UDK: 282:314.745.3-054.

73
262.12 Hudal, A.
Izvorni znanstveni članak
Received: November 12, 2012
Accepted: September 16, 2013

BISHOP HUDAL, THE “RAT-LINE”, AND THE

“CROATIAN CONNECTION”

Jure KRIŠTO*

Bishop Alois Hudal, the rector of the German-Austrian College Santa Mar-
ia dell’Anima in Rome, became widely known after a sensationalistic book
promoted him into a central figure in the network that supposedly helped
Nazi war criminals to escape the justice of the Allies. The author had a priv-
ilege to examine the Hudal papers before they became accessible to the pub-
lic to write this study of bishop’s engagement in the Church’s efforts to help
the refugees.
Key words: Bishop Alois Hudal, Vatican, Post-War Europe, Austrian émi-
grés, German émigrés

Introduction
The authors of a book that received a world-wide attention unhesitatingly
agree with the Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal that there was “a sophisticated
Vatican network” for smuggling Nazi war criminals out into Argentina and
elsewhere in order to evade retributive justice.1 They had no doubts that Bish-
op Alois Hudal, the rector of the German-Austrian College Santa Maria
dell’Anima in Rome, was central figure in that “network”. Wiesenthal mentions
some Nazi war criminals that Hudal supposedly helped: Franz Stangl, Com-
mandant at Treblinka Concentration camp, Gustav Wagner, Commandant at
Sobibor, and Alois Brunner, Adolf Eichmann’s assistant. Wiesenthal alleges
that Hudal even helped the escape of Adolf Eichmann, providing him with a

∗
Jure Krišto, Ph. D., Emeritus Scientist, Croatian Institute of History, Zagreb, Croatia
1
Mark Aarons and John Loftus, Unholly Trinity. How the Vatican’s Nazi Networks Betrayed
Western Intelligence to the Soviets (New York, 1991), p. 27.

189
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

new identity as a Croatian refugee Richard Klement.2 Bishop Hudal in Septem-

ber 1943 allegedly met Walter Rauff in northern Italy, man in charge of gassing
the Jewish prisoners.3
This is how the Vatican network was supposedly established. After Cardinal
Maglione died in August 1944, Pope Pius XII decided not to appoint the Secre-
tary of State, but relied on Monsignors Domenico Tardini and Giovanni Monti-
ni. Since the future Pope Paul VI (Montini), was Hudal’s friend and in charge of
Pontifical Assistance to Refugees, the door to the Vatican became wide opened
for him and the establishment of the escape network secured. Hudal allegedly
was able to use the channels of Pontifical Commission for Assistance, which was
in charge of issuing travel documents to refugees, and to Caritas Internationalis,
which helped paying living and traveling expenses to refugees.4
This alleged negative role of the Catholic Church after the war was super-
imposed on the assumed “silence” of Pope Pius XII during the war to construct
a sweeping condemnation of the Catholic Church in general and its leadership
in particular. It was not hard to find individuals and groups, inside the Church
and even more outside, who were willing to propagate this alleged blemish of
the Church.5 With the advance of new technologies, such as Internet, all kinds
of hysterics have found their opportunity to attract some new warriors.6
Was there really a network and was Bishop Hudal part of it? What was the
nature of Hudal’s and the Holy See’s assistance to the refugees? The task that I
set for myself in this paper is to answer those questions. I try to reach an an-
swer on the basis of documents in Hudal’s personal archives that are about to
be made public.7 However, I will try to throw some more light on that question

2
Ibid., pp. 25-28.
3
Ibid., p. 33. In a type-written list in Spanish of persons, probably of those accepted by one of
the South American countries, the name of Gustav Wagner, his wife Katharina Schwarzkopf,
and two children Baerbel (b. 26 September 1940) and Marion (b. 2 April 1943) is found. There
is also Paul Stangl, his wife, and three children, but not Franz. Two other persons on the list are:
Hans Joachim Renner and Hans Joachim Jahnz with their families. Wilhelm Eichel is added in
handwriting as fifth person, Hudal’s personal papers (HPP), Collegio Santa Maria dell’Anima
(CSMA), Rome,HPP, box. 25, No. 578 and 579.
However, on the list of six persons recommended for emigration to Argentina made 30 July,
1949 and signed by Bishop Hudal, none of those is found, HPP, box 25, No. 184.
4
Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity, pp. 34-35, who reln Ladislas Farago, Aftermath (London:
Pan, 1976), pp. 210-211.
5
Cf. Rabbi David G. Dalin, The Myth of Hitler’s Pope. How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews from the
Nazis, (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc, 2001).
6
One of the more histerical addresses, with a pretentious identification, is one by a former
Catholic priest, now a United Methodist minister, http://www.liberalslikechrist.org.
7
Part of this paper was presented at the conference held at the College Santa Maria dell’Anima
in Rome 6th and 7th October, 2006. Since the proceedings of the conference have not yet been
published, I am submitting it to interested readership.

190
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

by relying on Croatian witnesses, who were in the same business of helping

people escape the hardships of post-war Europe and the status of displaced
persons (DP’s) or were trying to escape. I have in mind Croatian priests Mons.
Juraj Magjerec,8 prof. Krunoslav Draganović,9 and others. Fortunately, some
valuable research of the Fraternity St. Jerome’s archives has been done, which
may help us with portraying Hudal’s work.10
I must caution that this paper is a first impression after looking at some
selected documents, and not a comprehensive study of the problem. More by
accident than intention, it is a response to some of the claims by authors of
greater or lesser importance, particularly the implication that there was some-
thing sinister in the work for refugees by Bishop Hudal’s and other priests from
countries occupied by the Communists.
I should also indicate that this research does not go into Hudal’s role as a
priest, scholar, Church official, or the like,11 but is limited to his role in helping
Austrian and German refugees after the World War II, i. e. from 1945 to 1950.

