Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Monsignor O'Flaherty

http://www.msgrhughoflaherty.50webs.com/

 Hugh O'Flaherty, the genial Irishman from Killarney,
who became the Nazi's biggest problem in Rome.
Photo: Charles C. Fennel
Source: Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican by J.P. Gallagher

The O'Flaherty family
Hugh Joseph O’Flaherty was born on February 28th, 1898, in County Cork, Ireland. According to the custom of the time, his mother Margaret had returned to her family home of Lisrobin for the birth of Hugh, her first child. Margaret’s husband, James O’Flaherty, was a sergeant in the Royal Irish Constabulary, posted to Killarney, in County Kerry. This small and scenic Irish town was where Hugh, his brothers Jim and Neil, and his sister Bride would spend their childhoods.
It wasn’t the easiest time to grow up. Ireland was under the control of the British, denied “Home Rule,” or the right to form a government of its own. Any movement toward Irish independence was quickly and sometimes brutally suppressed by the British army forces that occupied the country. The most notorious of these was a group called the “Black and Tans,” which was primarily made up of petty criminals who’d shortened their prison sentences by agreeing to serve in the army. The members of the Royal Irish Constabulary had the awkward job of helping enforce the unpopular British policies. Eventually, like many of his colleagues, James O’Flaherty resigned rather than continue to be torn between duty and patriotism. All of these events made a deep impression on the young Hugh. 

From his early teens, Hugh knew that he wanted to be a priest, and he attended a monastery school in Killarney and a Jesuit seminary in Limerick toward that end. He was rather better at sports than studying, however. After leaving the Constabulary, his father had become the caretaker for the Killarney Golf Club. The O’Flaherty family home bordered directly on the golf course, and young Hugh soon developed a passion for the game, along with other outdoor pursuits.
Hugh was also known for his fierce dedication to the Irish Nationalist cause. For him, as for many of his peers, it was not just a philosophical question. During the year of 1920, four of Hugh’s classmates were shot by the Black and Tans in four separate episodes. Hugh himself was once taken in for questioning simply because he’d attended the funerals of two other slain supporters of Irish independence. Every time Hugh and his student friends heard about more injustices like these, they would pound on their table in the refectory and roar, “One day we’ll sink the entire British navy!”
In 1922, Hugh went to Rome to complete his studies. He entered Urban College of the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, and amazed his former teachers by earning his theology degree in just one year. Hugh was ordained in 1925, and spent another two years at Urban College, serving as vice-regent and earning three doctorates in Divinity, Philosophy, and Canon Law.
In 1934, O’Flaherty was appointed a Monsignor. He traveled to Egypt as a secretary to Msgr. Torquato Dini, a diplomat of the Catholic Church; but Dini died suddenly while in service. O’Flaherty had to take over—and in the process, discovered that he possessed an enormous talent for diplomacy. This fact was not lost on his superiors. For the next four years, O’Flaherty was sent on diplomatic missions to places as diverse as San Domingo and Haiti (where he was decorated by the presidents of both islands for his work on famine relief), and Czechoslovakia (where the nature of his assignment has never been made clear, although it’s likely it had something to do with the hostility that was beginning to be obvious all throughout Europe). His work in all these matters must have been exemplary, for in 1938 he was recalled to Rome and appointed to the Holy Office.  In 1922, Hugh went to Rome to complete his studies. He entered Urban College of the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, and amazed his former teachers by earning his theology degree in just one year. Hugh was ordained in 1925, and spent another two years at Urban College, serving as vice-regent and earning three doctorates in Divinity, Philosophy, and Canon Law.
In 1934, O’Flaherty was appointed a Monsignor. He traveled to Egypt as a secretary to Msgr. Torquato Dini, a diplomat of the Catholic Church; but Dini died suddenly while in service. O’Flaherty had to take over—and in the process, discovered that he possessed an enormous talent for diplomacy. This fact was not lost on his superiors. For the next four years, O’Flaherty was sent on diplomatic missions to places as diverse as San Domingo and Haiti (where he was decorated by the presidents of both islands for his work on famine relief), and Czechoslovakia (where the nature of his assignment has never been made clear, although it’s likely it had something to do with the hostility that was beginning to be obvious all throughout Europe). His work in all these matters must have been exemplary, for in 1938 he was recalled to Rome and appointed to the Holy Office. 

The Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) is the supreme court of the Catholic Church. Its officials deal with challenges to the Faith, handle controversies over the Church’s doctrines and teachings, and examine claims of visions and miracles. As an organization, the Holy Office dates back to 1560—when it was known as the Inquisition. It was here that O’Flaherty would spend his career, starting as Scrittore, or Writer, and rising to the position of Primo Notario, or Head Notary, the official who draws up the final drafts of all the decisions and signs them.
O'Flaherty golfing. O’Flaherty’s work was very important to him. So was his golf game. He was Italy’s amateur golfing champion (never mind that there were diocesan regulations against priests playing golf). He was also a superb boxer, played a good game of handball, and was a decent hurler. Six-foot-two, raw-boned and strong, with cheap wire-rimmed glasses and an Irish brogue, O’Flaherty did not look, or act, like a typical cultured Church official. But Roman high society was crazy over him. He regularly golfed with Mussolini’s son-in-law, and with the former king Alfonso of Spain. He was invited to all the best parties. He knew everyone, and everyone knew him. And they adored him. Some of O’Flaherty’s colleagues in the Church raised their eyebrows over his behavior, but others appreciated his unique gifts, and used him as a sort of unofficial ambassador in many confidential matters. 






The Storm Begins.

A picture of Italy's Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini The year 1939 saw two events that would have stood out in importance in O’Flaherty’s mind. In March, Cardinal Pacelli was crowned Pope Pius XII. And in September, World War Two began. The Nazis invaded Poland. Britain and France declared war on Germany in return. Ireland remained neutral—with an army of only seven thousand men, and a navy that consisted of two ships, its position was extremely precarious. But Italy’s Fascist leader, Benito Mussolini, was confident of his own country’s strength. He had signed a “Pact of Steel” with Adolf Hitler; once Germany went to war, Italy was bound to follow. On June 10, 1940, Italy declared war on France and Britain. O’Flaherty, doubly neutral as an Irishman and a priest, found himself in the middle of a war zone. But he was in the middle of it in a very special way.

The State called Vatican City.

The Vatican City, where O’Flaherty lived and worked, is the spiritual and physical capital of the Roman Catholic Church. It traces back to the fourth century A.D., when a basilica was built to honor the tomb of the Apostle Peter. During the 1300’s, the popes began to take up residence in palaces around the basilica. Vatican City became the seat of the Holy See, the central government of the Catholic Church. At first, the pope ruled the Vatican like a monarch. But as the various Italian cities and states unified into the country of Italy during the 1860’s and ‘70’s, the question arose: who would have control over Vatican City, the pope or the new Italian government? And if the pope is to be the spiritual leader of a worldwide body, what should be his relationship to secular governments? These questions had only been settled within O’Flaherty’s lifetime. In 1929, Mussolini and Cardinal Gasparri signed the Lateran Treaty, which recognized the “absolute and visible independence” of the pope and gave him “sovereign jurisdiction” over Vatican City and a few other properties owned by the Church. The Vatican would become an independent country, with its own laws, its own money, and its own court system. It would not be subject to Italian regulations or taxes. In return, the Holy See promised not to get involved in the politics of Italy, and to maintain absolute neutrality in all international affairs. This treaty was only a decade old at the outbreak of World War Two.


The White Line.

In accordance with the Lateran Treaty, the Vatican remained neutral when war was declared. But it was a tiny island of neutrality—the Vatican covers only 0.44 square kilometers (108.7 acres), and is completely surrounded by the city of Rome. It does not even have its own water supply; every necessity has to come through Rome. When Italy went to war in 1940, the Vatican was effectively isolated in Fascist territory. In this position, it was vulnerable to the decisions of Mussolini and Hitler, but it was equally as vulnerable to British and American bombing raids.
Halfway through the war, the Germans had a white line painted on the cobbles across the opening of St. Peter’s Square. This was ostensibly to keep Axis troops out and show them where their jurisdiction ended—but some also saw it as a way to keep Vatican members in, and show them where their neutral privileges ended. Whatever the case, it was a very literal expression of the figurative fine line the Vatican’s citizens had to walk during the war.


"God's Traveler."

Italy's notorious Regina Coeli prison The war, from the beginning, created a huge number of homeless, displaced, missing, and imprisoned persons. At the same time, the war prevented the Holy Office from doing its usual business. So it was decided that the Office should handle the refugee issues. One Msgr. Bergoncini Duca was appointed to be the Pope’s messenger to the many prisoner-of-war camps scattered throughout Northern Italy. Tagging along as secretary and interpreter was Hugh O’Flaherty. They started their tour of the camps on Easter, 1941. Msgr. Duca’s style was to set a stately pace, inspecting one camp a day, spending the evenings at hotels. O’Flaherty’s style was to spend hours talking with the prisoners, then, at night, travel back to Rome by a fast train. He would relay messages from the prisoners to his friend Father Owen Sneddon, who worked at the Vatican’s radio station. Sneddon would broadcast the information so the prisoners’ families would know they were alive. Meanwhile O’Flaherty would rush back to join Duca at another camp.  Somewhere O’Flaherty also found the time to arrange for warm clothing to be delivered to the camps in time for the cold Northern Italian winter. He collected and distributed an estimated ten thousand books for the prisoners—and didn’t let official camp censors stand in his way. When bureaucracy held up the delivery of Red Cross packages, O’Flaherty blatantly cut through red tape and regulations until the parcels reached the prisoners. The camps at Modena and Piacenza were very badly run; with a word in the right ear, O’Flaherty managed to get both camps’ commandants fired. A visit from O’Flaherty, the authorities found, would raise the prisoners’ spirits, and lower the morale of the guards.
After half a year of this, J.P. Gallagher writes, “the Italian Government decided it was time this pest was kept out of their POW camps.” Bureaucratic pressure was brought to bear on Vatican officials. By December of 1942, O’Flaherty was instructed to resign his work in the camps. In obedience to his superiors, the monsignor returned to Rome. But not before he had drawn attention on many levels. Michael MacWhite, the Irish envoy to Italy, even mentioned O’Flaherty in one of his dispatches back to Dublin: “It would not surprise me if he found himself in a concentration camp one of these days …”


The First Rescues.

As it turned out, it was a good thing O’Flaherty came back to Rome when he did. Mussolini and the Germans were beginning to crack down on those Roman citizens they felt were dangerous or undesirable. Their targets included prominent Jews, well-known anti-Fascists, and Italian aristocrats who were vocal in their opposition to the regime. O’Flaherty knew many of these people. They were the society he had socialized with before the war. And when they found themselves in danger, it’s not surprising that the first person they thought of turning to was the Irish priest. O’Flaherty began by asking some of his friends who were not under scrutiny to open their homes to those of his friends who were. Then he began sending people to monasteries or convents for refuge. As the Fascist raids became more dangerous, O’Flaherty started bringing people directly into Vatican City.
One of the first of these was Princess Nini Pallavicini, a young widow from one of Rome’s oldest aristocratic families. She had been discovered operating an illegal radio and had only escaped arrest by jumping out a window. O’Flaherty found a room for her in his own place of residence, a building known as the “German College,” because it had traditionally housed German religious scholars, and was staffed by German nuns. O’Flaherty had lived there since the beginning of his Vatican career, and had developed a great admiration for the German people and their culture—he even did his best to learn their language, although he never spoke it as well as he did French and Italian. It is, of course, an enormous irony that thanks to O’Flaherty, the German College would keep many of its country’s “enemies” safe for the duration of the war.  

Another group who knew O’Flaherty and was inclined to come to him for help were the prisoners-of-war who had met the priest during his visits to the camps. Any POWs who managed to escape tended to head for Rome, in search of the British embassy. St. Peter’s Basilica was an inviting destination too; surely the church had to offer shelter to anyone who asked?
The Vatican was doing what it could. All the diplomats from the countries now considered Italy’s enemies had been moved into the Vatican. Some 477 Jews would be sheltered in the Vatican throughout the war, and other early refugees found sanctuary there as well. But 0.44 square kilometers can only hold so many people, and the Nazis were keeping a close eye on Vatican activity. By the beginning of 1943, the Swiss Guard, the Vatican’s police force, was ordered to turn asylum-seekers away. One such group of British escapees was standing bewildered in the middle of St. Peter’s Square when someone brought them to O’Flaherty’s attention. The Irishman arranged to have them hidden in the barracks of a sympathetic Italian police brigade. It was all in a day’s good work for O’Flaherty. He probably had no idea what he had started.




A map of Vatican City   A picture of Monsignor Hugh O'Flaherty.

Enemies.

