Itt-Ott, 1976 (9. évfolyam, 1-6. szám)
1976 / 2. szám
is ironic, but true, that the same nationalist sentiments that had previously kept the majority of Hungarians within the folds of the Catholic Church now dictated that they leave it. Transylvania's last Catholic bishop, Pál Bornemissza, appointed by Ferdinand in 1553, was attacked by the Transylvanian military. He complained in a letter to the Archbishop of Esztergom, his superior, that Ferdinand had sent him to Transylvania to be a bishop and not the warden of a fort, and that if they did not want him to get killed, they should recall him, because he could no longer serve in a country in which not a single village was loyal to Ferdinand anymore. Let us note this reference: loyal to Ferdinand, not to the Church, because to Bornemissza, too, loyalty to Ferdinand and to the Catholic Church were parallel concepts. In any event, when Izabella returned, she faced a Protestant majority in the land and also in the Transylvanian parliament. And one of her first acts was to declare, as recorded; "Cum de religione tractaretur, concessisset regina ad supplicationem regnicolarumutteneretquilibetsectamquamvellet." It is thus at the request of her subjects that she grants them the right to belong to whichever religious faction they wish. She herself, however, did what she could to protect what was left of the Catholic Church in the realm. The law of the foUowing year (1557) regulates the religious controversy in greater detail, but in the same tolerant spirit: "that everyone be permitted to hold whichever faith he will, of either the old or the new rites, all being free in the matter of religion to act as their own judgement dictates, short of causing offense to anyone. Let not the followers of the new religion offend against the old faith, nor let the followers of the latter be harmed in any way.” The law concludes by establishing a national synod for the purpose of debating religious differences before learned theologians and the nobility. Thus, recapitulating, the law of 1557 1) permits personal choice between the two faiths and recognizes the validity of personal judgment, 2) forbids the molesting of loyal Catholics by adherents of the Reformation, 3) sets up a national (not an ecclesiastic 1) synod of clergy and political leaders for the purpose of restoring peace in doctrinal controversies, to provide a controlled forum for discussion and in the hope of removing dissension in matters of religion. It is of interst to note here that the legal side of the Transylvanian Reformation has never been properly evaluated by our historians .* Thus, Gyula Szekfű, whose thinking dominated Hungarian historiography until 1945, sees in these laws only a pro-protestant plot. He and C. A. Macartney both believe that they demonstrate the weakness of the Transylvanian government. Contemporary Marxist history-writing is even more bigoted in this respect: it paints a picture of a helpless, corrupt government, wasting its time on useless religious controversy, when it should have been promoting the class struggle. Nothing could be further from the truth than these views. The Transylvanian government displayed consummate skill in dealing with an explosive situation, a dispute that led to civil war in other countries. In Transylvania, where the dissension took a national form, the situation was even more dangerous. Yet the peace was kept — and, what was unheard of in those days, freedom for the individual was steadily increased in the process. The importance of the national issue cannot, I feel, be overemphasized. The Saxons had namely organized themselves by now into a unified, national church, under the leadership of Johannes Honterus. For their part, the Saxons were happy to stop things here, and they were not inclined toward tolerance themselves. Thus, Honter's Kirchenordnung of 1547 went so far as to forbid the importation of unapproved books to the Saxon towns, lest the * Kivételt képez itt Szent-Iványi Sándor, aki A magyar vallásszabadság c. művét ennek a kérdésnek szentelte. A könyv azonban sajnos csupán kéziratként jelent meg, s így nem kerülhettek még kiváló meglátásai a történetírás vérkeringésébe. 25
