Freedom to start and freedom to stay

(From 15.02.2022 Profittlich’ s webinar, Maria Chiara Dommarco)

In my brief speech I would like to focus on an aspect of Eduard Profittlich’s life that I consider relevant, namely, the development of his vocation in dialogue with the two popes of his mature years: Pius XI and Pius XII. I believe that this aspect is relevant for every person – especially Catholics, but not only Catholics – who approaches his figure. In fact, on the one hand, for a Catholic, the relationship with the pope (usually mediated through official publications, speeches, etc.) is fundamental for one`s faith, by virtue of the special role that the Petrine charisma has in the Catholic Church; And on the other hand, the trust and freedom with which the two pontiffs engaged with the Jesuit is a constructive example of the exercise of power by an authority and the free and conscious response by a subordinate. In short, it is the development of a dynamic that affects many people and in various fields.

Profittlich’s desire to become a missionary in Russia in the 1920s was certainly born out of a very specific historical moment. Indeed, the Bolshevik revolution was a watershed which had revived Catholic missionary hopes for the eastern territories. However, the focus on the East was given new impetus even before the outbreak of the revolution by Pope Benedict XV through the attention he paid to missionary work and the activity of Catholic missionary institutions. He had undertaken many charitable initiatives for refugees, prisoners of war and the poor and, through Motu proprio “Dei providentis”, established the Congregation for Eastern Church (lat. Congregatio pro Ecclesia Orientali) on 1 May 1917. The prefect of the Congregation was the pope himself. This Congregation was charged with liaising and keeping in touch with all the Eastern Catholic Churches to help them develop and preserve their rights and their liturgical and spiritual heritage. And on 15 October 1917, a few days before the Bolshevik revolution, Benedict XV also established the Pontifical Oriental Institute (lat. Pontificium Institutum Orientale) to get a better understanding of the various aspects of the Eastern Churches and to educate clergymen complying with missionary life in the Eastern territories. The founding document, “Orientis Catholicis”, presents the new institute as «the proper seat of higher studies in the Urbe concerning Oriental matters». What characterised this institution was its inter-confessional openness, since right from the beginning not only Eastern and Latin Catholics, but also Orthodox, could attend it. In addition Benedict XV demonstrated a special emphasis on missionary activity also through the publication of the apostolic letter “Maximum Illud” (30 November 1919). This document, together with the confirmation of the central role of the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith (lat. Congregatio de Propaganda Fide) in the coordination of missionary activities, emphasised some features of missionaries and missions, which were innovative or important for the time. These include: a special concern for the education and training of the native clergy, who should be able to achieve perfect independence from the missionary clergy; a total detachment for the missioner from the secular interests of his/her country of origin; and finally, a special attention to the education of seminarians and priests¹. When Achille Ratti ascended the papal throne in 1922, with the name of Pius XI, attention to Russia and the Eastern countries had a very special place. In fact, Monsignor Ratti had carried out most of his diplomatic service in the East, as nuncio to Poland and then apostolic visitor to the Baltic countries². In this movement of renewed missionary impulse to the East, the Pontificium Collegium Russicum was founded in 1928 for Catholic clergymen to increase their knowledge of Russian and Slavic history and the theory and practice of the Byzantine rite. Of importance also is the papal mission to Russia that took place from 1922 to 1924. This mission, although diplomatic and charitable in nature and explicitly excluding preaching, is an important example of that closeness in charity that can foster dialogue between believers and atheists and between adherents of different confessions. Post-Tzarist Russia experienced a severe famine between 1921 and 1923, exacerbated by the drought of 1921. This was used by the Leninist government to deal a severe blow to the Church during its campaign to requisition church property. However, the socio-economic situation deteriorated to such an extent that the new Soviet state came to the brink of implosion. Pius XI, in his encyclical “Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio”, drew attention to the people of the eastern lands who were suffering from hunger and epidemics³. To prevent this, Lenin allowed foreign relief missions to enter Russia and help the population. Among them, was the mission sent by Pius XI to try to establish a lasting contact, making the mission permanent in the form of professional schools that could support the new generations. In 1924 however, having averted the risk of an implosion of the new established order, the Leninist government liquidated all foreign missions, forcing them to withdraw. During their two years in Soviet territory, the 12 papal envoys and their collaborators had offered a precious contribution to the population and the local Church: by providing them with food and clothing; by sending sums of money and bread for the celebration of the Divine Liturgy helping both the Catholic and Orthodox faithful⁴; and by searching for people who had disappeared after the World War and the Bolshevik revolution, in some cases even managing to find them⁵. What´s more, they played a fundamental role as a source of information, since the Holy See had men at its disposal who were able to provide first-hand information on what was happening in Soviet territory, to the benefit also of the governments and media of the Western world. The nunciatures and the neighbouring countries played a central role in the information process of the mission in Russia, thanks to which it was possible to transmit the letters and telegrams that the papal envoys wanted to send to Rome. In this regard, mention must be made of the nunciatures in Prague, Warsaw and Berlin and the help provided by officials of the Latvian and Polish governments⁶. This role continued over the following decades, since diplomatic relations between the Holy See and Russia, as is well known, were restored only in 1990. At that time, in the neighbouring countries there were communities of exiles, mostly Russians fleeing from Bolshevik repression; Orthodox and Eastern Catholic communities also lived there permanently. So, if Russia was inaccessible to Catholic missionaries at the time, Poland, Germany and the Baltic Republics were not. Pius XI’s concern for Byzantine-rite believers struck a chord in the young Profittlich who, from the beginning of the 1920s, expressed to his superiors his desire to go to Russia as a missionary.