Colonel Kappler of the SS On July 19, 1943, the Allies bombed Rome. The Italian Fascist administration crumbled, and Mussolini was arrested. By September 8, surrender to the Allies had been arranged. Prisoners-of-war began to pour out of the now-unguarded camps, and head in droves to Rome. But they were premature. Between September 11th and 23rd, the Germans occupied Rome, rescued Mussolini, and set up a military government. The danger was greater than ever. And there were two men in particular to be very frightened of. One was Colonel Herbert Kappler. Born in Stuttgart, Germany, he had risen through the ranks of the SS, and had won his superiors’ admiration for his brutal suppression of the Belgian resistence during the early stages of the war. He was now appointed Head of the Gestapo in Rome. One of his first acts was to demand a ransom of two million pounds of gold from the Jews of Rome—if it was not paid, they would be deported to Germany. With the help of many Italians, the amount was raised. But the deportation went ahead anyway, supervised by Kappler. Some 1,000 Jews were sent to Auschwitz. About 16 survived.
Later in the war, Communist resistance fighters set off a bomb that killed 32 German soldiers. In retaliation, Kappler chose ten Italians for every German killed, marched them to the Ardeatine Caves at Domitilla, and machine-gunned them down. When the shooting was finished, the entrances to the caves were blown up, sealing the victims, whether dead or wounded, behind tons of rock.
Pietro Koch Then there was Pietro Koch. An Austrian by birth, he was head of interrogation for both the Italian Fascists and the Gestapo, and was known as “an acknowledged master of tortures both crude and refined.” Gallagher describes a few of Koch’s methods: sometimes he would strap the subject into a leather belt studded with narrow steel spikes, and slowly tighten it. Another trick was to systematically file to the subject’s teeth down to the sensitive roots. Undeniably a sadist, Koch liked to supervise SS torture sessions and was probably the most hated person in Rome.


Friends.

These, then, were the kind of men that O’Flaherty was up against, if he was determined to stand for humanity. And the numbers of those in danger was rising daily. O’Flaherty decided to ask for help. The first person he approached, although a logical choice, was not someone O’Flaherty would normally befriend: Sir Francis Godolphin D’Arcy Osborne was an English gentleman, cousin to the Duke of Leeds, and British Minister to the Holy See. Since most of the escaped POWs were British, O’Flaherty assumed that Sir D’Arcy would want to do something. The Minister thought the whole situation was “acutely embarrassing for His Majesty’s Government,” but unfortunately he could not risk compromising the Vatican’s neutrality. One can imagine O’Flaherty’s Irish blood was close to boiling after this speech. But D’Arcy wasn’t finished; he suggested the priest have a “quiet chat” with the Minister’s butler, a small, inscrutable Cockney named John May. “I don’t want to know any details,” J.P. Gallagher has the Minister say, “but I have a good idea he can help you!” A picture of British butler John May John May, O’Flaherty would later say, was a special kind of genius: “the most magnificent scrounger I have ever come across.” May had an incredible talent for obtaining things that weren’t supposed to be obtainable. Did the escapees need shoes or clothing, no questions asked? Not a problem. Did they need more food than wartime rationing allowed? John May could get it. Like O’Flaherty, May had friends everywhere, particularly in the black market. Numerous useful people owed him favors. As shrewd and careful as O’Flaherty was large-hearted and innocent, John May proved to be the perfect counterpart to the Monsignor.
Also involved was Count Sarsfield Salazar of the Swiss Legation, very helpful in procuring neutral Swiss identity papers and oiling diplomatic wheels. Thomas Kiernan, the Irish ambassador to the Vatican, had to adhere strictly to his country’s policy of neutrality, but his wife, the noted singer Delia Murphy, had a freer hand and helped where she could—seeing that O’Flaherty had the use of the Irish Legation’s car when he needed it, for example. Molly Stanley, a middle-aged English governess, was another good friend of O’Flaherty’s who turned out to be a tireless worker on his behalf. She had lived in Rome since her early twenties, and her insider’s knowledge of the city was invaluable. Behind the scenes, Sir D’Arcy quietly supplied money. With these people aiding O’Flaherty, the rescue effort started to take on the appearance of an organization.



A Heroic Lady.

One of the organization’s first and best-loved collaborators was woman named Henrietta Chevalier. The Chevaliers were from Malta, a tiny British-owned island in the Mediterranean. Mrs. Chevalier was a widow. Her oldest son, being officially a British subject, had been put in prison at the beginning of the war. Her second son, a clerk at the Swiss Legation, was sheltering there; her youngest daughter had been sent to a convent. Mrs. Chevalier, her elderly mother and her five other daughters lived on a small pension in a third-floor apartment on the Via Dell’ Impero. When a couple of escaped POWs needed an emergency hiding-place one day, a priest mentioned Mrs. Chevalier to O’Flaherty—only as a temporary solution, of course. Private citizens would be executed if caught sheltering refugees. But the five-foot-four Mrs. Chevalier was not easily frightened. She took in those two refugees, and would host escaped soldiers throughout the war, sometimes as many as nine at a time in her two-bedroom apartment. If the accommodations were lacking in space, Mrs. Chevalier’s cooking more than compensated. Her daughters, ages twenty-one through thirteen at the time, were in charge of shopping and running errands, and keeping the escapees entertained. They recall playing gramophone records with the soldiers, and showing them around the sights of Rome, once the men had received forged papers that made it somewhat safe to go out. War or no, everyone managed to have fun.
The danger, however, was very real. SS troops would often conduct surprise raids of suspected properties. Several times, sympathetic neighbors warned the Chevaliers to send their soldiers out for a long walk and tidy away the extra mattresses and plates. Soon, rifle butts would crash against the door, troopers would march in, and the apartment would be thoroughly searched. Mrs. Chevalier would be calm, on one occasion sitting and darning socks for “her boys.”

Casting Bread on the Waters.

The organization was getting the hang of things now. Refugees would make their way to the Vatican or be referred there by sympathetic Italians. O’Flaherty and May would find places for them in monasteries, hotels, or warehouses, and in private homes like Mrs. Chevalier’s, under the care of friendly Italian padrones, or patrons. When more space was needed, O’Flaherty began to rent properties of his own—such as the luxury apartment on the Via Firenze, which backed directly onto a hotel used by the Gestapo! Food and supplies were found by May. A circle of priests would deliver the supplies to the various billets every day, check up on the refugees’ welfare, and bring warnings if it were necessary to vacate the premises. In the middle of it all was O’Flaherty, ubiquitous Irish twinkle in his eyes, calmly doing whatever needed to be done while showing a complete disregard for the official curfew, the Fascist troops in the streets, the disapproval of Church officials, or anything else that might slow him down. But perhaps what O’Flaherty was most known for disregarding were the distinctions that usually get drawn between different groups and nationalities during wartime. He would honestly help anyone who needed it. An old granary on the Vatican grounds once held a typical mix of refugees: fifteen American civilians unable to get home, one American GI, two American airmen, eight British soldiers, one Irish Guardsman, several political fugitives, a Protestant clergyman from South Africa, and an Italian pilot who’d had to disappear because he’d flown Italian top brass to the surrender meeting. Communists from Yugoslavia showed up at the Vatican’s gates. So did Arabs who had been captured during Italy’s campaign in North Africa. O’Flaherty did what he could for them all.
It took a lot to make the monsignor choose sides. At the beginning of the war, O’Flaherty, with his childhood memories of British oppression, was often heard to say that he saw no real difference between the British and the Germans. “I used to listen to broadcasts from both sides,” he told a friend later, “All propaganda, of course, and both making the same terrible charges against the other. I frankly didn’t know which side to believe—until they started rounding up the Jews in Rome. They treated them like beasts, making old men and respectable women get down on their knees and scrub the roads. You know the sort of thing that happened after that…” Once he saw this, O’Flaherty came down on the side of the Allies. And in another of the great paradoxes of the Monsignor’s life, he, who had been so anti-British as a youth, actually ended up rescuing more British POWs in Italy than anyone else. 








A Cheeky Priest.

The view over St. Peter's Square Of course, O’Flaherty’s organization was not the only one hiding and aiding refugees in Rome. But as William Norman Grigg writes in The New American, “What distinguished O'Flaherty from his colleagues was his audacity.” Almost every evening, O’Flaherty would stand on the top step of St. Peter’s, in full view of the SS troops patrolling the white boundary line. He was saying his prayers, but he was also waiting for anyone in need to approach him. He had numerous tricks for smuggling people in or out of the Vatican. Sometimes he disguised them in his own monsignorial robes. One young lady was dressed up in a Swiss Guard uniform and marched right through. O’Flaherty himself moved pretty openly through Rome, calling on friends, collaborators and supporters, collecting money or supplies, visiting hospitals and the notorious Regina Coeli prison. “He used to play games with the Germans,” recounted one of the rescued POWs, Major William Simpson, in his book, A Vatican Lifeline. “It was the most gigantic game of hide-and-seek you've ever seen.”

O’Flaherty was actually a fairly distinctive figure, given his height, his glasses, and the wide-brimmed hat and red-and-black cassock he wore as a monsignor. But he was not above disguising himself. Sometimes he would put on the uniform of a postman or a street cleaner; other times, he would go out in the clothes of a simple laborer. There is even a story that he occasionally dressed up as a nun. For years before the war, O’Flaherty had made a habit of saying a very early Sunday morning mass, which was largely attended by the men who ran Rome’s trolley-system, since their schedule prevented them from going to other services. The friendship and gratitude of these trolley men turned out to be extremely helpful, later, when O’Flaherty needed to move himself and his refugees around Rome.
O’Flaherty was almost never intimidated by his task, and almost always optimistic. One evening, a Jewish couple approached him on the steps of St. Peter’s. They expected to be deported any day, and were resigned to their fate. They asked only that O’Flaherty save their seven-year-old son, and offered the priest a long, solid gold chain in payment. O’Flaherty took the chain, hid the boy safely, and obtained forged identity papers for the couple that allowed them to survive the occupation. At the end of the war, O’Flaherty reunited the parents with their son—and their gold chain. He had kept it in a desk-drawer in his room the entire time. When appalled colleagues asked him why he was being so careless with something so valuable, O’Flaherty shrugged: “Nobody here will steal it.”  

Everything O’Flaherty did seemed to have a certain style to it. Once, a man he had hidden in Urban College developed appendicitis. O’Flaherty borrowed a car from an important Vatican official and drove the man to Santo Spirito Hospital, where it was arranged that the nuns would quietly add the man to the surgery list. He was operated on by a German military surgeon, recovered in a ward full of German officers, and was taken back to the College by O’Flaherty.


Luck of the Irish.

The Palazzo Doria Pamphili in Rome It was probably this attitude of O’Flaherty’s that made Colonel Kappler so determined to catch the Irishman. The SS had strong suspicions of his activities. But because O’Flaherty was protected by Vatican neutrality, they couldn’t simply arrest and interrogate him; they needed solid proof. Kappler also needed to catch the priest outside that white line. One day it looked as though he had succeeded.

One of O’Flaherty’s aristocratic friends, Prince Filipo Doria Pamphili, had been supporting the organization with donations of cash. This morning, O’Flaherty had come to pick up the money. But Kappler had the Palazzo Doria under surveillance. Just as O’Flaherty was about to leave, the Prince’s secretary happened to look out the window. The street had been blocked off, SS troops were surrounding the Palazzo, and Kappler himself was getting out of his car to supervise the search. This was it, Prince Filipo said. Time to give up. O’Flaherty didn’t agree. If he could just get himself and the money safely out of the Palazzo, the Germans would have no proof, Prince Filipo wouldn’t be compromised, and everything could keep going.
So as the SS men thundered into the Palazzo, O’Flaherty dived down into the cellars. The act gained him a few moments to think. He noticed a strange rumbling noise. One of the cellars had a chute that opened onto the courtyard above. At the moment, coal was being poured down the chute. O’Flaherty risked a look. Two coalmen were worriedly watching the SS men. O’Flaherty snuck an empty coal sack down into the cellar, pulled off his robe and hat, stuffed them into the sack, and covered his shirt and face with coal dust. 

Then he waited until one of the coalmen was right above the chute. O’Flaherty warned him in a whisper, and asked him to hide in the chute while the priest took his place. The man agreed and a few minutes later, O’Flaherty was carrying his sack past two lines of SS men. They moved out of his way so he didn’t get their uniforms dirty. Once the coal truck blocked him from view, he took off down the street.
The coalmen finished their delivery and left, unmolested, while the search moved to the roof. O’Flaherty ducked into the nearest church, washed up in the vestry and resumed his hat and robe. Then he walked unchallenged back to the Vatican. Colonel Kappler spent two hours at the Palazzo Doria, but was forced to leave empty-handed—and very angry. 

 

Narrow Escapes and Escapades.

