Amerikai Magyar Értesítő, 1983 (19. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)
1983-07-01 / 7-8. szám
1983. jul.- aug. Amerikai Magyar Értesítő 17.oldal tress great institutions. He is one of those stiff-necked human beings who cannot be beaten down, blackmailed, silenced in jail, forced into submission or coerced into cooperation For quislings, such an unconquerable soul is a threat; for the church, which gave his movement impetus. Walesa is not totally controllable and seems to have become an embarrassment Arch bishops and editors will ac.'ept discipline labor leaders may not. which may be why the pope seeks to make himself the exclusive symbol of Polish freedom That may suit the Warsawdust Caesar and it may relieve those in the Vatican who fear that a rise of Solidarity would trigger a crackdown on the church ar well as a Soviet invasion of Poland But it is not right. In undermining Walesa — and that is what he is clearh perceived as doing — the pope is not wearing his moral vestments The church, to endure, is sometimes required to make deals with totalitarians. but it is wrong to weaken the following of those who dare to call for political freedom by presuming to substitute for them For the individual, obedience to God does not require obedience to tyranny The pope should uphold and protect Walesa, not try to replace him. For one glorious week, the world thought that the Polish Communists had made a terrible mistake in permitting the Polish people to turn out to greet the pope; the Vatican will have to do more than fire an editor to disspell the impression that, at the end. it was the pope who made the mistake After a meeting with Jaruzelski Did the pope 'doublecross' Lech Walesa? William Satire „ WASHINGTON r OPE JOHN PAUL II has surprised and disappointed Lech Walesa, arrogated to himself the spirit of Polish nationalism, and apparently cut a deal with General Jaruzelski to guarantee the Vatican’s opposition to any uprising in return for an end to martial law. “Doublecross” is the verb not used in that startling series ~““ of conclusions, because of its potent double meaning and the ominous silence about what went on _____in the meetings of the hectic last day of the pope’s visit to his homeland. All we are permitted to see is a worried union leader, a suddenly triumphant quisling, and a Curia-divided Vatican that cannot decide what public impression to transmit. For most of the first seven days of the pope’s historic and courageous return, his message heartened free people throughout the world. He publicly admonished the trembling quisling at their first, televised meeting; he found a “natural right” in union activity; he deliberatedly defied his official communist hosts with his repeated use of the word solidarity, which happens to be the name of the outlawed union. Thanks to his presence, the isolated Polish people were given the opportunity to assemble and to sense their unity in the face of the Soviet puppet’s oppression. Then something as yet unexplained took place. Perhaps the pope felt he had gone too far; perhaps his advisers thought he was giving a too-secular impression; or perhaps his vigorous opening rhetoric was prelude to the making of a very pragmatic deal between church and state. The irst sign of the backing away from moral heroism came from the pope’s press spokesman, who complained about the way the free press was playing the story. That gave the puppet regime's propaganda apparatus a much-needed way to shift the emphasis toward a papal recognition of the legitimacy of the government. Another sign was the deliberate haziness in the timing of the audience with Walesa, the union leader who has personified the martyrdom of Polish freedom. He was made to wait in publicized ignominy, and when the meeting finally took place, the photograph was suppressed by the Vatican. Later, the union leader canceled a planned news conference and said only that he had “some hard thinking to do about my talk with the pope.” In contrast, the film of the hastily-arranged second meeting between pontiff and puppet leader showed smiles and handshakes. The pope understands how public appearances can be used, and calibrates his facial expressions at such events. Here the sign was unmistakable: church and state have reached some secret agreement, and the political blessing so avidly sought by Moscow's chosen Polish leader was given, to be played and replayed on state television. Soon after that, the newspaper published by the Vatican, L’Osservatore Romano, in a front-page editorial announced that Walesa had "lost his battle . . . Sometimes the sacrifice of uncomfortable people is necesary so a higher good can be born for the community.” The writer of the editorial, a veteran deputy editor, had committed the cardinal sin of going beyond the official line and blurting out the truth; he probably did so at the behest of the faction of the Curia most worried about Soviet threats and was fired the next day by a different faction or by John Paul IÍ. That newspa per is traditionally authoritative; the scapegoating of an editor is solid evidence of Vatican disarray on the subject of Walesa. The Vatican editorialist was all too candid; Walesa is one of those “uncomfortable people" whose courage can dis
