Tag Archives: Hungarian Catholic Church

Freemasons, Satanic forces, the Soros Plan, and the kitchen sink

This morning I was listening off and on to a call-in program on Klub Rádió in which a man phoned in, asking a sensible question. What financial benefits does George Soros reap from settling millions of migrants in Europe? He complained that no one in the opposition asks this very simple question, when such an inquiry could unveil the total absurdity of the government’s charges against Soros. Clearly, no one could possibly give a rational explanation for how Soros would benefit financially from the millions of migrants he allegedly wants to settle in Europe.

The caller was right. Some obvious questions are never asked of Fidesz politicians, although I have to admit that even the best questions can be sidestepped or simply left unanswered. And that takes me to a lecture Tibor Navracsics, European commissioner for education, culture, youth and sport, gave Saturday on the future of Europe. From the media coverage of the event it seems that Navracsics is a supporter of the vision Jean-Claude Juncker outlined a few weeks ago of a closely-knit European Union, which many of my readers found far too optimistic and most likely unattainable. As he should, Navracsics refrained from talking about Hungarian domestic politics, but he did answer a question concerning the “Soros Plan.” Navracsics assured his audience that no such plan is on the agenda of the European Commission. About a month ago he called it merely campaign rhetoric. But today, when Ildikó Csuhaj of ATV confronted Viktor Orbán with Navracsics’s denial of the existence of the Soros Plan, the prime minister summarily announced that he is right and Navracsics is wrong. End of discussion. Another good example of the primitive games the Orbán government is playing is its answer to the tongue-in-cheek request by Bernadett Szél for a copy of the “Soros Plan.” She was instructed to go to the national consultation questionnaire where, in the infoboxes, she will find all the information she needs.

Viktor Orbán may have cut short the discussion on the existence of the Soros Plan and the European Commission’s adoption of it, but Navracsics’s denial of an essential part of the election campaign must have irritated him to no end. He sent his deputy, Zsolt Semjén, after him. Semjén is not known for his brains, as you will see from the way he took on Navracsics in an interview on an early Sunday morning Kossuth Rádió program. Five years ago HVG was alerted to the possibility that about 40% of Semjén’s doctoral dissertation was plagiarized. If you want to know more about the case, read my post “Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjén, the modern St. Sebastian.” Semjén’s modest intellectual prowess was painfully obvious in this interview. After repeating the accusation that “George Soros holds in his hand and pocket the world of which Navracsics’s work is a part,” he decided to demonstrate his knowledge of history and philosophy, which in Semjén’s case usually results in hair-raising absurdities. In his view, the reason for the current “migrant crisis” is, believe it or not, the ideas of Freemasonry, which have gone through several mutations like Jacobinism, Bolshevism, and finally “Soros’s extreme liberal thing,” which hates Christian traditions and nation states. Soros’s philosophy wants “to abolish” them. The world according to Soros would be a United States of Europe led by bureaucrats who “would pass power over to NGOs,” whatever that means. Of course, all this is utter nonsense. I got a real kick out of Semjén’s claim that “Hungarian culture defines itself against Islam as the shield of Christian Europe.” Hungarian culture is really going up in the world. I should add that several people believed that Semjén expressed anti-Semitic sentiments in this interview. It reminded Viktor Szigetvári of Együtt of the “hateful, anti-Semitic talk of the 1930s.” Éva Hajnal of Amerikai Népszava asked, “Why doesn’t Semjén finally say that it is the Jews?”

Zsolt Semjén is an admiring and loyal servant of Viktor Orbán

I left the best to last. A KDNP member of parliament, András Aradszki, who is also undersecretary in charge of matters related to energy in the ministry of national development, had a few startling “revelations” about George Soros. Aradszki spent most of his adult life working as a counselor to MOL. He is a devout Catholic who joined the Christian Democratic People’s Party at the earliest possible moment, in 1990. Otherwise, he doesn’t seem to have any experience in public speaking because he could barely read the text of his parliamentary address, titled “The Christian duty to fight against the Satan/Soros Plan.” I will not go through the nonsense this man put together line by line because an excellent English rendition of the speech is available on YouTube.

It is also available in the original Hungarian.