Bishop Hudal and Refugees in Post-War Europe

Hudal’s work with refugees should be looked upon primarily as trying to

fulfill the Church’s mandate to assist people in need. However, his political
convictions play also an important part, but the fact that he once was a mem-
ber of the National Socialist Party is not decisive. He felt German more than an
Austrian,12 but did not hesitate to propose plans for the future of Austria.13
Mostly, however, he adhered to the idea of a middle European state organiza-

8
Damir Bobovec, “Mons. dr. Juraj Mađerec (1885-1957) Prilog za životopis”, Papinski hrvatski
zavod sv. Jeronima (1901-2001). Zbornik u prigodi stoljetnice (Jure Bogdan ed.), Collectanea
Croatico-Hieronymiana de Urbe 5, (Rome – Zagreb: Papinski hrvatski zavod svetog Jeronima
– Glas koncila, 2001), pp. 445-486.
9
Milan Simčić, “Prof. Krunoslav Stjepan Draganović (1903-1983)”, Papinski hrvatski zavod sv.
Jeronima, 843-854; Andrija Lukinović, “Bratovština Sv. Jeronima za pomoć hrvatskim izbjegli-
cama” (The Fraternity of St. Jerome’s for the Assistance of Croat Refugees), Papinski hrvatski
zavod sv. Jeronima, pp. 771-839.
10
Lukinović, “Bratovština Sv. Jeronima”.
11
For an overview article on some of those Hudal’s preoccupations see Johan Ickx, “The Vati-
can and Worl War II: The Case of Bishop Hudal””, manuscript of 25 pages. I thank Johan for
letting me read it.
12
HPP, box 39, No. 180, “An meine lieben Landsleute in Argentinien!, Rom, Silvester 1948”;
No. 189, 4 February 1949.
13
HPP, box 39, No. 193, a confidential memorandum titled “L’Avenir de L’Autriche, Rome 1944”,
which consists of two proposals, one by Bishop Hudal titled “Note sur la configuration d’une
nouvelle Autriche au point de vue de la politique étrangère” and the other by B. H. Schilling ti-
tled “The Future of Austria”.

191
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

tion, which was best incarnated in Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.14 After the

defeat of the German Army, the political trials that ensued, and the hardships
and tribulations that both the Germans and Austrians suffered, Hudal refused
to accept the guilty verdict on German people and the treatment people re-
ceived from the victors. On the contrary, much of the guilt burden he laid
upon politicians and statesmen who at the peace negotiations at Versailles and
elsewhere after World war I set the preconditions for the World War II catas-
trophe.15 Hudal did not hide his disappointment, even contempt for the justice
that the Allies applied to the Germans and “their collaborators”:
The Allies’ war against Germany was not a crusade, but the rivalry of eco-
nomic complexes for whose victory they had been fighting. This so-called
business ... used catchwords like democracy, race, religious liberty and
Christianity as a bait for the masses. All these experiences were the reason
why I felt duty bound after 1945 to devote my whole charitable work main-
ly to former National Socialists and Fascists, especially to so called ‘war
criminals’.16
Hudal’s impressions were shared by many refugees, especially those from
“defeated countries”.17 It was certainly shared by Ivo Lendić, a Croatian poet
and journalist, who feared to be picked up from his hospital bed in Rome and
extradited as a “Fascist” to Yugoslav Communists as a gift of thankful Allies.
Indeed, Communists sought all opponents to their ideology as “war criminals”
and the Allies served those wishes.18 It should be stressed that refugees came
from countries and areas occupied by Communists. Lendić experienced how
the Allies surrounded the Croatian College of Saint Jerome in Rome with 20
jeeps, took all refugees off from their modest supper, and held a dozen of jour-
nalists.19 It is ironic that the man in charge of the operation was Major Stephen
Clissold, Press-Attaché at the British Consulate in Zagreb and Communist
sympathizer, now a member of the British Special Screening Mission, which

14
Ibid. This sentiment is shared by some people even today, and does not make part of any sup-
posedly sinister design by name of Intermarium or anything like that, Aarons – Loftus, Unholy
Trinity, 50-69.
15
“An meine lieben Landsleute in Argentinien!”, pp. 2-3.
16
A. Hudal, Römische Tagebücher: Lebenberichte eines alten Bischops (Graz-Stuttgart: Leopold
Stocker, 1976), p. 21.
17
HPP, box 45, “Promemoria!” a seventeen-pages closely typed argument by General Dr. Otto
Wagen about the unfoundedness of accusations of German soldiers for war crimes, 29 Decem-
ber 1949.
18
“Dr. Krunoslav Draganović o svojem radu u Italiji od rujna 1943. do ožujka 1946. Tri pisma
i dva izvještaja, upućena dru Lovri Sušiću, od 18. listopada 1945. do 26. ožujka 1946.”, Hrvatska
Revija (München – Barcelona), December (1984): 589-611, 604.
19
Ivo Lendić, Božji kotači. Otvoreno pismo msgru. Augustinu Juretiću, J. Matanić ed., (Split:
Laus, 2001), pp. 16-17.

192
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

was in charge of tracking down fugitives Nazis.20 To make things worse, the
President of the Commission for War Crimes was Colonel Fitzroy MacLean, a
liaison officer with Tito’s partisans and his admirer.
Lendić also knew that the Yugoslav communist agents in January 1946 in
Trieste assassinated Ivo Protulipac, a prominent leader of the Catholic Action
in Croatia. The fear and frustration were augmented by the fact that the Allies
were not after the professed Fascists in Italy (journalists Virginio Gayda, Gio-
vani Ansaldo, and Ezio Maria Gray) and elsewhere (writer Erwin Kolben-
hever in the Russian zone), but after journalists and other intellectuals from
small nations of Eastern Europe.21
Needless to say, the fear among Croatian refugees in Italy, especially those
several hundred in Rome, augmented and the misery worsened. The office of
the Fraternity of St. Jerome’s, which cared for the Croatian refugees in Rome,
temporarily closed, the refugee kitchen closed, and refugees did not dare to
come close.22
The atmosphere of hunting for war criminals that sometimes bordered
with witch-hunting is corroborated with the United States military circles in
Austria and elsewhere. In a report from the headquarters of the military forces
in Austria Henry Mosauer shows that the idea of justice turned from the pun-
ishing of individual crimes to condemning organizations and their members:
Now, one year after the victory of the Allied powers over the Axis brought an
end to the period of crimes and Mass-murder, the process of bringing the
responsible criminals to Justice is well under way. In Nuernberg the Top
Nazis are being tried and out of their trial came the conclusion, that one can-
not hold only them responsible, but that whole organizations are to be re-
garded as criminal. Thusly, the SS, the Totenkopfverbaende and others are
being indicted and its members will have to stand individual trial to deter-
mine their individual guilt. They will not be permitted to even deny the fact,
that the organization of which they were members was criminal in itself, and
they will be punished for their membership alone. Even if no individual
crime can be proven.23
Hudal was undoubtedly aware of such an unequal treatment even among
“defeated enemies”. He undoubtedly experienced that all of his compatriots
were declared Nazis and war criminals just as members of other East European

20
Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity, 108-109. He also married a Serb woman.
21
Lendić, Božji kotači, pp. 17-19; also Spiridion (Dušan Žanko), “Nevin u ‘Regina Elena’” (The
Innocent in ‘Regina Elena’), Novi Život (Zagreb, 1967).
22
Lendić, Božji kotači, 19; Lukinović, “Bratovština Sv. Jeronima”, pp. 771-841.
23
National Archives, Washington, Ustasha Project, RG 319, box 62, Henry Mosauer, Head-
quarters of the United States Forces in Austria, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G -2 to
Chief, Section II, CIB, 25 June 1946.