O’Flaherty wasn’t the only one with stories like that to tell. When SS troops arrived one day for another raid on the Chevalier’s apartment block, the five escapers billeted there had no time to get away. In desperation, they went out onto the balcony and lowered themselves over the edge, clinging to the railings underneath. As it turned out, the troops searched a neighboring apartment, and fortunately never thought to look overhead as they left! And then there was the time when two British Lieutenants were out at the opera with their padrones, Renza and Adrienne Lucidi. Occupying the box next to them was the German general who’d just been appointed Military Governor of Rome. As the opera went on, it became obvious that the General was admiring the beautiful Mrs. Lucidi. Amused, her husband suggested she ask the General for his autograph. She did so, and the delighted General signed his name across her program. The next day, the Lieutenants gleefully brought the paper to the Vatican: an authentic signature from the man who was the absolute top authority in Rome! A legend arose that the organization used this signature on the counterfeit passports that John May (who had photography and forgery on his interesting list of skills) helped provide for refugees. In fact, they simply kept it in case they needed it. 

“S. Derry, Major.”

Major Sam Derry The organization was obviously the place for people with a bold turn of mind. In late October 1943, another of these showed up. Major Sam Derry of the Royal Artillery had been captured in North Africa, taken to Italy, and put on a prison train heading to Germany. He’d jumped to freedom and headed for the hills, where he found himself in charge of a motley group of POWs about 120 miles behind enemy lines. Since winter was coming on, Derry wrote a letter to the Vatican, asking for money and clothing. A friendly priest took the message, and returned with 3,000 lire and a request that Derry provide a receipt. Derry duly wrote out an acknowledgement of the money, signed it “S. Derry, Major,” and included a p.s. asking for more! These communications reached O’Flaherty, who liked their tone. He and D’Arcy had been looking for someone to bring a little discipline to the growing numbers of escaped soldiers. Derry was brought to Rome in the back of a farmer’s cabbage cart and sneaked into the Vatican—at six-foot-three, he was a good fit for O’Flaherty’s robes. The Monsignor and Sir D’Arcy liked what they saw, and Derry officially became a compatriot. Derry’s military mind brought some order and security to the organization. He started to list names and next-of-kin for the escaped POWs, and to keep track of the money involved. All these important records were stored in cookie tins and buried in the Vatican gardens. Derry set up a chain of communication within the organization, and issued code-names. Sir D’Arcy, for example, was called “Mount,” while Mrs. Chevalier was glamorously known as “Mrs. M.” O’Flaherty got the moniker “Golf.”
Derry eventually became head of a British group that grew out of and worked alongside of O’Flaherty’s organization. While O’Flaherty’s focus had always been humanitarian, the Brits’ aim was to get their men back into active service, and also to gather intelligence on the enemy. The Vatican was willing to overlook many activities on the part of their priests, but spying was not one of them. Derry tried to keep O’Flaherty out of the cloak-and-dagger stuff, but sometimes the monsignor couldn’t resist.


Subterfuge.

The Palazzo Massimo, Rome Thomas Kiernan, the Irish Minister to the Holy See, had a beautiful 19-year-old daughter, Blon, who had of course known O’Flaherty forever. O’Flaherty arranged for her to have a standing invitation to tea at the German embassy. She would return from the tea parties and report to O’Flaherty all the small talk made by the German officials. O’Flaherty would pass this on to Derry, who had four secret radio operators in contact with British Intelligence. O’Flaherty’s association in this led to the priest being called in and severely dressed down by his superiors—not that it had much effect. Dabbling in intelligence may have caused O’Flaherty trouble otherwise, too. In 2000, documents surfaced showing that the Nazis had gotten information from inside the Vatican. O’Flaherty was named as the source of one report. Since the report was inaccurate—it warned that the Allies were planning to invade north of Rome, instead of to the south, as they actually did—it’s possible O’Flaherty was trying to mislead the Germans. Then, too, the organization got involved with at least two known double agents, and as American intelligence reports later revealed, the Gestapo had agents inside the Vatican itself; so it’s also possible that O’Flaherty didn’t know what he was doing.
At any rate, it was obvious to everyone that espionage was not O’Flaherty’s forte. His friends sometimes despaired of how open and trusting he was. They were sure Kappler would use it to his advantage. And he tried.


Almost Betrayed.

Kappler managed to capture one of the Italian peasants who brought food and sometimes refugees into Rome. After torture and threats, the man agreed to approach O’Flaherty with a ‘message’ and lure him out of the Vatican into a trap. Just after morning Mass, a Gestapo staff car pulled up to the white line and waited as the unfortunate Italian entered St. Peter’s Square and headed toward the steps, where O’Flaherty was standing with John May. Three times, the peasant circled the Piazza, hesitating whenever he got near the priest. The Germans watched impatiently, O’Flaherty calmly, and May with increasing suspicion. Finally the man gave O’Flaherty one imploring look, and turned and ran down a side street deeper into the Vatican. O’Flaherty wanted to go right after him. May persuaded him to wait in his office until they were sure the man had had a true change of heart. (He had, and of course O’Flaherty made himself responsible for the man’s safety.) O’Flaherty’s colleagues had every reason to be cautious and distrustful. But sometimes the Monsignor’s open-hearted acceptance of every person proved to be wiser. The German soldier who was brought to the Irish Legation one day certainly looked suspicious. The Italian who accompanied him claimed that the soldier had collapsed with exhaustion in the street. When the Italian had stopped to assist him, the soldier explained that he’d gone without food for several days. He was a priest, he said, and was fasting in the hopes that God would give him the opportunity to celebrate Mass. Thomas Kiernan's wife, Delia Murphy, must have had her reservations. But she took the German to O’Flaherty. The Monsignor quizzed the man about the faith, and, satisfied that his claim was genuine, took him to a chapel. “As I watched him slowly mount the steps to God’s altar,” Delia wrote later, “I wondered about the foolishness of war and the sacrifices of life.”


The Fearful Days.

A picture of bombed-out ruins in Italy, 1943 As Christmas 1943 approached, Major Simpson remembered seeing O’Flaherty’s room “crammed with small parcels, all wrapped in gaily colored paper and tied with red silk ribbons.” Molly Stanley had prepared these packages for the refugees, and O’Flaherty was rallying his fellow priests to help deliver them. The escapees and their hosts were likewise determined that Christmas would be as merry as they could make it. Mrs. Chevalier cooked an epic feast. Delia Murphy gave many impromptu concerts. But on December 27, the “fearful days” began. The 7 p.m. curfew was strictly enforced, meaning that the organization had to move refugees around in broad daylight. The easiest gate into the Vatican was sealed off, forcing all visitors to pass through a heavily guarded checkpoint. Food was scarce and the rationing system in chaos. Sometimes the water was shut off, sometimes the electricity. The Allies landed at Anzio in January, but in Rome, it was Kappler who seemed to be winning.
First he arrested 18 Italian padrones. Then he found a young woman involved in the organization and threatened the life of her small child until she agreed to betray several key members. Kappler had SS men pose as escapers on several occasions. Once led to the hideouts and introduced to the padrones, the SS men would pull out guns and place everybody under arrest. From the people captured, Kappler would learn clues that would lead to another raid, on another billet, and more arrests. Each time something like this happened, O’Flaherty and Derry had to abandon the hideouts that had been raided and relocate many of the escapers—always risky. Bruno Buchner, a Yugoslav who had been aiding O’Flaherty since the beginning, was captured, tortured, and having divulged nothing, finally shot. Mrs. Chevalier’s oldest daughter, Gemma, attracted the attention of a plainclothes member of Koch’s police squad one afternoon, and only escaped him by jumping straight across the path of an oncoming trolley. Yet no matter how many people Kappler threatened, arrested, or tortured, he never seemed to get close to O’Flaherty. 

Desperate Measures.

By March 1944, Kappler was desperate and frustrated. He ordered two plainclothes SS men to attend Mass at St. Peter’s. At the end of the service, they were to grab O’Flaherty from his post on the basilica steps, and hustle him across the white line, where he would be “shot while escaping.” But John May knew someone who knew someone in the Gestapo’s clerical office, and so got tipped off about the plot. At first, May begged O’Flaherty to disappear for a while. The Monsignor was disinclined: “What, me boy and let them think I am afraid? As long as they don’t use guns I can tackle any two or three of them with ease”. So May made other plans. As Mass ended, the SS men were tapped on the shoulder by four Swiss Guards and firmly escorted past O’Flaherty. Outside, May had arranged for them to run into a group of Yugoslavian refugees who strongly resented what Hitler had done to their homeland. Gallagher writes, “it was a very bruised and battered pair” of SS men who reported failure to Kappler.


The entrance to the Ardeatine Caves March also saw the massacre at the Ardeatine Caves, which killed five of the organization’s members. The only good thing about it was that it made many Italians more sympathetic to groups like O’Flaherty’s. The help was needed. Curfew was now 5:30 p.m. and public transportation had almost completely broken down. Koch’s ‘police force’ roamed the streets, shooting first and asking questions later. In April, Kappler got a hold of the teenage son of one of the organization's collaborators and handed him over to Koch. After torture, the boy revealed many of the organization’s hideouts, and every refugee in them was taken. By now, some 40 of the escapers had been recaptured and eight others shot. But the Allies were pushing at the Gustav line south of Rome. It was only a matter of time before they reached the city. Even the Germans knew that.












An Unbelievable Request.

One day in late May, O’Flaherty was visited by an unidentified Italian nobleman, who opened the conversation by praising the priest’s bravery and cunning. O’Flaherty waited for the man to get to the point. Finally the nobleman came out with it. He had a message from Pietro Koch, he said. A request. Koch knew the Germans would soon loose power of Rome. He also knew exactly what would happen to him if Italian resistance fighters got their hands on him—probably his own tortures would pale in comparison. Koch was willing to take his chances at getting away. But he could not risk taking his wife and mother with him. And if they were found in Rome, the Italians would see them as convenient scapegoats, and kill them just as easily.
So Koch was asking O’Flaherty to smuggle them to safety.
Even O’Flaherty was taken aback. The man who had publicly outlined the tortures he had waiting for the Irish priest was now asking for help? Koch was, of course, ready to bargain. If O’Flaherty would save his family, Koch would make sure that the captured organization members were left behind in Italian prisons and not transported to Germany. And they were left—except for a small group, who were trucked about 14 miles outside the city, and then shot. O’Flaherty, for his part, made arrangements for Koch’s wife and mother to be taken to Naples and sheltered in a convent. The two women ultimately chose not to go, but O’Flaherty had kept his word to the Torturer of Rome.

An Unbelievable Request.

One day in late May, O’Flaherty was visited by an unidentified Italian nobleman, who opened the conversation by praising the priest’s bravery and cunning. O’Flaherty waited for the man to get to the point. Finally the nobleman came out with it. He had a message from Pietro Koch, he said. A request. Koch knew the Germans would soon loose power of Rome. He also knew exactly what would happen to him if Italian resistance fighters got their hands on him—probably his own tortures would pale in comparison. Koch was willing to take his chances at getting away. But he could not risk taking his wife and mother with him. And if they were found in Rome, the Italians would see them as convenient scapegoats, and kill them just as easily.
So Koch was asking O’Flaherty to smuggle them to safety.
Even O’Flaherty was taken aback. The man who had publicly outlined the tortures he had waiting for the Irish priest was now asking for help? Koch was, of course, ready to bargain. If O’Flaherty would save his family, Koch would make sure that the captured organization members were left behind in Italian prisons and not transported to Germany. And they were left—except for a small group, who were trucked about 14 miles outside the city, and then shot. O’Flaherty, for his part, made arrangements for Koch’s wife and mother to be taken to Naples and sheltered in a convent. The two women ultimately chose not to go, but O’Flaherty had kept his word to the Torturer of Rome.

Liberation!

Roman citizens greeting Allied soldiers after the Liberation of Rome. On June 3, Vatican radio picked up a call from a British spearhead division that had reached the Pope’s summer villa, some 30 km outside of Rome. Derry radioed back with the military situation of the city. German troops were simply pulling out. They were still shooting, still threatening, still stopping citizens and demanding to see identity papers, but the end was coming. At 7:15 p.m. on June 4th, the Allies entered Rome. They were greeted by cheering crowds. Many of the people Kappler had arrested a few months earlier simple walked out of the prisons. The refugees and their padrones planned huge parties. Sir D’Arcy, Derry, and John May watched from the roof as St. Peter’s Square filled with thousands of thankful people and Pope Pius appeared on his balcony to bless the city. And O’Flaherty?
“ ‘Well my lad there is work to be done,’” Sam Derry recalls the Monsignor saying. “And off he went into the City to visit some of our helpers and their relations who had suffered so much as a result of their activities on our behalf. In the evening he was back in the British Legation to see the Minister and myself with a list of requests for immediate action, some of which were not so easy to meet, considering the general chaos in Rome immediately after the liberation.”
To O’Flaherty, the liberation meant only an end to some of the hardships. Victory, triumph, conquest—these things mattered little to him, even if it was he and his friends who could claim them. Sometime in his life, somewhere in his heart, O’Flaherty had made a promise to come to the aid of anyone in need, no matter their nationality, no matter their religion, no matter whose side they were on. Now that the tide of war had turned, it was no longer the Allies and the Jews who needed help; it was the Italian Fascists and the Germans.

