Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Magnum Crimen Два Изостављена Поглавља Виктор Новак Василије Крестић PDF
Magnum Crimen Два Изостављена Поглавља Виктор Новак Василије Крестић PDF
2005
Viktor Novak
2005
РRБРАСЕ
8
PREDGOVOR
content and science enriched with а пеw knowledge about the attitude of the
Croatian Roman Catholic Episcopate towards Yugoslavia and the Yugoslavs,
towards the Sokol Movement and the reasons why it (the Episcopate) was so
vehemently hostile to it.
ТЬе chapter ECCI,ESIA MILIТANS АТ WAR WIТH ТНЕ IDEOLOGY
ОР TYRCH has Ьееl1 tound among the manuscripts of Viktor Novak type
\vritten. ТЬе differel1ce betweel1 this type written text and the text оп the
sheets is negligible. Only some words are Croatized and some minor editing
correctioI1 made. Since Novak has with his own hand corrected the already
printed text we deem that he has thus authorized it. This is the reason why we
decided to publish the thus latest version printed оп the sheets and omitted
from the book MAGNUM CRIMEN.
Viktor Novak's texts we are publishing are identical with the texts оп
the sheets. Nothing has Ьееп changed. 0111y some printing errors have Ьееп
corrected.
We would like to emphasize that remark по. 29 in the text of ECCLESIA
MILIТANS could 110t Ье found either in the type written text or in the
text printed оп the sheets. Remarks по. 93 and 103 refer to chapter XVI of
MAGNUM CRIMEN entitled ENTHUSIASТIC WELCOME - NDH (Inde-
pendent State ofCroatia) - AN OLD AND LONG COVETED DREAM. Due
to the omission of chapters XIV and XV аН chapters in the book have Ьееп
renumbered and some of their titles changed. BLOODY НARVEST was the
over title of the chapter entitled NDH-AN OLD AND LONG COVETED
DREAM ,vhich ,vas chapter XVIII оп the sheets.
]0
Preface/ Predgovor
11
XIV
ECCLESIA MILITANS
АТ WAR WITH TYRSH AND HIS IDEOLOGY
12
XIV
ECCLESIA MILITANS
RATUJE S TYRSEVOM IDEOLOGIJOM
13
Viktor Novak
14
МаgШ1111 сгimеп XIV
15
Viktor Novak
readily support. 3 In his speech Dr Tzar emphasizes that the Sokol has never .
Ьееп ап anti-religious organization, nor is it now. Оп the contrary. А great
number of Slovenian and Croatian Catholic priests are not only its members
but also leaders of its local branches. Moreover, the Sokol Center in Zagreb
was the уепие of the First Eucharistic Congress held in 1900, which proves
that the Sokols were not regarded as ап anti-religious and impious mоуе
ment, the proof being the presence at the First Croatian Sokol Rally of Dr.
Ante Bauer, at that time Archbishop-Coadjutor, the delegation of the Captol
and the parish priests of Zagreb. Еуеп the Chairman of the First Catholic
Congress, Count Miroslav Kulmer, attended the event. 4 At that time попе of
them viewed the Sokols as ап anti-religious or impious organization.
Ву 1911 the Croatian and аll other Sokol organizations јп Slavic соип
tries had [иllу adopted the principles established Ьу Miroslav Tyrsh, actually
the perennial Sokol principles. It was in 1912, at the ALL SLAVIC SOKOL
RALLY, held in Prague that for the first time unification of the Serbian,
Croatian and Slovenian Sokols was discussed as а possibility. Теп days Ье
fore the assassination in Sarayevo, at the meeting held in the Croatian Sokol
Center in Zagreb, the representative of the Slovenian and Serbian Sokols ех
pressed themselves јп favor of unification which implied joint work, use of
the same terminology, use of the same flags, the same commands, orders,
etc. Еуеп соmmоп Rule were drafted in that aim. The First World War was а
serious challenge to the Sokol Movement. The THIRD ALL SOKOL RALLY
was scheduled for August 1914 in Ljubljana. It never took place, being рro
hibited Ьу the Austrian-Hungarian government already оп Јипе 20, 1914.
The Serbian Sokols were the most persecuted in Sremski Karlovci, Zagreb,
Sarayevo, etc. In Slovenia too. The Sokols were among the first arrested and
in а great number.
After the end of the First World War The Sokols resumed their activities
јп the spirit of the proposals adopted in 1912 and 1914. The Extraordinary
Sokol Assembly was held јп Zagreb, оп Мау 11, 1919. Dr. Vlatko Machek
(Macek), опе of the speakers, addressing the Assembly said:
"We are аН Yugoslavs! Therefore, аН South Slavs, the Serbs,
Croats, Slovenes and Bulgarians should Ье members of the same
Slavic organization. The Sokols have nothing to do with politics and
this fundamental principle should Ье honored Ьу both the Sokols
16
Magnum crimen XIV
17
Viktor Novak
and the politicians. Also, as of today the Sokol АШапсе should keep
the fourth seat vacant for ош Bulgarian brothers. "5
Оп Јипе 15, 1919, the Meeting chaired Ьу Dr. Lazar Tzar decided that
аН Croatian Sokols should merge with the Serbian and Slovenian Sokols
into опе, united Sokol АШапсе. The FIRST SOKOL CONVENTION which
took place јп Novi Sad, from 28 to 30 Јипе, 1918, adopted а пеw organiza-
tional pattern of the Sokols. А month later the FIRST REGIONAL SOKOL
RALLY took place јп Maribor and оп that occasion the Serbian, Croatian
and Slovenian Sokols changed their пате into ТНЕ YUGOSLAV SOKOL
ALLIANCE. Its first Declaration provides guidelines for the Sokol activities
јп the new state. At the end it reads as follows:
"Rejuvenated, renewed and united the Sokol Movement of the
Serbs, Croats and Slovenes is most cordially greeting аН of уои, ош
people for whose freedom, progress and blossoming аН Sokols are
ready to sacrifice themselves. We strongly believe that the victory of
the national idea and the ideal of truth and justice wi1l bring Ьар
piness and реасе to all of us. We also remain devoted to the idea
of Slavism which epitomizes ош cultural and ethical strength and
which, we Ьоре, will continue to keep ош Ьитап soul alive even
after the death of old Gods. "6
It is interesting to note that already јп 1919 and 1920 the Croatian Sokols
left the АШапсе and founded their own national organization. This Ьар
pened before 1921 when differences between the Zagreb Sokol Society and
the Yugoslav Sokol АШапсе emerged due to internal conflicts оп political
grounds. It was actually а conflict between the concept of particularism and
separatism, оп the опе hand, and the concept of integral Yugoslavism, оп the
other. However, the Croatian Sokol remained faithful to the Sokol principles
of Tyrsh and his progressive ideology. Even the separatism prone Croatian
clergy did not deny support to Croatian Sokols. They did not refuse to bless
their flags јп spite of the fact that the Leaders and Senior members of the
Croatian Sokol still fostered the ideals and ideology of their founding [а
thers. At that time the clerical organization ORLOVI (the Eagles) was found-
ed with the support of high Catholic clergy, the Seniorate and Episcopate.
The idea was to take young people away [roт the Sokols and attract them
to јојп the new independent gymnastic clubs. When јп 1919 the Ministry
of Education issued а directive to аН schools to organize physical education
18
Magnum crimen XIV
Medutim, jos prije nego sto је nastupio spor izmedu sokolskog drustva
и Zagrebu i Jugoslavenskog sokolskog saveza (1921) pod utjecajem unutra-
snjih partijsko-politickih previranja (i па kraju istupio iz Jugoslavenskog so-
kolskog saveza i osnovao Hrvatski sokol), vec 1919. а pogotovo 1920. stali
su se javljati znaci kritike i negodovanja sa Jugoslavenskim sokolstvom. Вio
је to sukob ideja, partikularizma i separatizma s jedne strane i integralnog
Jugoslavenstva s druge strane. Hrvatski sokol је i dalje zadrzao Tyrsova so-
kolska nacela sa svom njegovom naprednom ideologijom. Prema njemu se
separatisticki orijentirano svecenstvo ophodi1o i dalje naklonjeno i ono ти
nije ustezalo svoju ротоС. тi se svecenici nisu opirali da blagoslove njihove
zastave, iako su vode i starjesine izjavljivale da ostaju vjerni ideologiji osni-
vaca sokolstva. U isto vrijeme pada i osnivanje klerikalnog Orlovstva kojemu
su utirali puteve vode klerikalizma seniorat i episkopat. Prije svega najprije
odvajanjem omladine od sokolstva ра onda uClanjivanjem и samostalna gi-
mnasticka udruzenja.LKad је Ministarstvo prosvjete 1919. izdalo naredenje
da se и svim skolama vrsi tjelovjeZba и sokolskom duhu, ta је Cinjenica bila
predmet raspravljanja jugoslavenskog episkopata па apri1skoj konferenciji
1920.] Nije bez znacenja podvuCi da se па toj konferenciji па kojoj se prvi
put odrazio antisokolski stav episkopata nalazio i papinski nuncij Cherubini.
Ova podudarnost zapazena је bila и javnosti i о njoj se и novinama sa su-
protnih gledista raspravljalo. \protest episkopata upucen Ministarstvu pros-
vjete Ыо је motiviran tezom da и skoli mora sav odgoj biti vjerski i па vjeri
osnovan .• Ovako organiziran sokol и Jugoslaviji, и kome su bili sjedinjeni
katolici, pravoslavni i muslimani i koji је stao da propovijeda nacelo "brat
је mio koje vjere Ыо", punu i istinsku vjersku snosljivost i naklonost i ljubav
prema braCi bez razlike ispovijedanja, od samog pocetka Ыо је gledan sa
nepovjerenjem. Teza о vjerskoj toleranciji smatrana је kao veoma opasna za
katolicizam. Napredno shvacanje voda sokola formirala је и оБта klerika-
laca sliku veoma slozenih opasnosti za klerikalizaffi\\ Sokolske manifestacije
za neoslobodenu bracu и Julijskoj Krajini i и profasistickom periodu, ozna-
cavane su od talijanske stampe kao imperijalisticke provokacije. Uz nekleri-
kalnu i klerikalna stampa и Italiji zauzela је prema sokolstvu vrlo ostar stav
napadajuCi ga kao ustanovu opasnu па istocnim granicama Italije. Stari sokol
19
Viktor Novak
according to the principles of the Sokol Movement the document was dis-
cussed Ьу the Yugoslav Episcopate at its Conference held in April1920. It was
at this Conference that а negative attitude against the Sokols was taken for the
first time. Тhe presence ofNuncio Cherubini at the Conference was publicly
discussed and commented in аН papers in different ways. Тhe Episcopate
еуеп lodged а protest with the Ministry of Education under the pretext that
аН aspects of school education should Ье based оп re1igious principles and
conducted in the re1igious spirit. Тhe Catho1ic Church could not accept
the Sokols who bring together the Catholics, Orthodox and Moslems, who
launch the idea that "а brother is dear regardless of his faith" and who pro-
mote true religious tolerance, affection and love for the brothers irrespective
of their confession. ActuaHy, the clerics considered religious tolerance and
progressive ideals as extremely dangerous to the Catholic Church. Moreover,
Тhe Sokol protests in support of the brothers in Julian Alps region during
the pro fascist period the Italian press qualified as ап imperialist рroуоса
tion. According to both clerical and поп -clerical Italian press the Sokols were
viewed as а threat to the Italian Eastern border Dr. Laza Popovitch (Popovic),
and outstanding and old member of the Sokols, refuted аН these accusations
оп the ground of valid arguments.l
Тhe members of the Clerical Party and their supporters (in further text
CLERICALS) tried to disguise the political background of their anti-Sokol
campaign Ьу transferring the whole issue to the sphere of religious educa-
tion. It was for the уегу first time that they brought ир the problem of philo-
sophical naturalism and indifference to the principles of Christianity in the
learning ofTyrsh, assessing them as dangerous to perennial Christian values.
ActuaHy, the clericals, favoring separatism, were much more apprehensive of
the idea of Yugoslavism than of the philosophy of Tyrsh. Опе month before
the Meeting of the Episcopate (March 1920) the Yugoslav Sokol АШапсе is-
sued а Declaration оп its attitude to the idea of Yugoslavism, which reads as
foHows:
"Тhe Revolution of the Yugoslav peoples for liberation and uni-
fication, brought to its successful end in 1918, epitomizes its great-
est achievement - the idea of Yugoslavism which implies freedom,
unity, independence, survival and progress of аН Yugoslav nations
living united in опе state. Тhe idea of the Sokol Movement actuaHy
stems [rom the national idea of Yugoslavism. Its aim is to unite аН
20
Magnum crimen XIV
7 Laza Popovic, Katolicki episkopat Jugoslavije protiv Sokola. "Jugoslavenska оЬпоуа njiva" 1920., br.
32, 495-496.
8 "Sokolski glasnik" 1920., 145-146.
21
Viktor Novak
former ethnic Sokol societies into опе Sokol organization and thus
overcome аН regional, ethnic, religious and class differences and help
our people get stronger and improve their physical, intellectual and
moral qualities so as to Ье ready to соре with аН challenges along
that way, including struggle for life ... In the struggle for the unity
of the movement аН Sokols should spare по effort to translate their
ideals into reality and help them take deep roots in the Movement ...
Within the соттоп strive to keep the idea of Yugoslavism alive аН
of уои are equally great, equally useful and equally valuable ... "8
ТЬе idea ofYugoslavism and the principles of the Sokol Movement based
оп brotherhood and self-sacrifice as а prerequisite for national revival and
progress were а serious threat to аН promoters of separatism, particularly
the Croatian clericals and their supporters. Most of the Sokol leaders, par-
ticularly during the initial stage of the Movement, were sincere supporters of
the Sokol ideology that the Movement should exclusively serve the national
interests. However, it should Ье emphasized that the hostile ideas of some
politicians jeopardized the Sokol Movement and the idea of Yugoslavism.
But а similar damage to the Sokol Movement and the idea of Yugoslavism
was done Ьу those who encouraged education of the Sokols in the spirit of
Monarchism and support to the Royal Family, or abused the Sokols in pro-
moting the interests of some political parties, or against some social move-
ments. It is from these positions that most criticism, not always unjustified,
was addressed to the promoters ofthe Sokol Idea which till1918 had played а
positive role in the struggle for Slavic solidarity. ТЬе Catholic Episcopate and
the clericals very smartly took advantage of these differences and transferred
the whole issue to the sphere of education. ТЬеу were not only against secu-
larization of religious education but also against general education promot-
ing national features and features of national cultural heritage, not organized
or approved Ьу the Church. Evidently, ТЬе Sokols who promoted brother-
hood and equality of аН religions had а great епету in the Catholic Church
for whom religious tolerance was equal to religious indifference and as such
а great епету of the Church and religion.
ТЬе conflict of these totally opposing concepts of the progressive and
conservative, the Yugoslav and exclusively Croatian, tolerance and intoler-
апсе, continued in Zagreb and in аН regions populated Ьу Croats and was
gaining impetus with the increasing resistance of the clerical movement to
the idea of Yugoslavism, brotherhood and religious tolerance, from its та-
22
Magnum crimen XIV
9 "ТНЕ VAТICAN AND IТS INTRIGUES AGAINST ТНЕ ALL SOKOL RALLY IN PRAGU". ТЬе
Poles brought uр interesting details of the policy conducted Ьу high clergy behind the scene.
(Vatikanske spletke protiv svesokolskog sleta и Pragu ... ), WORD ("ЮЈЕС"), 1926 по. 277.
24
Magnum crimen XIV
9 Vatikanske spletke protiv svesokolskog sleta и Pragu. Zanimljiva poljska otkrica iza kulise visoke
klerikalne politike. "Rijec" 1926., br. 277.
25
Viktor Novak
Komensky, "the national teacher", "а Galileo ofeducation" who were proud to
Ье called the people ofKomensky. ТЬе first anti-Sokol Epistle ofthe Catholic
Episcopate in Yugoslavia and later оп the attitude of the Nuncio in Belgrade,
Cherubini, reveal а similar approach, which proves that the strengthening of
the Slavic idea and its dissemination through the progressive and freedom
loving Sokol Movement was equally unacceptable to both the Vatican and its
obvious ally-fascism.
ТЬе Archbishop ofSarayevo, Sharitch and his close associates reproached
the Croatian Sokols for not joining the Eagle Movement (Orlovi) since they
share the same feelings of national exclusiveness and separatism. Aleksandar
Freudenreich, опе of the Sokolleaders, delivered јп Sarayevo а lecture оп the
Sokol Movement, which ignited а very interesting discussion between the
Sarayevo clericals and the representatives of the Croatian Sokol. ТЬе Sarayevo
clericals and their supporters were appalled to hear from Freudereich that:
"it is absolutely irrelevant whether опе wears а fez оп his head, or а cross,
whether while praying опе crosses himself or keeps bowing because reli-
gion motivated Ьу ethics is а matter ofheart. We respect everyone's religion."
Sharitch's KATOLICKI TJEDNIK (Catholic weekly) of Мау 15, 1927 vehe-
mently reacted to this statement warning the Catholic parents to take this
idea seriously. "If уои ЬеНеуе that the Catholic Church is the only stronghold
of everlasting celestial and earthly happiness then уои must know that the
movement disseminating the ideas contrary to the Gospel is not the right
place for уош children." Evidently, the idea of tolerance the Sokols were dis-
seminating was rejected with bitterness. ТЬе polemics that followed was а
good opportunity for Freudenreich to give а long lecture оп tolerance and
brotherly love in the spirit of the Jesus:
"Love уош next ... " and emphasize that the Sokols simply cannot trans-
form love for the next into hatred of а brother of different religion which is
neither his merit, nor his guilt.
It should, however, Ье emphasized that аН Catholic Bishops did not share
the views of Archbishops Sharinitch and Bauer оп the Sokols. It is interest-
ing to note that in his letter of July 30, 1928 to the Sokol Society in Vinkovci
Вishop Akshamovitch (Aksamovic) thanks them for the Memorial Book and
at the end says: "Greetings Sokols! (Zdravo Sokoli) God bless уои аН and help
уои get stronger and stronger!"lO
26
Magnum crimen XIV
27
Viktor Novak
29
Viktor Novak
ence. This book (Ways and Objectives) devotes due attention to the Sokol's
approach to religion. "ТЬе idea of the Sokol Movement is [иН respect for аН
religious beliefs and feelings as the most intimate aspects of spirituallife of
each individual and [иН support to the principle of religious tolerance." 11
ТЬе book deals in details with the topic of religion in а separate chapter
entitled: ТНЕ SOKOL MOVEMENT AND RELIGION.
"ТЬе Sokol ideology implies the right of the individual to free-
dom of thought and belief. Its members are expected to respect аН
other different, openly professed and sincere beliefs and convictions
Ьу, at the same time, safeguarding the purity of the Sokol ideology.
ТЬе Sokols [иНу respect аН religious beliefs and feelings as the lofti-
est aspects of the intimate life of each individual. Each member of
the Sokol is free to honor the principles of his religion and church
and behave accordingly."
ТЬе clericals and the Episcopate did not like this approach, particularly
now when the Sokol Movement got more closely linked to the elementary
and secondary school education. Actually, the entire concept of physical ed-
ucation at school was developed according to the Sokol system.
ТЬе clericals and the supporters ofORLOVI (Eagles) realized soon enough
that the establishment of the SOKOL ALLIANCE OF ТНЕ KINGDOM OF
YUGOSLAVIA and its role in the elementary and secondary school educa-
tion wi1l seriously impede their separatist activities. ТЬе Law оп the Sokols
of the Кingdom of Yugoslavia was vehemently criticized not only Ьу the
Yugoslav clericals, their supporters and the Yugoslav Episcopate, but also
Ьу the Italian fascist press and the official and semi -official Vatican press.
Evident1y, Боте bishops and archbishops were involved in the campaign
with the task not only to keep the Vatican informed about the imp1ications
of the new law, but also send their political comments with special emphasis
оп the prospects of separatism in view of that law. Ву the very nature of his
position the Nuncio was prominently active in this campaign. Не is known
for lodging protests against the Law оп the Role of the Sokols in Physical
Education. In the talks with the Yugoslav delegation in Rome negotiating the
CONCORDAT Cardinal Gasparri said that already in 1925 Боте Catho1ic
bishops in Yugoslavia were hostile to the state of Yugoslavia (at that time
called the Кingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes) and in Rome conduct-
ed а campaign against it. 12 In the light of that fact it is not difficult to assume
30
Magnum crimen XIV
.,.,
/ XIV.
- ECCLESIA MILITANS RAТUjE S ТYRSEVOM IDEOLOGIjOM
..~- 'Ргуо Sokol.ko drustvo osnоуапо је u Pragu 1862. Bilo ј: to ulшо роо[;је
sloma Bacllovog 3fJsolutizma i politUke odnarodav","ja, k.ju је austrij"ki .istem 8'а
planom izvodio nad nenjemaikim паrodп"ыtunа H~ ..г!;'""a carstva. Osmvaei
ideolozi ОУе nOVC narodne ustanove Ьilј 8U Јiпdгiсh Fugller i dr. Miroslav Туг" Оуо
dt-uItvо, kao i druga, koja su Бе р" njegovu шиu _ш\а оолi'Vаti ро Ce!koj,
postala з ... sastavnim d'jclom OPCeg narodnog preporoda. Сјlј је dru'lvu Ьio рod;...
,апје !Шсionаlпе 8videsti, орЈеlllcnјјуапј •. duicvne i fizicke roage lclkog naroda.
рtИет f.jzi&og i пюгаl,юg ищоја. Sokolfka dcviza: ]аСајmо вс! ~ је ле вато
za (ј'је/о; ·nego је obunvatila i d,ub, mогal, svijest, Јјооау ka domovini, ka .lоЬod; i
nezav.isnmti. Zdrav dUih u zdravom tijeJlI јтао је da oceJj~j јоеаЈе koje је probudena
nac;ја '11 ХНС stoljecu, u угјјете sloven.ske renesanse, рооtзујЈа U ргуј рЈап .уојјЬ
Т>I3I'tojanja. Pred plVU desetogod;snjicn postoj"",ja уеЈ: vel>kog bloja dru§tava, ТЈ::n
је 1871. podvukao o.novnu тј.ао zadai:ka Sokolslva:
»NaS ргУј i орБ zadatak је da 8rnо ргјје oel(o itko drugi pozv311i da
OOuуаmо .уој п..-od u опој svestTanoj !ivahno~ti koja пе da narodima da
izu.mru, u оуој &talnoj i svjezoj ~nazi. u onom tjclosnam, du5evnon'l. i moral-
пom zdravlj.u lюје пе da da .. ројауј ьјјо kakva pr<>past, "ј za.toj, ра пј
uazшlnја.!tvо. na}gori smrtoi zЈоЫп, koji то;;е da se УЈЋј nad оаrodјта.с l
31
Viktor Novak
the nature of their comments оп the Sokols. Since censorship during the
б-th ofJanuary regime was very strict the bishops smartly decided to use the
authority of the Holy See and its Encyclical devoted to general matters with
special emphasis оп Christian education. Everything in the Encyclical deal-
ing with education refers to Yugoslavia, without mentioning its пате. The
Vatican also reacted promptly. Оп December 31, 1929 Pius ХI announced
his Encyclical оп Christian Education of the young. In the introduction the
Роре explains that it is the nature of education in different countries and the
wish expressed Ьу а number of bishops and their believers to hear his views
оп that subject that he decided to openly аппоипсе them in this Encyclical. 13
Evidently the suggestion сате from Yugoslavia where in November 1929, а
month before the Encyclical, а Law оп the Sokol АШапсе of the Кingdom of
Yugoslavia and а Law оп School Education was enacted. The clericals and
their supporters were profoundly dissatisfied with both of these laws. То the
best of ош knowledge at that time this issue was not raised in апу other
country, except Italy which resulted in а conflict between Mussolini and the
Роре over the role of the CATHOLIC ACТION. Pius ХI admits that accord-
ing to church principle it is the church, the state and the family that share
the responsibility for the education of the young, but emphasizes that church
education has priority with regard to the other two because the spirit of the
church as а supreme and most reliable teacher of religion, should permeate
the complete school education.