Here I will only pick a few bones with Aradszki. I was so fascinated by his claim that, according to the Three Secrets of Fátima, Satan’s greatest and final attack against the Church will be the attack against families that I decided to read up on the subject. I personally don’t believe in the apocalyptic visions and prophecies given by the Virgin Mary to three young Portuguese shepherds. But at least Aradszki should have stuck with the real version of the three secrets: World War I, World War II, and the twentieth-century persecution of Christians. Not a word about an attack on families. I also wonder whether Aradszki knows anything about “forced politicization of gender theory.” I very much doubt it. Aradszki’s text at places is horribly muddled, but I was struck by his claim that Lucifer tricks people “with deceptive catch-phrases about humane treatment and love for one’s neighbor by lecturing the Church.” Aradszki is obviously trying to deflect criticism of the Hungarian Catholic Church for failing to practice their Christian duty, but he doesn’t offer any proof of the humane treatment of the refugees by the clergy. In fact, if you read the text carefully, he defends their behavior by calling the Soros Plan “a sin against man” which is also “a sin against God,” and therefore it is justifiable to resist any humanitarian impulses.

What is Aradszki’s remedy for the Satan-Soros Plan? First and foremost, Hungarians should fill out the national consultation questionnaire. This act will also give them an opportunity to make their opinions known about what “we think of our homeland’s thousand-year-old history, our national sovereignty, our freedom, our beloved Europe.” In addition, Aradszki has another weapon against Soros. As “Popes John Paul II and Benedict and other exorcists” believed, “the rosary is the strongest weapon against evil, and it is capable of changing history.” I am flabbergasted.

The question is whether this incredible performance was approved by the leader of the KDNP delegation. Unfortunately, I have only a vague recollection that approval by the whip is a prerequisite, but I will inquire from people who have parliamentary experience. Péter Harrach, the head of the KDNP delegation, called Aradszki’s views on the Soros Plan “a religious approach” that is his privilege to express. “This is what he thinks, but this is not a political message.” It is hard to know what Harrach means by this mysterious sentence. I assume he’s trying to distance KDNP from Aradszki’s speech. In any case, “the leader of the delegation is not competent either to criticize or to penalize a member’s private opinion,” claims Harrach. A friend called my attention to the fact that, with the exception of this brief response by Harrach in Magyar Idők, no government media outlet said a word about this mad speech in parliament. Perhaps even they decided that it was too much.

October 9, 2017

Friction between natural allies: The Orbán government and the Catholic Church

András Veres has been widely criticized ever since he delivered a brief but controversial sermon at the official Catholic celebration of August 20, Hungary’s premier national holiday. Veres, the bishop of Győr and the president of the Conference of Hungarian Bishops, is well known for his extreme conservatism. So when I heard that he would deliver the homily, I assumed that he would use the occasion to promote reactionary views of the Hungarian Catholic Church. I was surprised when I read the summary by MTI, the state-owned news agency. The summary was extremely short and devoid of any extremism.

Well, it didn’t take long before it was discovered that MTI had left out all the passages in which Veres was critical of the Orbán government. Magyar Kurír, the official internet site of the Conference of Hungarian Bishops, published the complete text, in which this passage could be found:

Brothers and sisters, we must pay attention to an internal danger. A deviously worded law under the guise of good intentions which ignores Christian values furtively is sneaking into the fabric of a Christian-based society, planting the blight of self-abdication. The last time we saw such a thing was in the provision to increase support for the test-tube baby program.

Another passage that was deemed unimportant by MTI was the one that dealt with relations between church and state. What Veres had to say on the subject, in my opinion, amounts to asserting the supremacy of the church over the state.

We Christians cannot abdicate our duty of shaping society according to the value system of the gospel. On the one hand, because we know that we serve the good of all people and, on the other, because if we renounced that task we would not fulfill our mission of baptism, that is, we wouldn’t be building the kingdom of God.

It took a couple of days before the real meaning of the words on the test-tube baby program sank in, but when it did, the outrage was widespread. Something unusual happened in a country of enormous political divisiveness: it mattered not whether people support the government or are in the opposition, they found Veres’s words unacceptable. When I read an open letter addressed to András Veres by László Szentesi Zöldi, I realized the depth of the rejection of the position of the Catholic Church on the subject. Szentesi Zöldi is a journalist who is usually the first to defend the Catholic Church. And yet in this letter he took it upon himself to teach the prelate about true Christianity.

András Veres, bishop of Győr

A long list of well-known personalities expressed their disappointment over Veres’s position. Some commentators couldn’t understand why Veres chose this particular occasion to get involved with such a controversial topic. But there is a fairly simple explanation that got lost in the emotional outcry against the church’s official doctrine. From the snippets of information that we have, the Christian Democratic People’s Party (Kereszténydemokrata Néppárt/KDNP), which considers itself to be the political arm of the Catholic Church seems to be extremely unhappy with the government’s decision to enlarge the test-tube baby program. As of now, the state funds the birth of 6,000 test-tube babies a year, but because of outside pressure as well as the government’s interest in increasing the number of births, it promised enough funds to double that number to 12,000. My suspicion is that behind the scenes Fidesz is encountering opposition from KDNP at the urging of the Catholic Church.

