Papal Military

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

Hello,

Now this question has a few parts to it, so bare with me.

I was reading a few days ago about different types of soldiers that fought for the Pope at different times, and I was surprised to find out that a couple of the units were abolished as recent as 1970, the Palatine Guard which, I believe, were very active in protecting Vatican City in World War II, and the Noble Guard who were again active in protecting the Vatican. My first question is why? Why did Pope Paul VI abolish them? Why did he abolish THEM and not the Swiss Guard? I am a rather “history-buff” so to speak, and I hold a lot of my devotion to Blessed Pope Pius IX. I just don’t understand the use of the disbanning and abolishing of the Guards.

If anyone can shed light, or offer opinions on this decision, if you think it was right, wrong, why, or show me any resources where I can learn MORE about the ‘Papal Military’ that would be wonderful.

Forgive me if this doesn’t fit in to the right forum.

~ Pius :knight1:

PS, what if World War III was to break out, I wouldn’t want the protection of the Holy Father solely in the hands of the Swiss and the Italian Police. I want someone who is FANATICALLY loyal to him. That might just be me though, who knows.

 

[MarkThompson]

Hello,

Now this question has a few parts to it, so bare with me.

I was reading a few days ago about different types of soldiers that fought for the Pope at different times, and I was surprised to find out that a couple of the units were abolished as recent as 1970, the Palatine Guard which, I believe, were very active in protecting Vatican City in World War II, and the Noble Guard who were again active in protecting the Vatican. My first question is why? Why did Pope Paul VI abolish them? Why did he abolish THEM and not the Swiss Guard? I am a rather “history-buff” so to speak, and I hold a lot of my devotion to Blessed Pope Pius IX. I just don’t understand the use of the disbanning and abolishing of the Guards.

Probably because they were vestiges of the days when the Vatican actually had significant territory (the Papal States) and waged wars, while in modern times it was unnecessary, overly expensive, and bureaucratically superfluous to provide for several different units to carry out the same function. Besides, the Noble Guard only dated to 1801 and the Palatine Guard to 1850, so it’s not as though they really had a compelling history or something that the Church needed to preserve for the ages.

PS, what if World War III was to break out, I wouldn’t want the protection of the Holy Father solely in the hands of the Swiss and the Italian Police. I want someone who is FANATICALLY loyal to him. That might just be me though, who knows.

The Swiss Guard are fanatically loyal to the Pope, and have been for a long, long time. See Stand of the Swiss Guard.

 

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

Probably because they were vestiges of the days when the Vatican actually had significant territory (the Papal States) and waged wars, while in modern times it was unnecessary, overly expensive, and bureaucratically superfluous to provide for several different units to carry out the same function. Besides, the Noble Guard only dated to 1801 and the Palatine Guard to 1850, so it’s not as though they really had a compelling history or something that the Church needed to preserve for the ages.

The Swiss Guard are fanatically loyal to the Pope, and have been for a long, long time. See Stand of the Swiss Guard.

Thank you for responding so soon, I got distracted. Anyway, as for your comment about the “Vatican actually had significant territory (the Papal States) and waged wars” I was primarily commenting about the Papal Military during WWII, although the risorgimento was obviously included. The Noble and Palatine Guard were primarily used for defence if I am not mistaken. I always thought the Papacy had other nations fight their wars for them, which isn’t a bad thing. Now on to “unnecessary, overly expensive, and bureaucratically superfluous to provide for several different units to carry out the same function.” Although I could see where it would be unnecessary to an extant, I do not see why it would be overly expensive. I read somewhere that the Noble Guard was a volunteer unit and the men had to buy their own uniform. While the Palatine Guard were militia.

I agree the Swiss have guarded the Pope for longer, however, the MAIN reason I bring this up is because I think about how many loyal Catholic men who wouldn’t give their lives for their Holy Father but can’t because of some of the Swiss requirements. I may be wrong.

~ Pius :knight1:

 

[MarkThompson]

Thank you for responding so soon, I got distracted. Anyway, as for your comment about the “Vatican actually had significant territory (the Papal States) and waged wars” I was primarily commenting about the Papal Military during WWII, although the risorgimento was obviously included. The Noble and Palatine Guard were primarily used for defence if I am not mistaken.

Defense is kind of a different thing when your territory goes from a substantial portion of the Italian peninsula to 108 acres, most of which is inaccessible private property. If the area controlled by the United States were reduced to the White House, the Capitol, and a portion of the National Mall, I tend to doubt we would need the U.S. Army, the Marine Corps, the National Guard, the D.C. Metropolitan Police, the U.S. Capitol Police, and the Secret Service.