,,1Ъе Church is, therefore, entitled to ореп and support schools
and other institutions teaching science and arts and culture, оп аН
levels. The same applies to physical education which should also Ье
under the motherly care of the Church because in view of its па
ture this education тау Ье developed to the benefit, or detriment, of
Christian education in general ... lЗа Furthermore, it is ап inalienable
right and imperative duty of the Church to monitor in аН public and
private schools and institutions not only the program of religious
education but also аН other aspects of teaching involving religion
and ethics. The use of that right should not Ье interpreted as interfer-
епсе of the Church because it only reflects its motherly care for the
children and their protection against аН kinds of dangerous scien-
tific and moral poisons."14
32
Magnum crimen XIV
33
Viktor Novak
15 Idem, 13-14
34
Magnuт стјтеп XIV
15 Enciklika, 13-14.
35
Viktor Novak
Јп Idеш,22-26.
17 Idеш, 23-24.
36
Magnum сгјтеп ХТУ
16 Enciklika, 22-26.
17 Enciklika, 23-24.
37
Viktor Novak
message of the Encyclical and their enthusiasm for the Roman Curia at that
particular moment was almost unprecedented in the history of their mutual
relations.
Thе Encyclical was very soon published in Yugoslavia in some papers
of the ORDINARIUM and in JANUARY 1930 as а separate booklet. Thus,
the Encyclical was given wide publicity and very soon attracted great public
attention as а significant and open political move of the Roman Curia. Thе
Episcopate and the clericals welcomed it with great enthusiasm because it
meant support from а high place to their negative attitude towards the exis-
ting school education and the Sokol. Thе Encyclical immediately aroused
animated discussions оп the po1iticallevel. At that time the situation in for-
eign policy was very complex and unfavorable. Revisionism was in fuH swing
in Austria and Hungary and wholeheartedly supported Ьу fascist Italy. Thе
Encyclical оп Education of Youth тау Ье interpreted as part of the same
effort. According to Milanese CORRIERE DELLA SERA the Encyclical
оп Christian education of Youth primarily addresses the circumstances in
Yugoslavia. For evident reasons r.:OSSERVATORE ROMANO of January
16, 1930 rejects the accusation and its connection with fascist ideology and
insists that the Encyclical has in view аН states and reflects the attitude of
the Catholic church to education of youth in general. Оп January 23, 1930
Roman TRIBUNA published ап article Ьу its Budapest correspondent un-
der the title: "Anti-Catholic Aspects of Serbian Struggle against Croats" in
which the author makes biased comments оп the situation in Yugoslavia.
Не even goes so far as to claim that the laws adopted Ьу the 6-th ofJanuary
regime endanger the property of some Croatian religious societies and in-
stitutions. Не also mentions the case of NAPREDAK which decided to
transfer its whole property to the Catholic Archbishopric of Sarayevo. АН
these comments indicate that negotiations оп the CONCORDAT will not
Ье continued. This and some other cases from time to time discussed in the
Austrian, Italian and Hungarian press represent only smart links in the chain
of activities undertaken and campaigns launched Ьу the Vienna clerical
REICHPOST and very keenly taken over Ьу the Italian fascist and the cleri-
cal press. Thе counter-attack was published soon in the article entitled: AN
ARTIFICIAL EFFORT ТО CREATE А CATHOLIC FRОNт. 18 Thе author of
the article signed CROAT CATHOLIC, evidently оп the ground of relevant
information and data from the Foreign Ministry, discusses а number of de-
velopments in foreign policy aimed against the interests of Yugoslavia and
18 ТЬе author was actually Мјlап Marjanovitch, Director of PRESS BURREAU. Minister Koroshetz
was very disturbed Ьу the article, but remained јп оfПсе.
38
Маgлum сгimел XIV
18 Sada se znа da је pisac Ыо Milan Marjanovic, tadanji sef Presbiroa. Clanak је uznemirio i ministra
Koroseca, mada је оп i dalje ostao u vladi.
39
Viktor Novak
40
Magnum crimen XIV
41
Viktor Novak
а Catholic front against аН others and the whole state. Some other interesting
developments along these lines should also Ье mentioned: the signing of the
LATERAN TREAТIES, reconci1iation between Mussolini and Pius Х1 and
the trip of Ante Pavelitch (Pavelic) to Bulgaria and Italy where he obtained
[иН support for his destructive activities against Yugoslavia. According to
evidences these activities were not conducted from Croatia, but from abroad,
to serve foreign interests in the first place. ТЬе ајm of combining the ethnic
with the religious aspect was to bring together аН dissatisfied Croats, not
only Croatian masses, but also Croatian intelligentsia, and persuade them
that the Catholic church as an international religious organization is the only
one сараblе of providing them the support they need for their struggle. It
should, however, Ье recaHed that the Croatian question has never been а
religious issue. ТЬе case in point are two Croatian leaders: Ante Starchevitch
(Ante Starcevic) and Stjepan Raditch (Stjepan RadiC) who both maintained
anti -clericals political views. N ow, the idea was to accept the leadership of the
church and the Ноllу See in Rome. 1n Vienna the Catholics and reactionar-
ies accused Serbia for being anti-Catholic. ActuaHy it was only their pretext
within the effort to establish а Catholic front. 1n Vienna and Rome best en-
deavors were being used to seH the idea that the Croats were denied equality
in Yugoslavia, not as Croats but as Catholics. ТЬе Nuncio in Belgrade vocif-
erously criticized the policy of education in Yugoslavia. Also, he organized
the population census in the Banovinas оп religious grounds and compared
the number of Catholics with their number employed in the regional ad-
ministration head offices (Banovina) in order to determine the percentage of
Catholics in public administration. ТЬе point was to impose some kind of а
"key" in the employment policy оп that level.
1his approach was in 1ine with the plans of Croatian clericals, the
Episcopate, the роНсу of fascist Italy and the Roman Curia. 1n their view this
was the right moment for pressure оп Yugoslavia to sign the СОNСОRDАт.
1n his circular letter the Bishop of Ljubljana, Jeg1ich (Jeglic) vehemently
criticized the new laws and regulations оп education and the status of the
Sokol, calling оп the devoted members of Catholic church to close ranks and
persevere in their resistance. ТЬе author of the article continues Ьу quot-
ing the Encyc1ical in which the clericals са]] оп Catholic parents to send
their children to Catholic schools only, although they are under some kind
of state control. ActuaHy, in spite of their independent administration and
autonomous development аН churches, including the Catholic Church, are
not separated from the state because the state partly budgets their activi-
ties and salaries of clergy. 1t is difficult to be1ieve that the Vatican did not
42
Magnum crimen XIV
43
Viktor Novak
know anything about these activities of the church. Evidently, the aim of the
anti-Yugoslav harangue was to antagonize the law abiding Catholics against
Yugoslavia and ignore the benefits and rights they enjoy in it as citizens and
believers. Evidently the intention was to leave the impression with the inter-
national community that there is по religious tolerance in Yugoslavia and
that Catholicism is jeopardized. In such an atmosphere the саН for а front in
defense of the Catholic faith and Catholic Church sounds natural and was
actuaHy planned as а smokescreen for the political aspect of the whole саm
paign.
It should Ье emphasized that аН Croatian Catholic priests did not partic-
ipate in that campaign, inspired from abroad and in the country conducted
Ьу а few fanatics who were very skillfuHy maintaining high tension. They
obediently foHow the instruction Ьу listening to the voice from abroad and
are deaf for the саН of their own flesh and blood, in the effort to bring under
their wing the whole Catholic clergy and аН Catholics in Yugoslavia. These
circle are not prone to the efforts of the Yugoslav government which is using
its best efforts to reach а favorable agreement with the Vatican and solve the
problems jeopardizing their mutual relations. It does not оссш to them to
support the request of the Government from 1924 that when appointing the
bishops the Holy See should select them from the list of candidates proposed
Ьу the Bishops' Council of that particular region. The Roman Curia does
not accept that limitation. The author of the article goes оп Ьу wondering
whether the clerical circles have the slightest feeling for the national aspect.
If they are sincere Croats they should support this request of the Yugoslav
government and thus prevent foreigners, Italians, Arnauts (Albanians),
Hungarians or Germans, to Ье appointed bishops in Dalmatia, Croatia,
Slovenia and Vojvodina. Efforts are being made to uproot from memory the
old request of Croatian priests to use the Glagolitic missal for Catholics оп
the whole territory of Yugoslavia. Why, wonders the author of the article
and answers: "Because it is not in the interest of the political background of
the whole campaign in support of the establishment of а Catholic front in
Yugoslavia. ActuaHy, this is not in line with the old Croatian tradition and
their struggle for national identity. This is an obscure machination which
Bishop Strossmayer would саН FURТIM, which means а specific, psychotic
atmosphere created in view of achieving а given aim. This high tension is
very smartly designed. The intention is to attract numerous former foHowers
of Stjepan Raditch (Radic) who used to insist оп the religious, but NOT оп
the confessional and clerical aspect, and also attract the intelligentsia, always
progressive, in the spirit ofStarchevitch or Strossmayer, and put them аН un-
44
Magnum crimen XIV
biti ograniCena predlozima biskupa jedne provincije. Ali, pita se pisac, ako
nasi crkveni krugovi imaju doista osjecaja za nacionalni momenat i ako u
njima doista Hrvati treba da nadu oslonac svojim nacionalnim nastojanjima,
zasto oni ne podrze оуо zahtjevanje vlade, ро kome Ы bila sprijecena ора
snost, da jednoga dana u jugoslavenskim biskupijama па sjeveru i па jugu, а
naroCito па zapadu, u Dalmaciji, u Hrvatskoj, u Sloveniji i u Vojvodini, ne
osvanu biskupi iz reda Talijana, Arnauta, Madzara ili Nijemaca? Zasto su
tako temeljito zabasurili stari zahtjev Hrvata za uvodenje glagoljice u katoli-
ckom bogosluzju па cijeloj teritoriji Jugoslavije? Naprosto stoga, odgovara
sasvim pravilno pisac, jer te stvari nisu u interesu one politicke pozadine koja
stoji iza Citavog ovog forsiranog nezadovoljstva i forsiranog formiranja kato-
licke fronte u Jugoslavij i. Sve ј е to protivno i daleko od stare hrvatske tradici-
је i Citavoj narodnoj ра i plemenskoj borbi Hrvata. Moze se nesto pokusati sa
kriumcarenim, zaobilaznim nacinom koji је Strossmayer nazvao "furtima-
skim". Jedino "furtim", "furtimastinom" moze da se podvali ovako nesto
Hrvatima, iskoriscujuCi postojecu i stvarajuCi novu psihozu medu njima.
Оуа se psihoza stvara jednim prepredenim nacinom, da se one mase, koje је
do nedavna vodio Radic i uzgajao ih u religioznom, ali ne i u konfesional-
nom, klerikalnom pravcu, i onu inteligenciju koja је u duhu bilo Starcevica,
bilo Strossmayera, bila uvijek napredna i kulturna, podredi vodstvu nekoliko
fanatika iz provincije, ili politicara iz Ljubljane, а pod uticajem Peste, Веса i
Rima. 20
Ovakav prikaz politicke atmosfere toga vremena u vezi sa klerikalnim
akcijama Ыо је uistinu vjeran odraz stvarnosti koje се u kasnijem zbivanju
naiCi па punu potvrdu, naroCito u uvodu u ustasku NDH, а u samom ustas-
tvu dat се hiljade naknadnih dokaza za njihovo ranije postojanje, ра i ono-
vremene klerikalne akcije. U tom trenutku, kada se prstom ukazalo па оуи
klerikalnu akciju, klerikalci su u koru povikali da su to najopakije i najnepra-
vednije denuncije. Odatle i odlucna reakcija zagrebackog nadbiskupa Bauera
па Clanak koji је u umjerenom i stvarnom izlaganju bez ikakvih licnih uvreda
samo iznio ор се uvjerenje sirih, naprednijih krugova u Jugoslaviji.
Nadbiskup Bauer ustvrdio је da је tesko ikada kroz оуо 50 godina sto
prati javni zivot u Hrvatskoj izasao u javnosti tezi napadaj па glavu katolicke
crkve, kojoj pripada hrvatski nar9d i gotovo polovina pucanstva Jugoslavije
kao i па katolicku crkvu иОРСЕ:/ Medutim, u tom trenutku је zacijelo za-
I
boravio nadbiskup Bauer па postojanje recimo zagrebackog "Hrvatskog
daka", "Pokreta", "Slobodne misli", "Vala", sibenskog "Naprednjaka", splitske
45
Viktor Novak
46
Magnum crimen XIV
21 Оуај termin "Hrvatski metropolit" је potpuno proizvoljan naziv, potpuno samozvani, i preuzet је
iz hrvatske stampe, та da ga nikad i nigdje пјје Rimska Kиrjja upotrjebila. Metropolita Croatics
пе postoji. Postoji Metropolita zagrebacke biskupije, а nikako Hrvatski metropolit ili Metropolita
Hrvatske koji Ы naziv јтао da odgovara madarskom Primas Hungariae. Postoji i naziv Primas
Serbiae, ali Metropolita Hrvatske пе. Reformno svecenstvo predlagalo је теЈи prvim svojim zahtje-
ујта i zeljama da se zagrebackom nadbiskupu da titula Primasa Jugoslavije. Svakako је karakteri-
sticno da se tako naziva sam nadbiskup Bauer. Njegovim primjerom роСј се i njegov nasljednik А.
Stepinac.
22 Hrvatski Metropolita па obranu crkve i Svetoga Оса. Izjava zagrebackog nadbiskupa dr. Antuna
Bauera uredniku "Hrvatske straze". "Hrvatska straza" 30. 1.1930. Vidi i "Katolicki list" 1930., br. 5,
56-57.
47
Viktor Novak
48
Magnum crimen XIV
sada postave neki naroCiti zahtjevi и vezi sa Enciklikom, jer Ы time jos i vise
и prvi plan Ыо uvucen autoritet Svete Stolice i same licnosti Pia XI. А to se
imalo pod cijenu tesko nametnute strpljivosti odloziti za najpogodniji tre-
nutak, kad ga budu odredi1e prilike и Jugoslaviji i suglasnost Rimske Кшјје.
Diskusija se nije stisala ni poslije svesokolskog sleta koji је odrzan sa velikim
svecanostima па Vidovdan 1930. Hrvatski klerikalizam manifestirao је svoje
snage i svoj stav и antipodnim svecanostima, и Zagrebu па Euharistickom
kongresu mjeseca augusta. U javnosti је smatrano da је оЬјауа i odrzavanje
Euharistickog kongresa doslo kao odgovor па odluku odrzavanja svesokol-
skog sleta и Beogradu. Uostalom tako su to tumabli i priredivaCi i ucesnici
Euharistickog kongresa. Jer, duh izvodenja оЫји svecanosti Ыо је najrjeCitiji
tumac и namjerama i ciljevima priredivaca. Zborovanje Euharistickog kon-
gresa zapocelo је 14. augusta 1930. а zavrseno 17. augusta. Papin delegat Ыо
је nuncij Pellegrinetti. Nadbiskup Bauer је dao i odgovor па pitanje zasto se
drzi оуај Euharisticki kongres "skopcan sa toliko troska, napora i zrtava? Nije
Isus Krist samo nas spasitelj, Оп је i nas Kralj, ра treba da ти se kao Kralju
klanjamo. Zato сет о ga svecano iznijeti па ulice grada Zagreba, da ти se svi,
svi javno kao Kralju poklone, da ти to bude naknada za sve uvrede sto ти
ih ljudi Cine i zadovoljstina za grijehe kojima ga vrijedaju". Predsjednik prj-
redivackog odbora, vikarni biskup Premus, ponovio је zakljucnu misao na-
dbiskupa Bauera kad је otvarajuCi kongres pozdravio kongres i izrazio "nadu
da се kongres рroСј sretno, koju пат daje i prisustvo delegata Svetog Оса раре
Msgra Pellegrinettija, jer је ро nјети теЈи nата sam Sveti Otac рара, nатје
snik Isusa Krista па zemiji, ра је tako i sam Krist теЈи nатаf"23 Sa kongresa
upucen је telegram и Beograd kralju i и Rim papi. Hrvati i Slovenci zahvalju-
ји papi па pocasti koju је ukazao kongresu sto је па nj izaslao svog nuncija.
"Izrazavaju nadalje svoju vjernost i odanost Rimskoj Apostolskoj
Stolici i Vasoj Svetosti kao zamjeniku onoga Isusa Krista, ајој pri-
sutnosti и presvetoj Euharistiji hoce оуај kongres odati postovanje i
slavu, uvjereni da је zaloga njihove narodne buducnosti lјиЬау pre-
та katolickoj crkvi i njenoj vidljivoj glavi па zemlji. Konacno тоlе
od Vase Svetosti blagoslov и svome radu i zborovanju, koje ima za
сЩ da presveta Euharistija preporodi duhovni zivot svih vjernika i
zavlada nasim javnim zivotom."24
Priprave koje su cinjene za taj kongres и klerikalnoj, а i и ostaloj sepa-
ratisticki orijentiranoj stampi и Zagrebu, Sarajevu, Splitu i drugdje, а tako i
49
Viktor Novak
rifice. Jesus is not only our Savior Не is also our Кing and we should bow to
him. 1herefore, we shaH take him to the streets of Zagreb in а solemn proces-
sion so that everyone can publicly bow before him and Ьу doing so expiate
for аН wrongs done to Him and give Him satisfaction for аН sins committed
against him."
ТЬе Vicar Вishop Premush (Premus), Chairman of the Organizing
Committee, reiterated the message, with which he concluded his opening ad-
dress to the Congress. "Expressing hope that the Congress will take place in а
favorable atmosphere he particularly emphasized that thanks to the presence
of Msgr PeHegrinetti, Envoy of the Holy Father, Christ is among us through
his representative оп Earth. "23
ТЬе Congress sent а telegram to the Кing in Belgrade and the Роре in
Rome. ТЬе Croats and Slovenes most cordiaHy thanked the Holy Father for
the tribute he paid to the Congress Ьу sending his Nuncio to represent him.
"ТЬе participants in the Congress also made а solemn pledge
of aHegiance, faithfulness and devotion to the Roman Apostolic See
and the Holy Father who represents Jesus Christ оп Earth and who,
through the Envoy of the Holy Father, is also present among us. It
is to his presence at this Holy Eucharistia that this Congress wants
to рау tribute and respect to our Lord, convinced that the future of
our people lies in love for Catholic Church and its visible LORD оп
Earth. ТЬе Participants beg your Holiness to bless the Congress and
support it in its efforts to help the Eucharistia enrich the spirituallife
of аН believers and take the lead in our public life. "24
АНinformation about the Congress in the clerical and other press ad-
vocating separatism in Zagreb, Sarayevo, Split and elsewhere and the at-
mosphere surrounding the Congress revealed that the connection between
Eucharistia and true religious feelings, оп the one hand, and the Congress,
оп the other, was only formal ТЬе general public understood the message
coming from the organizers and within that effort took part in violent dem-
onstrations staged in favor of separatism. 1here was not а single flag hoisted
in Zagreb, simply because Croatian flags, as ethnic, were prohibited and the
State flags were not acceptable. ActuaHy, the absence of the state flag is in-
dicative of the state of mind both of the organizers and participants. Only an
enormous flag of the Holy See was hoisted оп the tower of the Old Cathedral
with two tiny Yugoslav flags at each side, to meet the legal requirement.
50
Magnum crimen XIV
25 Niko Petric, Zagrebacki Euharisticki kongres. "Nasa sloga" 22. УIII. 1930.
51
Viktor Novak
52
Magnum crimen XIV
53
Viktor Novak
54
Маgпuш сriшеп XIV
55
Viktor Novak
Church. Lead us and bless our efforts to fulfiH our next task уои have
kindly assigned us in your divine providence, that through us we
win the hearts of аН our Slavic brothers so that together, in уои we
аН find јоу and ап eternal, happy homeland. AMEN"28
People very weH understood the figurative language of the Church and
from whom Jesus, the Кing ofКings, through his епуоу оп Earth, willliberate
them and restore their реасе of mind. Тhe message Pavelitch sent from Italy
was spreading from mouth to ear, always spiced with some personal сот
ments. Тhe most radical organizers of the Congress wanted to take advantage
of the atmosphere prevailing in the country in the most aggressive way pos-
sible. Eminent Croatian inteHectuals who condemned the 6-th of January
regime joined forces with them. 29 Before the beginning of the Congress I
talked to Dr Dezman, editor of OBZOR, about the Congress and its political
background, obvious еуеп to the much less informed. OBZOR started as а
liberal paper which fostered the ideas of Strossmayer and Yugoslavism, but
later changed its political stands. Now it was giving its fuH support to the
Congress and tried to bring to Zagreb as тапу Croats as possible to support
the event. Dr Dezman tried to explain that аН Croats, with по exception, do
not support the Belgrade regime. Тhey want freedom and independence and
in pursuing that aim they are ready to риН forces with the devil himself, еуеп
with the black International, with everybody willing and ready to help them
achieve their goal.
"Тhis Congress very weH serves our purpose. We shaH use this
occasion to openly demonstrate our hostility. We сап feel the politi-
cal atmosphere surrounding the Congress, which makes us particu-
larly happy, because it contributes to our success too. Тhe clericals
believing that аН these people are there for their sake wi1l brag about
it. Тheir illusion is irrelevant. Let them епјоу in their daydreaming.
Let them. It does not matter. In view of the prevailing circumstances
we аН have to join forces and Ье оп the same side: the clericals, соп
servatives, liberals or progressives. Тhe Croats are fortunate enough
to have the Catholic Church through which they сап speak both at
home and abroad. "30
56
Magnum crimen XIV
30 Razgovoru su prisustvovali па Korculi polovinom augusta 1930. u уш ing. А. Peyera јо!; i profesori
Ј. Tkalbl i С. Licar.
57
Viktor Novak
Further talks revealed that through the Vatican the Zagreb Curia had
already rendered important political services to the Croatian oposition ad-
vocating separatism. Dr МШуој Dezman was to the very detail familiar with
the secret machinations of the Croatian politicians. ТЬе articles published in
OBZOR at that time are the case in point.
ТЬе Eucharistic Congress in Zagreb was, undoubtedly, the first and most
courageous condemnation of the Кing and his policy, more than апу other
political act at that time and those that foHowed. Only stronger in that [е
spect will Ье some later political "punctuations" and Epistles of the Yugoslav
Episcopate against the Sokol. 1n his effort to win the Episcopate over to his
side, еуеп at the cost of golden chains, Кing Alexander only played into their
hands. Не was not smart enough to understand the рroblет. Еуеп the medal
KARADJORDJEVA ZVEZDA he took offhis chest and put it оп the chest of
Bishop Bauer did not do апу good. ТЬе offensive of Clericalism was in [иН
swing and they wanted everything. 1t was the order from abroad.
Like the Eucharistic Congress in Zagreb аН other local and district
congresses always had the same political background. Therefore, frequent
conflicts with the роНсе force, which was under strict orders to implement
the Law prohibiting ethnic intolerance. ТЬе masses were coming to the соп
gresses mainly for political and not religious reasons and in order to mani-
fest opposition to the regime. АН these politicaHy chaHenging controversies,
which often times ended ир in physical conflicts had nothing to do with the
respect for Eucharistia or prayers to Christ -the Кing. ТЬе роНсе reacted to
the violation of the Law according to which аН tribal flags were prohibited.
ТЬе clergy did not respect that Law and used to сапу these flags along with
the statues of the Holy Mother and the statues of other saints. Actually, nei-
ther the Episcopate, nor the clergy respected the Church and State laws in
force. Оп the contrary. АН these activities were, actuaHy, а smart mixture of
Catholic and religious feelings, оп the опе hand, and political aggressiveness
and intolerance, оп the other. А highly respected Catholic priest Dr Mirko
Perkovitch (Perkovic) in his article says openly and conrageously:
"Dangerous phenomenon-Dumping Jesuits" very bravely writes
about а phenomenon already present for two years, which тау Ье
very dangerous for future cultural and politicallife. This phenom-
епоп is accompanying аН religious events taking place in аН Catholic
parts of Yugoslavia. Nothing is wrong with such events when they
remain restricted to religious life. But this is not the case. АН these
events have а political and nationalistic background. Obviously,
their organizers have different, not religious objectives in mind. ТЬе
58
Magnum crimen XIV
59
Viktor Novak
organizers, actuaHy the bishops and priests, want to put the heritage
of Stjepan Radich, а great Slav and Croat, under the hat of Jesuits. 31
FoHowing in the wake of the Encyclical some bishops also
launched an intensive campaign against the amended Law оп
Schools. In his Epistle addressed to the Holy Mother Bishop Dr Josip
Srebrnitch (SrebrniC) vehemently attacks the Sokol.