The Work Continues.

A picture of a medic carrying a wounded German soldier The end of the war was in sight now, and if the rest of the world was inclined to sit back and relax a little, O’Flaherty was not. He was soon visiting POW camps again, only this time the prisoners were Italian and German. Just as he had before, he kept an eye on welfare and conditions, gathered names, and helped Italian citizens get news of their missing or imprisoned relatives. Sam Derry arranged for O’Flaherty to see the US General, Mark Clark, and recalls that the Monsignor spent most of the meeting quizzing the General about the Americans’ treatment of their German captives. O’Flaherty flew to South Africa to visit prison camps there. He visited Jerusalem to help many of the Jews he had rescued with their immigration to Israel. The two double agents who had been involved with the organization were put on trial as Fascist collaborators. O’Flaherty testified on their behalf. “They did wrong,” he told Derry, “but there is good in every man.”
1946 saw O’Flaherty promoted to a higher position in the Holy Office. But the tales told about his work and the regard with which the people held him (some called him a saint) unfortunately hurt his career more than helped it. Those Vatican officials who had always been annoyed by his unorthodox style were doubly offended now. Even though he never sought recognition, and would get almost angry if called a hero, O’Flaherty had to fight backbiting and politics for the rest of his career. This tired and disappointed him, but he didn’t let it discourage him too badly.



He was busy with other things anyway. After all, the golf courses were open again. While playing near Ciampino one day in ‘46, the monsignor stumbled on a half-starved group of Central European refugees squatting in a ruined village. Naturally O’Flaherty couldn’t just pass by. He provided food and clothing, helped the men find work, fixed up the buildings, taught the refugees about the Church, baptized them, and virtually adopted the whole village. For the next 12 years, he would visit every Sunday and say Mass.
1950 was a Holy Year (a jubilee celebrated by the Catholic Church four times a decade) and hundreds of religious pilgrims were expected to travel to Rome. To help them make the most of their visit, O’Flaherty was asked to co-author a guide to sights of the city. As usual, the Monsignor gave the job his all. The resulting book, O Roma Felix, is described by biographer Brian Fleming as “an amazing amalgam of geography, history, culture and archaeology … a very scholarly work and far richer in its content than the average guidebook.”  

O’Flaherty was justly proud of his book, and would tell anyone who asked that it was better than any other guide to Rome. But about his work during the war, he remained reticent. Even his closest family learned about his heroism only indirectly. His sister, Bride, recalled meeting a Jewish family on one of her visits Rome. When they learned that the Monsignor was her brother, they brought her into their jewelry shop and insisted that she pick out anything she wanted, so great was their gratitude to O’Flaherty. But from her brother himself, Bride could rarely get a word.

After the War.

Because of O’Flaherty’s silence, it is hard to know exactly how many people he helped to rescue during the occupation of Rome. According to Sam Derry’s records, the British escape organization saved some 3,925 prisoners-of-war—British, American, Russian, Greek, South African and twenty other nationalities. Major William Simpson, who became closely involved with the work of both Derry and the Monsignor, estimates that around 2,000 civilians were helped as well. For his work, O’Flaherty was made a Commander of the British Empire, and awarded the US Medal of Freedom with Silver Palm. (All such decorations were sent to his sister in Ireland, to be kept in a drawer.) Italy offered him a lifelong pension, but he refused to use it.


Sam Derry was given the Distinguished Service Order, and eventually retired a lieutenant-colonel. Mrs. Chevalier received the British Empire Medal, and many other members of the organization were decorated or commended. Gemma Chevalier married a British Corporal, Kenneth Sands; O’Flaherty performed the ceremony.
Pietro Koch escaped Rome but was shot by Italian partisans as he tried to reach Milan. Colonel Herbert Kappler was tried for war crimes and sentenced to life imprisonment. He served his time in Italy’s Gaeta prison, where, for the next decade, he had only one regular visitor.
Monsignor Hugh O’Flaherty came to see him every month.
And in March of 1959, Kappler was baptized into the Catholic Church at the hand of the Irish priest.  


The Books.

cover of The Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican Irish newspaperman J.P. Gallagher first heard about Hugh O’Flaherty while covering the war front, and was largely responsible for bringing the Monsignor’s story to the attention of the world at large. In one feature the reporter dubbed O’Flaherty the “Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican,” after the fictional hero of a popular adventure series by novelist Emma Orczy. The name stuck. After the war, Gallagher continued to be intrigued by the story. After much pleading on the reporter’s part, the reluctant Monsignor was persuaded to give one interview. This, plus much research and many other interviews with people who knew, helped, or were helped by the priest, became the basis for Gallagher’s book, Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican, published in the late sixties.  
With true Irish storytelling flair, Gallagher makes Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican read like a novel. The book moves chronologically through O’Flaherty’s life, focusing most closely on the war years. The chapters are filled with fascinating anecdotes (who knew that the one of the refugees, a young Yugoslav med student, would end up marrying actress Gina Lollobrigida?). O’Flaherty may come across as larger than life, but he never seems less than real. Any writer knows how hard it is to portray an honestly good person; in this Gallagher has succeeded.

Gallagher does have the attitudes of his era, a definite pro-British slant, and a regrettable tendency to fictionalize dialogue of the “Wait! We kom!” variety for the Germans. But on the whole the book is well-written, fast-paced, and never disappoints. Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican is out-of-print now, and a bit hard to find, but if you’re seriously interested in the Monsignor, it’s worth tracking down.



For a long time, Gallagher’s book was the only source of information about Hugh O’Flaherty’s life and career. But the Monsignor’s story has been getting more attention since 2008, when Irish writer Brian Fleming brought out his new biography, The Vatican Pimpernel: The Wartime Exploits of Monsignor Hugh O’Flaherty The publication of this book marks the first serious study of the Monsignor in more than forty years.

cover of The Vatican Pimpernel Fleming, a former member of the Oireachtas (Irish Parliament), and principal at Collinstown Park Community College in Dublin, has done an excellent job of giving us a contemporary analysis of O’Flaherty’s life. A great deal of research obviously went into the book, and Fleming has gotten as close to the original sources as he can in every case. While the story is basically the same as it is in Gallagher’s book (a tribute to O’Flaherty’s integrity, really), The Vatican Pimpernel offers us a wealth of new information.  

Fleming spends some time on the various political situations, expanding the stage on which the story is set. There are several new exploits to be added to the Monsignor's legend, and new details about the old ones. Many characters whose small roles were previously overlooked are now given their due. And we get more of a sense of O'Flaherty himself, as a man and a priest, not just a hero.
The Vatican Pimpernel may not be as sensational as Gallagher’s book, but you will still be absorbed in its pages. Fleming’s straightforward prose sets off the heroism of O’Flaherty and co. with all the simple style of a roman collar. As true-story reading goes, the book is quite enjoyable. 




















Monday, December 2, 2013

Heritage



Henryk had stumbled upon a problem -the Jewish problem- that confronted all Polish Jews at some time in their lives.
He would learn that his paternal grandfather, Hirsh Goldszmit, after whom he was named, had spent his life trying to solve it. Hirsh died at the age of sixty-nine in 1874, just a few years before his grandson was born, in the provincial town of Hrubieszow, southeast of Lublin.

Hirsh was a dreamer and a man of action, much as his grandson would be. In the early nineteenth century he joined the Haskalah, the Jewish Enlightenment movement that encouraged Jews to become part of the secular world. The Jews had been welcomed into Poland by the Polish kings in the Middle Ages, but they had remained isolated in the society. Hirsh and his fellow maskilim tried to convince them that if they cut off their beards and sidelocks, exchanged their long caftans for Western suits, and made Polish rather than Yiddish their primary language, they could still retain their spiritual values. It was an arduous task Centuries of discrimination in the diaspora had made them suspicious of Gentiles and comfortable only among themselves. " Build a fence around the Torah, and don`t get mixed up with anything from the outside " was a popular saying.
Somehow Hirsh, whose father was a glazier and trader in rabbit skins, managed to leap over the fence and make his way to medical school. After receiving his degree, he married Chana Ejser, two years his junior, and became the first doctor in Hrubieszow's small Jewish hospital. In true Haskalah spirit, Hirsh gave his three sons and two daughters Christian as well as Hebrew names, and as a leader in the Jewish community -whose three thousand Jews made up half the town´s population- he took advantage of any chance to praise ways in which Poles and Jews worked together. Soliciting funds for his small hospital in the regional Hebrew newspaper, Hirsh commended the two rabbis who had gone about like "beggars" collecting donations in spite of advanced age, poor health, and little means of their own, as well as the Gentile on the charity board who "spared no effort" in helping them.

But Hirsh´s claim that a secular education would not lead one´s children away from their own faith and into the dreaded jaws of conversion was weakened in 1849 when his eldest son, eighteen-year-old Ludwik, converted. Although conversion was not an uncommon occurrence in that impassioned period of Polish uprisings against the Russians, Hirsh himself remained a Jew, continuing to exhaust himself with projects that would build bridges between his people and the Poles.
It was not only the intransigence ofhis own people that made Hirsh´s task so frustrating, but the fact that a good many Poles did not consider a Jew, no matter how enlightened, a Pole. When Korczak´s father, Jozef, was born in 1844, Hirsh had to go to the Office of Non-Christian Religions with two Jewish witnesses to register him. He took the capmaker and the innkeeper. Four years later, he asked the synagogue caretaker and the ritual slaughterer to testify to the birth of his next boy, Jakub. Rather than converting like their older brother, Jozef and Jakub would carry on their father´s assimilationist mission by dedicating their lives to projects that would lift poor Jews into the mainstream of Polish society.

When he was a small boy, Jozef went to Hebrew school in Hrubieszow, for the maskilim believed in giving their boys a grounding in Torah before their secular schooling. He was attending a Polish gymnasium in Lublin during the failed uprising of 1863, reciting with the rest of his classmates the patriotic poems of Poland´s three great nineteenth-century Romantic poets, Adam Mickiewicz, Juliusz Slowacki, and Zygmunt Krasinski-poems he would pass on to his son, along with a yearning for national liberation from the Russians.
Little of Jozef Goldszmit in his healthy, productive years has come down to us except through his own articles and books. We haven´t even a photograph to divulge whether he was responsible for his son´s fair complexion and baldness as well as his patriotic fervor. In the Ghetto Diary Korczak writes: " I should devote a great deal of space to my father. I tried to put into practice the goals he strove for, and which my grandfather pursued with such pain. " But Korczak was never to fill in his complex feelings about this father who, like him, had literary aspirations as a young man.
Jozef was twenty when he wrote his first article for the Israelite (a progressive Polish-language bimonthly which had just begun publication), describing his nervousness on arriving in the big city to study law. In those days Warsaw was a bustling tree-lined capital of half a million people, one in six of whom were Jews who, except for a small assimilated circle, lived in squalid poverty. With its Royal Palace, occupied by the Czar's Viceroy, its skyline dominated by the onion-shaped domes of the huge Russian church, and its cobblestone streets teeming with droshkies, wagons, porters, and vendors, Warsaw could easily overwhelm an impressionable newcomer. Seeking a quiet place in which to gather his thoughts, Jozef wandered into the synagogue on Danilowiczowska Street, which, like everything else in this city, seemed grand compared to what he had known in the provinces, only to have loud clanging from the nail factory next door drown out the music and prayers. " Such things should not be allowed to happen in a House of God, " he reported indignantly. It was his first crusade, but not his last.