The question of expanding the program has been on the table for far too long. It was during the second Orbán government (2010-2014) that Miklós Szócska, undersecretary of health, commissioned a study that came to the conclusion that the expansion of the program might produce 10,000 new babies every year. His successor, Gábor Zombor (June 2014-September 2015), continued advocating for an expansion, and this time the government actually approved the measure. But its implementation was postponed. This spring his successor, Zoltán Ónodi-Szűcs, brought up the issue once again, but those eager would-be parents who might benefit from the expansion of the program are still waiting.

I fear they can wait for a while, because I’m quite certain that the “discussion” between Fidesz and KDNP hasn’t been settled yet. In fact, if we can trust Rózsa Hoffmann (KDNP), former undersecretary of education (2010-2014), the fight over the issue is raging at the moment. According to her, “the test-tube baby program can be continued, but because of the Catholic Church’s objection there will still be a lot of debate on the issue.”

An article published today confirms my suspicion of the raging debate between the government parties. The author of the article calls attention to the fact that there is “total chaos surrounding the test-tube baby program.” For example, two undersecretaries in the ministry of human resources hold diametrically opposed positions on the issue. Katalin Novák (Fidesz), undersecretary in charge of family affairs in the ministry of human resources, distanced herself from Bishop Veres by emphasizing the enormous help the program gives to infertile parents. She reiterated that the expansion of the program will be approved soon. On the other hand, Bence Rétvári (KDNP), political undersecretary in the same ministry, did not stand by the program and was extremely vague on the details. Rétvári, who is a typical member of a party that considers itself to be the arm of the Catholic Church, suspects that the promoters of the program support the idea because it gives extra work and income to those institutions that specialize in this particular medical procedure. Whether the public outcry will tip the scale in favor of doubling the program we don’t know yet.

András Veres subsequently gave interviews explaining the church’s position, and the more he said the worse it got. Since the church believes in birth only through natural means, infertile couples just have to cope with their lot. Or, as a remedy, they could adopt a child, which would relieve their anxiety so they could eventually produce a child of their own. No one seems to be convinced.

As for Veres’s second statement, about the duty of the church to shape society, no has taken notice of it yet, although it might be a much more weighty statement than the church’s views on test-tube babies. After all, 80% of women pay not the slightest attention to the Catholic church’s views on reproduction. The shaping of society according to the value system of the Catholic church is a much more frightening prospect, especially in a country like Hungary where state and church are far too close as it is.

August 25, 2017

The rise and fall of Mária Erdő, sister of the head of the Hungarian Catholic Church

What follows is an incredible story but I have the feeling not a unique one. It is about the rector of the Apor Vilmos Katolikus Főiskola (Vilmos Apor Catholic College/AVKF) in Vác, a teachers college whose main function is the training of elementary school and kindergarten teachers. Miklós Beér, bishop of Vác, has the misfortune of being in charge of this institution, which has had its shares of scandals over the last 15 years. The original home of this teachers college was Zsámbék, where it was under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Székesfehérvár, but in 2003 more than half of the building housing the college burned down and the decision was made to move the institution to Vác.

Why Vác? Because Vác had a very large building that could house the teachers college of Zsámbék. The building had originally served as the local state high school, but once it was given back to the Church, a brand new building was erected for those who didn’t want to attend a parochial school. So, the Church used it as a novitiate where at one time only 26 novices were housed. The final move from Zsámbék to Vác took place in 2004.

With the move came a new rector, Judit Szemkeö, who for a while was undersecretary in the Ministry of Education in the first Orbán government but apparently was let go before her appointment would have expired in 2002. In any case, she needed a job, and Fidesz, which usually takes care of its own, convinced the Bishop of Vác to appoint her as the new rector. Apparently, she immediately began “the methodical destruction of the institution,” starting with the wholesale firing of staff. According to the law, a rector must have a Ph.D., which Szemkeö didn’t have, and therefore she was “demoted” on paper. The Church came up with a number of priests with Ph.D.s who, one after another, were given the title of rector, but in fact it was Szemkeö who ran the show from the background. This was the situation until 2011 when Mária Erdő, the sister of Cardinal Péter Erdő, Archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest, joined the faculty as an assistant professor. Her modest status changed within a couple of months when, to everybody’s surprise, she was named rector of AVKF.