193
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

nations were declared Fascists and war criminals. The Yugoslav Communists
used exactly those charges to request extradition of opponents of communist
ideology.24
The fate of refugees in general was rather harsh. The Allies, rather their
Intelligence units, divided the refugees into those that did not collaborate with
the Fascist regimes - Whites, those that served those regimes as soldiers, lower
government and military officials that did not commit war crimes - Grays, and
those that made the higher government and military echelons of Fascist re-
gimes - Blacks.25 The situation was made even worse by the International Refu-
gee Organization (IRO) that was interested only in Displaced Persons (DP),
i.e. those that were refugees for racial, religious or political reasons.26 Addition-
ally, the British and American governments were not inclined to accept large
numbers of immigrants, not even those that they publicly supported, such as
Jews.27 Expectedly, the Germans and Austrians were IRO’s least concern, a fact
that was not overlooked by Bishop Hudal.
For refugees that were not IRO’s concern, i. e. that belonged to other two
categories of refugees, the procedure was complicated and criteria to fulfill dif-
ficult to meet. For Austrians (and Croats) there was no emigration in larger
contingents; only individual cases were taken into consideration. A person
who wanted to emigrate had to have a valid passport or a Red Cross pass. The
application had to be submitted to the consulates of one of the South American
states in Vienna. If there was no consulate in Vienna, the petitioner had to go
to Italy, for which he had to have Permesso (a person without such permit is
likely to be interned in one of the refugee camps).28 People could petition the
Catholic Caritas for help with securing documents, but they were encouraged
not to opt for emigration if not absolutely necessary.
In any event, when that atmosphere and Hudal’s judgment of contempo-
rary politics are taken into account, it is not surprising that the “old bishop”
concluded:
I thank God that He [allowed me] to visit and comfort many victims in
their prisons and concentration camps and [to help] them escape with
false identity papers.29

24
Perhaps, it is not surprising that Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity, 47, with no hesitation al-
leges that “the Vatican selected Fascist priests from Central and Eastern Europe” to supposedly
continue Hudal’s work of smuggling “war criminals” out of Europe, after he was replaced as Rec-
tor of the Anima and prevented from working with the refugees.
25
Lukinović, “Bratovština Sv. Jeronima”, p. 797.
26
HPP, box 23, No. 3, Merkblatt für Auswanderer (Instructions for Refugees), March 1948.
27
John Burns, Life is a Twisted Path (Rome: Santa Maria dell’Anima, 2002), pp. 119-120.
28
Merkblatt für Auswanderer. See the case of certain Georg Pavetits and his four children, HPP,
box 23, No. 34 and 35.
29
Ibid.

194
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

Another important element should be taken into account. As soon as the

war was over, the Allies parted their ways. The Soviets imposed the communist
terror on “their” part of Europe, and the British and Americans considered the
protection of their sphere of influence from Communist penetration as the
most urgent task. Former Nazis, war criminals or not, notorious for anti-com-
munist stance, could be of some help in that effort, and the British and Ameri-
cans began recruiting them for their intelligence and other purposes.30 Some
known war criminals have thus been spirited away by the British and Ameri-
cans. The Church institutions, which they encouraged to help those they were
interested in, served them for covering up their own intentions and interests.

Bishop Hudal and Assistance to the Refugees

The journalists craved for sensation constructed a story that Bishop Hudal
had used the Holy See’s offices or was enabled by those offices to get in touch
with world wide institutions engaged in assisting refugees for the purpose of
enabling war criminals to escape and thus avoid trial.31 The essential element
of that story is that Bishop Hudal supposedly had special connections to the
Vatican, even to the Pope Pius XII. The reader is left with impression that
Mons. Hudal did nothing but devised the escape of war criminals.32
Sensationalism often feeds on ignorance. Beyond sensationalism, the work
of Hudal should be looked upon as a piece in a general effort of the Church to
assist refugees in their various needs. That is why it should not be surprising
that Hudal helped the Allied refugees during the war just as he was assisting
soldiers and ordinary people from Germany and Austria, and other former
“Nazi states.”33 When the situation in refugees’ camps and the misery of those
people that were left without anything is taken into account, some form of as-
sistance was to be expected of the Church and Church organizations.
The Holy See tried to help refugees in various ways. It encouraged religious
orders to open up monasteries and convents for refugees to alleviate the prob-
lem of living expenses, nonetheless giving clear instruction that the Holy See
cannot cover the travel costs and other financial assistance.34 The bulk of work
of assistance for refugees was done through the Pontificia Commissione As-

30
“Dr. Krunoslav Draganović o svojem radu u Italiji”, pp. 604-605.
31
Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity.
32
Sensationalism is not a characteristic of modern journalism. Italian journalists tried to at-
tract readers by sensationalizing Hudal’s assistance to some men that journalists judged suspi-
cious or not meriting the assistance, see HPP, box 37, No. 134, a copy of Hudal’s letter dated 4
April 1946 to the “Italia-sera” requesting the corrections; Bishop Hudal noted in handwriting
that it was not published.
33
Ickx, “The Vatican and Worl War II”, pp. 18-19.
34
Merkblatt für Auswanderer.

195
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

sistenza (PCA), established by Pius XII 22 January 1945,35 which had its
branches in each diocese. In a written summation of a meeting of that Com-
mission it is clear that the Papal commission planned organizing national
committees, which will be made up of persons of good moral qualities and
dedicated to the work of charity and which will care for refugees of a specific
national group, including their needs related to the process of emigration.36
Indeed, the Pontifical national committees were soon organized.37
The Pontificia Commissione Assistenza was not a clandestine organization
in charge of securing false identity documents for refugees and of helping them
to escape from Europe, but worried about finding appropriate priests for pas-
toral care in military and refugee camps38 or of advising the National Commit-
tees where in Rome their clients can find inexpensive kitchens, “mense”, and
restaurants.39 Undoubtedly, some activities of the Papal commission are con-
nected to the work of IRO, Red Cross, particularly Croce Rossa Italiana, and
other international civil organizations. Thus, in October 1946, the Commis-
sion urgently requested lists of people who suffered political persecution, or
were interned in concentration camps, submitted to torture, and sustained
similar mistreatment by the Germans.40 The Commission also requested of
national committees to sent lists of children in camps younger than seven and
from seven to fourteen years old.41 The Red Cross took it upon itself to provide
refugees with necessary documents for the stay in Italy and for traveling abroad.
What may be of even more interest is that the Red Cross asked Hudal and
other representatives of National Committees to assist its efforts to enable émi-
grés to find a host country.42
As to those National Committees, they were composed of priests and lay
persons from various national groups in Rome and Italy, who were willing to