Although devoted to the cult of the Holy Mother in his Epistle Вishop
Srebrnitch devotes а whole paragraph to Miroslav Tyrsh and his ideology
which was severely criticized in аН churches where the Epistle was read. What
Dr Srebrnitch, Вishop of Krk, said was unprecedented in church practice. In
Bohemia it never occurred to any of the bishops, at the time of Tyrsh, or
fifty years upon his death to launch а campaign in the style of Dr Srebrnitch,
Bishop ofKrk. Evidently, the Catholic Church in Yugoslavia had а special rea-
son to even belatedly make ир for the omission of the Bohemian Episcopate.
ActuaHy, this blow to dead Tyrsh was addressed to his life achievement-the
Sokol Movement.
This is what Dr Srebrnitch says in his Epistle: "As oflately the en-
emies of the Holy Mother have decided to change the tactics and act
meanly. ТЪеу started extolling and disseminating the spirit and ide-
ology ofTyrch and his views оп the world, the man, nation, state ....
Tyrsh is а state of mind. Не fosters the spirit of naturalism and mа
terialism. At first Tyrch was under the influence of the German
philosopher Schopenchauer and later [еН in love with the physical
culture of pagan Greeks. Не also [еН under the influence of some
Mohammedan ideas and adopted the materialistic view оп human
society and the evolution of human species according to Darwin's
theory. His ideology does not recognize God, nor the eternal life
of the Soul ... Tyrsh preaches freedom, brotherhood and equality in
the sense of naturalistic humanism ... Не caHs for education of the
human mind and strength of wi1l thanks to which man willlove his
country and his people, love freedom, Ье ready to defend his people,
support education and moral values, but аН that as part of secu-
lar culture, without God, without Christ, without Church, without
prayer, even without the Holy Mother, because his ideal is the Greek
ideal of Man. According to him "по one in history has ever created
а better man than the Greeks." This was the approach Tyrsh, the
founding father of numerous organizations for education of youth,
was promoting in his work, eliminating every possible religious,
60
Magnum crimen ХIУ
61
Viktor Novak
32 LENT EPISTLE ТО ТНЕ HOLY MOTHER (Коrizшепа poslanica posvecena Presvetoj Bogorodici
Mariji),1931.
33 Iуап Ivanchitch: ТНЕ SOKOLS AND RELIGION (Ivan IvanCic: Sokolstvo i vjera), "SOKO NA
JADRANU", 1931, NO.3, 47.
62
Magnum crimen XIV
Tyrsevih djela i njegova zivota tvrde da nije ni u jednom spisu niti odricao
Boga ni crkve niti ih је napadao, sve је to pronasao dr. SrebrniC. Naprotiv
drugi biskup, Frano Uccelini- Тice, uceni teolog i орсе kulturni erudita, sa
velikim zivotnim i pastoralnim iskustvom jos је ranije rekao: "ProuCio sam
nacela ро kojima sokolstvo radi i uputio sam se u taj rad, аН nisam nasao
nista, u cemu Ы se vjerski osjecaj mogao povrijediti".33
Srebrniceva poslanica izazvala је пе samo paznju nego i veliku polemiku.
Sokoli su izdali svoj odgovor "Tyrs па 10maCi" u kojem pobijaju Srebrniceve
optuZbe protiv Tyrsa.
"Као sto su plamenovi proZdirali zivo tijelo Tyrsevog zemljaka
Јапа Husa (1415.), tako Ы trebao da oganj gnjeva rimokatolickog
svecenika sazge i unisti osnivaca sokolstva - 47 godina ро njegovoj
smrti (1884.); '" Sa mirnim ponosom postavljamo svoju cast i svo-
је grudi tom novom napadu srdZbe rimokatolicke vojujuce crkve u
uvjerenju, da се se od nas odbiti valovje strasti, jer пат је тоЫа
bolje nego biskupu krckomu poznata u sokolskom zivotu tvrdo pro-
kusana rijec: "Ako s njim umremo s njim сет о takoder zivjeti; ako
s njim trpimo, s njim сето takoder kraljevati."
63
Viktor Novak
ТheEpistle not only aroused great interest but also triggered а hot contro-
versy. Тhe Sokols responded in an article entitled TYRSH ON ТНЕ STAKE
in which they refute аН accusations concocted Ьу Srebrnitch.
"In 1415 John Huss was burnt alive. Ву the same token, now in
1884, 47 years after his death, а Roman Catholic priest is trying to
destroy the founder of the Sokols Ьу burning him оп the stake of his
hatred ... Against this new attack of the militant Catholic Church
with pride and dignity we set ош chests and honor, convinced that
we shall Ье able to соре with that wave of hatred. We, Sokols know
it perhaps better then the Bishop of Krk that if we die with them
with them shall we live; if we suffer with them with them shall we
triumph!"
Тhe ensuing polemics was only an introduction to an organized attack
against the Sokols. Actually, the attack оп its privileged status within the
school system and its ideology was only an attack in disguise оп Yugoslavia
and а smart effort to bring to the attention of the international community
the difficulties the Catholic Church is allegedly facing in Yugoslavia. In vehe-
ment protests emphasis was placed оп the evident fact that Srebrnitch was
only the first link in а smartly concocted clero-fashist campaign. "In spite of
different messages coming [roт Rome we are [иНу aware that the progres-
sive ideals of the Yugoslav inte11igentsia wi1l соте true only if we develop
а strong national awareness, severe religious links with Rome, set ир а na-
tional Church and create а genuine Yugoslav amalgamation. Тhe ideology of
Tyrsh тау Ье helpful in this regard, because it is the ideology of truth and
progress."34 Тhis message сате from Sushak (Susak) the most vulnerable
point оп the Yugoslav -Italian border and was addressed to the Bishop of Krk,
highly respected Ьу Italian fascists. Fascism was triumphing because it had
found an аНу against the Sokols. А reliable one, there was по doubt about it.
At that time only at the mention of these activities and only а finger
pointed at someone of them triggered violent reaction and protests against
cruel and unjust denunciations.
Archbishop Bauer vehemently reacted to that article claiming that Bishop
Srebrnitch wanted to justify his views оп the ideology of Tyrsh Ьу produc-
ing more convincing proofs. For that purpose two new brochures were риЬ
lished: FIAT LUX and ТНЕ SPIRIТ OF TYRSH, which, according to Вishop
Srebrnitch, "contain some ideas very important for the education of ош
64
Magnum crimen XIV
34 Ljubo Serdar, Biskup dr. Srebrnic, Schopenchauer, darvinizam i Tyrseva ideologija. "Nasa sloga" 29.
III.1931.
35 Josip Srebrnic, Crkvi slobodu. Zagreb 1932.,31.
36 Josip Srebrnic, "Fiat lих". Zagreb 1931.,20-21.
65
Viktor Novak
youth"35 These two brochures prove that the whole controversy is actuaHy а
conflict between two different concepts of life and the fatherland, in other
words Yugoslavia, which were getting increasingly incompatible. Srebrnitch
reiterated his саН оп Roman Catholics and Old Catholics to adopt а negative
attitude towards Tyrsh and his ideology because:
"In that ideology there is по room for God; there is по roот for
the Кing of the centuries and ош Savior Jesus Christ who should Ье
venerated Ьу аН of us and before whom, ош God and Lord, we аН
should bow; there is по room for the Catholic Church, nor the Роре
representing Jesus Christ оп Earth, at the head of His flock leading
it along the road of truth; there is по room for Celestial Providence
governing this world with great wisdom ... А good Catholic cannot
Ье expected to entrust the education of his children to the system
fostering that spirit. Оп the contrary. Every good Catholic should
reject such system of education with iпdigпаtiоп!"3б
Thе
views ofDr Srebritch, Bishop ofKrk, spilled over the local boundar-
ies and were disseminated in аН Catholic Dioceses and Ьу аН ordinariums,
except in the Kotor Dioceses headed Ьу the old Bishop Frano Ucce11inni-
Titze. Srebrnitch was in constant conflict with the Sokols. When the SOKOLS
ОР ТНЕ KINGDOM ОР YUGOSLAVIA decided to mark the Hundredth
Anniversary of their founding father Miroslav Tyrsh оп March 5 or 6, 1932,
only а few days before the envisaged event, оп February 25, 1932, Bishop
Srebrnitch circulated his Epistle to аН Sokol Societies in which he argues with
the ideology of Tyrsh in his weH known manner, rejecting it as impious and
dangerous for true Catholics. His request that the Epistle Ье read during the
ceremony aroused derision among the Sokols. In his Epistle Srebrnitch does
not mention the Encyclical the Holy Father announced оп Christian educa-
tion because he did not want to jeopardize his authority. Thе Holy Father was
not openly engaged in the anti -Sokol campaign, foHowing it [roт the shade.
ActuaHy, Srebrnitch took advantage of every opportunity to engage in conflict
with the Sokols, which is evident from the letters they exchanged, e.g. in 1932
the Bishop's reaction to their invitation to celebrate the morning mass оп St.
George's Day (Djurdjevski uranak), or his angry comments оп the privi1eged
status of the Sokols who оп state holidays always had а prominent place in the
Cathedral. When in the Summe~ of 1932 Thе Sokol Society in Supetar asked
the priest to bless its flag he asked Bishop М. Pushitch (Pusic) for permission
Ј5 Josip Srebrnitch: "FREEDOM FOR ТНЕ CHURCH" (Crkvi slobodu), Zagreb, 1932.,31.
36 Josip Srebrnitch: ,ЛАТ LUX", Zagreb 1931., рр. 20-21.
66
Magnum crimen XIV
37 Susacki "Mornar" 1. IX. 1932. poredujuCi radnje talijanskih prelata па granici Jugoslavije s оуј·
та jugoslavenskih biskupa u odnosu prema Sokolu kaze i оуо: "Kad је па Rijeci biskup Celso
Constantini u crkvi sv. Vida blagoslovio bodez sto su ga rijecke zene obuzete erotickim [иroroт
poklonile D'Annunziu, оуај mitrirani prelat nije ni poslije toga zatrazio od D'Annunzia da јаупо
67
Viktor Novak
37 "MORNAR", (published јп Sushak), iп its article оfSерtешЬег 1, 1932, сошрагiпg the activities of
the Italian Prelates across the Yugosla\' border \vith those of the Yugoslav Bishops with regard to the
Sokols, ашопg other thiпgs says: "Iп the Church of St. Vitus, Celso Constantini, Bishop of Rijeka,
blessed the dagger, а gift of sexually obsessed wошеп to D'Аппuпziо, but the Prelate пеуе]' asked
D'Аппuпziо to риЫјсЈу refute iп frопt о{ the church аll dirty words he has used against Christ and
Catholic morality јп his books оп the Index оЕ Prohibited Books. And the НоЈу Father, Pius ХI? Не
\·егу \vell knows 'Nho Мussоliпi is апd what he is doing. Не also knows that iп Geneva, јп front of
some f'riends, Мussоliпi claimed tlblt there was по God! ... Before he blessed Mussolini and deco-
rated hiш with tl1e highбt ОгЈег, Medal of the Gоldеп Spur, did the НоЈу Father ask him to риЫјсЈу,
јп fгопt of tlJe church, геflJtе this Ыаsрl1ешу? NO! Апd before dесогаtiпg the поtoriОlJS bandit апd
агsошst GilJnto 311d some fascists directly involved јп the murder of the honest mап Matteotti did
the Роре ask them to герепt iп риЫјс for the cOl11mitted сгiшеs? NO! After his recent гесопсiliаtiоп
with the Duce did the Роре ask him to stop persecuting ош priests iп the Јuliaп region? NO!"
38 "SOKOLSКI GLASNIK", ЈиЈу 14, 1932.
68
Magnum crimen XIV
69
Viktor Novak
Srebrnitch for the first time makes reference to the Encyclical only in соп
nection with two major subjects: general school education and physical edu-
cation for youth.
"Only the епету of the Church and its Celestial mission, only
those who know nothing about the Church, only those who deny
God and immortality of the Soul, only those who ЬеНеуе that hu-
тап life is only Ше оп Earth dare deny the Church the right to edu-
cate young people. Church will never give ир that right. ТЬе future
existence of the Catholic Church depends оп its right to perform
that mission. 1herefore, it should Ье emphasized that the Church is,
in fact, persecuted in every state which denies or in апу way jeopar-
dizes that right to the Church. "39
Evidently, Dr. Srebrnitch wanted to emphasize that in Yugoslavia Ше is
very difficult for the Catholics under the hegemony of the Orthodox. Serbs.
1his was the only intention of the booklet Also, this was music to the ears of
both centers of Italian nationalism which actually feared the consolidation of
Yugoslavia. Dr. Josip Srebrnitch was ап absolute champion in conducting а
hypocritical, Machiavellian and Jesuitical роНсу. Не was definitely superior
to Dr. Ivan Sharitch (Saric) otherwise а grand master of that skill. Speaking
about the status of the Catholic Church in Yugoslavia Dr. Srebrnitch, being
what he was, completely distorted the truth and his comments were sheer
falsehood. It was not his blunder. It was part of а well pondered campaign
with а perfectly defined aim. At the end of his book Srebrnitch makes the
following comment:
"Вitter is the freedom which the Catholic Church enjoys in
Yugoslavia. Freedom of Church in Yugoslavia is sheer irony... Every
kind of slavery is а crime and the greatest of аН crimes is to deprive
the Church of its rights and reduce to slavery the loftiest Celestial
Providence turned into reality оп Earth, in the aim of alienating the
believers and push them to impiety..... High State officials should
Ье better acquainted with Church Canons, its spirit, its history and
its organizational pattern. Our High officials do not know or do not
want to know, anything about that .. 1his is the source of аН our соп
flicts, crisis, dissatisfactions, deviations from the right course and so
much injustice done to our Catholic Church and to the Catholics!
Before concluding 1 would like to launch and appeal: FREEDOM
70
Magl1um crimel1 XIV
zloCin liSiti Crkvu njezine slobode i njezinih prava, te nastojati, da bude Ona,
najljepsa realnost Bozjih zamisli па zemlji, ropkinjom, te расе sustavno iCi
za tim da se narod Crkvi otudi i zavede u bezvjerstvo ... Drzavnici Ы morali
tu Crkvu temeljito poznati, do dna Ы morali poznati njezin Zakonik, duh
Crkve, njezinu proslost i njezin ustroj. Nasi је drzavnici nazalost ne poznaju
ili nece da је poznaju. Radi toga, eto toliko nezadovoljstva, toliko kriza, toliko
lupanja, ра i toliko velikih nepravdi Crkvi i nama katolicima! ... Zavrsujem:
Crkvi Slobodu! U Krku, па blagdan Majke Bozje, Kraljice Svete Krunice, 27.
listopada 1932."40
Srebrnicevu misao prevela је najmnogobrojnija organizacija К. А. sa
"Hrvatskoj slobodu". Ovdje su se tako sustekle dvije misli koje su se i jedna-
ko dopunjale i pomagale.
Na drugoj strani, u talijanskoj fasistickoj stampi, sve su оуе ројауе u
Jugoslaviji bile registrirane i па svoj naCin komentirane. Kad је SKJ priredio
izloZbu u Beogradu, bili su prikazani i oni jugoslavenski djelovi koji su poslije
Rapalla doSli u sklop talijanske drzave, а u kojima је nekad cvjetalo sokolstvo.
NaroCito Rijeka, Zadar, Gorica i Trst bila su mjesta iz kojih је zraCila sokolska
misao. Zastavice, zavite u crno uz imena оуљ gradova па velikoj geografskoj
karti za milanski "Corriere della Sera" bile su strahovita provokacija. Jer, "one
pokazuju da jos ima brace koju treba osloboditi i da је сЩ sokola da pripravi
njihovo otkupljenje".41 Zato istodobni fasisticki i jugoslavenski klerikalni na-
padaji па SKJ dovodeni su u uzrocnu vezu kod velikog dijela rodoljuba, ра i
takvih koji su bili prema sokolu u kritickom stavu, sto је pristao da radi pod
diktatorskim rezimom. "Jugoslavenski katolicki episkopat i talijanski fasizam
kao ро dogovoru, u isto doba, naSli su se па istom terenu u borbi protiv so-
kolstva. Najnovija dva ispada protiv sokolstva, jedan sa strane fasista, а drugi
sa strane naseg episkopata, pokazuju, jer su istodobni, da se borba protiv so-
kolstva vodi s jedne zajednicke fronte ро jednom skupnom planu sa svim ra-
spoloZivim sredstvima".42 Svima rodoljubima bila Ы оуа stvar zagonetna da
nije bila i odvise oCigledna. Jer decenijama је postojalo sokolstvo, decenijama
su se blagosivljali sokolski domovi i zastave ... Decenijama је svecenstvo bilo
naklonjeno sokolstvu, koje је uvijek radilo u duhu Tyrseve ideologije. 1 sad se
najednom otkrilo da је sve to Ыlа jedna ogromna zabluda, da su blagosivljali
ustanovu, njene zastave i domove, koja se osnivala па bezvjerskim nacelima.
71
Viktor Novak
FOR OUR CHURCH! Krk, оп the Day of the Holy Mother, Queen
of the Rosary, October 27, 1932."40
CATHOLIC ACTION, the organization with the most massive mеm
bership, took over the ideas of Srebrnitch and published them in the paper
HRVATSKA SLOBODA (Croatian Freedom). This was actually the conver-
gence of two complementary ideas.
ТЬе Italian fascist press closely followed these developments in
Yugoslavia, informing about them and commenting them from their angle
of vision. When the SOKOLS OF ТНЕ KINGDOM OF YUGOSLAVIA or-
ganized their exhibition in Belgrade they also indicated оп the maps the
parts ofYugoslavia which after the RAPPALO TREATIES were handed over
to Italy, because the Sokol Movement used to flourish there, particularly in
Rijeka, Zadar, Gorica and Trieste. According to CORRIERE DELA SERA it
was аn unprecedented provocation to put the flags wrapped in black next to
the manes of these places, because it meant "that some of our brothers are
not free and that the Sokols intend to bring them freedom. "41 Маnу patriots,
еуеn those who criticized the Sokols for accepting to continue their activi-
ties under the dictatorship, recognized the connection between the simulta-
neous attacks of the Fascists and Yugoslav clericals and their supporters оп
the Movement "ТЬе Yugoslav Catholic Episcopate and the Italian Fascists,
as if Ьу agreement, are side Ьу side struggling against the Sokol Movement.
ТЬе two simultaneous attacks оп the Sokol Movement, оnе coming from
the Fascists and the other from the Yugoslav Episcopate are evidently part
of а joint front organized according to the same plan and with аН available
means"42 Everything was so evident that there was nothing enigmatic about
it. ТЬе Sokol Movement has existed for decades and for decades their centers
and flags have Ьееn ceremonially blessed ... For decades the clergy had Ьееn
prone to the Sokol Movement, always faithful to the ideology of Tyrsh. АН of
а sudden they discovered that everything was only а blunder, that they used
to bless the centers and flags of аn institution based оп religious indifference.
Evidently, the issue was raised for completely different reasons and Ьу differ-
ent circles, both from Yugoslavia and abroad.
Оп November 22, at the end of its work the Вishop Conference adopted
а Resolution later published in CATHOLIC GAZETTE (Katolicki 1ist), the
72
Magnum crimen XIV
73
Viktor Novak
official gazette of the Zagreb Diocese. ТЬе Public Prosecutor, being abso-
lutely independent, decided to prohibit it as "а threat to state interests." It
was а mistake because the uninformed general public was thus led to believe
that everything in the Resolution was true and that the prohibition meant
persecution of justice. Otherwise, the issue would have aroused only а lim-
ited public interest with по detrimental effect оп the interests of the State.
In the meantime the Episcopate managed to disseminate the Resolution. It
was even published in some clerical papers, e.g. in Dubrovnik NATIONAL
AWARNESS (Narodna svijest) of November 30, 1932, which was immedi-
ately prohibited.
Here is the whole text of the Resolution:
"At its regular Annual Conference held in November of this year
the Catholic Episcopate in Yugoslavia discussed important Church
and administrative matters and political issues regarding the Church.
After а very detailed discussion some important conclusions were
arrived at and the following Resolutions adopted:
1. ТЬе Episcopate strongly protests against uncivilized attacks
оп the Holy Father and Catholic holy objects Ьу non-Catholics and
enemies of the Church;
2. ТЬе Episcopate demands that the Church and the State, Ьу
mutual agreement, find а solution to аН issues of common interest.
Religious education in elementary and secondary schools and pro-
fessional schools of the same level should Ье devoted special atten-
tion so as to fully guarantee the rights of the Church and parents;
3. ТЬе Episcopate has соте to the conclusion that in school text
books many topics are presented in а way insulting to the Catholic
Church and its moral standards and grounded оп distorted histori-
cal facts. ТЬе Episcopate demands immediate corrections;
4. ТЬе Catholic Episcopate protests against evident injus-
tice done to Catholic parents Ьу appointing mostly or exclusively
поп -Саtlюliс teachers for their children. According to the Law оп
Education secular school teachers тау also teach religion, which is
unacceptable and makes this protest fully justified;
5. Owing to the fact that the Sokol of the Кingdom ofYugoslavia
fosters the naturalist philosophy of Tyrsh the Catholic Church de-
mands that Catholic youth Ье spared the fatal influence of that edu-
cational system;
6. ТЬе Catholic Episcopate condemns the insults and various
other forms of persecution Catholic bishops, priests and Catholic in-
te1ligentsia are exposed to through mean denunciations. This prac-
74
Magnum crimen XIV
75
Viktor Novak
tice has а negative effect оп реасе and harmony between the Church
and state authorities. "43
Аconfidential report based оп information coming from one of the
Captol Curiae in Zagreb, addressed to the Prime Minister in December
1932, describes the militant spirit prevailing at the Bishop Conference. These
information are absolutely re1iable. According to the Report "the most in-
transigent and hostile with regard to the state were: Dr. Sharitch, Bishop of
Sarayevo and Dr Srebrnitch, Bishop of Krk. Both demanded а more severe
and vehement resolution, including sabotage of state authorities, establish-
ment of closer contacts with the opposition and recall ofNuncio Pellegrinetti
in view of breaking off diplomatic relations between Yugoslavia and the
Vatican. It was Nuncio Pellegrinetti who сате to the Conference in Zagreb
оп the last day that persuaded them to withdraw these demands. According
to the Report the Conference developed in 1ine with the instructions of the
Jesuits who insisted оп the right of the Catho1ics to found their own, Catho1ic
athletic clubs. ТЬе CRUSADEERS (Krizari) should Ье in charge of these
Athletic clubs (Gymnastic societies), like in Austria and Germany and or-
ganize them according to the military system. Therefore, аН former Austrian
officers who were not accepted in the Yugoslav Army were called upon to
join the CRUSADEERS. At the end the Conference assigned Bishop Garitch
(Garic) and Jesuit Miiller to maintain contacts with the opposition, particu-
larly with the FRANKOVCI -USTASHA wing and its leader Dr Mile Budak,
the closest collaborator ofDr Ante Pave1itch, in emigration. Jesuit Miiller was
using his best efforts to persuade the opposition parties to overcome their
differences and together with the clericals and ustashas establish а united
front, not only against the government but also against the state. This newly
established united front was particularly active during the elections for the
National Assembly in November 1931. Archbishop Bauer convened in а con-
ference аН prominent members of the Captol, Catho1ic priests and members
of the CATHOLIC ACTION and asked them to boycott the elections, but at
the proposal of Canon Dr Raditchevitch (RadiceviC) the Captol rejected this
idea with а great majority of votes. Only Archbishop Bauer and his closest
collaborators were in favor of the proposal. Before the elections Secretary to
the Archbishop, Dr Slamitch (Slamic), in а confidential circular letter, re-
quested the boycott of elections, which was in line with the decision of the
opposition. One of the conclusions of particular interest was the саН of this
43 Неm seven of the Resolution recommends the priests and devoted Catholics to engage јп Charitable
activities.
76
Magnum crimen XIV
44 Iz prepisa sa originala, ustupljenog od licnosti, koja је autor ovog izvjestaja. О tim рlапоујта ерј
skopata, narocito о diplomatskom prekidu sa Jugoslavijom, prodrle su vijesti u stranu stampu, се
sku i austrijsku ("Narodny Listy" i "Neues Wiener Tagblatt"). "Ljubljansko Jutro" tim povodom
donijelo је decembra 1932. Clanak: "Konferencija jugoslovenskih skofov v Zagrebu. Senzacionalne
vesti inozemnih listov о poteku јп о sklepih skofovske konferencije." OdbijajuCi tvrdnje da postoji
progonstvo katolicke crkve u Jugoslaviji i poredujuCi progone julijsko-krajinskih crkava, "Jutro"
tvrdi da danas пета u Evropi drzave koja Ы sa toliko obzira stitila interese crkve i postovala vjerska
osjec'anja naroda kao sto је to u Jugoslaviji.