Like so many of his generation who had become disillusioned with armed struggle after the failed insurrections against the Czar, Jozef believed that the only way to create a strong Polish nation was to build its economy from within. Wanting the Jewish people to be part ofthis vision, he took time from his law studies to raise money for Polish-language craft schools in both Lublin and W arsaw, where poor Jewish boys and girls could learn skills that would equip them to enter the Polish work force. Both he and his younger brother Jakub, who would follow him in law, wrote articles promoting those schools.
Jozef also collaborated with Jakub on a series of monographs called Portraits of Famous Jews, in which they hoped to enlighten the public about remarkable Jews of high moral character. (They later expanded this project to include famous Poles.) The first volume was on Moses Montefiore, the exuberant philanthropist and financial advisor to Queen Victoria, who traveled the globe with his carriage, wife, and doctor in tow, distributing large sums of money to poor Jews for hospitals and orphanages, never neglecting to slip something to the sultans and czars of those lands for their own poor.
" Sir Montefiore is a Jew and he never forgets it. But he is also an Englishman, and an exemplary citizen of his country who fights not with the sword but with the force of virtue, " Jozef expounded in his flowery nineteenth-century Polish. This message was one that both he and his brother would stress in all their writings: it was possible to be both a loyal Jew and a loyal citizen of one´s country. At the age of eighty-four, in failing health, Montefiore had not hesitated to make a strenuous trip to Jerusalem when he heard his fellow Jews were once again in dire need. " Even though the journey is dangerous, nothing will stop me, " Jozef quotes him. " Having devoted my entire life to my people, I will not desert them now. "
Known as the "Brothers Goldszmit," Jozef and Jakub used writing as a tool to educate and raise both Polish and ]ewish consciousness. They wrote numerous articles on the need to secularize Jewish education and upgrade Jewish orphanages, and even turned their hand to fiction to address burning social issues. One has only to read their stilted novels-Jozef´s on the need for medical planning for poor Jews; Jakub´s on the plight of women driven to prostitution-to understand why their dream of helping to create a genre of books about Jewish life that would become part of Polish literature was doomed to failure.

The Goldszmit brothers moved easily in the narrow stratum of society made up of Polish and Jewish liberal intelligentsia. Their friends included the most famous Polish writers of that period, many of whom created Jewish characters in their novels with whom Polish readers could empathize. When Jakub became editor of the Polish-language Jewish Kalendar, his Polish friends contributed articles affirming their brotherhood with the Jews. The Kalendar´s purpose, Jakub wrote, was to " enlighten Christians concerning Jews and Judaism and to help bridge the gulf that still keeps the Jews separate. " But Jakub infuriated the wealthy leaders of the small but influential assimilated Jewish community with an article in the Kalendar criticizing their " spiritual poverty ." Labeling them a " class of religious hypocrites who do not believe in anything ," he accused them of shirking their responsibility toward the poor Jewish masses.
Jozef´s last major publication, in 1871, was his dissertation on Talmudic divorce law, a subject in which he specialized. Praised in an introduction by his Warsaw University law professor for being the first to make this esoteric topic accessible to the Polish people, Jozef was clearly intent on demythologizing the Talmud, which many Poles blamed for the strange and even "evil" behavior of the Jews. Unlike other assimilated Jews who joined the Poles in criticizing the holy book as a backward influence on their people, Jozef gives an erudite overview of Jewish law (quoting both German and Hebrew sources) as it operated in Poland from the eleventh century to the nineteenth.

There are no records as to when and how Jozef Goldszmit met his wife,  Cecylia Gebicka,but it may have been in 1874 when he lectured on Jewish marriage law in Kalisz, an old industrial town in western Poland. He was thirty, and she seventeen. It is probable that Jozef had introductions to the leading Jewish families in Kalisz, among whom was Cecylia´s father, Adolf Gebicki. A successful textile manufacturer active in both Jewish and Polish circles, Adolf, who himself was the son ofa doctor, had an assimilated background and moral fervor similar to Jozef´s. (He was even something of a folk hero to the poor Jews of Kalisz whom he saved from homelessness by persuading the Governor to spare their dilapidated tenements marked for demolition.) The following year, when he was fifty-three, Adolf was "felled like an oak and paralyzed" (as his obituary would read). He, his wife Emilia, and his son moved to Warsaw, perhaps to be near his daughter, who was by then either married or engaged to Jozef. When he died two years later, Emilia moved in with the newly married couple.
Although Korczak wrote with deep affection in the Ghetto Diary of his " Grannie " (the only grandparent he knew, and the only person in his household who "understood" him), he was more reticent about his complex relationship with his mother, whose picture he kept on his desk all his life.
" My mother. Later about that, " he noted.
But there was to be no later.








 


Sunday, December 1, 2013

Korczak Child of the Drawing Room


http://www.korczak.com/Biography/kap-1.htm


Child of the Drawing Room

 
    He made his first moral decision at the age of five.
    Peering down at the courtyard around which his fashionable Warsaw building was wrapped like a fortress, Henryk Goldszmit confided to his maternal grandmother, the only one who understood him, his "bold scheme to remake the world." He would do away with all money, but how to do it and what to do next, he had no idea. The problem was perplexingly difficult, but the goal was clear. to fix things so that there would be no more dirty or hungry children like the janitor' s son and the gang down below with whom he was forbidden to play. "My little philosopher," said his grandmother, slipping him a raisin. He never knew the exact year he was born-July 22, 1878, or 1879 -because his father, Jozef Goldszmit, a prominent lawyer in Warsaw, delayed registering his birth. "I suffered a few difficult moments over that," Korczak was to write. "Mother called it gross negligence."
    Jozef may already have been showing signs of the instability that would eventually erupt into mental illness, or his procrastination may have been deliberate. Warsaw was then part of the Czarist empire (Poland having been partitioned over a century before by Austria, Prussia, and Russia), and many parents falsified their sons´ ages with the hope of postponing, even avoiding, their induction into the Czar´s army But though he hadn´t officially registered the birth of his first, and only, son, Jozef sent announcements to friends at home and abroad. He was extremely proud of a letter of blessing from the Chief Rabbi of Paris:
    "Your son will be a great man of Israel." Korczak kept the letter throughout his life, although he was aware that there had been little in his early behavior to give his father confidence that he was raising a great man.

    He was a dreamy child who could play for hours on his own. The large household was dominated by women: besides his mother, there were his younger sister and maternal grandmother, a cook, a maid, and a series of French governesses. Outside was a world where men had power, but in this elegant apartment of ornately carved chests and tables, plush sofas, and oriental rugs, "that stern regiment of women" held sway. In those days there were few places a child could play. Saxon Garden, in the heart of the city and not far from his home on Senatorska Street behind the National Theater, had no playgrounds with swings or soccer fields where a child could stretch his legs and work off his energy. Janitors took a broom to anyone who dared bounce a ball near their gates, and the police chased those children who made a sport of jumping on and off the red horse-drawn tramcars that clanged through the streets. Because it was considered bad manners for a child of good family to play in the courtyards, a sensitive, overprotected boy like Henryk could do nothing except sit indoors and "harbor secrets," or press his nose against the dining-room window and envy the janitor´ s son and the other roughnecks in the courtyard below.

    The boy heard repeatedly from his mother that poor children were dirty, used bad language, and had lice in their hair. They fought, threw stones, got their eyes poked out, and caught terrible diseases. But he saw nothing wrong with the janitor´s son and his friends. They ran about merrily all day, drank water from the well, and bought delicious candy from the hawkers whom he wasn´t allowed to go near. Their bad words were actually funny, and it was a hundred times more inviting to be down there with them than in that boring apartment with his French governess and his little sister Anna. "A child is someone who needs to move," he would write one day; to forbid this is "to strangle him, put a gag in his mouth, crush his will, burn his strength, leaving only the smell of smoke."
    "That boy has no ambition," his mother said when she saw him playing hide-and-seek with his sister's doll. She didn´t understand that while searching for the doll, he moved into dimensions beyond the narrow confines of his apartment. "The doll wasn't merely a doll, but the ransom in a crime, a hidden body which had to be tracked down. "
    "Children's games aren't frivolous," he would write. "Uncovering a secret, finding a hidden object, proving that there is nothing that cannot be found-that´s the whole point."

    His father flew into a rage, calling him "a clod, fool, or an idiot" when he saw him sitting for hours with his building blocks. He didn´t understand that Henryk was constructing the solitary towers that would appear in King Matt the First "and other books as a symbol of refuge for the orphaned and the lost. "Feelings that have no outlet become daydreams," he wrote. "And daydreams become the internal script of life. If we knew how to interpret them, we would find they come true. But not always in the way we expect."
    It was also considered bad manners for a child to hang around the kitchen, but sometimes when his parents were out Henryk would sneak in to ask the cook to tell him a story. This imaginative woman would set him up on a high stool by the table where she was working-as if he were "a human being and not a lapdog on a silk cushion."
    "So it is to be a fairy tale? Well, all right. What was I going to say? Oh, yes, it was like this. Just a moment, let me see. " She seemed to know he needed time to make himself comfortable before she started.
    "So she is going through the forest, " the cook might begin, as if continuing where she had left off before. "It is very dark, nothing can be seen, neither trees nor animals, not even a stone. It is pitch black. And she is so afraid. Well, she crosses herself  once, and that helps a little. She makes the sign of the cross once more and goes on . . . "

    She knew when to pause to let him catch his breath, when to rush on. He never forgot the warmth of her style, the dramatic suspense, as natural to her as the rhythm of her fingers kneading the dough. He would always be grateful for her patience when he interrupted with a question, the respect she had for both the tale and the listener. it was she, he knew, who was responsible for the magical ingredients that went into his own talent as a storyteller.

    Not all of his experiences with the household staff were positive. One night when his parents had gone to the theater, Catherine, his French governess, had a visitor in the kitchen, a strange man with high boots. When Henryk started to cry that he wanted him to go away, his governess told him to apologize. The boy refused. "If you don´t, we´ll leave you here alone," the governess threatened. "I will turn out the light, and you'll be in the dark. An old beggar will come and grab you, and put you in a large bag."
    He stood there helplessly until his parents came home. "Why isn't my son sleeping?" his mother asked the governess. And then to him: "Were you crying? Your eyes are red."He shook his head no, and kissed her. The drawing room was another place that was off-limits to children. During the day the gauze curtains filtered out the rays of the sun but not the clip-clop sounds of the horse-drawn carriages passing over the cobblestone street below. Like all fashionable drawing rooms, it faced the front rather than the dark courtyard. Only at night when there were guests did the room come to life under the candlelit chandeliers.


    • Sometimes Henryk was summoned to meet the guests and recite the Romantic ballad by Adam Mickiewicz that all good Polish children were required to memorize for such occasions: "The Return of Daddy." He would stand pale and awkward as he began: "Daddy is not coming back! Daddy is not coming back!" -becoming as he spoke the child who feared his father would be killed by bandits on his way home from a business trip. The father was eventually spared by the bandits, who were moved that a child was waiting for him. But little Henryk was never spared the "false smiles" of the men with prickly beards who blew cigar smoke in his face, and the strong perfume of the women who tried to draw him onto their laps. (Until he was reprimanded for it, he wiped his face thoroughly after each kiss.) He was embarrassed by the senseless ques- tions and hollow laughter: Whom did he resemble? Oh, he was such a big boy! Just look how he'd grown! Didn´t they know that children don´t want to be touched or kissed by strangers? Even his mother and father seemed like strangers at such moments.




    His father had already become unpredictable. He tweaked Henryk´s ears quite hard despite the most emphatic protests from the boy´s mother and grandmother. "If the child goes deaf, it´ll be your doing," his mother would say. Once, when the boy had an exciting piece of news, he ran into his father´s study and tugged at his sleeve. Jozef exploded at him for causing an inkblot on an important piece of paper. Yet at other times his father would act like a friend, especially during the Christmas season, when he would take Henryk and his sister to a Nativity play. His mother was always nervous when the children were out with Jozef Sometimes it seemed to the boy that his charming, mercurial father was as dangerous as the janitor´s son. He exuded a reckless male sense of freedom that was both exciting and terrifying.
    Something in Henryk knew that there was reason for his mother´s concern. "Mama was right to be reluctant about entrusting her children to the care of her husband," he would say when looking back on that time, "but just as rightly my sister and I would welcome such excursions with whoops of delight and remember fondly even the most strenuous and disastrous pleasures sought with an amazing intuition by that not particularly reliable pedagogue-my father."
    One year when he went with his father to a Nativity play in the long, overheated hall of an orphanage, his father agreed with "a mysterious, strange lady" that his son would see better ifhe sat with the other children in the front row. Already overwhelmed by the air of mystery in the packed house, the boy panicked at the thought of being separated from his father. He also remembered that he was always terrified when the Devil and Death came prancing out.
    He called out helplessly as he was being led away. "Daddy!" His father, not comprehending, replied only. "Go along, silly boy" On the way to his seat, he kept asking the woman whether Herod and the Devil would appear, but she was as unaware of his anguish as his father. "Wait and see, " was all she said. It was not by chance that the future educator would instruct teachers: "Don´t force surprises on children if they don´t want them."

    Preparations dragged on and on before the curtain went up, and the faint sounds and whispers coming from behind it set his nerves on edge. The lamps were smoking. The children pushed and shoved each other: "Move over! Take that hand away! Keep your legs to yourself! Don´t lean on me!" A bell rang, and then, after what seemed a very long time, it sounded again.