35
Lukinović, “Bratovština Sv. Jeronima”, p. 800.
36
HPP, box 26, No. 587, Letter of Mons. Ferdinando Baldelli, the president of the PCA, to
Bishop Hudal, No. 641. The letter is not dated, but the meeting must have been held shortly after
the end of the war.
37
A list of representatives of National Committees is to be found in HPP, box 25, No. 203. The
head of the Croatian Committees was Giorgio (Juraj) Magjerec, the Rector of the Croatian Col-
lege of St. Jerome’s.
38
HPP, box 36, No. 42, letter from the PCA diocesi di Milan to Bishop Hudal, 30 July 1945. A
list of pastors of various camps in Italy is to be found in HPP, box 25, No. 208.
39
HPP, box 23, No. 128.
40
HPP, box 26, without No., letter dated October 3, 1946, No. 1006.
41
HPP, box 26, No. 560, letter No. 1952, November 5 1946. For Christmas 1946, Hudal sent a
list of children with handwritten comment that in one group there were 60% Jewish chidren and
in another 90 %, HPP, box 26, No. 599. In Spring of 1948 the review “Caritas” published statistics
of various activities of the PCA (see HPP, box 27, No.458, 3 May 1948).
42
HPP, box 26, No. 368, Rossetti, the Director of the Croce Rossa Italiana, to Hudal, No. 6620-
C/6./1232, 12 June 1947.

196
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

work in the care for refugees. They usually lived in or around the national col-
leges in Rome, such as St. Jerome’s, which was then as it is today the home for
several Croatian priests, professors and students at various Roman colleges,
institutes, and universities.43 Bishop Hudal, the Rector of the Austrian College,
was the head of the Pontifical Committee of Assistance to Austrians.44
On the other end of the world, in Argentina and other South American
countries,45 there were also Catholic committees of assistance, such as Argen-
tinean Catholic Committee of Assistance for Immigration in Buenos Aires,
which were also made of priests that represented different national groups:
Italians, Croats, Slovaks, Polish, Hungarians, Lithuanians, and Ukrainians.46
Being that it was a Church effort, a special care was taken that those refugees
have the opportunity to receive religious assistance in their mother tongue.
Hudal, of course, requested the names of German speaking priests in Buenos
Aires, and the Archdiocesan office obliged with the information.47 Among its

43
The head of the National Committeee for Croats was Mons. Giorgio (Juraj) Magjerec, the
Rector of College of St. Jerome. The representative for the Slovenes was Father Antonio Preseren
and of Serbs Rev. Zvonimir Damjanov. For an official list of National Committees see Corriere di
Farfa, vol. 1, No. 6, 1 August 1948, HPP, box 26, No. 693.
44
HPP, box 25, No. 203. Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity, pp. 43 and 44, single out certain Fa-
ther Josef Gallov as representative of the Committee for the Hungarians and one of the chief
individuals for securing illegal documents. However, such person does not appear on the list;
Father Francesco Vajda is listed as the representative for the Hungarians. Aarons – Loftus, Un-
holy Trinity, pp. 51-69, identify Ferenc Vajta as the leading man in the “Itermarium” and a source
for the USA intelligence.
A list of people that attended the 6 August, 1947 meeting at the PCA is as follows: besides Mons.
John O’Grady and Mons. Andrew P. Landi of WRS, the following representatives of National
Committees were present: Mons Carlo Heineman was replacing Mons Hudal (Austria), Revs.
Efrem Blandeau (France), Boleslaw Szkiadz (Polish), Paolo Becs (Latvia), Carlo Murgas (Slova-
kia), Augusto Zan (Austria and Germany), Antonio Livajušić (Serbia), Krunoslav Draganović
(Croatia), Miha Krek (Slovenia), Giovanni Dolsina (Slovenia), Giovanni Praszko (Ukraine),
Mattia Šaruga (PCA), Mr. Ilie Olteanu (Rumania), and Mr. Antin Iwanchuk (Ukraine), HPP,
box 26, No. 369, 6 August, 1947.
45
In June, 1948, Hudal made a handwritten and shorthand list of countries, addresses, people
of resposibility etc., HPP, box 23, No. 83, 2 June, 1948.
46
HPP, box 23, No. 118, Foglio informazioni generali del Comitato Cattolico Argentino di As-
sistenza per l’emigrazione, April, 1947. Cf. a letter of Compagnia Agricola Industriale to Hudal
in which it responds to his request to send 120 Austrians as farmers to Caracas, HPP, box 23, No.
69, letter dated 4 April 1948. On 13 August 1949 the IRO sent a letter to all National Committees
with a list of employment positions in Columbia, Pakistan, Peru, and Uruguay, HPP, box 24.
The following persons constituted the Comitato Cattolico Argentino di Assistenza per
l’Emigrazione di Buenos Aires: Rev. Ontonio D. Zitta, President; Mons. Antonio Das Neves,
Vice-president; Rev. Juan B. Pencode, Second Vice-president; Mr. Roberto Marcenaro Boutell,
General Secretary; Mr. Marino Felix, dr. Ernesto Padilia Rev. Luis Pasa (Iralians) Blas Stefano
(Croats), Juan Hladnik (Slovaks), Alessandro Michalik (Polish), Venanzio Virag (Hungarians),
Casimiro Vengrans (Lythvanians) , and Vladimiro Kovalik (Ukanians).
47
HPP, box 23, No. 129.

197
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

activities the Argentinean Catholic Committee listed the treatment of special

cases, especially those in extraordinary conditions, such as collaborationists,48
intellectuals, and foreigners who do not have a representative chaplain.49 The
Secretary General of the Argentinean Committee was official representative
with War Relief Services and with the International Organization for Refugees.
By April 1948, the Committee was able to obtain 867 permits to enter the
country from the lists and 25 individual cases; 326 cases from lists and 27
individual cases were practically resolved. The lists of people prepared by
individual communities are not included.50
Of course, all those people that petitioned emigration to South America
needed to be transported to their new destination. They depended on existing
ship lines from main Italian ports. Understandably, it was an immense task in
logistics. At the receiving end, it was not only a question for a representative of
the Committee of being present at the arrival of the boat, but the real problem
was associated with preparations for people to arrive and to depart to their
respective destinations. A constant cable and telegraphic messages had to go
back and forth with the headquarters of War Relief Services and the IRO in
New York and Geneva and with their offices in Rome and in Rio de Janeiro.51
Even greater task awaited those responsible for receiving émigrés in departing
ports, housing them, feeding, and getting permission to embark them on over-
loaded ships. Expectedly, finding people of influence who could help securing
the most spaces for “their” contingent of people assured the mediators the sta-
tus of importance. It is no surprise that Hudal just like Croatian priests Kruno-
slav Draganović, Karlo Petranović,52 Dominik Mandić, and others became
known among émigré circles as men of good connections capable of securing
a ticket on a ship to Argentina or other South American destinations.53 Such
power has been highly esteemed in the Balkans ever since the advent of Otto-
mans. It is even less surprising that Bishops of those port cities assumed an
important role in mediating between ship owners, National committee’s repre-
sentatives, and refugees.54