45 "Punktacije" dr. KoroSca. "Novosti" 12. I. 1933.
77
Viktor Novak
44 ТЬе сору of the original document was provided Ьу the author of this Report. ТЬе news about the
plans of the Episcopate, particularly regarding the break off of diplomatic relation with Yugoslavia
leaked out and was published јп Austrian and Czech press. ("Narodny Listy" and "Neues Wiener
Tagblatt"). "LJUBLJANSKO JUTRO" (Ljubljana Morning Paper), јп December 1932 published
the article entitled: "CONFERENCE OF YUGOSLAV SOKOLS IN ZAGREB"... Sensational news
јп foreign newspapers оп the course and сопсlusiопs of the Conference of Bishops јп Zagreb."
Denying the persecution of the Catholic church iп Yugoslavia and describing the forms of persecu-
tion of our church јп the Јuliап region the paper "JUTRO" (Morning) concludes that there is по
country јп Europe јп which the interests of the church and the religious feelings of the people are
more respected than iп Yugoslavia.
45 "Dr. KOROSCHETZ AND НIS РUNСТUАТЮNS" (Dr. Korosec i njegove "PUNKTACIJE"),
"NOVOSTI" (News), January 12,1933.
78
Magnum crimen XIV
79
Viktor Novak
Prague that "the ideas of the Sok01 Movement live unchanged in the hearts
and minds of аН Sok01s. АН ош Sok01 societies are organized in the spirit of
the 01d tradition of Sok01 brotherhood promoted Ьу Tyrsh. As 10ng as we, 01d
Sok01s, stay at its head the 01d spirit of S1avic Sok01 brotherhood will prevail
in ош new organization."
ActuaHy, the Episcopate was in favor of separatism and therefore ve-
hement1y opposed to the idea of S1avic brotherhood. Engelbert Gang1, а
S10venian Ьу nationality, ten years 1ater, when cooperation of Bishop Dr
Gregor Rozman with the greatest enemy of S1avism and the Yugos1av peop1es
Ьесаmе open and evident, discovered that a1ready in 1933 this bishop secret1y
worked for Roman c1ero-fascists. NaturaHy, the Sok01s and the genera1 public
were great1y disturbed Ьу the Epist1e and embittered against the Episcopate,
the c1erica1s and their supporters. ТЬе Sok01s, the c1erica1s and 1ibera1s of аН
c010rs were engaged in very animated p01emics.
"Offended and embittered SOKOLSKI GLASNIK (the Sok01
Hera1d) initiated the p01emics Ьу publishing the editoria1 signed Ьу
Englbert Gang1e, illustrated with а picture of the funera1 of Miros1av
Tyrsh, taken оп November 9, 1884 at Vats1av Square in Prague,
showing the participation of c1ergy in the procession. ТЬе artic1e dis-
cusses the problem in а very detailed manner, emphasizing that this
Epist1e is not an is01ated case and that it has nothing to do with the
interests of c1erica1 puritans at home. ТЬе artic1e assesses it as а very
weH p1anned action within the campaign Ita1y has been conducting
against Yugos1avia for а 10ng time.
With the faH of the Austria-Hungarian monarchy the Roman
Curia 10st the most powerfu1 strongh01d of its p01itica1 authority.
After the First Wor1d War the idea ofULTRAMONTANISM and the
efforts of the Vatican to enhance its influence in аН Catholic countries
were great1y jeopardized. In spite of that the Roman Curia was not
ready to give ир its empire оп earth, which is, obvious1y, the Vatican's
first priority with regard to the Ce1estia1 one. These aspirations of the
Vatican were obvious even to the 1ess familiar with the deve10pments
in internationa1 p01itics. These activities were conducted under the
guise of protection of the Cath01ic Church and Christianity. Best ef-
forts were used to seH politica1 aspirations under the 1аЬе1 of reli-
gious matters. Many peop1es trying to get rid of the Vatican's tute1age
had to engage in similar strugg1es in which the smeH ofhuman blood
rep1aced the scent of incense to the g10ry of the A1mighty. Nowadays
strugg1e is rep1aced Ьу refined dip10matic means and patience. ТЬе
approach actuaHy depended оп the circumstances in which the
80
Magnum crimen XIV
81
Viktor Novak
"6 See the case ofВishop Bonefachitch and don Frano Ivanishevitch, later јп the text.
"7 "ТНЕ PASTORAL PAPER" (Pastirski list) ОР ТНЕ CATHOLIC EPISCOPATE AGAINST ТНЕ
SOKOLS-declaration of cultural war!-"SOKOLSКI GLASNIK", January 13,1933.
82
Magnum crimen XIV
rnа dobro poznati sokolski ciljevi i teznje, kao i pred svirna sirorn
odkriveni sokolski zivot i rad, te koje rnogu da proizlaze sarno iz zle
volje, politickog racuna ili fanaticke zaslijepljenosti.
Savez Sokola Kraljevine Jugoslavije s ogorcenjern u dusi dize
svoj glas protiv ovakvog naCina borbe najvisih predstavnika katoli-
cke crkve u drzavi protiv sokolstva, koje tu borbu niCirn nije izazvalo
i sa zaljenjern utvrduje, da se bas sa onog rnjesta odakle treba da
Krscanska ljubav i pornirljivost zrace па cijeli nas narod i cijelu nasu
zernlju, u tako nada sve ozbiljno vrijerne nacionalnog i drzavnog zi-
vota, nastoji u siroke slojeve naseg naroda unijeti razdor i rnrznju,
i raspirivanjern vjerskih i plernenskih strasti, te unosenjern zabune
i uznernirenosti oslabiti otpornu snagu jugoslavenskog naroda, bas
onda kada rnи је ona najpotrebnija.
SKJ па prvoj svojoj skupstini od 29. rnarta 1931. godine u
Beogradu, u onde jednoglasno prirnljenirn rezolucijarna, iznio је
па jedino rnjerodavan naCin svoje stanoviste u odnosu Sokolstva
prerna vjeri, i, u potpunoj suglasnosti sa tradicionalnirn sokolskirn
shvacanjirna, utvrdio: Sokolstvo kao ideja slobode, priznaje i slobo-
du uvjerenja i rnisli svakog pojedinca, i da naroCito postuje svako
vjersko uvjerenje i osjecanje, srnatrajuCi vjeru najsvetijirn dijelorn
unutrasnjeg zivota svakog covjeka; da sljedstveno jednako postuje i
ispoljavanja svakog vjerskog uvjerenja i osjecanja, i da svaki pripa-
dnik sokolske organizacije rnoze slobodno da izvrsava zapovijesti i
propise svoje vjere i crkve ... "48
U savrsenoj podudarnosti episkopatskog napadaja, u korne se pri kraju
kaze pozivajuCi vjernike da ostanu cvrsti u vjeri otaca i neka se ne daju od
te vjere odvratiti od Sokolstva "koje nece da znade za Spasitelja nasega ni za
posteno nase hrvatsko i slovensko irne", dosao је i napadaj glavnog organa
fasisticke stranke u Italiji ("Lavore Fascista") koji је 12. januara 1933., dakle
poslije Citanja pastirske poslanice nazvao SKJ "zloCinackorn i nernoralnorn
organizacijorn" bacivsi па nju rnasu pogrda.
Sa svih strana zernlje gdjegod је bilo sokolskih drustava, naroCito iz
Hrvatske i Slovenije iz posve katolickih krajeva stizali su protestni telegrarni
protiv оуе biskupske poslanice. АН ne sarno i sokolska drustva, nego i brojne
druge nacionalne ustanove osudile su оуај biskupski postupak koji se роја
vio u trenutku najzivlje fasisticke antijugoslavenske akcije. U tirn trenucirna
48 "Politika" 17.1.1933.
83
Viktor Novak
also Slavic, пате in the title, the Sokol Movement actually stood up
against ош tradition and everything sacred to ош people."
ТНЕ SOKOL AI_LIANCE ОР ТНЕ KINGDOM ОР YUGO-
SLAVIA strongly rejects all these groundless and appalling accusa-
tions and insults. ТЬе aims and aspirations of the Sokols are very
well known. Тп their life and work there is nothing hidden from the
public еуе. It is the facts that refute all these slanders concocted Ьу ill
will, political calculations and tanatical blindness.
ТНЕ SOKOL ALLIANCE ОР ТНЕ КINGDOM ОР YUGO-
SLAVIA, with bitterness raises its voice against the kind of campaign
the highest representatives of the Catholic Church in this country
are waging against the Sokols who have not provoked it in апу way.
ТЬе Sokols deplore the fact that at this crucial moment in the life of
ош people and ош соuпtгу, instead of disseminating Christian love
and tolerance, the llighest representatives of the Catholic Church
disseminate hatred and dissent, instigate religious and ethnic intol-
erance and thus confuse and disturb the Yugoslav people and under-
mine the indispensable detensive ability of the country.
In опе of the Resolutions adopted Ьу its Assembly held in
Belgrade, оп March 29, 1931, the Sokols presented their attitude
to religion and in line with the Sokol tradition declared that: "ТЬе
Sokol Movement is based оп the idea of freedom and freedom of
thought and belief. ТЪе Sokols respect all religions. Every member
of the Sokol Movement is free to express his religious feelings which
are viewed as the most sacred aspect of his life as ап individual. This
means that every member of the Sokol Movement is free to respect
the principles of his faith and Church and behave accordingly... "48
At the end of its attack оп the Sokols the Episcopate calls оп the believers
to remain devoted to the faith of their forefathers and do not allow the Sokols
to persuade them to give up that faith, because "the Sokols reject ош Savior
and ош honest Croatian alld Slovenian пате. At the same time another at-
tack сате from the top of the Fascist party in Italy (LAVORE FASCISTA)
which, оп January 12, 1933, after the reading of the Epistle, addressed dirty
insults to the Sokol Аlliапсе of the Кingdom of Yugoslavia, еуеп calling it "а
criminal and immoral organization."
1Ъе Sokols from all over the country, particularly those from the Catholic
Croatian regions alld Slovenia, massively reacted to the Epistle Ьу sending
telegrams of protest. Numerous other national institutions also condemned
84
Magnum crimen XIV
85
Viktor Novak
this move of the Bishop Conference, at the moment of the most vigorous fas-
cist anti- Yugoslav campaign. 'Ље general public expected to hear the opinion
of those priests who have remained faithful to Strossmayer and his views оп
the Sokol Ыеа.
1n his interview to the Belgrade daily POLIТIKA Frano Uccellini-Titze,
Вishop of Kotor, asked to comment the Epistle said:
,,1 know what I ат going to say and what to expect after having
said it. 1 have never hesitated to say what I think and feel, nor will I
do it today. 1T WAS NOT А RELIGIOUS ISSUE. That is why I did
not sign the Epistle and it was not read in ту bishopric. If they in-
vite те to bless their work I will do it, in the пате of God and for
His sake. Contrary to what is said in the Epistle I have nothing to
reproach to the activities of the Sokols in ту bishopric and believe
that there will Ье по reproach in the future either. "49
'Ље statement of the Bishop of Kotor greatly impressed the general риЬ
lic, the Sokols and the clergy and caused а true sensation. His blow оп the
heads of his colleagues produced а stronger effect than any polemical book
оп that issue, or any public protest.
When they heard what the Bishop said the Sokols from Cetinje decided
to go to Kotor and personal1y thank the old bishop for his courage and his
words which were а balm оп the souls of the slandered and insulted. 'Ље old
Bishop was sincerely touched Ьу their words of gratitude. Emphasizing that
their national work has always been correct and in line with the principles
of Christianity, he also said: "Our only true salvation lies in the harmony
among the brothers of the same blood: the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. I have
been fostering this ideal since ту young days and under Austria I dedicated
ту D1VNA GLUMA (Perfect Acting) to the harmony and love between the
Serbs and Croats. I have always cherished that idea and I ат not going to give
it ир now! Dear brothers, thank уои for coming and continue to foster and
disseminate the feelings of love!" Оп that same day the Sokols took part in
the procession headed Ьу the Bishop himself. 50
'Ље Meeting of the Executive Board of the Sokol Alliance, held оп
February 6 and 7, 1933, forwarded to Bishop Uccellini-Titze а letter of grati-
tude for his nice words of consolation and promised to continue to behave
according to the highest moral principles and respect the faith and Church.
When Tzarevitch (Carevic) the Bishop of Dubrovnik refused to bless the
86
Magnum crimen XIV
87
Viktor Novak
flags of the Sokols [roт the surroundings of Dubrovnik it was the Bishop of
Kotor Ucce11ini -Тitze who did it. Оп that occasion, in his patriotic address,
the Вishop, mentioning the Epistle, said: ,,1 refused to sign the Epistle Ье
cause it was slanderous. ТЬе Sokols did not commit the guilt they are accused
of. ТЬе Epistle is а great error. That is why 1 criticized it. It was not based оп
true facts and consequently condemned the Sokols оп false grounds. Tears
were coming to ту eyes."51
А year later, оп Мау 14, 1934, Bishop Ucce11ini- Тitze made а statement
in which he said that the Epistle of the Holy Father could also Ье subject to
criticism.
"ТЬе Sokols are not guilty of what they accuse them for. In ту
bishopric they are beyond reproach. 1 immediately told them (the
bishops) that they were wrong. We in Dalmatia Нуе differently. 1 told
to one of them: "If уои don't change they will start spitting us in the
[асе. Their Epistle is а big mistake. Therefore 1 criticized them. ТЬе
facts they mention are not reliable. Their accusations against the
Sokols are false. Tears were coming to ту eyes!" This is what the old
bishop said speaking about the same thing in 1933 and 1934.52
ТЬе Bishop ofKotor was not the only one to condemn the Epistle. Several
priests met in Split and also condemned the Epistle and its demagogical ро
litical messages as damaging for the Church. One of the Catholic priest pres-
ent at the meeting even sent а letter to NOVOSТI (News) а Zagreb news-
paper, in which he explained their views. High clergy and the clericals were
enraged. It was а пеw and vigorous condemnation of high clergy. ТЬе letter
speaks about distortion of facts, lack of precision and falsehood. In addition
to that he author of the letter commends the Sokols for sincerity, openness
and generosity, qualities [иllу in line with the idea of Catholicism.
"ТЬе Epistle is sheer demagogy. Its intention is to instigate in-
tolerance and Pharisaism. It grossly violates the Constitution of our
Кingdom. Those who should Ье the first to respect the law are set-
ting а deplorable example. ТЬе Epistle is sheer Pharisaism which is
very sad. ТЬе Sokols have always respected the same principles and
they decided to attack them only now.
88
Magnum crimen XIV
89
Viktor Novak
... Why only now? Oddly enough, the Epistle comes together
with different PUNCTAТIONS, statements made Ьу miserable emi-
grants and ап ореп campaign conducted Ьу hostile press.
Let us Ье ореп and straightforward. They do not attack the
Sokols for their anti-religious activities. They attack the Sokols as а
Yugoslav national institution! 1 ЬеНеуе that the attacks оп the Sokols
сот е from foreign sources. The attack is also orchestrated out of fear
that the Sokols тау attract to their ranks аН our young people, which
would greatly jeopardize the activities of various CRUSADEERS
(Krizari) and similar anti-national organizations and movements. 1
say anti-national because in their statements and in their press there
is not а single word about the national aspect. The attacks оп the
Sokols are also motivated Ьу the fear that the clericals and their sup-
porters could lose control over various efforts of ethnic separatism
which, in the final account, might еуеп turn against them. This is the
explanation for demagogical bargaining in connection with various
PUNCTAТIONS"53
90
Magnum crimen XIV
54 Pismo biskupa dr. BonefaCica don Frani Ivanisevicu (17. XI. 1933.). Prepis s originala.
91
Viktor Novak
with апу other document. Оп1у perfidious free masons are сараblе
of p1anting such fa1sehoods. "54
1his is how Bishop Ucce11ini -Тitze, don Frano Ivanishevitch and а highly
respected reverend Vjekos1av Spinchitch (SpinciC) were promoted into "the
ringing ЬеН of free masons." In his answer to the Вishop (a1ready оп the [о1-
10wing day, January 18), Frano Ivanishevitch describes the situation and the
1iving conditions of ош реор1е in the ЈиНап A1ps region and speaks about
ап organized fascist campaign against Yugos1avia. Не is of the opinion that
in view of the situation Yugos1avia shou1d mobilize its patriotic forces for
defense.
"Не a1so rejected the criticism of the Bishop that war is not а
topic for priests to discuss. I emphasize that in ту speech I was not
calling for war. Оп the contrary. I оп1у spoke against the war. In ту
opinion in peacetime the priest should speak against ап aggressive
war concocted in the head of Mussolini and against his appetite for
ош coast. I tackled that issue in severa1 of ту public speeches in
Yugos1avia, as Chairman of the JUGOSLOVENSКA MATICA and
deputy of JAD RANSKA STRAZA and so far по опе in his right mind
has reproached те for discussing that subject in public." Don Frano
a1so rejects the insinuations of the Bishop that "he enjoys listening
to the big ЬеН of free masons", emphasizing that "he оп1у listens to
the voice of his conscious and behaves according to the criteria of
his wisdom. "In ту modest work-continued don Frano-faithfu1 to
the princip1es of Bishop Strossmayer, I have a1ways tried to strike
the right Ьа1апсе between the ethnic and the religious, between
the notion of Faith and the notion of the father1and. I have never
swerved from that path and I note with great satisfaction that ту at-
titude has a1ways Ьееп well accepted. And now, with аН due respect
for уои as ту Spiritua1 Father, strict1y speaking about the interest
of the Catholic Church оп1у, I [ее1 free to tell уои that Ьу attack-
ing the Soko1s the Catho1ic Episcopate has gone too far. It does not
stand to reason, nor is it honest to say that it was уои who wanted
to endanger ош country and particu1ar1y compromise its reputa-
tion abroad, because that wou1d Ье а crime punishable Ьу 1aw and
уои could Ье held responsible and tried for that. Now, when Ita1y is
supp1ying Hungary with weapons and concocting intrigues in the
effort to flare ир а war in the Ba1kans and Ешоре, Catholic Bishops
92
Magnum crimen XIV
55 Ооп Frano Ivanisevic biskupu dr. BonefaCicu, 18. 1. 1933. Prepis s originala.
93
Viktor Novak
55 DON FRANO IVANISHEVIТCH ТО ВISHOP Dr. BONEFACHIТCH, January 18, 1933, сору of
the original document.
56 ВISHOP Dr. BONEFACHIТCH ТО DON FRANO IVANISHEVIТCH, February 3,1933, по 426,
сору of the original document.
94
Magnum crimen XIV
56 Biskup dr. Bonefacic don Franu IvaniseviCu 3. П. 1933 .• br. 426. Prepis s originala.
95
Viktor Novak
98
Magnum crimen XIV
99
Viktor Novak
57 Viktor Novak: "OON FRANO JVANISHEvrтCH ABOUT ТНЕ EPISTLE OF ТНЕ CATHOLIC
EPISCOPATE", "POIJTIKA", F~hruary 3, 1933.
58 OON FRANO Ј\"АNЈSНЕ\'ПСН ТО вrSHOP Or. BONEFACHIТCH, February 6, 1933, сору of
the original cl0cument.
59 OON FRANO IVАNЈSНЕVПСН ТО BISHOP Dr. BONEFACHIТCH, February 6,1933, сору of
the original documel1t.
100
Маgпuш сriшеп XIV
njegov autor, dao izjavu profesoru Novaku u Beogradu, па Ciji ga tekst иро
zorava kao i па сЩ koji је ovim iпtеrvјuош imao. 58
U isto vrijeme su se razmimoisla pisma don Fral1ino, i novo biskupa
BonefaCica koje је uputio don Fral1u 6. II 1933. Biskup ovdje govori vec о
Clanku, doticno о izjavi datoj za "Politiku" i raspituje se da li је tekst vjerodo-
stojno reproduciran?
"Biskupskom ordinarijatu је potrebno da znade, jeste li Vi s gosp.
dr. V. Novakom doista о predmetu razgovarali i jeli u spomenutom
Clanku taj Vas razgovor u cijelosti i vjerno prikazan ili је potpuno ili
djelimicno mistifikacija? Ovim Vas se poziva, da u najkracem roku
biskupski ordinarijat о tomu izvjestite, odnosno izjavite, sto kanite
uCiniti, ako је razgovor Ыо iskrivljen i za popravak sablazni sto ји је
cak izazvao ро sebi, bez obzira па njegovu ispravnost. "59
UzdrzavajuCi se od svakog komel1tara, ostavljam da se neposredni utisci
dobiveni iz tih pisama povezu sa zakljuccima о jednom sasvim izuzetnom
moralnom shvacanju jednog biskupa u pogledu ataka па slobodu savjesti,
kojim se zeli postiCi poricanje jedne istinite tvrdnje, da је istina neistina. 1
opet istoga dana mimoisla su se 8. II pismo don Frana IvaniseviCa i biskupa
BonefaCica. Don Frano daje obavjestenja koja је biskup od njega trazio.
"Kako sam u тојет listu od 6. ov. тј. priopCio, tako Vam i ovim
listom potvrdujem, da sam ја ovlastio gosp. Viktora dr. Novaka neka
тој razgovor s njime о biskupskoj poslanici objelodani u "Politici"
sto је оп to i uCinio. Za nekoje stilisticke izreke, sporedne naravi,
koje su potekle iz njegova pera, ne mogu da odgovaram, ali za Citav
sadrzaj u glavnom ја uzimljem odgovornost i u savjesti sam potpu-
по miran, da sam onom izjavom mnogo doprinio ublazenju onog
05traca i zlovolje 5to је prouzrokovala poslanica kod dobrih rodo-
ljuba katolika, па prvi mah. Ро treCi put Vam, preuzviseni, iskreno
izjavljujem, da sve 5tO sam dosada uradio i sto си i dalje uraditi to је
sve u interesu i ugledu nase katolicke crkve. Eto Vam dokaza:
Pri prvom uzbudenju proti poslanici u nasem gradu, nastojao
sam kod nekih Clanova Sokola, neka se о prelazu па drugu vjeru,
kako su neke ugrijane glave mislile, niti ne govori i mogu Vam reCi,
da је тоја preporuka dosta djelovala. Kada је ovih dana dosao glas iz
Zagreba i Susaka, da se zapocne sa rastavom od Rima i osnuje nova
jugoslavenska katolicka crkva, nastojao sam kod onih, koji su se za to
101
Viktor Novak
103
Viktor Novak
60 ВISHOP Dr. BONEFACHIТCH ТО DON IVANISHEVIТCH, February 8, 1933., сору of the origi-
паЈ.
104
Magnum crimen XIV
Sokolski slet
7he Sokol Rally
а priznajete, da је и "Politici" ро Vasem ovlastenju iznesao dr. Viktor
Novak Vas razgovor s njime, bas radi toga sumnjicenja ро Vasem
misljenju i pisanju о biskupskoj poslanici - ро Vasem nalogu pre-
tiskanoj и "Jadranskoj Posti" i и "Novo Doba" - objavljenjem toga
razgovora је zgrazanje и javnosti jos уесе postalo, jer ste se driali
postavljenog nacela: Qui Ьепе distinguit, Ьепе docet.
Stoga Vas pozivijeт da posebnoт izjavoт kategoricki odbijete od
sebe svaku suтnju za clanak и "Novostiтa" kao takoder da pozalite i
pred javnoscu opozovete razgovor sa dr. V. Novakoт и forтi i sadrza-
ји kako је objavijen, jer јnасе biskupski ordinarijat bit се ponukan da
postupi preтa kanonskiт propisiтa. "
Biskup BonefaCic је, medutim, 11. П, uputio don Franu IvaniseviCu pri-
vatno i povjerljivo pismo, и kome ти пе odrice dobre namjere, аН ти pri-
govara da s izjavom и "Politici" zeli da biskupima dijeli lekcije о patriotizmu
i da pise и zargonu masonstva i denuncijantstva, jer da gleda sve kroz роН
ticke naocare. 1 sada ga pozivlje neka opozove svoju izjavu, inace neka ceka
kaznu.
Na оуо је don Frano Ivanisevic, kao i па pismo od 8. II odgovorio.