    Writing about the incident years later, Korczak could not recall if the Devil was red or black, but he knew that never before had he heard such a laugh or seen such leaps, such a pitchfork, such a very long tail. "I even suspected, which may well be true, that hell really does exist." Somehow, he managed to survive the experience and even felt a pang of regret when the lights went up, revealing an ordinary room in Warsaw filled with cigarette smoke that made him cough.
    He had his father's hand in his again, but could not remember if they stopped to have ice cream or chipped ice with pineapple juice. He did recall that he lost his scarf, and developed a low fever for which he was kept in bed for three days. His mother let his father know that he was not to bring ice cream home until spring, and admonished him sternly when he tried to approach his son´s bed on the third day: "Your hands are cold, don´t go near him!"
    Jozef withdrew meekly, but threw his son a "conspiratorial glance." The boy answered with a "cunning, knowing grin." At that moment, Korczak would write, father and son were as close as they would ever be:
    "I think we both felt that in the end it was we men who held the upper hand . . . We were the masters, but we had to give in for the sake of peace. "

    There was another event during the Christmas season that Henryk both looked forward to and dreaded-the Nativity puppet show that the unemployed construction workers from Miodowa Street brought around the neighborhood. His father always invited them in over his mother´s objections that they would track in mud. While the men made their way to the kitchen entrance, the maid rushed about hiding small valuables, convinced that these yearly visitors were the reason for two missing spoons.

    The "regiment of women" was always in a high state of agitation as the puppeteers set up their little wooden stage in the kitchen. He watched from the doorway. It was not Death or the Devil prancing about to the accompaniment of an accordion or barrel organ that he had been dreading all year, but rather that moment at the end of the performance when the curtains closed and an old man appeared from behind the set with a sack to take up a collection.
    The boy had already changed all the money he had into tiny two-penny coins as his father had instructed; trembling with excitement, he tossed them into the sack. But as usual, after peering inside, the old man said, "Not enough, young gentleman, not enough! A bit more!"
    He had scrimped all year to avoid this terrible confrontation, even refusing street beggars their expected allotment so that he´d have extra coins. But the old man was as insatiable as his sack was bottomless: "It managed to devour every last penny. I gave and gave, always trying to see if finally he'd say enough."
    It was never enough. The old man with the sack was teaching him "the hopelessness of defense against persistent requests and unbounded demands that are impossible to meet."

    Henryk did not know that the puppet shows and Nativity plays had religious as well as cultural significance. By stressing the ethical rather than the ritual part of their Jewish heritage, his parents had not yet made him aware of that "mysterious question of religion." It took the janitor´s son and the death of his canary to do that.
    The canary had been the boy´s closest friend, caged in as they both were, neither allowed to fly free. (The bird might perish from the cold outside, just as Henryk might perish from some terrible disease.) But one day he found the canary lying stiff on the bottom of the cage. He picked up the little body, put the beak in his mouth, and tried to breathe life into it. It was too late. His sister Anna helped him wrap the dead bird in cotton and put it into an empty candy box. There was no place to bury it except under the chestnut tree in the forbidden courtyard below. With great care he constructed a little wooden cross to put over the grave.
    "You can´t do that!" the maid told him. "It´s only a lowly bird, lower than man." When tears streamed down his face, she added,"It´s a sin to cry over it. "
    But Henryk was stubborn, even then. He marched down to the courtyard with his box, his sister tagging behind him, and began digging the little grave. Then the janitor´s son came along, took in the scene shrewdly, and objected to the cross for a different reason: the canary was Jewish. And, what was worse, so was Henryk.
    It was a moment of revelation he never forgot:
    "I, too, was a Jew, and he - a Pole, a Catholic. It was certain paradise for him, but as for me, even if I did not call him dirty names, and never failed to steal sugar for him from my house-I would end up when I died in a place which, though not hell, was nevertheless dark. And I was scared of the dark... 










     

Who was Janusz Korczak?

http://www.korczak.com/Biography/kap-1who.htm 

ch 1 Betty Lifton's bio

Janusz Korczak Biography » Index « » next «

Who was Janusz Korczak?

    "The lives of great men are like legends-difficult but beautiful, "
    Janusz Korczak once wrote, and it was true of his. Yet most Americans have never heard of Korczak, a Polish-Jewish children´s writer and educator who is as well known in Europe as Anne Frank. Like her, he died in the Holocaust and left behind a diary; unlike her, he had a chance to escape that fate-a chance he chose not to take. His legend began on August 6, 1942, during the early stages of the Nazi liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto-though his dedication to destitute children was legendary long before the war. When the Germans ordered his famous orphanage evacuated, Korczak was forced to gather together the two hundred children in his care. He led them with quiet dignity on that final march through the ghetto streets to the train that would take them to "resettlement in the East" -the Nazi euphemism for the death camp Treblinka. He was to die as Henryk Goldszmit, the name he was born with, but it was by his pseudonym that he would be remembered.
    It was Janusz Korczak who introduced progressive orphanages designed as just communities into Poland, founded the first national children´s newspaper, trained teachers in what we now call moral education, and worked in juvenile courts defending children's rights. His books How to Love a Child and The Child´s Right to Respect gave parents and teachers new insights into child psychology. Generations of young people had grown up on his books, especially the classic King Matt the First, which tells of the adventures and tribulations of a boy king who aspires to bring reforms to bis subjects.
    It was as beloved in Poland as Peter Pan and Alicein Wonderland were in the English-speaking world. During the mid- 1930s, he had his own radio program, in which, as the "Old Doctor," hedispensed homey wisdom and wry humor. Somehow, listening to his deceptively simple words made his listeners feel like better people.
    At the end, Korczak, who had directed a Catholic as well as a Jewish orphanage before the war, had refused all offers of help for his own safetyfrom his Gentile colleagues and friends. "You do not leave a sick child inthe night, and you do not leave children at a time like this," he said.
    I first heard of Janusz Korczak in the summer of 1978 when friends who had left Poland during the war stopped by my home on Cape Codwith a theater director who had just arrived from Warsaw. As she wasdescribing what it had been like for her troupe to perform in JanuszKorczak´s ghetto orphanage, I interrupted to ask who Korczak was.
    I couldn´t tell if she was more shocked at my ignorance or at my mispro- nunciation of his name, but she spent a few moments teaching me to say Kor-chock before answering my question.
    As we spoke about him that afternoon on Cape Cod, Korczak emergedas a utopian and yet pragmatic figure preoccupied with creating a better world through the education of children. I could also see him belongingto that unique group ofwriters, along with Lewis Carroll and James Barrie, who were most at home in the company of the children for whom they created their stories. With a difference. Korczak´s children did not romp with their nannies on the manicured lawns of Kensington Gardens butlanguished in the dark slums ofWarsaw. He set up orphanages and livedamong children in real life, not just in the imagination, for he saw themas the salvation of the world.
    It wasn´t that Korczak glorified children, as did Rousseau, whom he considered naive. Korczak felt that within each child there burned a moral spark that could vanquish thedarkness at the core of human nature. To prevent that spark from being extinguished, one had to love and nurture the young, make it possible for them to believe in truth and justice. When the Nazis materialized out of that darkness with their swastikas, polishedboots, and leather whips, Korczak was prepared to shield his Jewishchildren, as he always had, from the injustices of the adult world. Hewent with them into the ghetto, although he had been offered refuge on the Aryan side of occupied Warsaw, and spent the last two-odd years of his life protecting them and other orphans from starvation and disease.
    The theater director described how she had watched with others from behind shuttered windows in the Warsaw Ghetto as Korczak, head held high, marched by with his little band on that last day. It seemed to her then that this man, who behaved as if he had a divine calling to savechildren, had failed, much as his fictional King Matt had failed in hisattempt to make the world a better place. And yet, by remaining true tohis principles and not abandoning the children when they needed himmost, he had achieved his own kind of victory.
    Korczak wrote of life as a strange dream, and sometimes my own life seemed just that as I began learning about his. Until 1978 I had been neither personally nor professionally involved with the Holocaust, but in the fall of that year my thirteen-year-old daughter and I went to live in Munich with my husband, who was beginning his study of the psychology of Nazi doctors. It wasn´t long before our small apartment was filled with books on the Third Reich and I was foraging through this grim library.
    Plunging into Holocaust literature, especially in Germany, was like plunging into an abyss. I seemed to be living in two time frames at once, with the past often taking on more reality than the present. Waking up in the middle of the night, I would transform the smoke stacks of the neighboring brewery into crematoria; the localtrain would become a cattle car; and Bavarian men parading in colorful costumes would metamorphose into the SS goose-stepping through the streets in full regalia. As an as- similated American Jew who had never dwelt on my Jewish identity, I was now confronted with what it meant to be a Jew during the Third Reich in Europe -and, for that matter, through all of history.
    Often, in the volumes describing the murderous behavior of Nazi doctors, I would find references to Janusz Korczak´s last march with the children. I wanted to know more about this man -a good doctor- who had chosen to die rather than compromise the principles by which helived. What had given him the strength to uphold those principles in aworld gone mad?
    But something else drew me to Janusz Korczak. I identified with him as a writer -as one who has written fantasies for children, and workingas a journalist in the Far East, reported on war-wounded, orphaned, anddisplaced children in Hiroshima, Korea, and Vietnam. Many of my booksare concerned with the right of all children to know their heritage andto grow up in a world unthreatened by war.
    Yet I might not have pursued my interest in Janusz Korczak any further had my husband and I not been injured in a car crash in Paris and gone to the Sinai to recuperate. On our return trip by way of Jerusalem, I heard that some of the orphans Korczak had raised and the teachers he had trained were living in Israel. And in that city of strange dreams I made a sudden decision to remain for a few months with my daughter in order to interview them.
    I rented a small stone house overlooking the walls of the Old City and went about with an interpreter to interview Korczakians, as they call themselves. They ranged in age from the fifties to the eighties, all having lived or taught in his Jewish orphanage during different periods after its founding in 1912. Many were alive because as Zionists they had emigrated to Palestine in the nineteen-thirties; a few had survived ghettos and concentration camps or had spent the war years in remote towns in Siberia. Others had come to Israel following the 1967 Six-Day War in the wake of the "anti-Zionist purge" that essentially swept Poland of its remaining Jews.
    " I dont want to talk about the dead Korczak, but the living one ," they would begin, disturbed at his being remembered for the way he died rather than for the way he had lived. It was not the martyr whom they had known and revered, but the vital, fallible father and teacher. Listening to them, I could envision Korczak as a modest, disciplined man who dismissed with an ironic quip problems that would have over whelmed others. Traveling to the kibbutzim and the cities he had visited during the two brief trips he made to Palestine in the mid-thirties, I tried to understand his state of mind then. Although not a Zionist, Korczak had been forced, like so many acculturated Jewish writers in prewar Europe, to keep one step ahead of the malevolent thrusts of history. When the rise of extreme nationalism in Poland caused him to despair about the future of his work, he turned to Palestine but was deeply ambivalent about whether or not to settle there. Believing that, to avoid being a deserter,
    " one has to remain at one´s post till the very last moment, "
    he was still in Warsaw on September 1, 1939, when the Nazi invasion of Poland settled the issue for him.
    Who was Janusz Korczak? I have on my desk his two best-known photographs: one of himself as a young boy that he used as the frontispiece of his book King Matt the First so that his readers could see him as he was when he was small and vulnerable like them; the other of a man whose eyes are intense and sad and whose bald head disappears into white space because an impulsive orphan ripped the photograph out of the developer before it was ready.
    These are the two Janusz Korczaks-the young utopian King Matt who dreamed of making a better world for children, and the skeptical Old Doctor who knew that one always falls short of attaining the dream.
    " It will be hard to describe Korczak to Americans, " the Korczakians had told me in Israel. I was to hear the same sentiments from Korczakians in Poland-but for different reasons. " He was very Polish, " Igor Newerly, Korczak´s former secretary and now a prominent writer, told me. " But at the same time that he was part of the Polish intelligentsia of his period, he was alone. A man with his own individualistic style and beliefs. He was warm and witty, but he was also lonely and sad. He was everything, and you have to capture that. "
    To capture everything, I soon realized, meant to see Korczak as both a Pole and a Jew. to be both-in the words of the novelist Tadeusz Konwicki -is more difficult than to be just a Pole or just a Jew. The problem is revealed in the semantics of the issue:
    a Polish Catholic is called a Pole, but a Polish Jew is called a Jew, not a Pole.
    Perhaps because Korczak was determined to live as both a Pole and a Jew in prewar Poland, he was not above criticism in his lifetime: many Jews saw him as a renegade who wrote in Polish rather than Yiddish or Hebrew, while no amount of acculturation could make the right-wing Poles forget that he was a Jew. The radical socialists and the communists of the interwar period saw him as a conservative because he was not politically active, and the conservatives saw him as a radical because of his socialist sympathies. There were those who considered him an eccentric, even as they sang his praises and supported his causes: unmarried, asocial, he was as intolerant of pompous and self-aggrandizing adults as he was tolerant and forgiving of mischievous children.
    As I talked with people in Warsaw i pondered how to write this book about Janusz Korczak. Those who do not want their Biographys written burn their papers; history had done that for Korczak. The Warsaw Ghetto, where he was confined from late 1940 until mid-1942, was destroyed by the Germans during the uprising there a year after his death. Consumed in the flames were the notebooks in which Korczak had jotted down his thoughts in his microscopic handwriting; his letters and memorabilia; his observations on children's sleep patterns, and the weight and height charts collected over thirty years that were to comprise a book on child development; his library of both literary and scientific books in French, German, and Russian, as well as Polish; and his drafts of books he planned to write. The relatives and childhood friends who would have been able to fill in the details of Korczak's early life and provide some portrait of his parents and sister died in the camps.
    To go in search of Janusz Korczak, as i did, was to seek a man who was no longer there in a place that was no longer there. His multi-ethnic world no longer exists. Warsaw, once called the Paris of the East, vibrant with caf‚s, fine restaurants, and cabarets, was leveled by the Germans during the uprising of the Poles in 1944. Rebuilt after the war (with the baroque Palace of Culture, an unwelcome gift from the Russians, dominating the skyline), the city resonates with economic and political discontent.
    During my four trips to Poland and my two trips to Israel between 1979 and 1986, the Korczakians were always generous enough to delve into their memories for one more detail about their experiences with Korczak. in the sparse archives in Warsaw and Israel I was able to find a few books of reminiscences by people who had known Korczak in one capacity or another. There were also copies of his twenty-four published fiction and nonfiction books-many of them autobiographical-as well as the newspaper and magazine articles, numbering over one thousand, that he wrote throughout his life. Other than the six dozen letters written in the late twenties and thirties that were saved by their recipients in Palestine, all that remains of Korczak's private papers is the diary that he wrote in the last desperate months of his life. Smuggled out of the ghetto after his death, it was sealed up in the walls of his Catholic orphanage in the Warsaw suburb of Bielany and retrieved after the war ended.
    Although Korczak died a year before the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, many of his surviving Jewish orphans and teachers returned to Poland from all over the world to honor him during the commemoration of the Uprising´s fortieth anniversary in April of 1983. They came reluctantly, some because of the imposition of martial law in 1981 and the disbanding of Solidarity, but most because of the pain of reliving the past and of seeing how little remained of the world they had known.
    It is this lost world of Janusz Korczak, and of Warsaw's 350,000 Jews, that one encounters when one visits the former site of the Jewish quarter. It had been walled in by the Nazis to make the ghetto, and then burned by them to make the barren stretch of rubble that for many years after the war the Poles referred to as the "Wild West." New buildings have gradually risen over the ashes and rubble. The Ghetto Fighters Monument sits in the center of this unnatural landscape, reminding one of the unnatural cruelties which were committed there.
    The International Janusz Korczak Association, based in Warsaw, invited its members to an unveiling of his bust that now commands the front courtyard of the former Jewish orphanage. The irony would not be lost on the Old Doctor that the four-storied white building, gutted during the war, was restored in the mid-fifties without the garret room that had served as his study. The stretch of roof is no longer broken by the graceful arc of the three-paned window through which he had peered at the children playing below and fed the wild sparrows who kept him company. When the unveiling ceremony was over, the Korczakians wandered through the orphanage, looking-for what? Themselves as children or apprentice teachers? For the Old Doctor? For Stefa Wilczynska, who had been his codirector for thirty years?
    The Polish orphans who live there now moved like phantoms through the halls, making room for the old phantoms who had come back. They invited us to sit in the large recreation room, which had also served for dining and studying in Korczak's day, to watch them perform two short plays: one a humorous skit based on a scene from King Matt; the other a reenactment of the march by Korczak and the Jewish orphans to the train that transported them to Treblinka. The Polish children became the ill-fated Jewish ones they had heard so much about, walking slowly with Korczak to their unknown destination, even climbing up into an imaginary cattle car and gathering in a circle around him, swaying with the movement of the train, as he told them one last story in which good prevails over evil.
    On the chartered bus that was taking us back to our lodgings, I sat next to Michal (Misha) Wroblewski, a teacher who was the last among the survivors to have seen Korczak alive. He bad been working on the other side of the wall -at a job Korczak had managed to find for him- and returned to the ghetto orphanage late that afternoon to find everyone gone.
    Misha was silent for some time, and then he leaned over to me:
    " You know, everyone makes so much of Korczak´s last decision to go with the children to the train. But his whole life was made up of moral decisions. The decision to become a children´s doctor. The decision to give up medicine and his writing career to take care of poor orphans. The decision to go with the Jewish orphans into the ghetto. As for that last decision to go with the children to Treblinka, it was part of his nature. It was who he was. He wouldn´t understand why we are making so much of it today. "
    As I worked on this book back in New York City and Cape Cod, I came to see Korczak as a man who walked without fear over what the Hasidim call the narrow bridge of life, making at each stage the moral decisions that would inform his actions.