I always thought the Papacy had other nations fight their wars for them, which isn’t a bad thing. Now on to “unnecessary, overly expensive, and bureaucratically superfluous to provide for several different units to carry out the same function.” Although I could see where it would be unnecessary to an extant, I do not see why it would be overly expensive. I read somewhere that the Noble Guard was a volunteer unit and the men had to buy their own uniform. While the Palatine Guard were militia.

Everything costs way more money than you think. Even if a guardsman works for free and provides his own uniform, he probably won’t be paying for his own background check, extensive training, officers, equipment, billet, food, health care, and on and on.

My point is that there is, as far as I can tell, almost no reason to retain this proliferation of units (little venerable history, no ecclesiastical importance, almost no symbolic importance) and every reason to reform and simplify them. Assigning several independent groups to do the same job is one of the best ways to ensure that it doesn’t get done.

I agree the Swiss have guarded the Pope for longer, however, the MAIN reason I bring this up is because I think about how many loyal Catholic men who wouldn’t give their lives for their Holy Father but can’t because of some of the Swiss requirements. I may be wrong.

But the Church has no need for those men. Too bad they weren’t born Swiss, I guess. For now, there are enough Swiss, and it is better to retain their historical tradition as well as the cohesiveness of the unit that is created by their shared national origin. An American guy who wants to serve the Pope by being in his bodyguard has, at least, one way to sympathize with a woman who wants to serve Christ by being in his presbyterate. And he can find a different way to serve; you don’t have to be standing in St. Peter’s wearing a uniform designed by Michelangelo to serve the Pope and the Church. That might be much cooler than the other option, but it’s just not open to him.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

as recent as 1970, the Palatine Guard which, I believe, were very active in protecting Vatican City in World War II, and the Noble Guard who were again active in protecting the Vatican. My first question is why? Why did Pope Paul VI abolish them? Why did he abolish THEM and not the Swiss Guard? I am a rather “history-buff” so to speak, and I hold a lot of my devotion to Blessed Pope Pius IX. I just don’t understand the use of the disbanning and abolishing of the Guards.

Perhaps they were too out of date to be effective. A modern army needs tanks, fighter jets, and nuclear weapons. The vatican is hardly large enough for an airfield.

 

[Shin]

Pope Paul VI had the tendency to abolish a whole lot of things in general, right and left. His pontificate had the significant use of a giant eraser.

For what it’s worth…

From what I’ve read it seems that in some of Catholic end times prophecy, there’s a prophecy attributed to St. Francis of Paola, has it that the last religious order of the Church will be a military order, with soldiers in it.

I think we could use a good military religious order today. That sort of discipline and work has a good deal to teach. But… the way things have gone with internal corruption and removal of Catholicism from government make it unlikely.

There’s also a good deal in the Revelations to St. Bridget of Sweden about what constitutes a good member of the military (or rather knight) for Christ.

“God Almighty will exalt a very poor man of the blood of Emperor Constantine…who shall on his breast wear a sign which you have seen at the beginning of this letter (a red Cross)…He will gather a grand army, and the angels shall fight for them…”

“He shall be the founder of a new religious order different from all others. He will divide it into three strata, namely military knights, solitary priests, and most pious hospitalliers. This shall be the last religious order in the Church, and it will do more good for our holy religion than all other religious institutions.”

“This religious order shall be the last and best in the Church: it shall proceed with arms…Woe to tyrants, to heretics, and to infidels to whom no pity will be shown…An infinite number of wicked men shall perish through the hands of the Cross-bearers…most holy Crossbearers elected by the Most High, who, not succeeding in converting heretics with science, shall make vigorous use of their arms…These holy Cross-bearers shall reign and dominate holily over the whole world until the end of time…”

“But when shall this take place? When crosses with the stigmas shall be seen, and the crucifix shall be carried as the standard. The time is coming when the Divine Majesty will visit the world with a new religious order of holy Cross-bearers, who will carry a crucifix, or the image of our crucified Lord, lifted up upon the principal standard in view of all. This standard will be admired by all good Catholics; but at the beginning it will be derided by bad Christians and by infidels…You shall destroy the sect of the Mahomet, and all infidels of every sect. You shall put an end to all the heresies of the world…”

St. Francis of Paola (15th Century)

 

[Matthew_Holford]

… I believe, were very active in protecting Vatican City in World War II, and the Noble Guard who were again active in protecting the Vatican.