"Kako sam и тојет odgovoru 8. оу. тј. izjavio ја uzimljem svu
odgovornost za izjavu и "Politici" а пе mogu da odgovaram za Clап
ke и "Novostima", jer ih nisam napisao uistinu, kako sam уес izjavio,
105
Viktor Novak
106
Magnum crimen XIV
107
Viktor Novak
109
Viktor Novak
feel very happy for having done it. Оп the other hand, I ат ready
and willing to accept from уои every reprimand serving а given рш
pose, but I beg уои, the Right Reverend, to Ье cautious and Ьу trying
to риll out the weeds not to also риll out healthy wheat. I beg уои
not to take any action resulting in NOVISSIMUS ERROR PEJOR
РЮОЮ.
ТЬе Right Reverend, in the interest of the same cause I would
kindly ask уои for а favor. Namely, when уои see the Archbishop of
Zagreb if уои deem it pertinent, please bring to His attention ту ех
planation for what I have done. I hear from the circles in Belgrade and
Zagreb that efforts are being used to overcome this conflict, which I
most cordially welcome. If уои find that ту modest self could Ье of
any help in this regard I ат wholeheartedly at уош disposal. "62
Оп the 15-th of February don Frano Ivanishevitch answered the Bishop's
private letter ofthe ll-th ofFebruary, in а style which reflected stoical ра
tience, modesty and readiness to help his Church in а difficult situation. Оп
his part, the Bishop retaliated Ьу vehemently attacking the old patriot who
only wanted to draw the Вishop's attention to the possible negative effects of
the Epistle оп state interests. Being а patriot, like many other patriots, he was
convinced that the Epistle served the interests of those who undermine ош
state unity, although personally he did not believe that the Episcopate did it
deliberately.
"We should not close ош eyes, nor turn а deaf ear to what is
going оп around us and to what people talk about. I wonder wheth-
er the Right Reverend Bishops have read the statements of Prime
Minister Herriot and the former Italian Minister Sforza in which
they openly speak about Mussollini's intention to invade ош whole
Adriatic coast and аН ош islands. I can understand the attitude of
Bosnian Bishops and the Bishops in the hinterland. ТЬеу are far
from the coast. But we, living along the coast, the first target and
the first to bear the brunt, must never forget that this tragic develop-
ment will take place if we weaken the position of ош state. ТЬе Right
Reverend, I ат deeply convinced that аll those working against the
unity of ош state по w, in the present political circumstances, are ас
tuaHy working against its survival. ТЬе reaction of the State is, there-
fore, not surprising. ТЬе strict measures are meant to save the State
from destruction. ТЬе actual behavior of ош Church is not wise Ье-
110
Magnum crimen XIV
62 Don Frano Ivanisevic biskupu dru Bonefacicu 13. п. 1933. Prepis s originala.
63 Don Frano Ivanisevic biskupu dru BonefaCicu 15. п. 1933. Prepis s originala.
111
Viktor Novak
cause it is detrimental both to the Church and the State. Taking into
account аН the above I was induced to say јп ту statement that at the
present political moment the Epistle is absolutely pointless ... "63
Оп the 18-th ofFebruary, 1933 Bishop Kvirin Кlement sent his last letter
to don FrarlO Ivanishevitch calling оп the old priest to revoke his statement
јп the interest of Church discipline. In other words, he asked him to lie. Since
the old priest did not repent the Bishop of Split found him guilty, according
to the Canonical Rules of Inquisition, опlу because the old priest refused to
publicly and јп his right mind deny а statement he strongly believed was јп
the best interest of the Catholic Church. "ТЬе honest don Frano 10st his title
of Honorable priest of the Cathedral of Split, was prohibited to celebrate the
mass for six days, preach sermons and take confessions for опе year and was
ordered to practice spiritual exercises for three days. This was ап exemplary
punishment for his "abomination", according to Сапопјсаl Law i 27 and 385
and paragraphs: 2 300, 22 344 and 2 355. ТЬе Consistorium pronounced the
verdict at its Meeting of the 14-th of February, for non-compliance with the
order of the Ordinarium to риblјсlу repent for the committed evil. "64
Falsehood and mystification were behind the order "to repel1t for the
committed evil."
ТЬе old priest was appaHed and deeply offended Ьу the unjust punish-
ment and even more hurt Ьу the fact that јп the ХХ -th century coercion and
punishment were used against moral scruples and wisdom. ТЬе il1tention
was, оп the опе hand to stigmatize al1d humiliate the liberal opponent, and
оп the other, help the Episcopate improve its compromised reputation. Don
Frano Ivanishevitch found consolation јп the letters he had exchanged with
the old Вishop Ucellini- Тitze who completely shared his views. These letters
prove that Bishops: Srebrnitch, Yeglitch and Bonefachitch, each of them јп
his own way, tried to convince the old priest to revoke his statement as plant-
ed оп him! These letters also prove how 10w опе тау [аН Ьу using the power
of senior authority јп the effort to justify ап erroneous approach.
When јп his answer of the 7 -th of February, 1933, don Frano informed
Bishop Uccellini-Titze about the statement the Bishop expressed his [иН
agreement with every word јп the text. ТЬе Вishop was also against the whole
campaign launched at the po1iticaHy most inappropriate moment, consider-
112
Magnum crimen XIV
64 Biskup dr. BonefaCic don Franu Ivanisevicu 18. П. 1933. К. br. 616. Prepis s originala.
65 Biskup Frano Uccellini- Тјсе don Franu Ivanisevicu 7. П. 1933. Prepis s originala.
113
Viktor Novak
ing don Frano's statement ап act of patriotism. After repeating some ideas
already qlloted јп don Frano's letter to Bishop Bonefachitch, he also said:
,,1 ат very old, 1 have а very 10ng memory and 1 have very
illllch pardoned јп ту life, but 1 could never dream that the Catholic
Episcopate јп Yugoslavia would опе day аППОllпсе sllch ап аЬотј
паblе Epistle to Ье read [roт the Altar! Ве it опlу the last misfor-
tllnate paragraph and the Conclusions. This is а trick. And Ље so
called proofs! Уои have disqllalified them аll! Уои helped те а 10t Ьу
proving V\That 1 tried to prove, bllt did not succeed. Уои proved that
they were lying. Now ош Bishops will raise hue and cry against уои,
like they did against те. But both of llS have the same friend. This is
ош CONSOLAТION. 1 ат sending уои His picture so that уои сап
have Нјт close to уои. "65
Don Frano Ivanishevitch continued informing Bishop Uccellini -Тitze
about the course of the conflict with the Bishop, enclosing the copies of the
relevant letters. Two letters Ьу Bishop Uccellini, опе of the 19-th and the oth--
er of the 23- rd of February shed new light not опlу оп the anti -Sokol Epistle,
but also оп the moral scrup]es of Bishops: Dr. Srebrnitch, Dr. Yeglitch and
Dr. Bonefacllitch, who аН three called оп the old Bishop to revoke his pllblic
statements against the signatories of the Epistle.
Оп the 19-th of February, irritated Ьу the reaction to don Frano's state-
ment and his controversy with Bishop Bonefachitch, Bishop Ucce11ini Titze
made the following comment:
,,1 have never experienced anything similar јп ту life, nor did
1 expect it to happen to те. Stand firm оп the ground and mind
the traps. Those who speak the truth praise God. BOl1efachitch is
а great surprise to те, bllt if he decides to go too far try to contact
Rome through the Nllncio јп Belgrade. Yesterday 1 received а letter
[roт Fra Miloshevitch (Milosevic) about his visit to the Nuncio јп
Belgrade. We also discussed these issues Не told те abollt numerous
letters he had received, signed and anonymous. Не does not agree
with the anti-Sokol Epistle either. Не is of the орјпјоп that it was а
mistake to generalize some cases and mention Croatia and Slovenia
at the end of the Epistle. According to him the task of the Bishops is
to understand and disseminate religion јп the right way and behave
114
Magnum crimen XIV
19. 11 1933. рј5е biskup Uccellini- Тice, ogorcen nad svime 5to se
dogac1a, kao refleks don Franinih izjava i raspravljanja sa biskupom
BonefaCicem.
,,5to slicna u zivotu nijesam dozivio, niti sam se nadao doziviti. Тј
se drzi5 dobro i ne pU5taj se smesti od nikoga. Tko govori istinu Boga
hvali. Cudim se BonefaCicu, ali ako тi dodija obrati se па Rim preko
Nuncija u Beogradu. Jucer sam primio od Mil05evica iz Beograda
list, u kom тј рј5е о njegovu posjetu kod NUl1cija: 'Razgovarali smo
se о svim pitanjima. Rekao тј је da оп prima otud razna pisma sa
potpisom i bez potpisa, anonimna. Оп ne odobrava onu poslanicu
о Sokolima. Pojedine slucajeve nije se јтаlо generalizirati. Svr5etak
poslanice - hrvatsko i slavensko јте - osuc1uje. Оп kaze da biskupi
moraju jednako misliti i naucati u pitanju evanc1elja i vjere. U osta-
lim pitanjima mogu misliti kako hoce, pak su slobodni i u politickim
pitanjima: 66
Na mene se obratio pismeno biskup krcki, jer da sam stra5nO
sablaznio kod njeg cijeli svijet, pak hoce da povucem 5tO su о meni
pisali listovi - ali odre5ito, а da се те оп braniti! Da ga ovlastim!
Kratko sam ти odgovorio, ali fino i opapreno. Izmec1u ostalog: da
oni nesretni docetak opoganio сјјеlи poslanicu. Naputio sam ga i па
Tvoja pisanja u "Politici". 1 knez-biskup ljubljanski, jucer те је тоlјо
da se izjavim, је li istina 5tO рј5е о meni "Vreme"? Uputio sam njega
па Ьroј 7 "Sokola" od 10.11, koji se tiska u Ljubljani, ра da се vidje-
ti ogromnu 5tetu, 5tO su nanijeli biskupi katolickoj crkvi, osobito u
ovim stranama.
U ovom pitanju, тој dragi Frane, evo kako mislim ја: Na5i bisku-
рј javno su optuzili i javno osudili Sokole; ра su tu osudu najsvecani-
јјт naCinom u bozjem domu, s oltara i s amvona kroz blagdansku sv.
Misu proglasili kr5canskom puku, ukim i neukim, pismenim i ne-
pismenim. То је ne5to vrlo ozbiljno i znamenito i vrlo te5ko. Sokoli
nijesu bili pri optuzbi saslu5ani, а oni sada i Cine kroz uficijezni svoj
organ sasma pametno i zakonito. То јт se ne smije zanijekati. Suci
koji su ih tako svecano i 05tro javno osudili, duzni su ро savjesti i
svakom ljudskom bozjem pravu pomno savjesno i росјјеl0 5titi ova
opravdanja, ра nac1u lј da su ih krivo osudili, javno poreCi, kako su
ih i javno osudili. Ne uCine lј, za vijeke su se osramotili i nanijeli
ogromnu 5tetu svetoj crkvi.
Neka se koprcaju koliko hoce, oni se nece opravdati. Da ti odgo-
vorim s darom па dar, 5аlјет тi fotografiju 5tO sam ucinio pr0510-
66 Biskup Frano Uccellini-Tice don F'ranu Ivanisevicu 19, II, 1933, Prepis s originala,
115
Viktor Novak
116
Magnum crimen ХIУ
ga januara. Dragi Bog imade milosrda bolje nego neki ljudi tamo.
1 noge те ра i оа dobro sluze. Slava ти i hvala! Molim Те prijavi
mi se imades li sto nova da mi pises. Non fallare, поп tremare! Mi
u katolickoj crkvi imademo nas Codex, to је zakon za svakoga, od
maloga djeteka sto је krsteno danas, do Sv. Оса Раре. А sad idem
па objed."67
Kroz nekoliko dana, 23. 11 mogao је biskup Ucce1lini-Tice da doda dvo-
jici biskupa, koji su od njega traZili da odrece svoje date izjave, i trecega.
Biskupa dra BonefaCica.
"Dok sam iscekivao odgovor па тој zadnji list gdje sam Ti Ыо
priopCio razgovor don Antuna Milosevica sa apostolskim Nuncijem
u Beogradu, zatekao те spis tamosnje biskupske kurije u komu mi је
priopcena i Tvoja osuda. Evo Ti ovdje moga odgovora, drzi ga molim
Те za sebe. 68 1 meni biskupi Korosevci slovenski htjeli Ы da nametnu
brnjicu, najprije Srebrnic, za njim knez biskup ljubljanski, ра sad evo
i Istranin BonefaCic. Ро тоте mnijenju тi si osuden bez povoda i
nelegalno. Kada Ы se pozvati па Rim molim Те prijavi mi se.
А sad тој dragi prijatelju budi miran. 1 meni se pocetkom moga
episkopata dogodilo nesto slicna. Bio sam kaznjen zabranom роп
tificalium, koja је trajala duga 4 mjeseca, а bila Ы trajala i godinu.
А zasto? Za jedno djelo, koje sam ја smatrao Bogu najugodnije i za
тоји biskupiju najcasnije i najprobitacnije. Bila mi је savjest Cista, ра
nijesam zbog te kazne izgubio ni pet casa moga mirnoga sna. Sve је
svrsilo sa imenovanjem assistens solio pontificio, da nekako polizu
(и Vatikanu) grdnu svoju pogrjesku. 1 тi ро тоте sudu, mozes i kao
svecenik i kao patriota kazati: Savjest mi је Cista i pred Bogom i pred
svijetom, а oni sto su тi krivo иапш neka dobro promisle, da se пе
moze Boga varati kako se moze ljudima dati rog za svijecu. Ne idem
dalje, а jos uhvam primiti odgovor па тој zadnji list. "69
Ovu пеоЫспо vaznu prepisku ро tome pitanju zavrsilo је pismo
don Frana Ivanisevica, koje је 28. 11 uputio biskupu u Kotor.
"Vrlo те veseli Vas odvazni i ustrajni duh, odlicna vrlina u Cita-
vom Vasem zivotu, poznata пата, koji pratimo Vas rad jos sa skol-
skih klupa, ра evo i sada u ovom okrsaju sa ljudima kratkih i пеЫ
strih pogleda. Мепе је silno zacudio pokusaj biskupa BonefaCica,
koji mi nareduje, neka opozovem опо sto sam svijesno i promislje-
67 Idem.
68 Zato оуо pismo, па zalost nisam mogao dobiti.
69 Biskup Frano Uccellini don Franu Ivanisevicu 23. П. 1933.
117
Viktor Novak
ЬаЬу ир to the Ноlу Father. And now 1 have to stop and have ту
lunch."67
ОП the 23-rd of February Bishop Uccellini- Тitze got а letter
form Bishop Bonefachitch in which, like the previous two Nshops,
he asks him to refute his statement.
,,while waiting for уош answer to ту letter in which 1 inform
уои about the talks between don Antun Miloshevitch and the Nuncio
in Belgrade 1 received from the Curia of the Bishops the informa-
tion about уош verdict. Here is ту strictly confidential answer, just
for уои. 68 ТЬе Slovenian bishops, followers of Koroshetz, wanted
to muzzle те as well, first Srebrnitch, Bishop of Ljubljana and now
Bonefachitch, Bishop of Istria. 1п ту opinion the accusation against
уои is groundless and the verdict is not legal. 1f уои decide to арреаl
to Rome against the verdict let те know.
Take it easy, dear' friend. Something similar happened to те at
the beginning of ту Episcopate. 1 was prohibited to pontificate for
four months, although it could have Ьееп much 10nger. Why? For
doing something that 1 deemed would Ье pleasing to God and hon-
orable and beneficial for ту bishopric. Му conscious was clean and
1 опlу 10st less then five hours of peaceful sleep. 1п order to make
honorable amends they appointed ап assistenens solio pontificio.
1п ту view, as а priest and patriot уои сап also say: ту conscious
is clean before God and the whole world and those who did уои
wrong should remember that they сап deceive теп but they cannot
deceive God. 1 will stop now, expecting уош answer to ту last letter
to уои."69
This very important exchange of letters ended with the letter
don Frano 1vanishevitch sent to the Вishop of Kotor оп the 28-th of
February.
,,1 admire уош courage and perseverance, the qualities ассот
panying уои аН уош Ые. We who know уои since уош school days
are very well aware of them. Уои displayed these qualities also now
in this conflict with shortsighted реорlе with hazy views. 1 was very
surprised Ьу the order 1 received from Bishop Bonefachitch to refute
what 1 have declared јп full awareness and after а serious consider-
ation of the effects of ту words, having in mind only the interests of
67 Idem.
68 Unfortunately, 1 could not get this letter.
69 ВISHOP FRANO UCCELLINI-TIТTZE ТО DON FRANO IVANISHEVIТCH, February 23,
1933.
118
Magnum crimen XIV
the Catholic Church. But I have not yet 10st ту temper. I see from
your 1etters that уои have Ьееп contacted Ьу three bishops who de-
manded that уои a1so refute your statement. Believe те, the Right
Reverend, I simp1y cannot understand how dare they do that. This
is ап attempt оп your conscious. ТЬеу shou1d understand that the
act of your refuting the statement would Ье equa1 to mora1 suicide
of your honesty, your [асе and sou1. In ту view such requests are
immora1.
Оп the other hand, аН their attempts prove that their conscious
is not с1еап and that from the 10ftiest р1асе of Тruth, the A1tar, they
were trying to disseminate fa1sehood instead of truth, which is surfac-
ing and acting against them. I have contacted our реор1е in Be1grade
and Zagreb, аН good Croats and Cath01ics and they аН agree that
the Catholic Church shou1d Ье thankfu1 to Bishop Uccellini, rever-
end Ivanishevitch and professor Spinchitch that after the reading of
the anti-Sok01 Epist1e hundreds of thousands of Cath01ics did not
give ир their church. Опе ofthem was professor Shilovitch (Si10vic),
former Вап of the Croatian Banovina (Banovina Hrvatska) ап out-
standing sch01ar and а devoted Catholic.
ТЬе Right Reverend, thank уои for having Ьееп so ореп with
them and for advising them to Ье reasonable and соте ha1f way
back before it is too 1ate. Enc10sed p1ease find а сору of the verdict of
the Ordinarium of the Bishops against те. Four sentences, сап уои
believe it? And for what? For having prevented hundreds of thou-
sands of Catholics from giving ир their church. Уои right1y said that
something similar had never happened in Da1matia. Of course, the
unjust punishment hurts а 10t. But, ту conscious is с1еап.
In the verdict there is ап item against which I protested with the
Ordinarium. It exp1ains the root of the wh01e fa1sehood because the
decisions sounds as if I had admitted the abomination caused Ьу
ту statement published in POLIТIКA. Оп the contrary. ТЬе 1etters
I exchanged with Bishop Bonifachitch c1ear1y show that I believed
in what I was doing and was doing it for the benefit of the Cath01ic
Church, because it is their Epist1e that gave rise to great disappoint-
ment and abomination. I оп1у admitted to have formaHy vi01ated the
Ru1es of Church Discipline according to which the priests are not
aHowed to write about church matters without а previous approva1
of church authorities. For that I cou1d have Ьееп reprimanded and
ту further writing prohibited. Оп the other hand, the оп1у intention
of ту statement was to he1p overcome the conflict to the satisfaction
120
Magnum crimen XIV
121
Viktor Novak
of both the Church and the State. The sentence is too severe. I ат
not а criminal, 110Г а debauch priest, and they know it уегу we11. The
Right Reverend, I believe that уои share ту view. And now QUID
FACIENDUM? WHAT ТО DO? Do уои think that I should 10dge an
арреаl with Rome, through the Nllncio? I beg your advise because
I Ьауе never been in а similar sitllation before and I simply do not
know what to do. I wOllld Ье very thankful to Ьеаг from уои ... "70
Two exemplary priests, оп higЬ positions in Church ЫегагсЬу, highly
respected, both of them patriots, in their letters reveal that the clerics, in vie\v
of achieving а given goal, do not hesitate to resort to the methods contrary to
the basic principles of Christianity.
While don Frano Ivanishevitch was discussing his issue with Bishop
Bonefachitch and seeking advice from Bishop Uccellini and while the other
three bishops were using their best efforts to persuade Вishop Uccellini to
refllte his statement the Episcopate was shocked Ьу а пеw pro-Sokol and
anti-Epistle statement published in POLIТIKA ofFebruary 19,1933, which
was reprinted Ьу а11 other papers and had а wide риblјс есЬо. Its author was
Vjekoslav Spinchitch (SpinCic) an оЫ fighter for the national callse from
Istria, an ехетрlагу priest who was living in his native town Kastva, close
to the Italian boarder established Ьу the Rapa110 Тreaties, so that Ье litera11y
could see his brothers living under Italian occupation, deprived of their re-
ligious rights.
The оЫ Vjekoslav Spinchitch was also shocked Ьу the Epistle. When Ье
was asked to publicly express his opinion оп that isslle Ье did not hesitate
to give an interview for POLIТIKA to an оЫ Sokol Dr. Milorad Dragitch
(DragiC).
Не was far тоге open and vehemently against the Epistle than Bishop
Uccellini- Тitze and don Ivanishevitch. Vjekoslav Spinchitch was а Sokol аl
ready in high school (1868) which Ье attended in Rijeka and later during his
studies in Praglle from 1872 to 1875. Не realized that the Sokol Ыеа embod-
ied the 10ftiest patriotic ideals. As Member of Parliament in Vienna Ье estab-
lished contacts with Czech patriots who were а11, without exception, Sokols
Не never heard that the Sokols had anything to do with atheism, and Ье рег
sona11y knew some who were devoted believers. Later оп, during his work for
the national callse Ье got familiar with the Sokol Movement in Istria. Their
122
Magnum сrimеп XIV
123
Viktor Novak
activities were restricted to the field of national education and culture only
and they were always in the first Нпе of struggle for the renaissance of Istria.
"In view of ту past experience I was shocked Ьу the Epistle ...
I was appaHed to hear [roт ош bishops that Tyrsh grounded the
Sokol Movement оп atheism because I know that the Catholic priest
celebrated his funeral mass. ТЬе Sokol Movement has Ьееп existing
for seventy years. During аН that time neither ош, nor the Czech
Catholic priests and bishops, or апуопе else had а word of reproach
in that regard. Catholic priests and bishops used to attend the Sokol
events, and тапу of them were active members of the Sokols. For
that reason I have recently accepted the invitation of the Sokols in
Kastva to bless their flag.
I was shocked Ьу the Epistle because I personaHy know тапу
good Sokols who are also good Christians and good Catholics. I was
shocked Ьу the Epistle because I have never seen anything immoral
or indecent at апу of their events. I was shocked Ьу the Epistle par-
ticularly because I deem that the Sokols are ап eminent national or-
ganization whose primary task is to foster mutuallove and tolerance
among ош peoples and prepare them to defend the country in case
of danger.
For аН these reasons the Epistle dismayed аН ош peoples I par-
ticularly have in view the priests who are great supporters or friends
of the Sokol Movement and their pain when they had to read the
Epistle in their churches, from the Altar or the pulpit. ТЬе Sokols,
good Catholics and their friends were also dismayed. ТЬеу were аН
so dismayed that they did not know what to do ... ТЬеу simply сап
not believe that the Holy See and its Nuncio in Yugoslavia did not
know anything about it. ТЬеу are аН good Catholics and they want
to remain good Catholics! But the Epistle hurts, particularly in the
light of the fact that the Holy See goes hand in hand with the founder
of fascism, the Duce.
Protests against the Epistle were organized аН over the coun-
try. ТЬе closer to the Italian boarder the more vehement they get.
People living in the border region are particularly hurt Ьу the Epistle,
which explains why the Bishop of Kotor and Deputy Bishop of Bar
did not aHow the reading of the Epistles in the churches of their re-
spective dioceses. In тапу churches in Dalmatia the Epistle was not
read either. ТЬе protests against the Epistle were most vehement in
Sushak (Susak), Kastva, Tzrikvenitza (Crikvenica), Novi, Rab and
Krk. People in these regions very weH know and remember what is
124
Magnum crimen ХIУ
the neighboring country doing and speaking against us. Both the
secular and clerical Rome. Тhey very well remember that Andrey
Karlin, Вishop of Тrieste and Kopar, now Вishop of Maribor, was
forced Ьу the Holy See to leave Тrieste and his service there. Тhey
also know that the bishopric in Rijeka was established in great haste,
for purely political and not religious reasons. 1Ъеу also know that
the official Rome appointed Вishop Isidor Sain, who was installed Ьу
а Cardinal. But, Вishop Sain did not speak ош language and there-
fore could not сапу out his duties. However, Вishop Sain founded
in Rijeka а Clerical school (Sjemeniste) for education of priests. Тhe
students were prohibited to communicate in their mother tongue-
Croatian. Тhe violation of that rule was considered а sin which they
had to admit at confession.