Vilmos Apor Catholic College, Vác

The reason for Erdő’s delayed appointment was also her lack of a Ph.D. We don’t know all the details of her academic career. She most likely finished a three-year teachers college somewhere because for a while she taught as an elementary school teacher (tanító). Then, in 1989, she graduated with a degree in pedagogy from the University of Szeged. When it came to pursuing the Ph.D., she went to Katolícka univerzita v Ružomberku in northern Slovakia. This university has been in existence since 1995 in Ružomberok/Rózsahegy. It has four faculties: pedagogy, philosophy, theology, and health. A strange choice, I must say.

As for her dissertation, we don’t know in what language it was written. The professor who was the reader of the dissertation was a Pole, Jan Zimmy, who teaches at The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin. He referred to the title of the dissertation, in Slovak, as Mediálna kultúra – nové moznosti katolíckej vychovy a vzdelávania. We know that Erdő doesn’t speak Slovak. One person suggested that she may have defended her thesis in English. According to eyewitnesses, however, Erdő, although she claims to know both English and Russian, required the assistance of an interpreter every time she encountered foreign visitors to the college.

The dissertation was, it seems, basically plagiarized. A former psychology professor, who had lost her job at AVKF, read it and wrote a letter to both Zoltán Balog, minister of human resources, and László Lovász, president of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. In her letter she claimed that she had acquired a copy of the dissertation and had come to the conclusion that Erdő’s academic title should be withdrawn because “she used falsified data designed to mislead” the granting authority. She asserted that the dissertation was basically a copy of a book that had been published in 2002. In 47 instances Erdő changed the publication dates of her sources in order to give the impression of recent research. These are serious charges, yet János Áder, on the recommendation of Zoltán Balog, bestowed a high state decoration on Mária Erdő “in recognition of her work in promoting the interests of the homeland and enhancing universal human values” two years after this fact became known.

That’s bad enough, but what was really distressing was that Mária Erdő almost totally destroyed the institution. She immediately began “restructuring,” which primarily meant staff firings. The atmosphere was such that within two years after her arrival the number of students plummeted. Between 2012 and 2013 the number of students shrank by 52%. Moreover, it turned out that about 60 degrees were granted illegally. Most of her dismissals of faculty members were arbitrary, and several fired faculty members sued the institution. In the last five years—that is, during Erdő’s tenure—the Vác police launched four investigations, but naturally they never found anything worth pursuing. Because of her authoritarian leadership, fear and tension were widespread among the faculty as well as the student body. If someone dared to disagree with one of her decisions, the next day that person couldn’t step inside the building. She also turned the institution into a kind of family business. After she got rid of the IT instructor, she hired her own husband to fill the position. Her daughter was appointed to head the office of the rector.

One more interesting piece of information about Mária Erdő. One of her former students said that when she was a lowly instructor she was so timid that “she would have even apologized to the threshold for tripping on it.” But as soon as she became a person of power and importance she became a tyrant.

She is the author of four textbooks on the teaching of religion and the general editor of 24 textbooks published and sold by the Catholic Church’s Szent István Társulat, a publishing company. In December 2012 Mária Erdő first appeared in the media when someone discovered that in her grade 4 textbook she was telling children that “homosexuality means a sexual relation between people of the same sex, which is a grave and mortal sin.” Admittedly, this is the official doctrine of the Catholic Church, but critics argued that instilling homophobia at an early age is inappropriate, especially in light of Pope Francis’s more lenient words on the subject. She also insisted that “even if a child chooses ethics instead of religion, that still should be taught in a spirit not far from the Catholic Church’s views.”

Well, this year Mária Erdő finally lost her job. The Vác Bishopric announced at the end of January that her tenure would expire on July 31 but that due to health issues she would be going on paid leave immediately. The statement said that “there is not and never was any infringement procedure against her.” Surely, one cannot touch the sister of the head of the Hungarian Catholic Church. However, Miklós Beér’s patience must have run out when, at the beginning of January, the secretariat of the office of the rector, without the knowledge of the bishopric, announced a new tender for the post of the head of the institution. Erdő most likely was trying to remain in her post through this back door. Once Bishop Beér learned about this ruse, he withdrew the illegally declared tender and removed her from the premises five months before the end of her tenure.

I wonder where Mária Erdő will end up after this fiasco. I’m sure she will receive a cushy job somewhere, where she can continue her destructive and poisonous activities. Fidesz is generous to its own. Of course, it is also possible that she will get a full time job at the Szent István Társulat, whose sponsor is Cardinal Erdő, Archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest, who just happens to be her brother.