That may have been their role but I hardly think they would have been very successful in defending the Vatican from the armies of Fascist Italy or Nazi German.

 

[RoryMcKenzie56]

Hi Pius IX,

Have you ever read the biography of your namesake by Yves Cheron? Not a hagiography (magnifying his sanctity), but a critical historical analysis that leaves a Catholic like me with profound admiration for Bl. Pope Pius IX. Pius IX deeply believed that the pastor of the univeral church needed to be independent of control from any temporal power and thought that this was only to be achieved by holding his own temporal power, the Papal States. I think subsequent history, since 1870 when the pope’s temporal power was confined to a few hundred acres in Rome called Vatican City, has shown that he is not unduly influenced by the state, Italy, which surrounds and controls the political environment of the rest of Rome.

Pius IX was correct in understanding that the faithful needed the assurance that their Holy Father would be independent of the nation in which he resided. But I tend to think he failed to foresee other providential ways by which his independence did not rely on soldiers. My opinion is that of a self-educated (uneducated) Catholic truck driver who has read only a little on the subject and I am open to other interpretations which would advocate the ongoing necessity of a papal army. But from what I can see, if anyone should dare to violate the spiritual authority, or even the person of the pope, we faithful are better off invoking the wrath of God and the Holy Apostles, Sts. Peter and Paul, than any trained military body that could be practically assembled on the Holy Father’s behalf.

I welcome any corrective comments or observations.

Rory

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I never knew their size. I always saw them as primarily ceremonial, I suppose basically because the Papal States were lost in 1870 and the Holy See didn’t gain any sovereign territory again until 1929. From various things I’ve read, Mussolini came close a couple of times to just marching into the Vatican and the Germans could never quite understand why he didn’t. I believe it’s one reason why Pius XII was very careful about what he said regarding Italy’s fascist regime and Germany’s Nazi one.

 

[Timothysis]

I never knew their size. I always saw them as primarily ceremonial, I suppose basically because the Papal States were lost in 1870 and the Holy See didn’t gain any sovereign territory again until 1929. From various things I’ve read, Mussolini came close a couple of times to just marching into the Vatican and the Germans could never quite understand why he didn’t. I believe it’s one reason why Pius XII was very careful about what he said regarding Italy’s fascist regime and Germany’s Nazi one.

Both Hitler and Mussolini had many Catholic conscripts in their armies who would not have been supportive of an invasion of the Vatican and arrest and/or murder of the pope, bishops and cardinals.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Both Hitler and Mussolini had many Catholic conscripts in their armies who would not have been supportive of an invasion of the Vatican and arrest and/or murder of the pope, bishops and cardinals.

What a shame they didn’t revolt against the murder of millions of their fellow human beings.

 

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

Hi Pius IX,

Have you ever read the biography of your namesake by Yves Cheron? Not a hagiography (magnifying his sanctity), but a critical historical analysis that leaves a Catholic like me with profound admiration for Bl. Pope Pius IX. Pius IX deeply believed that the pastor of the univeral church needed to be independent of control from any temporal power and thought that this was only to be achieved by holding his own temporal power, the Papal States. I think subsequent history, since 1870 when the pope’s temporal power was confined to a few hundred acres in Rome called Vatican City, has shown that he is not unduly influenced by the state, Italy, which surrounds and controls the political environment of the rest of Rome.

Pius IX was correct in understanding that the faithful needed the assurance that their Holy Father would be independent of the nation in which he resided. But I tend to think he failed to foresee other providential ways by which his independence did not rely on soldiers. My opinion is that of a self-educated (uneducated) Catholic truck driver who has read only a little on the subject and I am open to other interpretations which would advocate the ongoing necessity of a papal army. But from what I can see, if anyone should dare to violate the spiritual authority, or even the person of the pope, we faithful are better off invoking the wrath of God and the Holy Apostles, Sts. Peter and Paul, than any trained military body that could be practically assembled on the Holy Father’s behalf.

I welcome any corrective comments or observations.

Rory

No I have not read it, although I just looked it up on Amazon and it seems wonderul, I’ll look into it further, don’t you worry!

I also agree with Pius IX, the Holy Father should be pure and solid on Papal territory. I cannot help but be disgusted by Giuseppe Garibaldi, the “hero” that allowed British school children to sing “Lets get a rope and hang the Pope so up with Garibaldi!” while in a parde of sorts. Garibaldi and his band of scoundrels thought the Papal States were the plage of the Italian Peninsula. So I can see why Blessed Pius IX had those feelings about foreign and neighboring governments.