People from the coastal region also remember the case of Sedey
who had to resign at the request of the Holy See ... Soon after he was
replaced Ьу the Italianized fascist Giovanni Sirotti he died of pain
and sorrow. People of that region very vividly remember аll that and
are therefore even more hurt Ьу the Epistle.
Тhey also know about the Lateran Тreaties between the secular
and clerical Rome. According to that Тreaties priests and spiritual
shepherds of the ethnic groups under Italy do not have to speak their
language. Оп the other hand, many priests-_missionaries learn the
languages of wild tribes so as to Ье аblе to properly teach them reli-
gion and spread Christianity. Тhis is the reason for empty churches
and а decreasing number of devoted believers.
I think that we should also speak about fascism in Italy. Fаsсisш
could not care less for religion and religious education. Some of their
activities are an offense to Christianity. In spite of that the bishops
over there, either as individuals, or in corpore have never raised their
voice against fascism ... And these fascists and their Duce do not dis-
seminate love, but hatred, they do not want реасе, they want war.
Тheir teachers оп the other side of ош border brainwash ош chil-
dren Ьу advising them not to go across the border because "they тау
Ье attacked, beaten even killed Ьу the people living there." Summary
courts kill one Mateotti, one Morzini and people like them in old
Italy. In Istria, Тrieste and Gorizia they kill ош people Ьу the name
of Gortan, Bidovac, Marushitch (Marusic), Milosh (Milos) and
Valentitch (Valentic). Fascist attack аН people they find suspicious,
particularly those of ош origin. Тhey beat them to death, maltreat
them, break into their homes, burn their houses, break into ош
churches and drive the priests out. Over there we once had several
126
Magnum crimen XIV
narodne skole kojih је bilo vise stotina; rasturena su sva nasa drustva
- prosvjetna i privredna.
Nasem narodu u Istri пе dozvoljava se da prede preko granice u
nasu drzavu па Тrsat da se pomoli trsatskoj Majci Bozjoj. Ра sve ovo
nije pokrenulo ni Svetu Stolicu ni talijanski episkopat da uzme u zasti-
tu povrijedeni princip vjere i poboinosti. А covjeka, pod счоm ирт
vom strasno pati nas narod u Italiji najvisi vatikanski dostojanstvenici
nazivaju providencijalnim covjekom, poslatim od Boga za dobro tali-
janske driave. Тај covjek ieli da uz роmос Svete Stolice obnovi Rimsko
carstvo, а najprije da osvoji nasu Dalmaciju. А sto to znaci znamo iz
historije kao iz svega onoga sto se zbiva u Istri, Тrstu i Gorici, naime:
Rimljanin gospodar, а stanovnistvo zauzetih zemalja - roblje.:,./f
Kad па sve to mislim, poslanica mi postaje jos teza ро svome
znacaju. NaroCito kad pomislim па doba u kome se pojavila. Italija
prijeti svakoga dana, naoruzava se, gradi tvrdave, brodove, nastoji
da pridobije i naoruza i druge drzave radi toga сЩа. Sve akcije ире
rene su protiv nas. Izdrzava i neke nase emigrante koji davaju toj
zешlјi Dalmaciju za toboznju Hrvatsku, koja Ы nesumnjivo postala
рliјепоm Italije i Madarske. Uopce паslапјапје пеkih паsih ljudi па
vanjske neprijatelje pretstavlja пајоdvrаtпiјu ројауи u паsеm zivotu.
То је izdajstvo. Svi smo duzпi da radimo unutra, u svojoj drzavi, da
пат se kuca uredi i da јасато опо sto su nagovjestavali viјеsпiсi
bolje buducnosti, zasto su dali svoje zivote stotine hiljada nasih lju-
di ... 1 bas u оуо vrijeme u koje podizu glavu razni protivnici nasi, u
vremenu kada Italija jasno i otvoreno govori 5to hoce protiv nas, u to
doba ројауа роslапicе djeluje jos роrаzпiје. А to se moze vidjeti jos
i iz toga, sto је talijanska stampa, а паrоCitо rijecka, prihvatila ovu
biskupsku poslanicu sa пајvisim odusevljenjem.
Sta treba Sokolstvo sada da radi? Тreba da prikupi sve svoje sile
da se i u hrvatskim, slovenskim i srpskim krajevima sto vise роmпо
zi broj sokola, uvijek razumije se kao i do sada sto nisu ЫН пi bez-
vjerci пi protuvjerci, i da sve svoje sile posvete dobru nase mlade
Jugoslavije; da intenzivno rade па dU5evnom stapanju i produblji-
vапјu jugoslavellskog narodnog jedinstva i da ovakvim оdgојпim
radom pripremaju narodu sretnu ЬuduСпоst ... "71
Ovako је Vjekoslav SрiпCiс па zalazu svoga zivota, kao prvoklasni ро
znavalac jugoslavenskih i tаliјапskih prilika, svjetovnih i crkvenih, svih роН
tickih aspiracija fasizma i Vatikana, kroz prizmu talijanske stampe, obuhvatio
127
Viktor Novak
71 "POLIТIKK, February 19, 1933 and "NOVO DOBK (New age), February 23, 1933.
128
Magnum crimen ХIУ
129
Viktor Novak
These are the words of Vjekoslav Spinchitch, perfectly familiar with the
situation in Yugoslavia and Italy, both in the secular and clerical field and
fully aware of the political aspirations of fascism and the Vatican, clearly ех
pressed in Italian press. ОП the ground of his Ше long experience and liv-
ing his last days he very weH understood the implications of the Epistle and
therefore condemned it as TREASON.
Telegrams of gratitude for his courage started pouring оп Vjekoslav
Spinchitch from аН over Yugoslavia, and particularly for having revealed the
background of the problem. 'Ље Catholic Episcopate, аН clerics and particu-
larly the Nuncio were appaHed and embittered. In his letter Вishop Uccellini
mentions that Vicar Antun Miloshevitch told him about the negative attitude
of the Nuncio to the Epistle. This was, evidently, only а cheap maneuver of
the Nuncio aware that he was talking to the Vicar of the Bishop of Kotor
in order to dispel every suspicion about the possible involvement of the
Holy See and the Vatican. This statement was particularly valuable because
Spinchitch was ап exemplary priest and respectful politician, who over sixty
year actively participated in the public Ше of Istria and Croatia as опе of
its most prominent public figures. His statement dealt а severe blow оп the
Episcopate and the enemies of Yugoslavia, who were particularly shocked
when they realized who was ready to unmask the Episcopate, so hypocriti-
саНу concerned for God and faith in connection with the ideology of Tyrsh
along the Italian border!
Now Dr Starchevitch (Starcevic) Bishop of Senj, in whose diocese
Vjekoslav Spinchitch lived, got the task to use the same method in his
case Bonefachitch, Srebrnitch and Yeglitch applied in the case of Bishop
Uccellini and Reverend Ivanishevitch. Namely, оп the 3-rd of March Bishop
Starchevitcll delegated two priests to contact Spinchitch and deliver him per-
sonally а written order of the Ordinarium of Senj to officially answer their
questions, namely: is his statement published in POLIТIKA trustworthy and
what are the names of other newspapers that have reprinted it; whether he
was ready to refute his statement regardless of its trustworthiness; to explain
the reasons behind his attack оп the Holy See and the Catholic Episcopate
and whether he accepts, or not, that Ьу making that statement he has vio-
lated the principle of subordination. Spinchitch answered аН these questions
frankly and directly. Не acknowledged authorship ofhis statement published
in POLIТIKA emphasizing that it only reflects his views оп the Sokols and
claimed that he did not attack the Holy See and the Episcopate. Не only
thought that the Роре and the bishops in Italy should Ье equally just towards
аН peoples, which is not the case now. Ву saying that he actuaHy wanted
130
Magnum crimen XIV
131
Viktor Novak
to once again raise the case of Archbishop of Gorizia, Sedey, which he de-
scribed in details in his statement. 72 After that а news spread that Spinchitch
was threatened with suspension "а divinis", which gave rise to new protests.
This piece of news was also announced in POLIТIKA and printed and abun-
dantly commented in аН dailies.
"Оп second reading and in view of suspension "а divinis" for
Spinchitch there is а smaH difference between the case of the late
Archbishop Sedey in Italy and the case of professor Spinchitch in
Yugoslavia as а free country. Spinchitch was а victim of his national
beliefs and Sedey was sacrificed as а fighter for our national and re-
ligious rights in fascist Italy. Spinchitch raised his voice in defense of
our national rights and against those who, under foreign influence,
were trying to usurp them in free Yugoslavia. If he is to Ье sacrificed
he will Ье sacrificed to the same Rome to which Sedey was sacrifised.
Is it possible that the zone of influence of the united Rome could in
such а short time spread from Gorizia to Zagreb and Senj?"73
The Inquisition in Senj and Zagreb did not have time to complete the
procedure because the old man died in the meantime. Thus, death inter-
rupted his argument with the Ordinarium. Professor Spinchitch died оп the
27-th ofMay, 1933. His funeral was ир to the respect he commanded. Viktor
Tzar Emin (Viktor Car Emin) an outstanding writer and his coHaborator in
his necrology for Spinchitch mentioned their encounter оп Easter when he
visited the ill professor. Оп that occasion Spinchitch showed him the docu-
ment the Вishop of Senj wrote оп the 3-rd of March, 1933 which [иНу en-
dorsed the views published in POLIТlКA about the action of the Bishops
against Spinchitch. At the end Vikrtor Tzar Emin emphasized that his at-
titude to the Epistle and his statement in POLIТIKA stem from his steadfast
principles and l1is awareness of the tragic history of Istria.
"Adherence to the principles was the most outstanding feature
of his strong personality. As an independent mind he was an open
enemy of the Vatican роНсу which has always been hostile to our
people. Spinchitch was а good Christian, like аН of us who worked
with him. But, he never missed the opportunity to reveal the machi-
nations of Italian clerics of аН grades and оп аН levels, who have
always worked and are still working against the vital interests of our
people. In Istria Spinchitch was openly against the ill-famed Bishop
132
Magnum crimen XIV
133
Viktor Novak
134
Magnum crimen XIV
75 Izjava nadbiskupa gospodina dr. Bauera о poslanici protiv Sokola. "Politika" 27. I. 1933.
135
Viktor Novak
cretly fostered in the heart have Ьееп revealed" (St. Luke. 2-35) and
now everybody knows how numerous the enemies of the Catholic
Church in Yugoslavia are. 75
This statement is in striking contrast with those given Ьу Uccellini,
Ivanishevitch and Spinchitch in the approach to the same issue and in the
tone and spirit of the discussion. Bishop Uccellini was ready to bless the
Sokol flags еуеп after the Epistle and continued to respect the Sokols for their
patriotic efforts, don Ivanishevitch and professor Spinchitch did not consider
them atheists and impious and аll three of them recognized the link between
the Epistle and the clero-fascist press and its enthusiastic reaction to it .. Оп
the other hand, Archbishop Bauer sees nothing but "the infernal hatred for
the Catholic Church" and "identifies numerous enemies of the Catholic
Church in Yugoslavia". Archbishop Bauer and Bishops Yeglitch, Bonefachitch,
Srebrnitch and Starchevitch did not manage to persuade the three exemplary
Catholic priest to change their mind with regard to the Epistle, nor did they
manage to change its general effect. Archbishop Bauer did not manage to ех
culpate the Zagreb Jesuits either (Не failed like in 1891 when he tried to соп
vince the Croatian Parliament (Hrvatski sabor) to let them соте to Croatia).
Actually, 10ng before that the opinion prevailed among the intellectuals that
the Jesuits stand behind аll important moves and actions undertaken Ьу the
Croatian and Slovenian Episcopate.
After the Archbishop's statement SOKOLSKI GLASNIK (the Sokol
Herald) опсе more reacted to the Epistle placing emphasis оп its spirit in line
with the political views of the FRANKOVCI and revealing its political, rather
than religious aims.
"The dirtiest accusation against the Yugoslav Sokols is the slan-
der that they reject the honest Slavic and Croatian пате. What else
сап it Ье than politics, politics against our State based оп the idea of
national unity and the Yugoslav пате! No wonder that the Epistle
was announced first abroad, in Italian press, and then in Yugoslavia.
Like in 1931, during the vehement conflict between the CATHOLIC
ACТION and fascism in Italy, when the Monsignories smuggled
across the border the Encyclical of Pius ХI and announced it abroad,
and опlу later in Italy... The purpose of the Epistle and the aim of
its authors are something quite different. Actually, High Catholic
Clergy was trying to use the Epistle as а tool for its rather aggressive
interference in daily politics. Their "struggle for religious and сиl-
136
Magnum crimen XIV
137
Viktor Novak
tural rights" was nothing but а maneuver in the effort to secure for
the Catholic Church the exclusive right to overall education for the
young, and not only in the religious, spiritual and ethical fields. The
proof can Ье found in the Resolution of the Conference of Вishops,
held оп the 17 -th of November last year. In its Conclusions out of
seven items four exclusively deal with education of the young, at
school and outside school. Actually, Ьу raising the issue of educa-
tion the Epistle has raised the fundamental problem underlying the
Church- State relations concerning the priority in organizing not
only the spiritual and ethical education of the young but also prior-
ity in shaping ош overall social and nationallife. This is the point of
the Epistle and this is what gives it а primarily political character. "76
While in Yugoslavia the Encyclical оп education of youth had the аЬоуе
described political aim in Italy, in the Summer of 1931 the same issue trig-
gered а conflict between CATHOLIC ACТION and fascism. The Vatican
was forced to comply with МussоШпi's warning, probably because it was the
Vatican that proclaimed Ыт "leader sent Ьу providence." Mussolini said that
"the priests should stay out of politics and that the state is the only responsi-
blе for education of the young." It is а notorious fact that Mussolini has used
роНсе torce to dissolve the CATHOLIC ACТION. Later оп, оп the ground
of an Agreement according to which Archbishop of Gorizia, Sesey, was sac-
rificed, the activities of CATHOLIC ACТION were restricted to the social
sphere only. After that, till the fall of fascism relations between Mussolini and
the Vatican remained harmonious.
The Catholics abroad also noticed the link between the anti-Sokol Epistle
and the anti -Sokol fascist propaganda with the Vatican in the background.
LA VIE CATHOLIQUE (Catholic life) published а statement of а Member
ofFrench Parliament, who said: "According to some information the Vatican
соиЫ Ье in the service of the Italian government in their joint effort against
Yugoslav unity. In more explicit terms, Mussolini is using Pius ХI to deepen
the internal crisis in Yugoslavia. The French liberal Herriot expressed а simi-
lar opinion. "77
It should Ье noted that in the Catholic regions 345 priests refused to read
the Epistle, and some only read it in excerpts?8
It was not only the Sokols, а few priests, scholars, public personalities
and some national institutions that protested. In many cities and towns
138
Magnum crimen XIV
139
Viktor Novak
gatherings (called Assemblies) were organized and from their rostrums the
Epistle was severely criticized. At its meeting of the 27 -th ofJanuary, 1933
the Boards of the Croatian Banovina vehemently criticized the Epistle. In his
statement Reverend Dr. Mato Novosel said that the bishops should reprint
the text Ьу Bishop Strossmayer in which he says:
"Мапу will Ье coming to уои, trying to persuade уои to stay
away from Serbs, others will keep repeating that уои should protect
the Catholic religion from the Orthodox, but BEWARE, because аН
these advisers could not care less for Croatism and Catholicism, they
only want to stir ир discord and disseminates hatred between the
brother of the same blood. А true friend of ош people, Ье he а Serb
or а Croat, is the опе who disseminates love between brothers of the
same blood. Оп the other hand, the опе who stirs ир discord and dis-
seminates hatred, Ье he а Serb, or а Croat, is ап infernal monster. "79
ТЬе National Assembly also had the topic of the Epistle оп its Agenda.
Оп the 16-th ofJanuary 1933 Dr. Milan Metikosh (Metikos) in his interpel-
lation to the Prime Minister asked him to explain this attack coming from
the bishops. In his opinion the Epistle reflects the political ambitions of the
Catholic Episcopate which claims that the Epistle was written in а Jesuit топ
astery and reveals its connection with the anti-Yugoslav activities of Italian
fascists. 80
Оп the 7-th ofFebruary, 1933 Dr. Nikola Kesheljevitch (Kesljevic) sub-
mitted to the National Assembly а draft law оп separation of the Church
and State. According to that law аН schools in Yugoslavia are secular; church
property as а national good becomes state property and the foHowing year it
is to Ье distributed to the members of the church, former owner of that prop-
erty; civil marriage is the only legaHy contracted marriage; the municipal ad-
ministration is јп charge of the registers of the Ьоrn, married and deceased;
the priests of аН ranks and аН confessions are before law citizens with the
same duties and responsibilities like аН others. 81 Оп the 17 -th of February
Ante Kovach (Kovac) оп behalf of а group of MPs in their interpeHation to
the Minister for Physical Education asked his explanation for the anti-Sokol
Epistle. 82
140
Magnum crimen XIV
141
Viktor Novak
In the general agitation against aggressive clericalism the idea was gain-
ing increasing support that the main source of the problem should Ье elimi-
nated, namely that the Jesuits should Ье prohibited to continue their activities
in Zagreb, Sarajevo, Ljubljana and elsewhere. ТЬе promoter of the action that
followed was Dr Oton Gavranchitch (GavranCic), Member ofParliament and
а Sokol of long standing.
In spite of some merits for the development of education in Croatia in
the XVII-th and XVIII-th century (described with due respect Ьу Рауао
Stoos, poet and priest, Ьу Ante Mazuranitch (Mazuranic) an outstanding
scholar, Ьу the historian and priest Ivsha Tkalchitch (Ivsa TkalCic) and lat-
er Ьу Strossmayer and Rachky) the Jesuits have left dark traces in the na-
tional history of Croatia. АН outstanding Croatian intellectuals used every
opportunity to emphasize the negative influence of the Jesuits and their
spirit оп Croatian clericalism. Petar Preradovitch (Preradovic), an out-
standing Croatian poet, expressed his ant -Jesuit revolt in his patriotic роет
DUBROVNIK, written in 1849, later included in his Collection of Patriotic
Poetry called RODOLJUPKE, published in 1873, Ьу the Yugoslav Academy
of Sciences and Arts (Franjo Rachky was chairman of the Board of Editors).
In this роет Preradovitch sings about the glory of Dubrovnik, deplores its
great tragedy caused Ьу the severe earthquake that struck it in 1667, and
speaks about the Jesuits in Dubrovnik as the greatest calamity of аН:
142
Magnum crimen XIV
83 Kad sam sa starim biskupom Uccelliniem 1935. i 1936. duze razgovarao о njegovoj mladosti, sa
gorcinom је ispricao kako su ти jezuite u Dubrovackoj gimnaziji nasilno рroтјјепili njegovo
јте Тice, сјјј predi poticu iz Hercegovine, u Uccellini i tako ти kroz sva dokumenta pronijeli ovo
nametnuto јте. Zato se kasnije Uccellini potpisivao: Uccellini- Тice.
84 Viktor Novak, Natko Nodilo. Novi Sad 1935., 155.
143
Viktor Novak
144
Magnum crimen XIV
As of the day of entering of this Law into effect the members of the
Society of Jesus have по right to find themselves in апу place оп the territory
of Yugoslavia.
2. Those members of the Society of Jesus who are Yugoslav citi-
zens and do not want to emigrate are entitled to settle and Нуе оп the
island of Krk.
'Ље Yugoslav citizens - members of the Society of Jesus who оп
the ground of the provisions of this Law decide to emigrate lose their
Yugoslav citizel1ship and if they decide to соте back to Yugoslavia
have the status of foreigners.
3. Members of the Society ofJesus-Yugoslav citizens are not al-
lowed to live in groups оп the island of Krk. 'Љеу have to Нуе sepa-
rately and work for their living. 'Љеу are not allowed to own рroр
erty, either purchased, or inherited.
If опе of them finds himself оп the territory of Yugoslavia 48
hours ироп entering into effect of this Law, or outside the island of
Krk if he is а Yugoslav citizen, he will Ье arrested Ьу роНсе and sen-
tenced to 30 days of prison. Upon having served his term he will Ье
deported across the boarder, or to the island of Krk ifhe is а Yugoslav
citizen.
4. If after the time determined Ьу this Law а member of the
Society of Jesus is discovered involved in апу church, or secular ас
tivity, he will Ье prosecuted Ьу the Criminal Court and sentenced to
5 years of prison. After having served the term he will Ье deported
across the border, or to the island of Krk if he is а Yugoslav citizens.
5. Immediately ироп entering into effect of this Law the relevant
authorities оп each territory will make ап inventory of the тоуаblе
and immovable property of the Society of Jesus.
This property will Ье sold at public auctions and the топеу prof-
itably invested with the State Mortgage Bank (Drzavna hipotekarna
banka). This топеу will partly go the Fund for education of Catholic
priests in the Yugoslav national spirit and partly used for financial
support to the poor Roman Catholic dioceses. 'Ље Minister ofJustice
and the Minister of education will issue special Decrees to regulate
that matter in more detai1s. 'Ље Decrees will have legal force.
6. This Law also applies to the Lazarists, to the Order of the
Sacred Heart and аll other orders of monks and nuns directly linked
to the Society of Jesus.
7. This Law goes into effect after having Ьееп signed Ьу the Кing
and officially promulgated."
146
Magnum crimen XIV
Obrazlozenje
"Red DruZbe Isusovaca osnovan ро Ignaciju Loyoli ima svrhu
da se bori za papinsku vlast. Оуи svoju zadacu red provodi kon-
sekventno od svog postanka do danas u svim zemljama u kojima
djeluje. Sjediste reda је u Rimu, gdje stoluje general, takozvani crni
рара. Red se dijeli па provincije. Na celu im је provincijal (ovakova
је t. zv. hrvatska, а пе jugoslavenska provincija u Zagrebu). Rade
u samostanima takozvanim kolegijima. Red se dijeli па cetiri klase
(grada). NajniZi su novaci. Novicijat traje dvije godine. Kroz to se
vrijeme ујеЉаји u posebnim zavodima u poslusnosti i samoodri-
сапји. Poslije dvije godine novicijata polazu tri poznata redovnicka
zavjeta, te prelaze u klasu (grad) skolastika. Оуа klasa traje 8 do 15
godina. То је vrijeme naukovanja. Treca klasa (grad) su koadjutori.
Dijele se u svjetovne (temporales) koji se skrbe za zemaljska dobra i
u duhovne (spirituales) koji vrse duznosti kao uCitelji omladine, kao
propovjednici i ispovjednici. Najvisa, cetvrta klasa (grad) jesu рro
fesori koji treba da su svrsili teologiju i koji polazu posebni cetvrti
zavjet bezuslovne poslusnosti Svetom Оси Papi. Odatle i ime: pro-
fessi (quatuor votorum). Izmedu profesa bira se'general reda, njegov
asistent, provincijal i иорсе svi casnici reda.