August 23, 2017

The Hungarian government chips away at the abortion law

Thursday afternoon, during his regular press conference, János Lázár announced the latest government decision. Two hospitals–the Budai Irgalmasrendi Kórház, managed by the Hungarian Catholic Church, and the Bethesda Gyermekkórház, maintained by the Hungarian Reformed Church–will receive a generous grant of 7.8 billion forints so they can offer obstetric services. In return, they will not perform abortions and will refuse to accept gratuities, which, as we all know, are steep. Obstetricians can become quite wealthy from money happy new parents pass to them under the table.

The immediate reaction in the liberal press was negative. Journalists remember only too well earlier attempts to restrict abortions. The sanctity of life issue is at the core of the Christian Democratic People’s Party’s ideology. During the debate on the constitution in 2010 KDNP politicians were adamant about the issue. Eventually the following sentence made its way into the final text of Orbán’s constitution: “Human dignity shall be inviolable. Every human being shall have the right to life and human dignity; the life of the fetus shall be protected from the moment of conception.” Subsequently, KDNP tried several times to convince Viktor Orbán to follow the Polish example, which makes abortion illegal except in cases of rape, when the woman’s life is in jeopardy, or if the fetus is irreparably damaged. The Polish government recently tried to enact a total ban on abortions, but it had to retreat in the face of huge demonstrations. Orbán knows that the introduction of a sweeping abortion law in Hungary would be political suicide.

Társaság a Szabadságjogokért (TASZ), the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, objected to the terms of the grants. Judit Zeller, who works on patients’ rights cases, took the position that although individual doctors may refuse to perform surgical interventions in pregnancy cases, institutions as such can’t. If the condition of the government’s financial assistance depends on the hospitals refusing to perform abortions, the arrangement between the hospitals and the government is illegal.

As is often the case in the chaos within the Orbán government, there was a discrepancy between Lázár’s statement and the official government text. In its announcement Magyar Közlöny, the official gazette of government edicts and laws, said not a word about the special understanding between the hospitals and the central government concerning the prohibition of abortions.

The two hospitals will actually share one new obstetric department, which will be housed in Bethesda. People familiar with the medical facilities in Budapest claim there is no need for an additional facility. They suspect that the arrangement is a kind of unholy alliance between the two so-called historic churches, on the one hand, and the Hungarian government, which is eager to have the churches’ full support, on the other.

KDNP, the “political arm of the Catholic Church,” has been unhappy ever since 2010 when it failed to have a total ban on abortions included in the new constitution. The party therefore periodically makes attempts to smuggle in restrictive laws. In 2012 there was a huge debate on the “abortion pill,” in which KDNP successfully led the opposition to its availability in Hungary. The World Health Organization approved the pill in 2005 and the Hungarian “college of gynecologists and obstetricians” also endorsed its use. But KDNP’s “expert” described the horrors that follow the procedure, which in his opinion was even more dangerous than the surgical technique. He also claimed that “WHO suggested the use of the abortion pill for overpopulated countries,” not for countries with a low birthrate like Hungary. As a result of KDNP’s fierce opposition, the pill is not available in Hungary to this day.

A year later, in 2013, KDNP introduced yet another bill to restrict women’s gynecological rights. This time is was Bence Rétvári, undersecretary in the department of justice, who introduced the bill. KDNP wanted to put an end to voluntary sterilization. Prior to 2005 Hungarian laws had restricted voluntary sterilization. The Constitutional Court found them unconstitutional because they violated women’s rights. Therefore, after 2006 such operations could be freely performed at the patient’s expense. It was this liberal law that KDNP wanted to change in such a way that only those women who were over 40 years old and already had three children could be sterilized. This bill was never enacted into law.

Medián took a survey at that time on Hungarian attitudes toward the abortion issue, and it turned out that even supporters of Fidesz-KDNP didn’t back further legal restrictions. The poll showed that 72% of churchgoers thought that in cases of financial stress abortion was an acceptable alternative. The same group of people believed that the abortion pill that KDNP torpedoed a year before was an acceptable, maybe even preferable, method of birth control.

A year ago Index got hold of a study by a hobby demographer whose remedy for the low birthrate in Hungary is to forbid all abortions on childless women between the ages of 35 and 45. This hobby demographer has close ties to KDNP. In fact, his study was at least partially financed by KDNP’s Barankovics Foundation.

In brief, KDNP has been relentlessly trying to overturn the current law on abortion. Yet the top politicians of the party now claim that they had absolutely nothing to do with the deal between the two hospitals and the government. I doubt that this is the case. I can hardly imagine that Miklós Soltész (KDNP), the secretary for churches, minorities and civil affairs, had nothing to do with the 7.8 billion forints given to the two church-run hospitals.

