and prepared
for a coup d’état to replace the entire government
of the Third Reich. When Count von
Stauffenberg placed the brief case under the table in
the Wolf’s Lair, it was to signal a provisional government
led by Carl Goerdeler as acting Chancellor
which would seek to end the war. Perhaps the traditional
criteria of the just war might apply: Were all
other options exhausted? Certainly. Was there reasonable
chance of success? Yes. Would bloodshed be at a
minimum? Had the conspirators succeeded, this
would have been the case. The question remains how
the Church will evaluate this type of reasoning, however
complex it may have been. Nikolaus Groß had
no part in the planning or the execution of the assassination
attempt, but played a role creating the network
that was to enable a new civil and military
administration to come to power in Germany following
an assassination. As to whether he was right or
wrong in the circumstances, the Church herself
passed judgement on October 7, 2001 when Pope
John Paul II beatified Nikolaus Groß. His feast is kept
on January 23. Ora pro nobis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)