Ро svom kucnom redu Isusovci su obvezani, da zatome svaki
individualitet, radilo se о kakvom bilo prohtjevu ili kakvoj bilo spo-
sobnosti pojedinca. Jednako su obvezani па bezuslovno slijepu ро
kornost svojim starjesinama, па takozvanu pokornost ljesina. Тreba
imati па ити da је organizacija uredena sasvim ро vojnicki. Sve
пјЉоуе provincije stoje u stalnom posluhu prema generalu i svaki
Clап ima slijepo da slusa svaki nalog svoga starijeg, koji su u praksi
mahom professi, а koji su opet obvezani па slijepu pokornost prema
generalu i svetom оси papi.l...~
Kad promotrimo оуи organizaciju sa spomenutom duznom
okolnoscu sa gledista nase drzave i nasega raznovjerskoga naroda,
dolazimo do оуЉ konstatacija:
1. Jezuiti пе mogu da budu nacionalisti. 1 tom ih prijeCi slijepa
pokornost prema starjesinama, а u zadnjoj liniji prema пјЉоуот
generalu, а taj пета nikakvog nacionalnog osjecaja ni razumijeva-
пја. Оп је internacionalan. U tom im prijeCi пјЉоуо samoodricanje
i ugusivanje svake individualne volje. Ро tome postaju prosta masi-
147
Viktor Novak
JUSTIFICATION
"Society of Jesus was founded Ьу Ignatius Loyola with the task
to fight for the recognition of Роре as supreme authority. Since its
foundation to date the Jesuits have Ьееп using their best efforts to [е
alize that aim in аН countries in which they are active. Their See is in
Rome, headed Ьу their General called the Black Роре. ТЬе Society is
divided into provinces. ТЬе head of the province is called Provintziyal
(Provincijal). ТЬе See of the Croatian, not Yugoslav, province is in
Zagreb. ТЬе centers of their activities are the monasteries which
they саН collegiums. ТЬе Society has [ош grades (levels). ТЬе lowest
grade are the novices and they spend two years in that status. During
that time they Нуе in special institutions and practice obedience and
self-sacrifice. After two years the novices take three vows of monk-
hood. ТЬе next is the grade of scholar, which take 8-15 years. This
is actually the period of learning. ТЬе third is the grade of coadjutor
and the students are divided into two groups: the secular (tempora-
les) trained to deal with the matters connected with secular live, and
spiritual (spirituales) trained for teachers of the young, preachers or
confessors. ТЬе fourth is the grade of professors, usually with а uni-
versity degree in Theology. ТЬеу take а special vow of unconditional
obedience to he Holy Father. ТЬе title professor actually comes from
quator votorum. ТЬе General, his Assistant, the heads of provinces
(Provicijals) and аН high ranking officials of the Society of Jesus are
elected [roт among the professors.
ТЬе Jesuits have to totally obliterate their individuality, еу
ery personal desire or propensity. ТЬеу have to blindly оЬеу their
superiors"as if they were cadavers". ТЬе Society is organized accord-
ing to the military pattern. АН their provinces are subordinated to
the General and every member has to blindly сапу out the orders
of his superiors, mostly professors, who, оп their part, are blindly
subservient to their General and the Holy Father.
ТЬе analysis of this organization from the point of view of ош
state interests and the interests of ош multi -confessional population
leads to the following conclusion: Jesuits cannot Ье patriots because
of their commitment to blind obedience to their superiors and their
General. АН of them are practically depleted of national feelings and
without апу possible understanding for national matters. ТЬеу are
internationalists due to ир rooted individualism. Thus they all turn
into machines, each of them is reduced to опе part of the machine
operated Ьу the Grand General in Rome. In their practical activities
148
Magnum crimen XIV
152
Magnum crimen XIV
85 Prijedlog ... dra GavranCica о raspustu i izgonu Isusovaca. "Katolicki list" 1933., br. 8, 81-82.
153
Viktor Novak
the island of Vis. Еуеп there they should not Ье allowed to engage
in church activities and should live individually, not in groups, in
the aim of preventing their destructive activities. Опсе they leave
the country Jesuits-Yugoslav citizens, lose their Yugoslav citizen-
ship. Their leaving the country is understood as their giving ир
Yugoslav citizenship. Today, our country needs реасе and religious
tolerance. "85
ТЬе same proposal was submitted to the NARODNO VIJECE (National
Council) in 1918, which means that јп 1933 the Il1yrian idea from 1849 stil1
had its supporters and that their warning was still present in the memory of
their descendants: "Si сит Jesu it is, nolite ire сит jesuitis" ("If уои follow
Jesus do not follow the Jesuits").
ТЬе whole clerical press jumped оп its feet to defend the Jesuits and the
whole clerical mechanism was set in motion to save its leaders and prevent
the passing of that law. There was по door at which they did not knock, im-
ploring, еуеп threatening under the pretext of protection of Catholicism from
abroad, including Rome. Within these efforts Archbishop Bauer decided to go
to Canossa, патеlу to рау а visit to Belgrade as owner ofKARADJORDJEVA
ZVEZDA (the Medal of the highest order-Star of Karadjordje of the First
Degree). Не asked audience with King Aleksandar and asked his protection,
promising "fullloyalty to the Royal Family and the State." We do not know
anything about what else Dr. Bauer promised to the King, but from а wel1
informed circle the information leaked that the Draft Law proposed Ьу Dr.
Gavranchitch will not Ье discussed until the Episcopate possibly changes
its attitude towards the state. Contrary to what the official representative of
the Catholic Church promiset јп Belgrade, Zagreb reacted differently, where
the clericals protested Ьу marching in procession to рау tribute to the Holy
Mother ofRemete. According to KATOLICKI LIST (Catholic Journal)" about
ten thousands Zagrebians marched in the procession lead Ьу Msgr. Beluhan,
Canonian and spiritualleader of the Zagreb KRIZARI (Crusadeers).
"This was our answer to the recent attempt of the enemies of the
Catholic Church and the whole Croatian people, and particularly to
the draft law against the church, оп the expulsion of the Society of
Ј esus from Yugoslavia." In the sermon he read in front of the church
in Remete Msgr. Beluhan emphasized that "whenever they were јп
trouble the Croats from Zagreb addressed to their Celestial Queen
for help. This time too when the enemies of the Catholic Church
154
Magnum crimen XIV
155
Viktor Novak
86 "ТНЕ РRОСЕSSЮN FROM ZAGREB ТО REMEТE, "KATOLICКI LIST", 1033, по.8, р.83.
87 Stjepan Bakshitch: WHY EXPEL ТНЕ JESUIТS? (Stjepan Baksic: Zasto Isusovce tjeraju и progon-
stvo?" "KATOLICКI LIST", 1933, по. 8, Petar Grabitch:"THE HUMANIТARIAN AND LEGAL
BASIS OF ТНЕ DRAFT LAW ON ЕХРULSЮN OF JESUIТS" (Petar Grabic:"Humanitarna i prav-
па podloga zakon. prijedloga Dr. GavranCica i drugova о izgonu Isusovaca), "KATOLICКI LIST",
1933, п.8, рр.79-80.
88 "ТНЕ PRIEST SAY... " "KATOLICКI LIST", 1933, по. П., рр.121-122.
156
Magnum crimen XIV
89 August Theiner, Geschichte des Pontifikats Кlements XIV Paris-Leipzig, II, 356-376.
90 August Theiner, Geschichte des Pontifikats Кlements XIV Paris-Leipzig, II, 506.
91 Stjepan Zagorac, О jezuitima. "Starokatolik" 1933., Ьг. 3, 3-4.
157
Viktor Novak
the past centuries were analyzed and explained in detai1. ТЪе average readers
were appalled to learn that in the past not only progressive intellectuals, but
also one Роре, several Cardinals, Archbishops and Вishops, Canons and the
Catholic University, professors of theology and Church history, numerous
priests, Sovereign of Catholic religion, statesmen and politicians were against
the Jesuits.
It is noteworthy to recall the explanation ofPope Clemens XIV for abol-
ishing the Society ofJesus (оп the 17-th ofJuly, 1773) Ьу his famous Brevet
"Dominus ас redemtor noster". Clemens XIV admitted that his predecessors
in vain tried hard to keep the accusations against the Jesuits under cover. His
predecessor, Clemens ХПI was also asked to abolish the Society of Jesus for
the sake of реасе in the Christian world. When he received the same request
supported Ьу "many Bishops and other respectful personalities known as
outstanding scholars and devoted Catholics "after having thoroughly con-
sidered the matter", he decided to abolish the Society of Jesus and аН its ser-
vices, centers, schools and collegiums for the sake of а permanent and true
piece in the Church. "89 This Brevet was later approved Ьу his successor, Pius
VI and reinforced Ьу three more Brevets he issued in 1783 "to prove that he
had по objection whatsoever to the Brevet issued Ьу Clemens ХПI. "90
After the French Revolution, the faH of Napoleon and restoration of re-
actionary forces Pius VП in 1814 with his ВиНа оп "Sol1icitudo omnium"
restored the Society of Jesus and thus revived permanent conflicts inside and
outside the Catholic Church. It is interesting to note that at the time when
Loyolla founded the Society of Jesus the Paris Sorbonne was against it "as
dangerous for the religion and а threat to реасе in the Church, more сараЫе
to destroy than build."
ТЪе Вishop of Paris and several French Вishops gave support to that
view. 91 As of 1814 the number of protests against the Jesuits has been con-
stantly increasing. It is not surprising that the most outstanding Croats-
Preradovitch, Strossmayer, Rachky, Nodilo, Raditch and many others did not
trust them and in many cases were even against them.
Jesuitism and Croatian clericalism before, and particularly after 1900
are one and the same. ActuaHy, Croatian Jesuitism was the main promoter
of Croatian clericalism and the master brain of аН anti -Yugoslav and anti-
liberal activities of Croatian Clericals. Imbued with the spirit of Jesuitism.
89 August Theiner: GESCНICHTE DES PONТIFIKATS KLEMENS XIV, Paris-Leipzig, II, рр. 356-
376.
90 August Theiner: GESCНICHTE DES PONТIFIKATS KLEMENS XIV, Paris-Leipzig, II, р 506.
91 Stjepan Zagorac: "ABOUT JESUIТS", "STAROKATOLIK", 1933, по. 3, рр.3-4.
158
Magnum crimen XIV
zi vjeri ... Ako dode do opreke izmedu prave vjere i narodnosti mora vazda
da ustukne narodnost ... 92
Unatoc odlucnom stavu napredne jugoslavenske javnosti klerikalci su
uspjeli kao i 1918. Samo је tada 1918. izaslo и susret nadbiskupu Baueru
Narodno vijece и Zagrebu, а sada 1933. kralj Aleksandar, koji nije imao
odvaznosti da izvede ovakav odlucan potez. Jer pod njegovim sugestijama
GavranCicev predlog nikad nije stavljen па dnevni red и Narodnoj skupstini.
Za ovaj njegov postupak oduzio rnи se narocitorn blagodarnoscu nekadasnji
jezuitski pitornac travnicke girnnazije Ante Pavelic, kao organizator rnarselj-
skog atentata. Sarn pak dr. Oton GavranCic, za svoj pothvat Ыо је nagraden
kada је и NDH ozivotvorena jezuitska "Civitas Dei" konfiniranim prostororn
и jasenovackorn logoru и strahovitoj "zici" и kojoj је podnio smrt па паБп
kakvu nisu mogle izmisliti ni najbudnije fantazije Velikog Inkvizitora. 93
U Narodnoj skupstini jos se и nekoliko prilika raspravljalo о antisokol-
skoj poslanici prilikorn budzetske debate и vezi sa predlogorn rninistra za
fizicki odgoj naroda. Jos је jednorn niz poslanika uzeo и obranu sokolstvo,
njegovu akciju kao i svu nepatriotsku pozadinu koja је stajala iza episkopat-
ske akcije.
U toku diskusije uzeo је о toj stvari rijec i predsjednik vlade dr. Milan
Srskic 16. 111 1933. i obiljezio stav vlade и pitanju pravnih i politickih odnosa
drzave prema katolickoj crkvi. Dr. Srskic је odbio misljenja episkopata da је
katolicka crkva gonjena и Jugoslaviji ukazujuCi da је upravo radi katolicke
crkve mijenjano skolsko zakonodavstvo, da su zadrzane sve konfesionalne
skole i da se и pitanju rjesavanja dalrnatinskog agrara crkva oslobodila pla-
сапја prinosa и kolonizacioni fond, Бте se obezbjedila па 20% veca odsteta
za crkvena irnanja. Sto se tice fizickog odgoja ornladine опа ји је neutralizi-
rala аН пе rnoze dopustiti da nosi vjersku oznaku. Jednako је uzeo rijec i dr.
Lavoslav Hanzek, rninistar za fizicki odgoj koji је jos jednorn polernizirao sa
episkopatorn, i branio Tyrsa i njegovu ideologiju koja se prema rnisljenju iz-
vjesnih ceskih svecenika пе protivi vjerskirn nacelima. Dr. Hanzek је и cjelo-
sti analizirao poslanicu i и svirn njenirn detaljirna oznaCio је kao prornasenu,
zadrzavsi se naroCito па stavu biskupa Srebrnica. Dr. Hanzek је pri kraju ро
dvukao cinjenicu da је za SKJ od velike vaznosti kao i najbolja rnoralna ро
тос i satisfakcija sto su povodom episkopatske poslanice izjavili svoju soli-
darnost sa SKJ ceski i poljski sokolski savezi. А poljski sokolski savez jednorn
159
Viktor Novak
92 Idem,4.
93 See the last chapter ofTHE BLOODY НАRVЕSт.
160
Magnum crimen XIV
161
Viktor Novak
94 "ТНЕ SOKOLS AND ТНЕ ОЕВАТЕ ON ТНЕ BUDGEТ IN ТНЕ ASSEMBLY OF ТНЕ КINGDOM
OF YUGOSLAVIA" (Sokolstvo u budzetskoj debati Narodne skupstine Kraljevine Jugoslavije),
Ljubljana, 1933., рр. 7-31.
162
Magnum crimen XIV
163
Viktor Novak
impression оп the Yugoslav public opinion. It was also а hard blow оп the
Yugoslav Episcopate. Again, under the pressure of the Кing to withdraw the
charge for gross insult the Sokol decided to comply. Оп the 15-th of Мау Dr
Goranchitch оп behalf of the Sokol declared that the incriminated did not
withdraw their insults, nor offered апу satisfaction customary in similar situ-
ations:
"We note that they have not even tried to produce evidence Ье
fore this Court for their insults in the Epistle, which proves that the
insults are groundless. For us it means moral satisfaction because
the indicted would have Ьееп condemned. But owing to their high
position јп church hierarchy and society and in view of the above
conclusion we withdraw ош charge. "95
1Ъе Sokols negatively reacted to both interventions of the Кing in favor
of the Episcopate and were u;lhappy about the course of action јп this regard.
In their view the Episcopate did not deserve such permissiveness.
At the moment when the conf1ict seemed to Ье over а пеw sting сате
from abroad and unmasked the true епету of the Sokols and who was Ье
hind the Croatian and Slovenian Episcopate in Yugoslavia. Namely, at the
meeting of the League of Nations the Italian delegates raised the issue of the
Sokol Аlliапсе of the Кingdom of Yugoslavia and јп the discussion vehe-
mently accused only Yugoslavia of being а hotbed of imperialism and as such
а threat to its neighbors. Fearing the strength of the Army of the Kingdom of
Yugoslavia the Italian delegates requested the Sokols to Ье considered as part
of active army. Thus, the official Italian delegates revealed that their views оп
the Sokols are identical with those presented јп their press, the press which
was the first to publish the anti-Sokol Epistle and оп that ground accuse the
Sokol Аlliапсе of the Кingdom of Yugoslavia of being а threat to реасе of
Yugoslav neighbors, Italy јп particular. PICCOLO DELLA SERA, (Тrieste)
raised the same issue discussing the confessional and ethnical circumstances
јп Yugoslavia in the spirit and tone of the Yugoslav clerical enemies of the
Sokols. These articles actually preceded the discussion јп Geneva. Obviously,
а continuous anti-Sokol campaign of the enemies of the Sokol ideology јп
Yugoslavia was closely connected with the campaign against the state of
Yugoslavia. This attack was particularly vehement because it сате from the
official state representatives from the rostrum of the League of Nations, ап
international institution of the highest level.
164
Magnum crimen XIV
svaku inkriminiranu tvrdnju, os1abio је njihov mora1ni stav pred svom jugo-
s1avenskom javnoscu. То је Ыо veoma tezak udar za jugos1avenski episkopat.
1 opet pod uticajem krune, SKJ od1uCio se da povuce tuZbu i da пе insistira
па izvodenje pred sud okriv1jenih biskupa zbog teske optuZbe: klevete. 15.
таја izjavio је pred sudom zastupnik tuzite1ja dr. GavranciC, da optuzeni
nisu opozva1i svoje k1evete, niti su da1i опи zadov01jstinu koja se оЫспо smi-
је ocekivati i koja se daje u takvim s1ucajevima.
"Konstatiramo da nisu ni pokusali dokazati svoje objede, koje su
iznijeli u biskupskoj pos1anici proti пата, Бте је pred ovim sudom
utvrdeno da njihove objede objektivno nisu istinite. Na osnovu ovih
konstatacija smatramo da smo dobi1i mora1nu nezadov01jstinu, jer
Ы tuzeni morali biti osudeni. No s obzirom па visoki p010zaj optuze-
пЉ u crkvi i drustvu i s obzirom па njihovu gornju izjavu пе trazimo
da oni budu kaznjeni i pov1aCimo svoju tuZbu. "95
ОЬа ova postupka kra1ja A1eksandra, kad је intervenirao u korist epi-
skopata u Skupstini i pred sudom, Ы1а su u sok01skim redovima prim1jena
negodovanjem i za1jenjem, u uvjerenju da episkopat nije zas1uzio ovoliku
obazrivost poslije svih svojih postupaka.
U trenutku, kad је izg1eda10 da се se Citava stvar stisati, jos је jednom
опа buknu1a kad је dato toj borbi protiv jugos1avenskog sok01a osvet1jenje
koje је dos10 izvana i koje је pokaza10 ko је pravi neprijate1j sok01ske ideje,
па protivnika, s kojim se i ispred koga se nasao hrvatsko-s10venski episkopat.
Naime о SKJ poveli su rijec па sjednici Drustva naroda talijanski de1egati
па konferenciji za razoruzanje. Oni su poveli jednu veoma ostru i unapri-
jed sracunatu kampanju protiv SKJ, obi1jezavajuCi time samu Jugos1aviju kao
zariste imperijalistickih teznji, opasnost za mir sa susjedima. Ta1ijanski de-
1egati u strahu od jugos1avenske vojske zahtijeva1i su da se SKJ шасипа u
ор се efektive vojske. Tako su ta1ijanski s1uZbeni faktori pokazali da imaju о
SKJ jednako neprijate1jsko mis1jenje kao i njihova stampa. Опа ista koja је
prva objavila postojanja antisok01ske pos1anice i iskoristila ји је prikazuju-
ci SKJ kao ustanovu opasnu za mir jugos1avenskih susjeda, naroCito Ita1ije.
Isti је problem ponovo potegnuo u diskusiju trscanski "Рјсс010 della Sera",
govoreCi о konfesiona1nim i etnickim prilikama u Jugos1aviji, u duhu i tonu
jugos1avenskih k1erika1nih protivnika SKJ. А upravo ovo pisanje predhodi-
10 је ataku u Zenevi. Dakle, sta1no jedna smis1jena i upad1jiva povezanost i
podudarnost akcija neprijate1jskih jugos1avenskoj ide010giji sok01a, u stvari
neprijate1jski samoj Jugos1aviji. Ovaj napad Ыо је izuzetno tezak. Jer оп је
165
Viktor Novak
166
Magnum crimen XIV
167
Viktor Novak
169
Viktor Novak
170
Magnum crimen XIV
100 "ТНЕ SOKOLS REACT ТО ATTACKS" (Sokolstvo odgovara napadacima), "NOVOSTI", Мау 1,
1934.
172
Magnum crimen XIV
173
Viktor Novak
heroic valor promote the spirit of national and state unity with his
Royal Highness at its head ... Ош national genius is steady and ип
swerving and with God's blessing always foHowing its straight path.
At the crucial moment in history, the First World War, brotherly
love brought together аН Serbs and the end of that war brought to-
gether the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes united in опе state-our dear
Yugoslavia ... In front of аН of them 1 see today the celestial pic-
ture of the great hero and Liberator, Кing Peter 1 together with the
Bishop of Djakovo Strossmayer the great promoter of the idea of
Yugoslavism ... We should learn from them. Their energy should
Ье the source of ош strength and human qualities ... etc The rest of
the speech was devoted to glorifying the Кing of Yugoslavia and the
Sokols of the Кingdom. 101
In the afternoon the ceremony of blessing of the flags took place, after
which the Bishop made а short speech.
"Let ош Кing, as а precious gift to аН of us, Ье а lofty inspiration
for further development of ош Sokols of the Кingdom ofYugoslavia.
Dear Sokols, boys and girls, уои will Ье worthy of the importance
vested in уои only if уои honor and promote the ideas of the Sokol
Movement, faithfuHy and to the point of self-sacrifice. God bless ош
Кing and the Royal Family, God bless the Leader of the Sokols of
the Кingdom of Yugoslavia Crown Prince Peter and God bless ош
beautiful and united Кingdom ofYugoslavia"102
The speech of Bishop Akshamovitch was а great surprise. Не was praised
Ьу аН and from аН sides with great enthusiasm. For most who heard the
speech it meant victory. Only а smaH number of the well informed did not
trust the Bishop's words, who ten years later will glorify with the same enthu-
siasm Dr. Ante Pavelitch, leader of the Ustasha Independent State of Croatia
during the Second World War and after the [аН of fascism address similar
words of praise to Тito, Marshal of Yugoslavia. This meant keeping расе with
time out of personal interest and in the interest of the Catholic Church! 103
His superior, Archbishop Dr Bauer, did not share his view. At the time
of the Sokol event in Petrovaradin the Sokols ofKarlovatz (Karlovac) invited
their priest to bless their Center (Ноте) in July 1934. The Bishop decided to
174
Magnum crimen XIV
Ispred svih mi se danas kao neko posebno nebesko videnje javlja duh
velikog oslobodioca kralja Petra ј heroja, u pratnji velikog ideologa
jugoslavenske misli biskupa dakovackog Strossmayera ... Njihov rad
neka bude nasa skola. Njihova energija neka bude nasa snaga i nasa
vrlina ... Itd., itd. u velicanju kralja Jugoslavije i Sokola kraljevine
Jugoslavije. "101
Poslije podne istoga dana bilo је па sletistu osvecenje zastave. Poslije Ыа
goslova odrzao је biskup jedan kraCi govor.
"Оуај dragocjeni dar, rekao је biskup Nj. V. Kralja, neka bude svi-
jetlo znamenje za razvoj jugoslavenskog sokola. Sokoli i sokolice, za-
hvalite se dostojno paznji koja уат је ukazana а to cete uCiniti samo
па taj naCin, ako budete sokolsku ideju cuvali vjerno i pozrtvovano.
Neka Svevisnji Gospod blagoslovi i pozivi naseg kralja, nas kraljevski
dom i starjesinu Sokola kraljevine Jugoslavije Prijestolonasljednika
Petra, nasu divnu i nedjeljivu kraljevinu Jugoslaviju!102
Svijet је Ыо iznenaden nad ovim "obracanjem" biskupa Aksamovica. Sa
svih strana osule su se па ovog dakovackog biskupa pohvale, priznanja, уе
licanja i kliktaji pobjede. Samo mali broj upucenih nije povjerovao rijeCima
ovog covjeka, koji се poslije deset godina jednakom emfazom glorificirati dr.
Antu Pavelica, а poslije njegova sloma i marsala Jugoslavije Тita! Dakako, sve
to radi licnih i klerikalnih interesa. 103
Medutim ovako nije sudio njegov sef па biskupskim konferencijama
nadbiskupa dr. Bauera. Upravo tih dana kad su se spremale svecanosti u
Petrovaradinu, karlovacki sokoli obratili su se svome zupniku za dozvolu da
јт posveti njihov dom mjeseca jula 1934. Zupnik se obratio па nadbiskupa,
а оуај је postavio dva uslova koja је trebalo usvojiti ра da izda dozvolu za
posvetu. Nadbiskup је zatraZio da sokolsko drustvo u Karlovcu izda pismenu
izjavu da stoji па krscanskom uzgojnom stanovistu i da iza katolickog duso-
briznika а ni prije njega niko drugi ne obavlja blagoslov. 104
Оујт svojim stavom nadbiskup је otkrio jednu vrlo vaznu pozadinu сје
lokupnoga pitanja. Rim nije mogao dopustiti da se pored katolickog sveceni-
ka па istoj svecanosti i pri istom crkvenom Cinu ројауј koji drugi predstavnik
druge vjeroispovijesti. Sokoli su bili spremni da povoljno odgovore па prvi
uslov, аН па drugi nisu mogli pristati jer је u drustvu bilo Clanova nekatolika
175
Viktor Novak
grant the permission under two conditions: that the Sokols submit а written
statement of commitment to the principles of Christian education and that
before the catholic priest по опе celebrated а mass of blessing. 104
ТЬе Bishop's attitude actually revealed а very important background of
the whole issue. Rome could not accept the presence of а priest of different
religion together with the catholic priest оп such occasions. ТЬе Sokols were
ready to give а positive answer to the first question, but not to the second опе
because аН their members were not Catholics, which required the presence
of а priest of another religion as well. 1his is what the Sokols said in their
answer to the Bishop:
,,1t is evident that уои did not want to meet our kind request
because the conditions уои set to the Sokols are unacceptable. Ап
attitude that does not deserve а comment. ТЬе believers only wanted
the blessing of the Almighty for their work. 1hat was аН. And they
were refused.