This first step toward “abortion free hospitals” might seem innocuous. It simply reduces the number of hospitals where women can have abortions. Perhaps this way KDNP’s drive for a ban on abortions might be less noticeable, especially if the process takes several years. Népszava’s headline to its article on the subject read: “Did the future begin?” A lot of people think so.

February 10, 2017

How not to pick a constitutional judge: LMP’s choices I

Parties of the democratic opposition are up in arms. They are outraged at the assistance LMP extended to Fidesz to score an important parliamentary victory, the approval of four new judges for the Constitutional Court.

MSZP in the last minute tried to delay the inevitable by instructing its representative on the nominating committee to resign ahead of the vote. With his resignation the committee, which according to house rules must have at least nine members, no longer had a quorum. The MSZP tactic might have been clever, but the socialists didn’t count on Fidesz’s total disregard for rules and regulations. The majority party could have opted to get another member to replace MSZP’s representative and, let’s say a week later, finalize the nominations. No, they simply went ahead. This time not even Gergely Gulyás, Fidesz’s legal magician, could give a half-believable explanation for the vote’s alleged legality. Because of the decision to go ahead with the nominations despite the lack of a quorum, the opposition parties consider the entire procedure by which these four people were appointed illegitimate.

The Károly Eötvös Intézet, the liberal legal think tank, hasn’t changed its opinion in the last year. Just as in January, the legal scholars working there consider LMP’s decision the worst possible move. Their position is that the Constitutional Court ever since its enlargement with four Fidesz-appointed judges has not been an independent court but an arm of Fidesz’s political will. It no longer fulfills its function. As it stands, there are seven judges who will always vote in favor of the government while four on occasion will express a contrary opinion. The four new judges, considered to be “conservative,” will make the situation even worse. And no judge will have to retire from the court before 2023.

That leads me to the problem of vetting nominees. It has happened in the past, when all parties participated in the nominating process, that the socialist-liberal nominee turned out to be much more conservative than anticipated. One reason for these “mistakes” is the lack of a body of legal work on the basis of which the candidate’s legal philosophy could be judged. A good example of this was the choice of Mihály Bihari by MSZP and SZDSZ. Although he had a law degree, he had worked as a political scientist. There was no reliable way to assess his legal views. A somewhat similar situation occurred when Fidesz nominated István Stumpf, again a political scientist, to the court in 2010. Judging by his past, he should have been an absolutely safe choice from Viktor Orbán’s point of view. After all, Stumpf served as Orbán’s chief of staff between 1998 and 2002. But he turned out to be much less reliable than expected. The same problem exists with people who have been practicing judges and have no published work on the basis of which one could assess their legal thinking. Among the new appointees Ildikó Marosi falls into this category. She has been working as a judge, dealing with administrative and labor cases.

Although all opposition parties are highly critical of LMP’s role in this affair, the Demokratikus Koalíció is the most outspoken in its condemnation of the party. Csaba Molnár, one of the deputy chairmen of DK, tore into Ákos Hadházy on ATV’s “Szabad szemmel” (Open eyes). It quickly became apparent that Hadházy had not the foggiest idea about the legal views of the nominees his predecessor, András Schiffer, had picked.

molnar-hadhazy2

Csaba Molnár and Ákos Hadházy on ATV’s “Szabad szemmel”

A lot of people, including me, hoped that under the leadership of Hadházy LMP would be more willing to cooperate with the other opposition parties. I remember vividly when he announced that any kind of a deal or coalition with Fidesz is absolutely out of the question as long as he is the co-chairman of LMP. Hadházy normally makes a very good impression on people. He comes across as a modest, earnest, idealistic man who isn’t quite at home in the world of politics. Unfortunately, he is also naïve. He doesn’t seem to understand how differences in legal philosophy shape how judges interpret the constitution. When Molnár tried to explain to him that at least three of the nominees come from the conservative legal camp, which would further strengthen the pro-Fidesz majority, Hadházy naively shot back: “And conservative people cannot be honest?”

In any case, poor Hadházy was demolished under the weight of the facts DK gathered on the legal and political past of the nominees. Hadházy could only mumble: “Well, I didn’t know that, I will have to check on this.” This was Hadházy’s answer to Molnár’s claim that Bálint Schanda’s views on abortion are so extreme that, if it depended on him, he would forbid pharmacists to fill valid prescriptions signed by a physician for the morning-after pill.

