I am following with close attention and sensitivity the discussion prompted by the news that the cause for the beatification of the Servant of God Bishop Ján Vojtaššák is moving forward. I regard with particular respect the statement issued by the Central Union of Jewish Religious Communities in Slovakia. I understand that issues connected with the period of the Slovak State can reopen painful memories within the Jewish community and in society as a whole, and can raise serious questions. I do not wish to avoid or downplay these questions.
The memory of the victims of the Holocaust deserves our profound respect. The Church is conscious of the suffering of Jewish victims, firmly rejects antisemitism and the persecution of Jews, and considers it her duty to speak truthfully and without relativization about this part of our history. The suffering of the victims must in no way be minimized or justified. I am convinced that acknowledging the failures of Christians during this period and honestly examining the life of a particular individual are not mutually exclusive. Both call us to truthfulness, humility, and responsibility.
I am aware of the historically documented facts concerning Bishop Ján Vojtaššák’s service on the State Council, his positions during the period when anti-Jewish measures were being adopted, and questions relating to the Aryanization of Jewish property. These are precisely among the serious historical issues that cannot be dismissed by a general reference to the “complexity of the times.” They must be examined on the basis of the available historical sources and within their specific contexts.
Among the faithful, there has long been a profound respect for Bishop Ján Vojtaššák’s witness during the period of Communist persecution and for the suffering he endured. The Church is therefore examining his life and his possible martyrdom. During his visit to Slovakia in 1995, Saint John Paul II, speaking in Levoča, encouraged the initiation of the ecclesiastical beatification process for Bishops Ján Vojtaššák and Pavol Peter Gojdič. The Diocese of Spiš responded to this appeal by opening the process.
The opening of a beatification process, however, never means that its outcome has been predetermined. Quite the contrary. The process is initiated precisely so that the Church may thoroughly and truthfully examine the candidate’s life and determine whether he meets the requirements necessary for beatification.
In the case of Bishop Ján Vojtaššák, the cause is not merely concerned with the general question of whether he was a “virtuous man” during his lifetime. It also examines whether his persecution, suffering, and death can, according to the Church’s criteria, be regarded as martyrdom. For this reason, too, it is necessary to evaluate his entire life and conduct, including the period of the Slovak State. Historical controversies cannot be separated from the overall assessment of his life, because they may be relevant to the theological and ecclesial evaluation of his martyrdom.
This is also how the recent announcement concerning the completion of the Positio super martyrio should be understood. The Positio is neither a decision on beatification nor the Church’s final judgment. It is a comprehensive scholarly dossier presenting the results of the investigation conducted thus far and submitting them for further expert evaluation. The documentation has now been presented to the historical consultants of the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints.
I consider it both necessary and right that the Diocese of Spiš, which initiated this process, should do everything required of it in this matter: gather the available historical documents, without avoiding difficult questions, and submit the findings of the investigation to the competent authorities of the Holy See for assessment. During the supplementary diocesan phase from 2015 to 2019, particular attention was also devoted to the period from 1939 to 1945 and to newly available historical documents. This work also addressed questions concerning Bishop Vojtaššák’s service on the State Council, his positions regarding anti-Jewish measures, and the issue of Aryanization.
There is no intention to conceal or retouch any part of history. At the same time, it would not be right to bring the investigation to a close without a thorough assessment of the serious questions and objections that have been raised. These must be taken seriously and examined without prejudice, on the basis of historical sources and within the context of a period that was itself extraordinarily complex and tragic. It is now for the competent experts to critically evaluate the documentation that has been submitted.
If the historical consultants reach a favorable conclusion, the Positio will subsequently be examined by theologians and by the other competent bodies of the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints. Only after the appropriate stages of the process have been completed can the matter be presented to the Pope for a final decision. For this reason as well, it is important to respect each stage of the process and not to prejudge its outcome.
As the current diocesan Bishop of Spiš, I feel a particular responsibility for the way in which we approach the life of my predecessor. The aim is not to create an idealized image of Bishop Ján Vojtaššák, but to contribute to an honest examination of his life. I will therefore respect the work of historians and theologians and, ultimately, the decision of the Church, whatever that decision may be.