ТЬе conditions уои set are very difficult and we could not take
the responsibility for justified revolt of аН our members against us if
we accepted to meet them. ТЬе conditions уои set directly hurt our
human and national feelings and our feelings as Sokols.
We expected your first condition and even before this request
were ready to comply with it. 1n our letter we emphasize that we
have never Ьееп against апу religion, or church, nor have we ever
prevented апу of our members from fulfilling regular Christian du-
ties. Our answer is, therefore, clear.
Оп the other hand, your second condition is а great surprise
and disappointment to us. Уои allow the blessing of а Catholic priest
only, and по опе else, before or after him.
Owing to the fact that а rather large percentage of our members
are Orthodox their wish to get the blessing of their priest too is quite
understandable. 1his is also the wish of аН our members because we
are equal brothers-Sokols, regardless of our ethnic origin, or reli-
gion. Complying with your second condition would теап dissemi-
nation of religious intolerance. ТЬе Sokols will never accept that. We
do not want discrimination among the brothers оп the confessional
basis, nor shall we allow апу опе to hurt their religious feelings and
beliefs ... We shall ореп our Sokol center without а blessing and it
176
Magnum crimen XIV
105 Idem.
177
Viktor Novak
will Ье уош guilt. We ЬеНеуе that in spite of that God and his mercy
will Ье with us if we cherish Him in ош hearts. Zdravo! (the Sokols'
salute meaning Good health).105
Archbishop Bauer never explained the reasons behind the prohibition
to Catholic priests to celebrate а mass of blessing together with а priest of а
different confession, before or after him. Actually, this decision was taken Ьу
the Supreme Congregation of the Saint Officio in Rome, оп December 14,
1932, exactly at the time of the anti- Epistle. It was the answer to the question
of the Episcopate as to how the Catholic priests should behave in such cases.
Actually, KATOLICKI LIST published these question, but in Latin and not in
Croatian language so as to attract less attention.
ТЬе questions of the Bishops in the Кingdom of Yugoslavia are the [оl-
10wing:
,,1. Is а Catholic priest allowed to celebrate а mass of blessing
together with а поп Catholic priest?
2. Is а Catholic priest allowed to celebrate а mass ofblessing after
the object has been previously blessed Ьу а non-Catholic priest?"
Decretum S.R. Congregationis S. Officii ad dubia proposita аЬ
Episcopis regni Jugoslaviae de communicatione in sacris 106 is а short
but а veryvaluable document because it refutes the anti-Sokol Epistle
more convincingly than any other critical analysis or comment and
reveals that the anti-Sokol Epistle was conceived Ьу the Vatican and
[иНу supported Ьу the Italian fascist press.
Later developments connected with Croatian and Slovenian clericalism
till the [аН of Yugoslavia will provide а пеw body of evidence оп the hostile
policy of the clericals, most of the members of the Episcopate and а consider-
аЫе number of Catholic priest against Yugoslavia.
105 Idem.
106 "КATOLICКI LIST", 1933, по. 7, р.69.
178
Magnum crimen XIV
pravo iz Vrhovne Kongregacije Svetoga Oficija u Rimu, koju је donio 14. ХII
1932., dakle taman poslije spremljene episkopatske antisokolske poslanice.
Mozemo mirno reCi da upravo u оуоте grmu zec lezi i da оуа zabrana, koja
је zapravo imala najvise da pogodi sokole, dosla је u vezi sa pitanjem jugo-
slavenskog episkopata kako da u takvim slucajevima katolicko svecenstvo
postupa. Оуа su pitanja bila slijedeca, kako ih "Katolicki list" objavljuje, ne
па hrvatskom, nego u originalu па latinskom jeziku, da ne Ы dnevnoj stampi
zapelo za oko. Та pitanja biskupa kraljevine Jugoslavije glase:
,,1. Smije li katolicki svecenik podijeliti crkveni blagoslov jednoj
te istoj stvari zajedno sa nekatolickim svecenikom? 2. Smije li katoli-
cki svecenik crkveni blagoslov podijeliti predmetu koji је уес blago-
slovljen od nekatolickog svecenika, ako katolicki svecenik taj blago-
slov ne obavlja istim Cinom i zajedno sa nekatolickim svecenikom?"
Dakako, Vrhovna Kongregacija Svetog Oficija u Rimu odgovorila је па
оЬа pitanja negativno.
Vise nego та koja izjava koja је kriticki analizirala i pobijala antisokol-
sku poslanicu i vise nego та koja postavljena hipoteza о podudarnostima
vatikansko-episkopatske antisokolske akcije, iza koje је bila puna i radosna
suglasnost fasisticke stampe, govori uvjerljivo kratki аН neobicno sadrzajni:
Decretum S. R. Congregationis S. Officii ad dubia proposita аЬ Episcopis re-
gni Jugoslaviae de communicatione in sacris! 106
Daljne ројауе u razvoju hrvatskog i slovenskog klerika1izma do sloma
Jugoslavije dati се nove dokumentacije о neprijateljskom odnosu klerikalizma
i najveceg dijela episkopata i znatnog dijela svecenstva prema Jugoslaviji.
179
XV.
Ј.ШЕЏ.L'с.; ЛСЦЈSАТIONIS
(PiO!,J,I[ то! ;/(( (ј/,п Г}ипа !1.щпi/r. и;,'а () ,ј."гсt{ јак! ,~l(n){ n,I{-сg EjJiJkopata prema
rll:r,l ј, ј,Ј((tullй lIшllЈ/,!,iI!JiI S(r јЈ;,и 1I r;/-.:.Zо!Ј)(! 19.Ј./- .. (/ 1, IШ1.Н'mЈЈГ~l 1934.
~"c!m /Јil!,/(!,iщ(/ 11 ]I,gcs!({"{:iji),
Spbl. Ј9. ХI. 1934.
).,(;, \Ј. -1;:1 li . ....l'J:,t! l\',)\;ak. 5\Cll(11;(111 pJ.,';CSUl' ~ecgrad.
1J~ ,~":~lm (~~ ),~\.ct·;)li?,tc Е~Г{lrli\'С ј7 1H'jCh"A сеје l!
.svojc vrijr.me парј'<'.зti
11:~'c) 'ј,Ј
,(' 1'aZyi~k,: r,,\Ч' тЈ;: је rlj'za\'e JL!~(J51Zl.\ij5~. P('zn_H'ajt~,:i \;~as
kao 'Е<з,vјеsnа
~,pi~ej~,\ i CC',J~" \" .1. :jt,ca. \~,,~{tI \Ја \ __НН Pcy~Н\ j(.:dU\1 П1Јјн "Sr'.Ћ1СВ;СU Ц kOjl't
$аш песlа\11(. \':)1:1'/:0 lli!;"Jc..n Ш:'3';,:.,:~LII)iЈ 1-\Ј):lf1ЈLс)'L! ctI': Skpie<'Ll' 11 ZagTcbu, а kc'.jl1
sltш t. j>'"(']1:S\1 dc ,',\"11;1 k;l~,)l;ck:'m h:','!\L~1,1]j(1 11 JL'.~()5'la"ijj kfl() S:to' i papskom
Г?Ј
лuг;сiјll LI B~<J{.i;·c~~IL;', L је (']1.1 Z:1. sa:-"IJ pli';all1e kспfј~1~псiаlru; naJ'avi тоНm Vas,
Ја bez шсјс Iu;clk (!('~YC~C "~ Ь ~tc (1 'Јј( ј L,< ja i /C:5tj 1l1sta p:,Jali n,!ti II drc:itvu
{!,l-;с..-iliL а I_~\. iZ<l IT,::;jC '3Inгti, (н:-!е 11 \r am po,rcba, C)\'Lm \'Q,Ч оу]а'1Сllјсn1 (la 5е
!iЈ(~)с:{п\.: pcsIL:.3:'': kc-,]o. hl..lr1~lc pis;J.Jt 1) ll']()zi kJ' ':icke сгk\"е II гаzvitku kra.lj-~vjn~
]l·,gPS]a.\'jjc, (с 1:::: 1;.:JI1CI1:tc (l~ је lL kl'u,gr\la п,јС;jtil)11:1 S\'cccl1ika III'yata bio· upo~
";l{Hl{l rj):::,I1{( j)r:,t П'ј SРОГЈL!]ШI1't п~Ј "':~ i1~tСУС3:Пlа ([;ZZl\'C-
SI'~l11CI1:ca је Г"~Р:::i()';3. 1 c\tr\HJ. С':-':: gо(l;ле, Го naptltku bi,skt.:p(]j
tTtcL'l'liI.l:,-~, kuji JL P'):LJ~.jJ,) r,.!./~)j!\) ~<\(lJzJ.j с:ј О'ЈС ~T'.',HCH:''::e, ј?С \~):sап.i на
(. f\О\.·{,\ГI~ГСЈ.. (,\!е !:,I~ р "1\;:.:- \1 РП'Р:-,1 'Ј\'\})1 \"')i~k~'fliша tiZ pcpratni li~л k[)ji Vam
vfГatc:m, c.!.1!I:Zlkc ЬЈ.Щ()· l,l РЈ l\'J.lnLl р~i"lJ.ы1.
S~ (LL ';оkiш ;!сVclПјLП! i Р11ј.llt1ј1ki,ш ','.)јl'с"ајеП1 тlje-~j se odani
l<'ra-ill" Ivani.scVtt. se.na:t'Or(~1
r, џ ~Hkl"i.'.:'u Pl!\H::
ј r~~ ii \'t
[)(:i ,. ~('\ii(tS.f;H'i n;:н i,)п~!г,i 11П1'(1С
:~l ;1':Г:1:"-1 је ~';H Ј',' . '111Ј)-'(:;I'С"I11 p1'i::,l~l! јсЈ.
; 1:;I()~~o1j(l{ kan prcd';<~avnilk
i ]"..1 cg :)\;;Ј1 tdeala. il ]ugGl.:;lavij-i!
је L! с' :1) р :L; i 1 \; ;tll!,.-:;ka pl;kJC!:'1 ka. Ь ll;ноЈПl svеСе.пi.k ,r.:~Jha ,Ја slo.bl' ; ;
;';1 tЛ":~:П: (11za, с а (1:; ~ ...' :J,!i1·'J(.-.i (: ";~('E",1):C C:'~:'C ј v.~::c. Za ta i tark~~ l1~t~~. )
I'CI:jz ;'.1 је ~)"1 .,;))'С1\1" ,Ј (1:-1 ~(ГЈ'lЈ 1 ci:t ШЈ~,'/l г: =pl'IJatno.stl 1 с:""-,:'Је {)d Sv{)'J!'~ VI'SJ'h
[, 'tt:,;-v'.l.'"l =-~1\:;aa, Cr:lt"" t ';Л:;/:.1iсд·(.ј г: ic ;;;шс~аIГ) (!а р; 'jLl1i' ј da г.::\.(li"dЈ.lје 1Ј L
iзtСlf\ )]1 .::"lll I~;il " 11 pl r,;;l;]~' J'~\lj
1!)19. ј EJzOjkad јс kao- i.nicija,~Qr ГI
~l)j':l~ ~\.L·.; ~.1~ ',,1. ~\ ёl';' ::~t\ Ј ј1ј!; Рl'ссllэgа( :::.jJ()rJlCJ;.Jk "'':('~Ш:Ј.!1!еn:tе rezol11cije r /
1 ;)ll~"_,l'~ t::cla;"j('TJl Г.~ II R,:'~}~·],:ltl. [' ,1 [(3.11') I\"Z'.,пi~еvi; v;lto је 1. o3Jt.~Ca()
jcJT~-:;'~'.. ; kZH· ј Jl.,Г Р ']i1i I)r')";1( \!jc\':'11a."" Sp 'lCI~, lLl stагi Ь:, ;ICl1p 11 I<otaru. Frano
.Ј_Ј.Р ~LcLl]ll' Т:се, (l<'l )1: kal; :iZk: f';J::;kIJГ:i! :,]) P)"·Jj.:~no .("I~yatj:) svoju IJlog"u II
Н lJitftRЦ'(I~~аVI 1 (i:1 S<\ 'Ј"', .:;ш ;: 'J\o"I':11 kсп~ti IlјСlliш })Ј,"~lV~ШЈ' Sa ис·а Fran-om Iva,ni.se- f 7'U
Уlсеln ј ~ ССП)') "[' S1e~~1 t'~:(\'l1 ~ po).;la\'l)a. Ovdj'': dО'lиsimо- П' cj.'jtla'.)ti~
_ А' 11}~~"vu ргот::шогiјtl о kair'J,:cl,_:;j c~·l{\;; !Ј J:lp<·"J.viji:~ 1,[:ј11' j~ L~;?U'tlo ml'~.Qm n,~a-
I tJ.j
h1Skl!J'":.; kr?1t,t( 11 (1Ј· ЛI("1)ZiЈI1 ~tcj);Jjcl i..':.-:L\ ЬJ~l l~ц..Ј." а 1. ЈЮVl'1ll,Ьга ъstе. gоdш.с
рt.јt:'niпаСП(1 )\"im h', 'zl-,p,ma J\,~~ ,1<1.\ i је "-;Р\Чl~ ]'~;(~' 1~0.1~1 1: {јссе iz rltl'se i pameti
И!С.'II1'.:,:ј ] ( :lcljt ,1)(1 ј ,"\ l·L'cn;k,,1 оЈ ,"t');kc је \'Јlпоsti i za \тјјеmе (I koje је n&Sta1a,
7<'1 ]јс<1. ko'jima је lllpt,{CI1L1 k{l'J ; ZJ SVU PQzacliu::1U stava. j'J'grrБlaveJ1l.:jkO'g ~pi.skopaA.aJ
руста dI.zavl. St(1ga је (i\,:.щ~iП10 tт cjcl'tn1,1
2 Il(J~ta\'!iC!1i fiH _<:.то l1СУi1?Лl rlji~loy!.KOjl ~t: "ll I,'\ШјС \,сl'l!оы роznэti iz s~ava С1оп
r. . . :jni~t "ji,L.
"РЈ"сuzуi;СПО11l џ,О::'Рl,,\lltLU Jl' j\lOjt.jll S1срiпп(, :Nadbi.::kupu KI)<IdjL1tl1i1.1
ZagreЬ.
'PrC117.,·j~(Тl:! 'Sl џ{,~:I\: 11 ':1~]!)\" '11"~""~'П\ i П:tјlј(Р~'lm 11adcm poz.(Jra'vi""
је PlJkl)J"ll~) pil!jJ;"~lI): \;~I~(, '1)1('I'':)'";1ПI(" ZZ\ k',{\(]\lltЏЈ'z\' Yl'l,) zа\tu:lIНШ\ d\..\hov~ ...
пот p~sti!t! 2J.'~ГC~Ц(;\E' т~а:Љi' 01· Лп!i В.1uсгu. ~V!11ine 'ита' ј, Н ~r
c1u~u рсгiс.Јtl r)(l ,!о
STC3 kl·O.Z ~")>1z11Jie i <lllbo·ku РО51.llје, pak
је pa(puna u"je;T!1. ,Ја CCl" i као "Ъ)ГЙ!l;.k па (ој st"liei, s!iie<!i.t'
nj.ego\'e stope fiэ. (:"a·-;t : ui\J.\. o\<ve \ ~О:i1l0Уlnе,
. :?bpisani, koji Va~l "У" retke llpravI!a ..је{! svссспik,stиiје dс,Ье. Rоd.епL ~
Је ISGЗ,. reden ?а S\'ссешkа Ј 886" "bavlo le ,,,?,пе ,Illzbe ,U 'sp!lwkom sJe-
шеni5tu kao p1tJtxl, [:.Ј,hо\'п:k i е'!ЩI1СШ: Ы{) је па ,g-,i,шnаziji i tea1ci u
Spii.tll ka\l plivl't:JIC1J'1 рГ:1fС':iГ. ;) [1 \'г;:шјi('i} Stl)];r1l1. р?l 1.1 ЈСЗС"I1Z-саmа',
"'ћEI'~'''ћ ,~, ... ,J, \'" ',1. ~ ,1:.,~ 1") '. _' L '1"1
107 Dr. Frano Ivanishevitch is по longer among the living. But, јп 1937 ће gave the permission to use
his Promemoria during the conflict over the Concordat. 1 ат very grateful to ћјт and 1 ат using
this document for the sake of truth, the whole truth and nothing but truth, particularly јп the light
182
XV
LIBELLUS ACCUSATIONS
183
Viktor Novak
Don Frano Ivanishevitch was an old fighter for the national cause
and Glagolitic missal, one of the last from the generation of supporters of
Strossmayer and his ideals. In Yugoslavia, being а national priest devoted to
its people, his whole behavior was an example of how а priest should serve
the interests of the state, without violating а single principle of his church,
or faith. Defending this stand he was ready to соре with great difficulties
and suffer injustice and condemnation of the high clergy. Nevertheless, he
continued his work in the same way he decided to follow already in 1919
and 1920, when he took initiative to organize а Meeting of the clergy of Split
and was the proponent of the now famous Resolution presented to the then
Nuncio in Belgrade. Don Frano Ivanishevitch, Vjekoslav Spinchtch and the
old Bishop of Kotor Frano Uccellini- Тitze were аН three of the opinion that
the Catholic Episcopate in Yugoslavia in fact misunderstood its role with
regard to the state Ьу assuming the attitude which only serves the interests
of the enemies of Yugoslavia. We shall deal with don Frano Ivanishevitch
in the following chapters too. Here we only want to present in extenso his
Promemoria оп the Catholic Church in Yugoslavia he presented to the young
Archbishop Coadjutor оп October 1,1934 and November 1 ofthe same year
а сору of the Promemoria to each Catholic Bishop in Yugoslavia, personally.
Тће Promemoria stems from the heart and mind of an exemplary patriot and
is very important with regard to the time when it was written, the individuals
to whom the Promemoria was addressed and the background which explains
the attitude of the Yugoslav Episcopate towards the state. Тће following text
is а complete and unabridged original version. 108
of the fact that the document does not reveal anything new јп the views of Dr. Ivanishevitch with
regard to his previous attitude оп this issue.
108 Опlу the parts of the text ref1ecting the previous well known views of Dr. Ivanishevitch have Ьееп
omitted.
184
Magnum crimen XV
FRANO IVANISEVIC
!!II!!!NATOR
(}oBpodin
Dr Viktor N о у а k
syeucili~ni profesor.
fI&i~ .. Ф4
Doznao sаш da У! Bak1ipljate gradiyo iz kojega cete u вуоје
yrijeme napisati hi8toriju о razyitku na~e mlade ~aye JцgoB1avije.
ве odaдi ј у ,--',
(!//ML~ J~~~~
,~,ц_J rL-
186
Magnum crimen ХУ
108 Izostavljeni su samo nevazni dijelovi, koji su od ranije уес dobro poznati iz stava don Ivanisevica.
187
Viktor Novak
109 This was written in 1934. Data from 1937 are even more favorable.
192
Magnum crimen ХУ
109 Don Fral10 Ivanisevic piSe god. 1934. Podaci iz 1937. јо;; su povoljniji.
193
Viktor Novak
196
Magnum crimen ХУ
Croatian people, he said "ош people", having in mind also the part
of ош people called Serbs. This is what he wrote in 1868, which
means 66 years ago, when ош people was separated. What would
Вishop Strossmayer say now had he lived to see his people united
уои сап imagine, the Most Reverend, because уои are familiar with
his Yugoslav ideals. Опе more thing. Next year the St. Jerome Society
will Publish а book CROAТIAN RENAISSANCE IN DALMAТIA,
which is [иНу in line with its historical role and importance of the
whole movement. But the title CROAТIAN RENAISSANCE is not
correct because, particularly at the beginning (1868-1870), the Serbs
and the Croats participated in ап almost equal number. Therefore 1
think that Ьу excluding their пате [roт the title the Society does
injustice to the Serbs whose merits are as great as the merits of
their Croatian brothers, till the discord in 1880. But the trend of the
Society is clear: to always places emphasis оп Croatism as opposed
to Yugoslavism.
For God's sake, по опе reading these lines should conclude that
we want to forget, or keep secret, ош true пате which we received
from ош mothers when they were breast feeding us, but ош "theo-
logia moralis" teaches us that еуеп јп the loftiest act, which is prayer,
we should Ье very careful not to utter something that would hurt
, the other side or antagonize it. In public 1ife we should Ье prudent
because PRUDENCE is MAXIMA VIRTUS of public 1ife. At the [и
neral of ош outstanding personality Frano Bulitch (Bulie) in Split in
several obituary addresses and articles Yugoslavia was not mentioned
at аН, only "Croatian people" and the fatherland. And for Yugoslavia
the late Frano Bulitch fought and pledged his reputation at the Реасе
Conference in Paris, in 1919. Moreover, по опе mentioned ош Кing
who decorated the late Frano Bulitch with а Medal of the highest or-
der. ТЬе participants noticed that some wanted to abuse the reputa-
tion of the outstanding scholar and exemplary priest to the detriment
ofYugoslaviaYo 1 have also read јп the papers about the initiative of
а Boards of Priests to build а church dedicated to Кing Zvonimir
and establish а Bishopric in Knin. ТЬе Proclamation says: "In this
Jubilee year of redemption it would Ье right to revive the place of
remote memories. If we cannot build а sumptuous Cathedral, we at
least сап build а modest church оп the place where the CROAТIAN
110 It should Ье emphasized that Archbishop Stepinec also made а speech at that [ипегаl,
198
Magnum crimen XV
199
Viktor N ovak
111 Неге don Frano Ivanishevitch means the Ustashi at that time јп Belgium.
200
Magnum crimen ХУ
201
Viktor Novak
203
Viktor Novak
207
Viktor Novak
* In the second edited version this sentence is cut after the word RELIGION. In the first version after
RELIGION the text goes оп ... "we have ап exemplary Ruler from а national Dynasty, who is not а
Catholic, but as а son of this country јп his generous heart he does not make апу difference between
the two religions, which he proves not опlу Ьу his words, but also Ьу his charitable deeds Ьу аЬuп
dantly subsidizing the Catholic Church and Catholic institutions." This favorable view about Кing
Aleksandar was expressed опlу eight days before his assassination јп Marseilles to someone who
obviously did not like it and was јп а position to eliminate it from the final version of MAGNUM
CRIMEN.
208
Magnum crimen ХУ
nego dobrotvornim djelima pruzajuCi iz svoje darezljive ruke obilne novcane potpore katoliCkim
crkvama i ustanovama?" Ovako povoljna ocena о kralju Aleksandru Karadordevicu, izrecena samo
osam dana pre atentata u Marselju, nekom, ko је svemocno uticao па konacnu verziju Magnum
crimen-a, zasmetala је, ра је ona, bez naznake izostavljena.
209
Viktor Novak
210
Magnum crimen XV
211
Viktor Novak
the means and therefore they accepted support from аН those who could
help them јп these efforts regardless of who they were. Less then seven years
later the developments will show how deep was the blunder of don Frano
Ivanishevitch, fostering the Utopian idea of Yugoslavism strongly supported
Ьу the Кing and the sincerity of aHeged Yugoslavism of Dr. Bauer which,
also at the time of Serbo-Croatian coalition was only а means for getting
the approval for his high position. When at the time of that coa1ition he did
not succeed to get the high nomination he tried to achieve it thanks to Вап
Tomashitch (Tomasic), supported Ьу Budapest and Vienna. Оп the other
hand, Dr. Bauer had support of the Jesuits because he strongly supported
their return before the Croatian Parliament (Hrvatski sabor) јп 1899. Тheir
support implied support of the Roman Curia, particularlyat the time of Pius
Х and his Secretary Cardinal Mery del Val.
It was just another јп а series of his disappointments. Тhis is а tragedy
of а great idea1ism destroyed Ьу upstarts who were not ир to his knee. Тhe
assassination of the Кing јп Marseilles has postponed the answer ad infini-
tum. After that tragic event the situation completely changed and clericalism
gained new impetus.
212
Magnum crimen XV
213
SUMMARY
PREFACE /8
XIV
ECCLESIA MILIТANSAT WAR
WIТH TYRSH AND HIS IDEOLOGY 112
ХУ
LIВELLUS ACCUSATIONS / 182
SADRZAJ
PREDGOVOR / 9
XIV
ECCLESIA MILIТANS RATUJE
S TYRSEVOM IDEOLOGIJOM / 13
ХУ
LIВELLUS ACCUSATIONS / 183