START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
1,281,615 people care about Politics

Is It Ever Okay to Protest a Funeral, Even for a Nazi War Criminal?


Erich Priebke was a Nazi war criminal serving a life sentence in Rome for his role in the massacre of 335 civilians during WWII. His death under house arrest last week ignited a fierce debate over what should be done with his body — Argentina, a country he had lived in for 50 years while attempting to avoid prosecution for his crimes, refused to take him, despite the fact that his family wanted him to be buried alongside his wife. The Catholic Church in Rome refused to hold a funeral service. Even his home country of Germany turned away the body of the former SS officer on the grounds that he had not lived there for decades.

Part of the reason no country wants to be known as Priebke’s final resting place has to do with the nature of his crimes. The 1944 massacre he participated in is considered one of the worst war crimes to be committed in Italy, and over the decades he refused to admit any wrongdoing, saying that he was only following orders and that the hundreds of people he killed were all “terrorists.” He also remained a Holocaust denier to the very end, claiming the Allies fabricated the death of six million Jews to cover up their own wartime human rights abuses. It’s easy to understand why the man is so reviled.

A Catholic splinter group, the Society for Saint Pius X, which is not recognized by the Vatican, decided to go ahead and hold a funeral for Priebke in Rome despite the controversy. The group strongly opposes the reforms made by the Second Vatican Council, particularly efforts to reach out to the Jewish community. Many prominent members of the group are vocal Holocaust deniers, so it’s not too surprising that they would try to publicly honor Priebke’s legacy. Just to add insult to injury, they decided to hold the funeral on the 70th anniversary of the day fascists and Nazis rounded up more than 1,000 Roman Jews and shipped them to Auschwitz.

Given the situation, it’s no surprise that protestors showed up and managed to successfully shut down the funeral on Tuesday. Priebke’s body was actually confiscated by the authorities, who so far are refusing to return it to his family. Unfortunately, the situation raises an uncomfortable question: is it ever appropriate to protest a funeral, even if it’s for the “right” reasons? Yes, Priebke was a despicable human being, and yes, the group that was trying to celebrate his life was an anti-Semitic hate group. But isn’t protesting funerals the sort of tactic hate groups themselves use?

When the Westboro Baptist Church picket funerals, they’re rightly and almost universally condemned for their behavior — and they don’t cause funerals to be completely shut down, nor do they prevent anyone from actually being buried or cremated. Can we ever justify denying someone a burial simply because we believe they were a bad person? When we execute criminals in the United States, we don’t leave their bodies to rot. We bury them. Even Osama bin Laden was allowed to be buried peacefully at sea.

At best, protesting the funeral seems to be a futile gesture: Priebke is dead and unlikely to care whether people object to the proceedings or not, so the only people really being punished here are his children. I don’t believe it’s acceptable to punish the family of a war criminal simply by association. They didn’t chose their parents. Surely there has to be some way to allow the man’s family some closure and give them the dignity of a cremation or burial without offending Holocaust survivors and their families.

It’s understandable that no world governments want to be associated with Priebke’s legacy and don’t want to be seen as condoning his crimes. But in the end, I think that’s the wrong attitude to take. Allowing someone a funeral isn’t condoning anything — if we can allow a war criminal to peacefully pass away from natural causes at age 100, why is allowing a funeral any more controversial?

What do Care2 readers think? Did the protestors in Rome handle this situation the right way? Or was there something else they could have done to condemn Priebke and the Catholic fringe group that would have been more appropriate for the occasion?

Read more: , , , , , ,

Photo credit: Thinkstock

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it


+ add your own
3:56AM PST on Jan 26, 2014

Priebke enjoyed in Italy a very comfortable life and nobody confronted him when meeting him while he was strolling through the streets of Rome. We are discussing a perfectly theoretical matter, because nobody protested against his funeral as such. The protest – a perfectly justified one! – was against the attempt of some criminally idiotic neonazi groups to stage up solemn funerals and use them to advertise and celebrate nazism! If they had asked his parish church to celebrate his funeral there would have been no problem whatsoever! So, let us try to be serious!

3:17AM PST on Jan 26, 2014


12:31AM PST on Jan 26, 2014

Thanks Julie.

12:31AM PST on Jan 26, 2014

Thanks Julie.

4:23PM PST on Jan 4, 2014

No matter how one feels about what a person did in their life, protesting at a funeral serves no real purpose. The man is dead. Protesting what he did in life will not change anything. His ultimate fate is now in the hands of God. A funeral is more for the benefit of the survivors than for the deceased. His family will love him regardless of what he did. If no country wants to allow him too be buried on their soil, the family should consider cremation and spreading his ashes at sea in international waters.

And how dare the Catholic church judge him? The church has been, historically, responsible for more murders and attempted genocides than any other group, including the Nazis.

That being said, it is erroneous to compare these protestors to the Westboro Baptist Church. The WBC doesn't protest at funerals because of the individual being laid to rest but simply because it gives them a public forum where they know they will get press. They have protested at the funerals of good, pious people because, apparently they believe that every death is a punishment from God over homosexuality. Fred Phelps and his little cult simply want to get the attention.

2:48PM PST on Nov 29, 2013

By the time someone is dead surely it is too late to start protesting about what they did when they were alive. Those who commit crimes against humanity should be prosecuted, and punished, while they are still alive.

4:51PM PDT on Oct 24, 2013

No it's never ok to protest a funeral

4:51PM PDT on Oct 24, 2013

No it's never ok to protest a funeral

3:13AM PDT on Oct 23, 2013

This is all about perpetuating fundamental lies about wars. The ww11 like all wars are a fabrication by the bankers to further their power and profit regardless of who or how many die. The nuclear bombing of woman and children in japan was the greatest war crime of all time but because the bankers need America to support their agenda just like Bushes invasion of Iraq using the lie of weapons of mass destruction which still have never been found but we now know it was all about protecting the good old dollars because Saddam wanted to sell his oil for Euros not funny money. Yes its the bankers who are he real war criminals and when they are punished, we will see a better world.

7:25PM PDT on Oct 22, 2013

He was already dead so who was he going to hurt? His soul is
already gone so I don't know why this family can't do what they
want to do.

add your comment

Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free

meet our writers

ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Select names from your address book   |   Help
