Cardinal Mindszenty

A reminder of the heroic Hungarian archbishop, symbol of the persecuted Church

by Giulio Andreotti

Cardinal Jozsef Mindszenty with his liberators, outside his residence in Budapest, 31 October 1956

A Hungarian fellow politician, whom I meet at Inter-parliamentary Union gatherings, has reproached me because, in his view, the Church and Italy have forgotten the heroic Cardinal Mindszenty. Maybe – he said – you want to avoid offending the sensibilities of the Left. Now that the Soviet Union has disappeared the memory of those who, at personal cost, sought to oppose the dreadful designs of the empire of evil should be all the more honored.
The reminder brought back to me a very tense sitting in the Chamber of Deputies on 8 February 1949.
In the tough election campaign for the first Republican government the previous year we, in the center alliance, had thoroughly beaten the Social-Communist Front. The Church had openly taken sides (by creating the Civilian Committees) precisely because of what had happened in the countries subject to Communism. It was no longer just the ideological reaction in defense of the Church challenged as “opium of the people”. What was at stake was preventing the victory of a congeries that had enacted terrible anti-religious persecution in the vanquished countries. And the name of Jozsef Mindszenty, Archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest, (who had taken refuge in the American embassy because condemned to death, a sentence... benevolently commuted to life in prison) had been at the center of our campaign.
The combative cardinal of Bologna Giacomo Lercaro rebutted the criticism of ecclesiastical encroachment into politics by saying that as the Confederation of Husbandmen had taken sides in the battle to defend the ownership of farms so the husbandmen of souls must defend themselves from invasion by the jailers of the Hungarian cardinal, Mindszenty, and other prelates and priests imprisoned.
Political and diplomatic exigencies, however, required a search for a possible solution of that and other cases. Contacts with the Eastern bloc, shaped for the Vatican Secretariat of State by Monsignor Agostino Casaroli, also included soundings of the Budapest government for a solution of a “case” that was also creating delicate problems for the Americans.
The initial idea of moving the cardinal abroad was long rejected by the interested party. Only after the “fraternal insistence” of Paul VI did he bow his head, agreeing «to obey with humility, renouncing the desire to end his life on Hungarian soil».

Political and diplomatic exigencies, however, required a search for a possible solution of that and other cases. Contacts with the Eastern bloc, shaped for the Vatican Secretariat of State by Monsignor Agostino Casaroli, also included soundings of the Budapest government for a solution of a “case” that was also creating delicate problems for the Americans

Before leaving the American residence and the country on 28 September 1971 he told the relatives who had gone to say farewell: «A day will soon come when the present is wiped away, because overwhelmed by its own foolishness. The pretension of building a world without God will always be illusory; and will only strengthen the union of the Church with the people and with all those who suffer. Only those who fear the truth are afraid of Christ».
As President of the Christian Democratic Group I sent him this message: «The DC members of the Italian Parliament, who at the start of your Via Crucis in captivity publicly expressed their solidarity and admiration, now send their heartiest best wishes and respects».
A figure such as Mindszenty was in fact a stumbling-block for Vatican diplomacy institutionally devoted to the search for a modus vivendi. When the persecuted cardinal came to Rome he didn’t find much warmth even on the other side of the Tiber. As I remember a public show of solidarity was also discouraged.
In the meantime the Italian Left Front had been dissolved, with the Socialists’ aim of gaining a certain autonomy from their companions of the extreme, concretely encouraged (we learned many years later) by Washington also.
It’s not possible to give an incontestable reply to the question of what would have happened in Italy if they had won in 1948. I believe one could object to those who claim that the unique essence of our country would have prevented Communist dictatorship that, by so claiming, they offend the Hungarian, Czech and Polish communists whom I don’t believe were aware and resigned from the start to being mere satellite tools of the Kremlin.
On the fiftieth anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, the events of the first decade of the post-war period were generally neglected in a widespread attitude that gave exclusive attention, or almost, to a future to be built on two cornerstones: the European Union and Russian development. People prefer to pass over even Gorbacev and his decisive shift.

Paul VI with Cardinal Mindszenty

Paul VI spoke in elegy of the cardinal during a Wednesday general audience (7 May 1975), describing him as: «A singular figure of priest and pastor [...]. Ardent in the faith, fierce in his feelings, constant in what appeared to him duty and right [...] History [...] will be able to give a more fully balanced and objective judgment on him, and on the place that he deserves».
I also remember that in October 1971 the Pontiff had the joy of celebrating mass with him in the Matilde chapel in the Vatican.
And when in 1987 the new Hungarian leader Lazar came to Italy the rules of discourse were to keep to the present, to the constructive links existing. A year earlier, though without great hullabaloo, a debate on conscientious objectors had made a certain impression, and a symposium, with both Catholic and Marxist scholars, on relations among cultures. Lazar’s visit had been preceded by a visit to Budapest by Monsignor (now Cardinal) Poggi.
The earthly needs of the Church sometimes necessitate a certain tactical ductility so as to avoid greater evil. Prudence is, after all, a virtue.
The analogy suggests itself of a letter of Pius X to a priest who, in the wake of the sometimes maniacal anti-modernism prevailing, had complained about an unfair censure. He might be right and might have been censured unjustly but the balance-sheet was drawn up on high and the Lord God would see to doing him justice.
So I believe that those who exalt the indomitable fierceness of Jozsef Mindszenty and those who criticize his stubbornness and, vice versa, his acquiescence in the compromise of exile, should be invited not to indulge themselves in argument. We pray not for Cardinal Mindszenty, but the cardinal symbol of the persecuted Church.