48
Later in the document they are written with quotation marks; A special commission was be-
ing organized to deal with such cases.
49
HPP, box 23, No. 118, Foglio informazioni generali, pp. 1-2.
50
Ibid. p. 2.
51
Ibid.
52
It is not surprising that Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity, pp. 104-108, make a villain of
Petranović and his efforts to help some of the Croatian émigrés.
53
One has to keep in mind, however, that those people were asked to intervene in quite ordi-
nary matters, such as storage and transportation of personal belongings, see Franz Glaser to
Hudal of 12 July, 1949, HPP, box 24, No. 807.
54
Aarons – Loftus, Unholy Trinity, 39-40; 108-109, imply that Archbishop of Genoa Giuseppe
Siri played an important role in smuggling of war criminals out of Italy.

198
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

The Pontificia Commissione Assistenza assisted financially national commit-

tees. Thus, Bishop Hudal, the president of the Committee of Assistance for Aus-
trian Refugees, was informed in 1946 that his committee was allocated a month-
ly sum of L. 20.000.55 Expectedly, Mons Hudal tried to get extra financial support
from other sources.56 But it was not rare that he was faced with refusal.57
Sometimes, the PCA gave financial support for certain individuals.58 At
other times other organizations, such as the War Relief Services of the Ameri-
can National Catholic Welfare Conference, headed by Mons. Andrew P. Landi,
sent money for a person.59
Sometimes the Secretariat of State asked the services of Mons. Hudal either
to give money to individuals that asked help of the Holy See, or to inform them
about necessary procedures for emigration, or to take care of similar needs.60
Once this basic structure was established, many other institutions and or-
ganizations came in and cooperated in the same purpose of assisting the refu-
gees. The requests for help of various natures circulated from the Pontifical
national committees to other institutions and individuals and vice versa. It is
no surprise that Italian Red Cross asked Hudal to assist two Austrians to be
liberated from the refugee camp in Lipari (Messina) and to help them with the
emigration to South America61 or that Hudal asked the Secretariat of State an
intervention for German prisoner of war Giorgio Szczepanski.62 Sometimes
interventions made more complicated roundabout ways, such as when Cardi-
nal of Vienna Mons. Jakob Weinbacher asked Mons. Montini to intervene for
Mrs. Mathilde Tremmel in the Reggio Emilia camp, Mons. Montini sent the
request to Ferdinando Baldelli, president of the Pontificia Commissione As-
sistenza, and he sent it to Mons. Hudal.63 The scope of Hudal’s interventions is

55
HPP, box 26, No. not visible, letter No. 1139 of October 8 1946. Bishop Hudal sent on a regu-
lar basis a list of persons his Committee helped and amounts they received, HPP, box 26, No.
595, 524, and others.
56
See for example, the reply of Schweizerischer Caritasverband, HPP, box 23, No.85, 15 April
1948.
57
HPP, box 26, No. 478, PCA of the Trent and Brixen diocese to Hudal, No. SM/3, May 7 1947.
58
That was the case with the help of L29.180 for Victor Mayer, HPP, box 27, No. 221, 23 April
1948. In a handwritten ledger V. Mayer and his wife are listed as receiving for the month of May
1948 L 672 for food, HPP, box 27, cover sheet.
59
Such was the case with Mrs. Emma Maria Drucker, HPP, box 27, No. 505, Landi to Hudal, 30
April 1948, and Willibald Lichmann, HPP, box 26, No. 696, Landi to Hudal, 6 October 1948.
60
HPP, box 26, No. 345, 256/b, 451.
61
HPP, box 23, No. 90.
62
HPP, box 26, No. 562, Segreteria di Stato to Hudal, No. 141571/S, October 8 1946..
63
HPP, box 26, No. 361, Baldelli to Hudal, No. 5896, August 20, 1947. See also Hudal’s interven-
tion for prisoners Giorgio Pietro Dohm, Mrs. Maria Graf, and Alfredo Strobel, HPP, box 27, 6
May 1948.

199
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

reflected in a petition from the president of the PCA Rev. Baldelli to assist Mrs.
Laura Bettiol and her mother in finding work.64
It is worth noting, especially in light of presumption that Hudal had a spe-
cial relation with the Secretariat of State, that sometimes the Holy See declined
to assist people Hudal recommended.65
A substantial occupation of Hudal, just as other representatives of national
committees of assistance, was the distribution of food and other goods that
arrived from various international bodies, primarily from the Catholic Relief
Services of the United States.66 Given the presence of many refugees and a
number of institutions trying to help them, it was inevitable that some people
tried to get assistance from several or all of the institutions.67 The work of the
PCA and National Committees was praised by independent bodies. The Inter-
national Association of Foreign Refugees in Italy, which tried to coordinate the
work of various organizations dedicated to the assistance of refugee, acknowl-
edged the work of the Church sponsored organizations as excellent.68
To illustrate the scope of Hudal’s responsibilities I should mention that he
served as commissary of the Austrian episcopate for the pastoral work among
emigrants. In that capacity, in 1947 he visited camps Fraschette and Farfa-Sa-
bina. In a letter to the Minister of the Interior, Hudal made several suggestions
how people in camps, especially the sick and children could be helped and
their situation bettered.69
Some times Bishop Hudal was sought for unusual interventions. Sisters of
Divine Providence had problems with Miss Paula Zallinger, who stayed with
them during the war, but now did not want to leave. Moreover, she is in the busi-
ness of denunciations to the police. Sisters asked Hudal for help in the matter.70

64
HPP, box 26, No. 288, letter No. 6237, 9 September 1947.
65
Such was the case of Mrs Muchard, HPP, box 27, No. 539, letter No. 180062, 21 June 1948.
66
HPP, box 27, No. 369, 140, 144, and others.
67
See letter of International Rescue and Relief Committee to Hudal of 17 July 1948 regarding
Mr. Victor Mayer and his wife, HPP, box 27, No. 785.
68
HPP, box 27, No. invisible, letter to Hudal of 24 April 1948. The Association was preoccupied
with assigning people for temporary work, such as the circus Cine-Citta, HPP, box 27, No. 510,
29 April 1948.
69
HPP, box 26, No. 205, letter dated 31 August 1947. Cf. a disagreement of Rev. Vettraino with
Mons. Hudal about the situation in camps in France, HPP, box 27, No. 773, 21 June 1948; also
the letter of Rev. Cognac, military chaplain of the 9th region, to the Archbishop of Marseille
Mons. Delay, of 4 July 1948 (HPP, box 27) and the letter of the Archbishop to Hudal of 12 July
1948 (HPP, box 27). Aarons and Loftus, Unholy Trinity, 36, suspect that Hudal was not the
“Spiritual Director of the German People resident in Italy” without sinister intentions and plans
on the part of the Vatican.
70
HPP, box 27, No. 207, letter without date, but Hudal indicated that it was received on 28
January 1948.