The fact is that Schanda writes almost exclusively on legal questions concerning religion. The list of his publications is a mile long, and some of them are available online. If it depended on Schanda, stores would be closed on Sundays because believers (Christians) should have the opportunity to follow the Scripture, which forbids any kind of work on the Sabbath. This is part of the freedom of religion in his opinion.

He can be critical of the government, but his criticism comes from his religious convictions and his special interest in the defense of the family. For example, he didn’t like the idea of keeping children in school all day long, which he considers to be a “left-wing notion” popular in Western Europe. That’s why he was surprised to learn that the conservative Fidesz government had decided to introduce such schools. He finds the idea of the state’s taking over the “nurturing” of children from the family unacceptable. Church schools, however, are different because the parents expressly grant the church the task of educating their children.

Schanda also liked the idea of “family electoral law.” That is, that parents, depending on the number of children they had, could have multiple votes. Admittedly, he doesn’t want Hungary to rush into being the first country in the world to introduce such a law, but “this question cannot be a taboo; it would be foolish simply to discard it without seriously considering it.” In the article he practically suggests starting preparatory work for such a piece of legislation to be introduced later. Perhaps if Ákos Hadházy took the time to read a couple of Shanda’s articles he would better understand the impact of legal philosophy on people’s daily lives.

Finally, Csaba Molnár brought up an article by Schanda that he published in Magyar Kurir, which is the official newspaper of the Conference of the Hungarian Catholic Bishops. The short article’s title was “Pope Francis and zero tolerance.” It was about the vexing question of pedophilia. Schanda explains that there is nothing new in Pope Francis’s announcement because the church has had strict laws concerned pedophilia since 2001. Zero tolerance in this case simply means that a priest accused of this particular crime is immediately suspended, which he approves of. He cautions, however, about exaggerating the problem “because according to American studies pedophilia among Catholic priests in comparison to lay teachers is infinitesimal.”

The only study on pedophilia among Catholic priests I found was from 2004. The John Jay College of Criminal Justice published a comprehensive study in which it was claimed that 4% of Catholic priests in the U.S. had sexually victimized minors in the past half century. This seems to be somewhat lower than school teachers during the same time frame. Well, “somewhat lower” is not “infinitesimally” less. Moreover, it is very possible that victims of priests are less willing to confront church authorities than victims of teachers are to go to civil authorities. But this is a small point and not an important one. What, on the other hand, I found disingenuous was his claim that “in the former socialist countries the proportion of such acts in comparison to western countries is much lower.” At this point I had to laugh. What makes Polish, Hungarian or Slovak priests less prone to committing such crimes? Their countries’ socialist past? Or, perhaps something else, like a lower rate of reporting and a higher rate of covering up cases. Schanda even tries to cast doubt on the seriousness of the very few stories that emerged in the last few years in Hungary by saying that the media used these cases to incite anti-church sentiment in the population. Moreover, he claims that these cases were exploited by political parties. Obviously, the socialist-liberal parties.

In the summer of 2011 I devoted four posts to the four Fidesz-picked judges, asking “how qualified will the new judges in the Hungarian Constitutional Court be?” I’m planning to do the same this time.

November 23, 2016

European solidarity and Orbán’s Hungary

It would be far juicier to write about György Matolcsy’s fascination with Buddhist ten-million multiplier days, which seem to direct the work of the Hungarian National Bank, and his new girlfriend’s fabulous pay of 1.7 million forints a month that she receives from four different foundations of the bank and as a researcher of Indian culture and philosophy. But I think I should return, even if briefly, to the affairs of the European Union, especially since Jean-Claude Juncker delivered his State of the Union Message to the European Parliament today.

Juncker’s speech was almost an hour long, and its primary aim was to pour oil on troubled waters, caused mostly by Viktor Orbán’s assiduous efforts to turn the countries of the Visegrád 4 against the European Union. In fact, Orbán spent the day in Bulgaria, working hard to convince Prime Minister Boyko Borissov to support his cause. I would be surprised if Borissov would oblige since he has been working closely with the European Commission on the defense of the Bulgarian-Turkish border, as we learned from Juncker’s speech.

juncker

In comparison to some of Juncker’s past speeches, this one was beseeching rather than strident. He tried to convince those countries that throw seeds of discord into the soil of the Union to be more constructive. He appealed to them, saying: “Europe can only work if speeches supporting our common project are not only delivered in this honorable House, but also in the parliaments of all our member states.” In plain language, don’t foment ill feelings against the common cause at home, as European politicians often do.

