1987. augusztus (98-100. szám) / HU_BFL_XIV_47_2
József Péller, a young mán from Sopronj^after graduatiítg from collegeX would have had to ser'J<£seven{months in the army bút he: ^e-^used. The established judicial practice used to be-h) • sentence the defenaant to serve a term in prison twice as long as ■the length of the military service would have been. The Military Court in Győr sentenced Péller to 24 months in prison. Thus this militaristic practice which violates nőt only the humán rights of c^nsciontious objectors buv^the Hungárián constitution has nőt changed at all. ^ ___— Public opinion must nct leave/jfchose who go to prison rather^ than act against the dictates of their conscience (to their fat§4 In Hungary conscientious objectors are the only communfby whose members are regularly imprisoned because of their convictions - because of their peace-lóving morality, We need nőt be pacifists ourselves to try to defend their personal rights. The Confgssion of Paith of Hthe Hungárián Bagg. Communities Objecfing to the Application of Porcé. In the Spring of 1961, 120 members of Hungárián Catholic Sastf communities were arrested and given long prison sentences. Oh Ilarch |y&\ 1961,the Hungárián Catholic episcopate published an encyclical in the press which was read aloud in the churches, tbo, in which the episcopate declared that the young people arrested fo(r their convictions were the enemies nőt only at the State bút of the Church as well. Which means that the episcopate took sides with those who persecute people fór their religion. A further manifestation of this attitűdé was the declaration of the episcopate which was published on tQctoberí~23^ 1986, on the 30th anniversary of the Hungárián uprising, -by the<n5tatist dpress, in which the episcopate denouncgd, those who rejected mplitary service on the basis of their convictions. And this statement was published at a time when the number of young people of different denominations v/ho are serving a severe prison sentence in the Hungárián prisons and penitentiaries fór con-cientious objection is well over one hundred. In this confession of faith we want to aeclare that we do nőt agree' with• the ctiíővc-mentioned diiuroh-persecuting statement of the episcopate and we want to /express our solidarity with all those who wanted to follow in the pást, are following in the present and are determined. to follow in the future, notwith- standing the great suffering it may cause the.m, Jesus’s command: "lőve thy enemies!" The Declaration claims that it represents the viewpoint of the feaá Vatican Council. It even quotes fro-m the 13th. point of the Gaudium et Sp§s constitution, which ‘:peaks about the neccessity to pút an end to the inhumanities of wbr, while the 80th point denounces totally the global wars of the modern éra. The Declaration quotes twelve lines from the above-mentioned 79th point, which’arguas against the permissibility of conscientious objection and only two lines that argue fór it. Furthermore, it quotes the passage arguing against conscientious objection before the lines arguing fór it, although the 79th point does just the opposite. The Declaration even comments on the passage of the Council’s Constitution which trpeaks about military service. "The duty to do military service cannot be rejected or denounced... The teachings of the Vatican Council... sr.y that to do one’s military service is right.." After stating this, it quotes the above-mentioned two lines defending the right of conscientious objection, bút without comment. That is, it fails to mention that according to the Vatican Council’s teachings conscientious objection