Friday, November 29, 2013

Ten Martyrs

Ten Martyrs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Ten Martyrs (Aseret Harugei Malchut עשרת הרוגי מלכות) refers to a group of ten rabbis living during the era of the Mishnah who were martyred by the Romans in the period after the destruction of the second Temple. Although all ten could not have been killed at the same time since two of the rabbis listed lived well before the other eight - they are listed together, in a manner of a dramatic poem (known as the Eleh Ezkera) recited on two important Jewish holidays, to elicit the proper mood of the day, one of reflection and the hope of redemption in the face of attacks to the beliefs of Judaism.
The term "martyrology" is also used about the story of the deaths (martyrdom) of several famous Rabbis (including Rabbi Akiva) by Romans, read both on Yom Kippur and Tisha b'Av. The deaths were gruesome, including, being wrapped in Torah scrolls and then being set aflame. See also Midrash Eleh Ezkerah.
The rabbis mentioned lived over a period of several hundred years and their stories are presented as a plot by Romans and others to weaken Jews by destroying Jewish leadership.

Story


In the story, the Roman emperor Hadrian decides to martyr 10 rabbis as 'punishment' for the 10 brothers listed in the Torah who sold their brother Joseph to Ancient Egypt (Genesis 37). He justifies this by saying that the penalty for this was death (according to Jewish law, one who kidnaps his fellow Jew and sells him into slavery is punished with death. This, however, does not allow for descendants to be punished in place of their ancestors), and though this crime took place almost two thousand years earlier, there are 'none like you' 10 who are capable of rectifying this crime.

The martyrs

According to the poem, the first two to be executed were Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rabbi Yishmael the Kohen Gadol. Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel was beheaded, and while Rabbi Yishmael wept, the Roman ruler's daughter coveted Rabbi Yishmael for his physical beauty. When she was told that he would have to be executed as well, she asked that the skin of his head be flayed while he was alive, so she could stuff the skin and look at his face.
The most well known martyr is Rabbi Akiva, who was raked over his skin with iron combs. Despite the pain consuming him, he was still able to proclaim God's providence in the world by reciting the Shema, drawing out the final Echad - "One".
Another sage martyred was Rabbi Haninah ben Teradion, who was wrapped in a Torah scroll and burned alive. Damp wool was packed into his chest to ensure he would not die quickly. When he was being burnt, he told his students that he could see the letters of the sacred torah "flying up" to heaven.
The others mentioned in the poem are Rabbi Hutzpit the Interpreter (so named, because he would interpret the words of the Rosh Yeshiva - the head of the Yeshiva - for the masses, who could not follow all his words); Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua; Rabbi Hanina ben Hakinai; Rabbi Yesheivav the Scribe; Rabbi Judah ben Dama; and Rabbi Judah ben Baba.

Simeon ben Gamliel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Shimon ben Gamliel)
Jump to: navigation, search
For the grandson of Simeon ben Gamliel (I), see Shimon ben Gamliel (II).
Simeon ben Gamliel (I) (Hebrew: שמעון בן גמליאל‎ or רשב"ג הראשון, c. 10 BCE - 70 CE) was a Tanna sage and leader of the Jewish people. He succeeded his father Gamliel I as the nasi of the Sanhedrin after his father's death in 50 CE and just before the destruction of the Second Temple. The traditional view[citation needed] is that he was killed by the Romans as one of the Ten Jewish Martyrs.[citation needed] during the First Jewish-Roman War.
He was a direct descendant of King David and the great-grandson of Hillel the Elder.[citation needed]
His tomb, located in Kafr Kanna near the Golani Interchange in the lower Galilee of northern Israel, has remained an important site for Jewish pilgrims for almost 2,000 years.[citation needed]

Part of the Yom Kippur services

This poem is best known as part of the Yom Kippur mussaf recital in the Ashkenazi ritual. This was made part of these services because of the impact losing so many pillars of Judaism would have to the masses. As such, it has become one of the 'highlights' of the day, marking a point when the congregation should reflect on their own lives and the sacrifices that were made for their sake. A similar poem Arzei haLevanon is recited as one of the Kinot on Tisha B'Av.

In contemporary times

In contemporary times, the moral of this poem has taken on a new meaning with the deaths of millions of Jews during the Holocaust. Many Jews followed Rabbi Akiva's example reciting the Shema as they were being led to the gas chambers. A liturgical link was made explicit in the Mahzor for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, a 1972 project of the Rabbinical Assembly which is the primary rabbinical association for Conservative Judaism. In an elaborate reworking of the traditional text, the martyrology was interwoven with material from Hayyim Nahman Bialik, Hillel Bavli, and other sources, connecting the Roman persecutions to later persecutions such as those by the Russian Tsars and the Nazis. The section climaxes with a special version of Mourner's Kaddish which names sites of persecution and Jewish flourishing.[citation needed]
v

Ishmael ben Elisha ha-Kohen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Tomb of Ishmael ben Elisha Ha-Kohen
For the 3rd-generation Tanna sage, see Rabbi Ishmael (ben Elisha). For the 3rd-century Tanna sage, see Ishmael ben Jose.
Ishmael ben Elisha ha-Kohen (Hebrew: רבי ישמעאל בן אלישע כהן גדול‎, "Rabbi Ishmael ben Elisha Kohen Gadol", lit. "Rabbi Ishmael ben (son of) Elisha [the] Kohen Gadol (High priest)"; sometimes in short Ishmael ha-Kohen, lit. "Ishmael the Priest") was one of the prominent leaders of the first generation of the Tannaim. His father served as Kohen Gadol in the Second Temple of Jerusalem as well. Ishmael ha-Kohen was also one of the Ten Martyrs, and was executed along with Shimon ben Gamliel. The tomb of Ishmael ben Elisha ha-Kohen is located in the Druze village of Sajur in the Upper Galilee.[1]
A reasonable case can be made that there never was an Ishmael ben Elisha Ha Kohen or an Ishmael ben Elisha, High Priest of a High Priest. The name "Ishmael ben Elisha" is the Rabbinically sanctioned name by which to enter into The Record (i.e., Mishna; Gemara; Midrash Rabbah; and the Midrash Halakha) the vast Halakhic and Hermeneutic achievements of the apostate "Elisha ben Abbuya." Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi were key for this quasi "rehabilitation" of "Akher" through the adage: "Remember his Torah but not his name." As in the New Testament, the Bavli allows for obfuscation with a range of motivations. The obfuscation is "doubling" of a name with an adjustment. The Priesthood "Ishmael" is thus a cognomen for a cognomen.

See also

External sources


Thursday, November 28, 2013

ben-azzai

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2859-ben-azzai Connection with the Canon.


Table of Contents
  • Connection with the Canon.
  • Relations with Akiba.
  • Relations with Akiba. Chief among Ben 'Azzai's teachers was Joshua b. Hananiah, whose opinions he expounded (Parah i. 1), proved to be correct (Yeb. iv. 13), or defended against Akiba (Yoma ii. 3; Ta'anit iv. 4; Tosef., Sheb. ii. 13). Akiba himself was not really Ben 'Azzai's teacher, although the latter occasionally calls him so, and once even regrets that he did not stand in closer relation as pupil to Akiba (Ned. 74b); and he expressed the same regret in regard to Ishmael b. Elisha (Ḥul. 71a). In his halakic opinions and Biblical exegesis, as well as in other sayings, Ben 'Azzai follows Akiba; and, from the tone in which he speaks of Akiba in the discourses that have been handed down, the Amoraim concluded that his relations with Akiba were both those of pupil and of colleague (Yer. B. B. ix. 17b; Bab. ib. 158b; Yer. Sheḳ. iii. 47b; Yer. R. H. i. 56d).
     