200
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

Among important responsibilities Hudal assumed was making interven-

tions for prisoners accused of war crimes and faced with the likely prospect of
receiving the death sentence.71 He rarely made initiative in that sense, but most
often he responded to the supplication of others. Such was the case of Harman
Lautenbacher72 who was imprisoned in Rome and whose brother asked Mons.
Hudal to find out what he was accused of and to suggest remedies.73 Hudal
probably helped financing the defense of some of the German military men
imprisoned in Italy, or at least he helped to channel money for their defense.74
And he was not alone in that. German Caritas, especially its office of assistance
to prisoners of war, used Hudal’s services to channel money for the defense of
German prisoners of war in Italy or at least informed him of sums sent to
various lawyers.75

Bishop Hudal and People from the Territory of Former Yugoslavia

My assumption before venturing into exploration of Hudal’s personal ar-

chives was that he closely collaborated with the Committee of Assistance for
Croatian Refugees, a similar enterprise that Hudal conducted. That assumption
was not confirmed by the documents Hudal left. Only sporadic notes and letters
indicate that people from Croatian organization collaborated with Hudal’s.76
Obviously, those organizations were part of papal efforts to assist refugees and
they collaborated in the sense of participating in meetings organized by the PCA
and in referring persons to each other. Perhaps it should be noted that a Croatian
priest Mato Šaruga worked for Pontificia Commissione Assistenza and that there
is at least one letter signed by him sent to Bishop Hudal.77
However, traces of a number of people from the territory of former Yugo-
slavia are left in Hudal’s personal papers. First of all, persons of German na-
tionality who were born in parts of former Yugoslavia (mostly Vojvodina and
Slavonia), so called the Volksdeutscher, sought Hudal’s assistance. Thus, cer-

71
See the letter from the Headquarters of United States Forces in Austria to Hudal regarding
Willi Schweitzer, HPP, box 27, No. HPP, box 40, No. 606, 14 July 1948.
72
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartman_Lauterbacher.
73
HPP, box 25, No. 273, Hans Lautenbacher to Hudal, 14 April 1950.
74
HPP, box 45, No. 102, The information of dr. Giavanni di Planitz concerning the defense
expences for several German military men, 20 January 1950.
75
HPP, box 45, No. 239, letter dated 16 January 1950, and No. 530, letter dated 7 March 1950.
76
On a letter that A. P. Landi informed Hudal about allocation of money for the travel expences
to Argentina for Willibald Lichmann, Hudal note in handwriting the name of prof. Krunoslav
Draganović with date 9/X 48, probably meaning that on that date he informed Croatian priest, the
secretary of the St. Jerome’s Fraternity, about it, HPP, box 26, No. 696, 6 October 1948.
77
HPP, box 24, No. 149, letter No. 10715, 3 June 1949. It concerned the recommendation of the
case of Rudolf Pettarin.

201
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

tain Jakob Waldeck from Kikinda signaled his and his son’s wish to immigrate
to Argentina.78 Rev. Franz Zollner referred Karl Jahn from Judenburg, born in
Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, his wife Anna Friedrich, born in Sarajevo, and
daughter Rosalinde Gertrude, born in Poland, also desiring to immigrate to
Argentina. Franc Stimac, born in Viškovci, near Djakovo in Slavonia, is also
listed as a Volksdeutscher, even though his last name seems to be Croatian.
That was probably because he married into his wife Eva Halvax’s family. In any
case, he had a large family: sons Franz, Josef, Jakob, and Mathial and daughter
Kathi.79 Karl Kutschera, born in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Hercegovina, listed him-
self, his spouse Elizabeth Zier, daughter Lydia, and son Viktor as Volks-
deutschers willing to immigrate to Argentina.80 Eduard Laas was born in
Slavonska Požega, whereas his spouse Karolina Otto and their son Leopold
and daughter Kornelia were born in Sarajevo; they also wanted to immigrate
to Argentina. Finally, Johann Wimmer was born in Sarajevo, whereas his wife
Pamela Topić was from Cernik, Slavonia. They had sons Johann and Friedrich,
and daughter Anna-Slavka.81
In March, 1949 Mons. Landi from the War Relief Services sent an urgent
letter to all representatives of National Committees with a list of people who
desire to emigrate to the United States of America. Civil authorities asked the
Church organization to provide “assurances” for those people, and Mons. Lan-
di asked the national representatives to supply information for “their” people.82
On those several sheets there was a number of Croats, Slovenes, and “Yugo-
slavs”, the latter comprising mostly Serbs.
Five people from Rijeka (Fiume), mostly Croats if one judges by their last
names, asked Bishop Hudal for intervention.83
It appears that Bishop Hudal help a Croatian man Anton Bibica to have an
audience with the Pope.84
The case of a Jewish man Walter Pick stands out.85 Due to the persecution
of Jews in Vienna in 1938, he followed many other Jews to Zagreb, Croatian
capital. He was helped there by the Archbishop of Zagreb Alojzije Stepinac
who instituted the Action of the Help to Immigrants (Djelo pomoći za imi-

78
HPP, box 23, No. 30 and 31.
79
HPP, box 23, No. 37-43.
80
HPP, box 23, No. 53-55.
81
HPP, box 23, No. 61-65.
82
HPP, box 24, No. invisible, letter dated 7 Mach 1949.
83
HPP, box 25, No. 422, letter dated 6 September 1949. Those persons are: Narciso Ciciovich,
Walter Virtich, Sergio Smilovich, Rome Copina, and Aldo Colussi.
84
HPP, box 38, No. 158, letter of 8 December 1947.
85
HPP, box 27, No. 115-116, personal letter to Hudal, 2 April 1948.

