Pius XII and the Church Today

Yesterday marked the fiftieth anniversary of the death of Pope Pius XII. Pope Benedict XVI commemorated the occasion by celebrating mass in honor of the late pope and offering a homily aimed partly at dispelling pernicious lies that have arisen about his papacy (http://www.zenit.org/article-23864?l=english). It is fair to say that few men have been the object of such gross historical revisionism as has Pius XII. A recent wave of scholarship has helped to correct the inaccuracies spread about the man many know as “Hitler’s Pope” (so dubbed in John Cornwell’s pseudo-historical look at Pius) but the general public remains unaware of his true contributions to World War II era Europe.
Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII, forcefully spoke out against the evils of Nazism and the anti-Semitic ideas it fostered for many years before ascending to the papacy. As an archbishop, papal nuncio, and secretary to Pope Pius XI he dedicated himself to combating evil social movements that contradicted the natural law and inherent dignity of the human person. His condemnations of evil men and ideologies were always inevitably steeped in his profoundly held Catholic beliefs. It was his commitment to truth that led him to vigorously assail false prophets of a perverse persuasion first in word and then in deed, saving the lives of over 700,000 Jews during the Holocaust (Pinchas Lapide, a Jewish diplomat/historian puts the number of Jews directly saved by Pius XII between 700,000-860,000). For obvious reasons I cannot go into a detailed historical account Pius XII’s papacy but for those of you interested in reading more I would suggest checking out The Myth of Hitler’s Pope by Rabbi David Dalin, Hitler, the War, and the Pope or Righteous Gentiles, both by Ronald Rychlak.
The (false) critique often leveled against Pius XII is that he failed to speak or act out in defense of the Jews. Despite the inaccuracy of this claim(forty of the forty-four speeches he delivered as papal nuncio in Germany between 1919-1929 mention in some way the evils of national socialism) it represents the false reality that has seeped into the collective consciousness of the western world. What I find interesting is that those who so readily lambast Pius XII for his perceived lack of interest in standing up to the social climate of his day are the same who cry foul whenever a modern bishop admonishes a wayward public figure in his own flock.
Separation of church and state is oft debated topic. Some would argue it is not the place of a bishop or religious figureheads to meddle in state affairs. Recent comments by Archbishop Chaput of Denver criticizing certain Democratic politicians were met with derision and contempt. Many object to the archbishop overstepping his ecclesiastical bounds and weighing in on matters deemed purely political.
I would argue that bishops, such as Chaput, have a moral obligation to comment publicly on what they perceive as gross injustices upon oppressed minorities, just as then Cardinal Pacelli did in pre-war Germany. The fact that these men are leaders of a church should not disqualify them from the public arena. Rather, inspired by their commitment to truth and justice they should follow in the footsteps of Pius XII and condemn evil where they see it.