  • His Piety and Devotion to Study.
His Piety and Devotion to Study.
Ben 'Azzai's most prominent characteristic was the extraordinary assiduity with which he pursued his studies. It was said of him afterward, "At the death of Ben 'Azzai the last industrious man passed away" (Soṭah ix. 15). A later tradition (Midr. Hallel) says of the zealous studies of Ben 'Azzai and Akiba—by way of reference to Ps. cxiv. 8—that in their perceptive faculty both had been as hard as rock; but, because they exerted themselves so greatly in their studies, God opened for the man entrance into the Torah, so that Ben 'Azzai could explain even those things in the Halakah that the schools of Shammai and Hillel had not understood. His love of study induced Ben 'Azzai to remain unmarried, although he himself preached against celibacy, and even was betrothed to Akiba's daughter, who waited for years for him to marry her, as her mother had waited for Akiba (Ket. 63a). When Eleazar b. Azariah reproved him for this contradiction between his life and his teachings, he replied: "What shall I do? My soul clings lovingly to the Torah; let others contribute to the preservation of the race" (Tos. Yeb. viii. 4; Bab. ib. 63b; Gen. R. xxxiv.; compare Soṭah 4b).
Another characteristic of Ben 'Azzai was his great piety. It was said, "He who has seen Ben 'Azzai in his dreams is himself on the way to piety" (Ber. 57b). Thanks to this piety he could, without injury to his soul, devote himself to theosophic speculations, when he, like Ben Zoma, Elisha b. Abuyah, and Akiba, entered, as tradition has it, into the garden ("pardes") of the esoteric doctrine. Tradition (Ḥag. 14b) says of him: "He beheld the mysteries of the garden and died; God granted him the death of His saints" (Ps. cxvi. 15). With reference to this verse, Ben 'Azzai himself had taught that God shows to the pious, near the hour of their death, the rewards awaiting them (Gen. R. lxii.). Other sayings of his concerning the hour of death have been handed down (Ab. R. N. xxv.). According to a tradition not entirely trustworthy, Ben 'Azzai was among the first victims of the persecutions under Hadrian; his name, therefore, is found on a list of the "ten martyrs" (Lam. R. ii. 2).

His Reputation.
Ben 'Azzai's posthumous fame was extraordinary. The greatest amora of Palestine, Johanan, and the greatest amora of Babylonia, Rab, each said, in order to mark their authority as teachers of the Law: "Here I am a Ben 'Azzai" (Yer. Bik. ii. 65a; Yer. Peah vi. 19c). The name of Ben 'Azzai is applied in the same sense by the great Babylonian amora Abaye (Soṭah 45a; Ḳid. 20a; 'Ar. 30b) and Raba ('Er. 29a). A haggadic legend of Palestine relates of him the following: "Once, as Ben 'Azzai was expounding the Scriptures, flames blazed up around him, and being asked whether he was a student of the mysteries of the 'Chariot of God,' he replied: 'I string together, like pearls, the words of the Torah with those of the Prophets, and those of the Prophets with those of the Hagiographers; and therefore the words of the Torah rejoice as on the day when they were revealed in the flames of Sinai'" (Lev. R. xvi.; Cant. R. i. 10).

The Greatest Principle.
Under Ben 'Azzai's name, traditional literature has preserved many sentences, with and without Biblical foundation. Two of these have been taken over into the sayings of the Fathers (Ab. iv. 2, 3).After a saying of Ben 'Azzai, at the beginning of the third chapter of "Derek Ereẓ Rabbah," this little book—which began originally with that chapter—is called "Pereḳ Ben 'Azzai" (Rashi to Ber. 22a; Tos. to 'Er. 53b). In a sentence that recalls a fundamental thought of Akiba, Ben 'Azzai gives the characteristic features of a kind of deterministic view of the world: "By thy name they shall call thee, at the place where thou belongest shall they see thee, what is thine they shall give to thee; no man touches that which is destined for his neighbor; and no government infringes even by a hair's breadth upon the time marked for another government" (Yoma 38a et seq.). Following Hillel, Akiba had declared the commandment "thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (Lev. xix. 18) to be the greatest fundamental commandment of the Jewish doctrine; Ben 'Azzai, in reference to this, said that a still greater principle was found in the Scriptural verse, "This is the book of the generations of Adam [origin of man]. In the day that God created man [Adam], in the likeness of God made he him" (Gen. v. 1; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, iv.; Yer. Ned. ix. 41c; Gen. R. xxiv.). The commandment to love God with all the soul (Deut. vi. 5), Ben 'Azzai explained in the same manner as Akiba: "Love him even to the last breath of the soul!" (Sifre, Deut. 32). Several of Ben 'Azzai's haggadic sentences, having been called forth by those of Akiba, are introduced by the words, "I do not wish to oppose the interpretation of my master, but will only add to his words" (Sifra, Wayiḳra, ii.; Mek., Bo, Introd.).
Ben 'Azzai's observations on sacrifices (Sifre, Num. 143) are obviously directed against Gnosticism. As against the doctrine of the Gnostics, that the part of the Law containing the rules of sacrifice could have originated only with a secondary god, the demiurge, who is merely just, not beneficent, Ben 'Azzai maintains, that in connection with the sacrificial laws, not any one of the various names of God is there used, but precisely the distinctive name, the Tetragrammaton, in which especially the goodness of God is emphasized, in order that the "minim" (disbelievers) might not have an opportunity to prove their views by the Bible. Ben 'Azzai's symbolic interpretation of the first word of Lamentations () is also polemical and probably directed against Pauline Christianity. He holds that in the numerical value of the four letters of this word is indicated that the Israelites did not go into exile until after they had denied the one God (א), the ten commandments (), the law of circumcision, given to the twentieth generation after Adam (), and the five () books of the Torah (Lam. R. i. 1).






A distinguished tanna of the first third of the second century. His full name was Simon b. 'Azzai, to which sometimes the title "Rabbi" is prefixed. But, in spite of his great learning, this title did not rightfully belong to him; for he remained all his life in the ranks of the "talmidim" or "talmide hakamim" (pupils or disciples of the wise). Ben 'Azzai and Ben Zoma were considered in the tannaitic school-tradition as the highest representatives of this degree in the hierarchy of learning (Tosef., Ḳid. iii. 9; Bab. Ḳid. 49b; Ber. Ḳid. 57b; Yer. Ma'as. Sh. ii. 53d; Bab. Sanh. 17b). Ben 'Azzai is especially named as an eminent example of a "pupil who is worthy of the hora'ah," of the right of independent judgment in questions of religious law (Hor. 2b). Ben 'Azzai stood in close relation to the leaders of the school of Jabneh. He handed down, "from the mouth of two-and-seventy elders," who were present on the occasion, a halakic decision, which was accepted in Jabneh on the day when Eleazar b. Azariah was elected president in the place of Gamaliel II. (Yad. iv. 2; Zeb. i. 3); also another resolution of the same day, declaring the books Kohelet and Shir ha-Shirim to be as sacred as the other Scriptures, whereby the collection of the Biblical writings, or the canon, was officially closed (Yad. iii. 5).

The Harmony of Creation Chapter 4: Mishna 3

The Harmony of Creation Chapter 4: Mishna 3 "He [the son of Azzai] used to say: Do not be disrespectful of any person and do not be dismissing of any thing, for there is no person who does not have his hour, and there is no thing which does not have its place." At its simplest level, our mishna is expressing the wise old adage: Every dog has its day. It is not in our best interests to get on anyone's bad side or to discard any items which may one day be of value. Any person may one day be in position to help or harm us. We should never underestimate the importance of one more friendship -- as well as man's capacity to harbor a grudge. What is not worthy of our attention today may tomorrow come back to haunt us. (The commentators differ regarding the precise definition of our mishna's second point -- "do not be dismissing of any 'thing'" (Hebrew: "davar"). Rabbeinu Yonah understands "davar" to mean "words" -- as the Hebrew word often connotes. He explains that one should not think it so unlikely that his words, uttered in private (against the person he disregarded), will cause him harm. Words spread quickly and are eventually heard by the wrong people, placing the onus of their utterance on their utterer (I think that made sense...). Rashi offers two explanations. (1) No information we are told should be entirely disregarded, for even remote dangers may one day strike. (2) Any opportunity we have to learn words of Torah should not be passed up or delayed. Study now when the opportunity arises, for who knows what the future will bring?) As we so often find in Pirkei Avos, the simple yet poignant words of our Sages can be understood on a far deeper level as well. I don't believe the intention of our Sages is simply that we must value others for self-serving reasons -- because they may one day benefit us. As we'll see, "every person has his hour" is far more profound. We should appreciate others creations -- both animate and inanimate -- because every object in creation is special, and has some unique role to fulfill in G-d's Master Plan. Every person has his hour; every object has its place. There is nothing G-d created for no purpose. Every person has his or her own unique contribution to make -- and at one time will be indispensable to the perfection of the world. Every object will in some way and at some time be used to glorify G-d's Name. And if we look down on any human being (including ourselves) or are neglectful of any part of G-d's world, we miss this crucial message. There will be a time when each of us will have to do his or her part -- or the world will be that less sanctified. Nothing G-d placed in this world is without purpose: G-d makes no mistakes. And when we realize this, no one and nothing is insignificant. The Mishna (Sanhedrin 4:5) states that one reason G-d created all mankind from a single set of parents is to indicate G-d's greatness, "for a person mints many coins from the same mold and they all resemble one another. But the King of kings, the Holy One blessed be He, forms each person in the image of Adam and not one of them resembles his fellow. Therefore, each and every person must say, 'For me was the world created.'" The implication of this mishna is clear. G-d, in His infinite wisdom and concealed in His wonders of DNA and heterosexual reproduction, willed it that no two people are exactly alike (possibly excepting identical twins). G-d made each of us different because we all have different, unique missions to fulfill in this world. G-d wants each of us to serve Him in his or her own special way, using the unique set of talents and capabilities only he or she possesses. There is something Dovid Rosenfeld can contribute to the world that no one else can do quite the same. If he recognizes and fulfills his role, the world is one step closer to its perfection. If he fails -- if he refuses to see his own uniqueness and ask himself what exactly G-d wants of him -- the world will lack something no one else can replace. And so, in our own special way, for each and every one of us was the world created. There is a well known (though hard-to-find) midrash (Midrash Alpha Beta Acheres d'Ben Sira 9) which states that King David felt he understood the purpose of everything in creation except for a very few things, one of them being the spider. Then on one occasion, while fleeing from King Saul, David ran into a cave. A spider quickly came along and wove a web over the entrance. Saul, seeing an undisturbed web, concluded that no one had entered the cave and went off. David, after realizing what had happened, humbly corrected his misconception. I don't believe the message of this midrash is that King David had so thorough an understanding of the ecosystems of the Near East. (David's complaint was that spiders spend all their time weaving webs too flimsy to be of any use to man.) Yet King David had the keen instinct that everything must play a role in G-d's Master Plan. In his world -- a world in which G-d's existence was ever-present throughout his travails -- everything must be purposeful. He expected to experience firsthand the usefulness of all G-d's creatures: the strength of his convictions would have them play a role in his very own life. And G-d saw David's wishes fulfilled. We further find King David to be a man for whom every aspect of creation was purposeful and combined into a magnificent whole. Nothing was mundane in David's universe. The same David who stood inspired before G-d and His Torah ("The L-rd is my shepherd; I shall not lack" (Psalms 23:1); "The L-rd is my light and salvation" (27:1); "G-d's Torah is complete, restoring the soul... G-d's commandments are clear, enlightening the eyes" (19:8-9); "If not for Your Torah, my delight, I would have perished in my affliction" (119:92)), saw the same beauty in every aspect of the cosmos, both great and small. In Psalms 104 he reflects on the natural world: "G-d waters the mountains from His upper chambers, from the fruit of Your works the land is sated.... The trees of the L-rd are sated, the cedars of Lebanon which He planted; there where the birds nest, the stork with its home in the cypresses. The high mountains for the wild goats, rocks as refuge for the rabbits.... The young lions roar after their prey, and to ask the L-rd for their food.... Man goes forth to his work, and to his labor until evening. How great are Your works, L-rd, You have made all of them with wisdom.... All of them look to You to give their food in its time. You give to them; they gather it in. You open Your hands; they are satisfied with good. You hide Your face; they are frightened. You gather their spirits; they expire and to their dust they return. You send out Your spirit; they are created, and You renew the face of the earth. May the glory of G-d be forever. May G-d rejoice in His works." (104:13-31). Nature, in its harmony, complexity and precision, speaks of sanctity and godliness no less than the Torah itself. The starry heavens fulfill a purpose in G-d's master plan, not least so that man may gaze upwards and see vastness and grandeur in perfect motion -- bespeaking an even greater Creator. Each person and every object in this world contains a spark of holiness and has an individual mission to fulfill. In unison -- the galaxies, the planets, the earth and its ecosystems, as well as the societies, communities and families of man in which each member lovingly accepts and fulfills his role -- are nothing less than a reflection of G-d Himself.