202
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

grante) and was himself working for that organization.86 This is significant in
light of the fact that the Yugoslav Communists in a show trial of the Arch-
bishop Stepinac in 1946 accused him, among other things, of not helping per-
secuted Jews. Some Jewish authors in Croatia have recently repeated the ac-
cusation.87 By mid 1939, Pick went to Switzerland, where he also worked in
Catholic charitable organizations. However, since he could not secure the work
permit, he returned to Zagreb 31 January 1940, where he again worked for the
Action for Help to Immigrants until the German troops marched in Zagreb on
10 April, 1941. He ended in a concentration camp, but was released, and on 14
July, 1941 went to Ljubljana (Slovenia). Since the Slovene capital was under
Italian domination, the Italians transferred him on 10 November 1941 to the
Ferramonti concentration camp. After further enumeration of dates and places
of his tortuous life, Pick asks Mons. Hudal for helping him to become Italian
citizen. We do not know how Hudal helped him in the past, but Pick thanks
the Bishop for his interest in him and for readiness to help him.
Only in one letter have I found the name of Rev. Draganović mentioned.
Actually, the letter was addressed to Draganović himself, and he obviously for-
warded it to Mons. Hudal.88 The name of Karlo Petranović is also mentioned
once in connection to money sent for the care of refugees in Genoa.

The End of Charitable Work in Disappointment

Hudal’s troubles connected to war criminals did not start until 1950. Part of
the problem was his admission that he had helped all who came to the door of his
college. To the curious journalists he used to say that he was a priest, not a police-
man.89 While some journalists could accept such reasoning, others reproached
him to have been behind the Church’s excommunication of Communists.90
At the beginning of February 1950, Bishop Hudal was informed that due
to shortage of financial means the Austrian Committee will no longer receive
any money from the PCA.91

86
As persons of reference, in addition to Archbishop Stepinac, Mr. Pick gives dr. Franjo Šeper,
his secretary (and the future head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith), Mons. Belu-
han, the president of the Action), and Mrs. Teresa Škringer, the secretary. Ivo Goldstein, Ho-
lokaust u Zagrebu (Holocaust in Zagreb), (Zagreb: Novi Liber – Židovska općina Zagreb, 2001)
does not mention this man among Jews.
87
Ivo Goldstein, Holokaust u Zagrebu (Holocaust in Zagreb).
88
Friedolin Guti to Draganović, handwritten letter of 6 June, 1949, HPP, box 24, No. 213.
89
Dino de Rugeriis, “Mons. Hudal conferma la morte di O.[tto] Waechter”, (NEWSPAPER),
XLIX, 22 February 1950 (DATE).
90
Antonio Rielli, “Il criminale Otto Skorzeny atteso all’Instituto di Santa Maria dell’Anima”,
(NEED DATES).
91
HPP, box 25, No. 771, letter No. 5004, 3 February 1950.

203
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

In the handwritten ledger of people he helped and the amount they received
for February 1950 – which he had done for all those years of existence of Aus-
trian Committee - Hudal added a short handwritten note “Damit schliest meine
charitative Arbeit ab überreich an Undank und Misserfolge. Deo gratias. 10/II
50”92 Hudal continued to intervene for people who were in trouble, but only in
the capacity of the Rector of the College dell’Anima.93 Moreover, Mons. Andrew
Landi of War Relief Services continued informing Hudal of possibilities for Aus-
trians to emigrate and to ask for assistance in the matter.94

Conclusion

After looking at the evidence left in Bishop Hudal’s personal archives and
after comparing it with the record of the Croatian Fraternity of St. Jerome’s,
which was preoccupied with similar tasks, one is left with the impression that
the work done by Hudal in favor of Austrian and German émigrés after the war
was more or less part of the ordinary effort of the Church in assisting people in
need.95 That work is usually centered on the person in need, regardless of his or
her faith, national origin, or political convictions. That is why one should not
be surprised to discover that Mons. Hudal, in connection with other Church
officials of various status and position, assisted the Allied soldiers who were in
danger of being caught by the Nazi services. The same criteria are applied to
the members of the National Socialist Party and the Wehrmacht soldiers. That
is also why those very Allied military men that Hudal assisted during the war
ordered the surveillance of Hudal and his colleague once their forces took con-
trol of Rome, expecting that the Bishop will not change his convictions that he
has to help people in life threatening situations, as was theirs during the war.96
It is quite possible that in the process some of those accused of war crimes
were helped in various forms. That would be possible without taking into con-
sideration political views and convictions of a Catholic Bishop. We should
trust Hudal’s reasoning that in those matters he behaved as a priest and not as
a policeman. However, Hudal’s political views make essential part of his atti-
tude towards Austrian and German refugees after the war. He was firmly con-

92
“Thus ends my work of charity from extensiveness to unthankfulness and failure. Deo gratias.
10/II 59”, HPP, box 25, No. 160.
93
He forwarded Mons. Joseph Enzmann’s testimony to the French Ministry of Justice in favor
of Helmuth Kienast who was sentenced to death, Ministère de la Justice to Hudal, 25 April 1951,
HPP, box 45, No. 389, See also HPP, box 45, No. 343.
94
Letter of 16 May 1951, HPP, box 25.
95
Rabbi David G. Dalin, The Myth of Hitler’s Pope, pp. 82-83, thinks that during the war over
150 Catholic monasteries, convents, and colleges took part in the protection and the saving of
Roman Jews.
96
Ickx, “The Vatican and World War II”, p. 22.

204
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

vinced that many have been judged on the basis of victors’ justice, heavily
influenced by anti-Nazi and anti-German feelings. So, his feeling of Christian
obligation to assist people in dire need may have been strengthened by his
experience and political judgment.
If we accept the reasonableness of this explanation, the question is why
Bishop Hudal’s charitable work after the war stirred so much commotion and
so much negative feelings towards the Catholic Church. The answer to that
question lies in attitudes that Hudal could not influence, in fact they are con-
victions contrary to his.
The journalists, publicists, and later historians have uncritically accepted
the truth proclaimed by the victors. Already during the war, the Allies had
firmly decided to punish the most important Nazi leaders, responsible for
causing so much suffering to many innocent people, particularly to Jews. The
courts for war crimes established in Nuremberg and elsewhere swiftly fulfilled
that decision. However, those courts left unfinished some things and opened
up new problems.
First, in the minds of those that suffered the most at the hands of the Nazis
not enough culpable people have been punished. That unfinished business of
retributive justice opened up the field for hunters of war crimes and prepared
the public opinion to suspect Austrians, Germans, and their “collaborators” as
war criminals. Second, the Communists used thusly created atmosphere to
punish as many opponents to their ideology as possible. They used the favor-
able disposition of their Allies to assist them in finding “war criminals” in ter-
ritories under their control, to get hold of many of their political opponents,
and to sentence them to death as “war criminals.” Let us be reminded that the
Yugoslav Commission for war crimes in less than a year gathered 900,000
allegations for war crimes and issued 65,000 decisions for “war crimes, trea-
son, and peoples’ enmity”. The same commission for Croatia requested of the
United Nations’ Commission for War Crimes to register and extradite 7,812
“war criminals”. The UN Commission obliged with 2,700 cases.97 Keep in mind
that it was after Communists killed tens of thousands of Croatian soldiers and
civilians that were returned by the British Army from Austria.
Third, the journalists, publicists, and even historians relied on those Com-
munist accusations and court decisions as legitimate democratic justice system
and therefore a valid source for judgments of persons and historical develop-
ments. The most glaring example is Carlo Falconi. It is not widely, if at all,
known that much of “information” for his book Il silenzio di Pio XII,98 espe-
cially for what he had to say about the role of the Catholic Church in the Inde-