Precisely during the years of the papal mission in Russia, in virtue of the desire he had expressed, the young priest was sent by the Pontifical Commission Pro Russia to study philosophy and theology in Krakow at the College of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Having completed his studies, he was sent to do his tertianship year in Czechowice-Dziedzice and then assigned to carry out his pastoral service in Opole. In 1928, he left Poland to go to Hamburg, as the priest in charge of the Polish community in that city. Shortly after professing his final vows in the Society of Jesus in 1930, Profittlich, at the suggestion of bishop Michel d’Herbigny, was sent to Tallinn. In the Estonian capital, in fact, the Catholic community consisted mainly of Poles whose language Profittlich mastered – and also of a small group of Germans and Lithuanians. In addition, in an Estonia with a Lutheran majority, there was a not inconsiderable number of Russian Orthodox. Therefore, the choice to support the drive towards the evangelisation of Russia, typical of the pontificates of Benedict XV and Pius XI, had implications for the German Jesuit that were certainly unimaginable beforehand. What is important here is that he found himself the main protagonist of the rebirth of the Catholic Church of Estonia after the country’s independence at the end of the First World War. Until 1918, the Estonian Catholic communities belonged to the diocese of Mogilev and, after independence, they joined the diocese of Riga. The rebirth of the Estonian Church had been started by the Jesuit Antonio Zecchini, appointed in 1924 by Pius XI as Apostolic Administrator of Estonia. It was formally completed in the 1930s, when Profittlich was appointed his successor (in 1931), with the Catholic Church officially registered in Estonia (in 1932) and when the German Jesuit was consecrated Bishop of Adrianople and then Archbishop of Tallinn (in 1936)⁷. His ministry was distinguished by his attention to the peculiarities of the local Church. In fact, despite the strong presence of the Polish element, Profittlich helped Estonian Catholics to become aware of their religious identity. To this end, in particular, he encouraged the learning of the Estonian language by the priests present there and he edited two publications: a prayer book in Estonian (1932) and a monthly periodical “Kiriku Elu” (“Church Life”, 1933) addressed to the Estonian intelligencia, so that they would know the vision of the Catholic Church on various issues and so establish a fruitful dialogue for the whole country. He used this periodical to illustrate to Estonian intellectuals the problems of the relationship between the different Christian confessions, openly declaring the need for reciprocal solidarity and cooperation, while not hiding his desire for a reunion with the Church of Rome⁸. This was the same vision expressed a few years earlier by Pius XI in the encyclical “Ecclesiam Dei”, in which he urged Catholic and Orthodox Christians to communicate with each other to increase their knowledge of each other’s histories and traditions⁹.

With the Soviet invasion of Estonia in June 1940, following the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, religious persecution spread to that country as well¹⁰. As Profittlich held dual Estonian and German citizenship, he could have left Tallinn and resettled in Germany, but, as is well known, he chose to stay. In the weeks leading up to his decision, some circumstances that coincided «so strangely», as the archbishop wrote to his loved ones, persuaded him to stay («It is God’s will that I remain here»). The decision to stay was confirmed in the letter by Pius XII that the Jesuit received as soon as he had made his choice, sealing it with the pontiff’s approval. In fact, Pius XII, while leaving the Jesuit complete freedom in this personal and delicate decision, expressed his appreciation for the archbishop’s choice of closeness to the Estonian people¹¹. So, having packed a suitcase and a rucksack, Profittlich awaited his arrest in June 1941 and ended his earthly life in Russia, in the Kirov prison¹².

The Jesuit’s free and conscious adhesion to his vocation, even to the point of witnessing martyrdom, was born and developed within the dialogue (mediated and then directly) with the authority of the Holy See. The latter, forced by the historical moment to abandon the mission in Russia and concerned with the destiny of Eastern believers, allowed the desire of the young Jesuit priest not only not to be lost, but to be fully realised in the pastoral care of the faithful who at that time could be reached further east. What is more, Profittlich, free to choose whether to stay or go after the Soviet occupation, welcomed as a comfort the pronouncement of Pius XII, which went in the direction the Jesuit had chosen: that is, a testimony of profound unity with the bishop of Rome, of whose will to be close to all peoples archbishop Profittlich gave proof. And in so doing, sharing to the end the destiny of the Estonian people.