By: Ivan Štuhec
The Slovenian Spring of 1991 dates back to the time immediately after the Second World War, when the Communists took full power, and the surviving Democrats hoped and worked for a free and democratic Slovenia. Some at home, some abroad.
In the last phase of the communist revolution, the Catholic Church and cultural figures were under attack. Because culturists are commonly known as individualists, they broke them down as individuals. And the Catholic Church remained the number one class enemy until social change, even though the Communists had infiltrated the very top of the Church.
For socio-political changes
The Church in Slovenia prepared a direct preparation of social changes – clergy and laity – mainly through the socially engaged programme of the annual theological course, organised by the student pastoral care in Ljubljana and later in Maribor; with a meeting of intellectuals in Draga, organised by Catholic intellectuals from abroad in the Municipalities of Trieste, and attended by Catholics and other dissidents from the homeland and around the world. Some authors also had their share by writing in the magazines Znamenje, 2000, Bilten – later the Third Day, Bogoslovni vestnik, in Družina and the youth magazine Ognjišče.
In the second half of the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s, when social movements were forming, the soul of which were Slovenian intellectuals gathered around Nova revija, and the peasantry under the leadership of Ivan Oman, the Church responded to all initiatives through the Justice and Peace Commission, which demanded a democratic change in society, and undoubtedly supported it. From dioceses to parishes, the Church offered infrastructure to emerging political parties because they were not accepted elsewhere.
In their pastoral letters, the Slovenian bishops also clearly supported the emergence of a democratic society. In 1987, the Justice and Peace Commission called for a conscientious objection, which mainly concerned the military service, and supported actors around the pivotal 57th issue of Nova revija, in which the authors developed the ideas of a national socio-political programme. The Commission advocated freedom of thought, speech, a power of argument, and a culture of dialogue. It rejected the incitement, threats, intimidation, and insults suffered by the authors of the articles by both the domestic and Yugoslav communist authorities. It advocated the continuation of the démocratisation processes and the nation’s identity. It criticised the so-called verbal delict and encouraged religious citizens to actively embark on the path of social change.
In the spring of 1988, when constitutional changes were being prepared to introduce a new party’s centralism in the disintegrating Yugoslavia, the Commission resisted them from the point of view of asserting human rights. This statement was later additionally supported by the Slovenian Pastoral Bishops’ Conference. President of the Justice and Peace Commission Dr. Anton Stres was also one of the speakers at the public grandstand in Cankarjevdom on 17 March 1987, which revealed the collaboration of the Slovenian communist political nomenclature with the constitutional changes in the former Yugoslavia that would endanger Slovenians as a nation.
For a democratic Slovenia and Europe
The Catholic Church saw the condition for success in the efforts to establish a democratic social order in Slovenia with the greatest possible consent and unity of all democratically minded Slovenes. Therefore, it did not take part in the game within the SZDL, but the Justice and Peace Commission in its two statements regarding the May Declaration and the Basic Charter of Slovenia expressed dissatisfaction with the disagreements that arose in the emerging democratic political opposition, the later Demos. The demand for unity was confirmed in a plebiscite by which the Slovenian people, by a large majority, decided for a democratic social order of an independent Slovenian state. This was a time when separation of political forces in Slovenia could waste the processes of démocratisation and the establishment of one’s own state forever. Differences in the ranks of the new democratic forces were already present at that time, and subsequent developments only confirmed the Justice and Peace Commission’s assumption of separation.
When communist dictators fell one after another in the 1990s, without great casualties, this was also a logical consequence of the peaceful and persistent pressure of Polish Solidarity and Pope John Paul II, who systematically visited all communist countries. The fact that the Soviets sent a Muslim to the Vatican via Bulgaria to shoot the Pope played a key role in this. The failed assassination of the Pope, on the one hand, showed how well they were aware in Russia of what the Polish Pope meant to Europe and the world, so they wanted to get rid of him. On the other hand, this very event opened the eyes of many to who we were dealing with and what they were willing to do to stay in power. And the assassination gave an indisputable socio-moral authority to John Paul II that everyone respected and feared in every way from 13 May 1981, as it was clear that it was a miracle that had saved him which was connected with Our Lady of Fatima and her proclamation of the end of communism. John Paul II introduced Christians to social courage, which Christians had lost after the Second World War because in some countries they were too close to nationalist and fascist regimes or to the communist system.
The entry of Christians into politics
The very first free elections on 8 April 1990 showed an important contribution of the Catholic part of the electorate, as the Slovene Christian Democrats (SKD) and the Slovene Peasant Union (SKZ) together won 25.5 percent of the vote, whereby the SKD overtook the SKZ by more than five thousand votes or 0.4 percent. Both parties were most strongly supported by Catholics, which surprised the Slovene Democratic Union, which had all the most prominent representatives from the circle of intellectuals, who played the most prominent roles in the formation of Demos.
As long as there was even more unity among Catholics and the continuation of the misguided OF’s policy did not remain an integral part of Slovenian political reality, the result in the first and later elections would be even better. Thus, now in our time, three decades later, we can see that it is not clear to many Christians what it means to be a Christian in a social and political context. Many Christians do not have a clear idea of the separation of Church and State, and of the role of private initiative in a democratic and plural society. Only these, the most crucial aspects for the placement of Christianity in modern society and consequent politics, clearly show whether the Christian reflects his social role more deeply than for the daily use of opportunistic and public politics.
The misconception in the field of politics, which referred to the Second Vatican Council that every Christian in the field of politics is completely free regarding with whom he cooperates and with whom he supports, also contributed to a certain confusion in the field of politics. This position, of course, is nowhere to be found in the Council documents, but it is true that there is talk of the autonomy of earthly realities, to which politics also belongs. However, this autonomy includes a fundamental Christian view, that a Christian cannot and must not trample on either science or politics or any other field.
Christianity has succeeded in asserting human dignity and, consequently, human rights in a social sense. Without Christianity, neither Europe nor Slovenia can be understood. Whoever denies this and undermines it is destroying the foundations of the civilisation on which we stand or fall. When we worship and glorify the peaceful revolution that overthrew communist systems as the communists did their bloody one, we will be on the right track and we will not have to fear the future.