97
Kisić-Kolanović, “Vrijeme političke represije: ‘veliki sudski procesi’ u Hrvatskoj 1945.-1948.”,
Časopis za suvremenu povijest 25 (1993), No. 1: 1-23, 3; Jurčević, “Nastanak jasenovačkog mita,”
p. 21.
98
Carlo Falconi, Il silenzio di Pio XII, Problemi e documenti 22 (Milano: Sugar Editore, 1965).

205
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

pendent State of Croatia, he got from the Yugoslav secrete service. With tai-
lored documents, he also received their “true” interpretation.99 It is a historical
irony that another widely popularized book thirty-five years later (John Corn-
well, Hitler’s Pope100) praises those same materials as insufficiently exploited
valuable sources and that he flagrantly exploits them.101
Fourth, another source of information that journalists, publicists, and even
historians have uncritically exploited are reports of various intelligence services.
It is not sufficiently taken into account that intelligence gathering relies heavily
on hear-say and often on individuals who are serving two or more intelligence
providers. Even less sufficiently is it recognized that writers of intelligence re-
ports must impress their superiors, which often forces them to tailor their re-
ports to the expectations of the receiver. When it comes to intelligence gather-
ing, one must keep in mind that with the end of war the Allies parted their ways
and positioned themselves for the “cold war” period. One of the consequences of
that new positioning was that former enemy, even war criminals, could well
serve the purpose of fighting “cold war” situation as intelligence gathering or as
providers of expertise. The Church was sometimes “peripheral victim” in the
ensuing “cold war” games. It was not a rare occurrence that the Western intelli-
gence looked favorably at and helped along the Church’s effort to help refugees,
even accused war criminals, in order to achieve its purpose, and at the same time
cover its involvement. The Church and its representatives were often forced to
find ways and means between vicissitudes of interests of stronger players, some-
times joining its efforts to their interests and at other times playing against them.
One exceptional example is Croatian priest Krunoslav Stjepan Draganović. He
did not hide the fact that he had good connections with intelligence agents of
several countries.102 On the other hand, his friends warned him of being more
cautious with acquaintances and supposed friends who may be Communist
agents. Eventually he fell down as victim of his naiveté and trust in people, when
Communist agents kidnapped him from Trieste.

99
Croatian State Archives (hereinafter: HDA), MUP RH, dossier 301.681 (Stepinac), subject
001-0/50, fol. 63; Stjepan Razum, “Dugo očekivani odgovor. Uz predstavljanje knjige: Jure
Krišto, Sukob simbola. Politika, vjere i ideologije u Nezavisnoj Državi Hrvatskoj Nakladni zavod
Globus – Plava biblioteka, br. 206, Zagreb, 2001, 460 str.”, Tkalčić. Godišnjak Društva za pov-
ijesnicu Zagrebačke nadbiskupije, Zagreb, (2002), No. 6: 583-593; Ivan Tomas, “Jedna pogana
knjiga: rodjena u mržnji, gradjena na lažima i falsifikatima. Knjiga Karla Falconija: ‘Šutnja Pija
XII.’”, Stepinac mu je ime. Zbornik uspomena, svjedočanstava i dokumenata, 2 vols., ed. by Vinko
Nikolić, (München – Barcelona: Nova Hrvatska, 1980), pp. 416.-451.
100
John Cornwell, Hitler’s Pope. The Secrete History of Pius XII (London: Viking, 1999).
101
Jure Krišto, “Potenciranje poznatoga i ponavljanje neistine: U povodu knjige John CORN-
WELL, Hitler’s Pope. The Secrete History of Pius XII”, Časopis za suvremenu povijest 32 (2000),
No. 1: 183-190.
102
Jere Jareb, “Dr. Krunoslav Draganović o svojem radu u Italiji od rujna 1943. do ožujka 1946.
Tri pisma i dva izvještaja, upućena dru Lovri Sušiću, od 18. listopada 1945. do 26. ožujka 1946.”,
Hrvatska Revija (München – Barcelona), December (1984): 589-611, 604.

206
 Review of Croatian History 9/2013, no. 1, 189-208

Fifth, as Rabbi Dalin has shown,103 on a more or less regular basis there
appears an individual or a group of people of strong liberal convictions, frus-
trated or perhaps lapsed Catholics, or individuals and groups of plain anti-
Catholics, who “discover” or “rediscover” new documents and apply new in-
terpretation of the known facts. There are also individuals or groups that are
willing to promote such new findings and, of course, make some profit. That
seems to be the logic of regular reminding the world of Pope’s “silence”, of Hu-
dal’s and Draganović’s “rat-lines”, and similar alleged shortcomings of the
Church.
I am convinced that Hudal was a victim of that explicit or covert anti-
Church attitude.

103
Rabbi David G. Dalin, The Myth of Hitler’s Pope.

207
J. KRIŠTO, Bishop Hudal, the “Rat-Line”, and the “Croatian Connection”

Bischof Hudal, “Ratten-Kanal” (“Rat-Line”)

und “kroatische Verbindung”

Zusammenfassung

Bischof Alois Hudal, Rektor des deutsch-österreichischen Kollegiums

Santa Maria dell‘Anima in Rom, wurde weithin bekannt, nachdem er von
einem sensationell aufgemachten Buch zur Hauptfigur eines Netzes prokla-
miert worden war, des Netzes, das angeblich nazistischen Kriegsverbrechern
geholfen hat, dem Rechte der Alliierten auszuweichen. Der Autor dieses
Beitrags hatte außerordentliches Privileg, die Dokumente aus dem Nachlass
Hudal zu erforschen, bevor sie öffentlich zugänglich werden. Resultat dessen
ist diese Studie, die die Teilnahme des Bischofs Hudal an Bemühungen der
Katholischen Kirche den Flüchtlingen zu helfen, beschreiben möchte.

208