The Catholic climate of the mid to late 1800’s was on fire to say the least, in my opinion. Many mother’s sons from around the globe were in Rome defending the Holy Father from outside threats. Pius IX can not be looked upon as a perfect individual, and you must remember he suffered from a few illnesses as a child and tried to join the Noble Guard but was discharged early on. I, too, think he could have settled things more diplomatically, although he was and is seen by his most dominant feature - his fiery temper.

I however will leave you with the following. What is the WRATH of GOD? It does come in many forms, correct? Who knows His wrath isn’t the call to arms in the the Porta Pia? At Mentana? Et cetera. The WRATH of GOD could have been a Papal Army. The only flaw is - they lost. However, maybe the Roman Question has yet to be answered. All we need is Pius XIII.

Also, having read a few of Pius IX’s documents, he greatly encouraged public prayer. Maybe he was looking for a bit of Divine Intervention.

~ Pius :knight1:

 

[Timothysis]

What a shame they didn’t revolt against the murder of millions of their fellow human beings.

Those soldiers conscripted into the army were not part of the machine that ran the death camps or deported people with the purpose to be murdered. It is important to recognize the difference between those who followed legitimate orders and those who performed criminally illegal acts. The basic German soldier was not the equivalent to those who belonged to criminal organizations such as the SS or the Gestapo.

 

[Reservoir_Dog]

Both Hitler and Mussolini had many Catholic conscripts in their armies who would not have been supportive of an invasion of the Vatican and arrest and/or murder of the pope, bishops and cardinals.

An SS unit wouldn’t have had any such scruples.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Those soldiers conscripted into the army were not part of the machine that ran the death camps or deported people with the purpose to be murdered. It is important to recognize the difference between those who followed legitimate orders and those who performed criminally illegal acts. The basic German soldier was not the equivalent to those who belonged to criminal organizations such as the SS or the Gestapo.

We were on the topic of invading somewhere, i.e. Vatican. The ordinary German and Italian soldiers invaded many countries. Why should those countries be different from the Vatican?

 

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

We were on the topic of invading somewhere, i.e. Vatican. The ordinary German and Italian soldiers invaded many countries. Why should those countries be different from the Vatican?

I may have to agree with you here,

We must remember the Italian Risorgimento. During that time, the Italians invaded the Papal States, Church territory, and Rome. Who says they wouldn’t have done it again, if commanded to? In the opposites sides defence, Benito Mussolini was the one who awarded Pius XI Vatican City, so who knows.

Back on topic, briefly, the Palatine Guard did come into conflict with Italian police units in WWII, when the Police units were hunting political refugees in Rome. My source is not accurate, of course.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatine_Guard#cite_note-0

Even though it is Wikipedia, there must be some truth to it.

~ Pius :knight1:

 

[Timothysis]

An SS unit wouldn’t have had any such scruples.

True, but as I was saying it was the conscripts of the German army that was made up of a high percentage of Catholics who would have objected. Even Hitler knew better than to take a direct course of action that what have resulted in disunity within his own troops. To order an invasion of the Vatican would have done just that.

 

[Timothysis]

The ordinary German and Italian soldiers invaded many countries. Why should those countries be different from the Vatican?

Look, this is not my personal opinion. It has long been known that Hitler did not consider an invasion of the Vatican and arresting of Pope Pius XII ( whom Hitler called his “greatest enemy”) because of the turmoil that it would create within his own regular army troops and for those people of Italy who would not approve. There were many Catholics who were conscripted in the German army; not every German was a “nazi.”

 

[Reservoir_Dog]

Look, this is not my personal opinion. It has long been known that Hitler did not consider an invasion of the Vatican and arresting of Pope Pius XII ( whom Hitler called his “greatest enemy”) because of the turmoil that it would create within his own regular army troops and for those people of Italy who would not approve. There were many Catholics who were conscripted in the German army; not every German was a “nazi.”

What would occupying the Vatican have accomplished?

 

[Timothysis]

What would occupying the Vatican have accomplished?

What did occupying France, Belgium, Poland, Norway, Greece, Italy, etc. accomplish?

Its well known that Hitler left the Church alone for the time until he fried his bigger fish. Had things gone his way, he would have tried to extinguish the Church along with the Jews, Slavs, Gypsies and everyone else who didn’t fit into his “plan.”