Juncker pretty much admitted that the European Union is broken at the moment. As he put it, “I believe the next twelve months are decisive if we want to reunite our Union. If we want to overcome the tragic divisions between east and west which have opened up in recent months.” He went on to say that he has never seen “so little common ground between our member states…. Never before have I heard so many leaders speak only of their domestic problems, with Europe mentioned only in passing, if at all…. Never before have I seen national governments so weakened by the forces of populism and paralyzed by the risk of defeat in the next elections. Never before have I seen so much fragmentation, and so little commonality in our Union.”

Juncker also announced that since Great Britain is on its way out of the European Union, a common European army can finally be established, as he had proposed at least a year ago. This announcement should please Viktor Orbán who, to everybody’s surprise, announced his desire to set up a common army in his speech at Tusnádfürdő/Băile Tușnad, Romania, on July 23. It was strange to hear Orbán’s insistence on an EU army when he is so keen on national sovereignty. I suspect that this announcement was designed to give Orbán a way out of the corner into which he painted himself with his constant opposition to everything coming from Brussels–with the exception of EU funds. He knew full well about the plan for a common army and decided to throw his weight behind it, acting as if it was his own idea. That way, when Juncker announces the decision to go ahead with the plan, he can proclaim victory, which his domestic supporters will believe and applaud. After all, “Brussels” had to accept his demand for a strong border defense. This way, after the Bratislava meeting he can justify his adherence to other common decisions by pointing out that, after all, his main demand, a common army and border defense, was satisfied. Very cagey fellow. As for the future, let’s not be at all optimistic about Orbán’s behavior. No matter how European politicians emphasize the need for cooperation, he will continue his fight against Brussels, the West, and liberal democracy.

But let’s return briefly to the part of Juncker’s speech that addressed the refugee crisis. He asked for more solidarity, “but I also know that solidarity must be given voluntarily. It must come from the heart. It cannot be forced.” Well, let’s peek into some Hungarian hearts.

Orbán sent out all Fidesz politicians, from the highest to the lowest, on a three-week campaign for the referendum. One Fidesz MP who was campaigning with László Kövér, president of the Hungarian parliament, cracked a joke about refugees at a town meeting in Jászberény. The “joke” went something like this. Three beggars are hard at work in Budapest. After the day is over they compare notes. The first one says that he got 2,000 forints because he wrote on a piece of paper that he was hungry. The second announced that he got 3,000 forints because he wrote on a poster that he had three hungry children. Finally, the third told them he did very well. He got 10,000 forints because he told the people that he needs the money to go home. Apparently they thought “the joke” was hilarious.

Kövér was no better. He accused the bureaucrats in Brussels of wanting to change the cultural, religious, and ethnic composition of Europe. The migrants are only the instruments of their evil plans. “This is a war in which they don’t use weapons.” The mayor of the town urged the Gypsies who were present to vote “no” in the referendum because otherwise they might lose their government assistance since the Hungarian state’s resources are finite. Kövér also accused the refugees of being rich. In his opinion, ten people in the audience don’t have as much money in the bank together as these “migrants” have alone. And it went on and on for two and a half hours.

But I left the “best” to last. A Hungarian Reformed minister, László Károly Bikádi of Hajmáskér, a small town about 14 km from Lake Balaton, delivered a sermon last Sunday, offered to the soldiers and policemen defending Hungary’s borders against the refugees. The text for his sermon was Luke 10:25-37, the parable of the Good Samaritan. In his exegesis he said: “You just have to take a look at the story of the Samaritan. Jesus asks who the brethren of this man are. Everybody? Are we all brethren of each other? It is true that we are all children of God. But who are the brethren? Those who are merciful to us.” Then the merciful reverend launched into a muddled story about “us as white men who didn’t treat the colored people, be they Arabs, Negroes, Africans, Asians, as our brethren and therefore we shouldn’t be surprised if they don’t look upon us as their brethren. And they are coming like locusts, coming because we chased them away from their lands. … Allow me to say that they are like ants, like the feral of the wilderness” and because the white men pushed them out from their natural habitat “they come like ants. They move into our houses. What happens with mice, voles, and other creatures of the field? They come and beset us.” He finished his sermon by asserting that although it might be our fault that these people are on the run, “we shouldn’t make the mistake of throwing out our values just because people arrived among us who don’t consider us their brethren.”

As far as I know, the Hungarian Reformed Church has issued no statement, despite the appearance of at least two articles on the disgraceful performance of one of their own.

On a positive note, I should report that two Catholic parish priests recently stood up against the Hungarian Catholic Church’s indifference toward the refugees. Alas, their leaders, the bishops, are either quiet or outright antagonistic. One of the worst is Gyula Márfi, archbishop of Veszprém, who believes that what Europeans are facing is “the yoke of Mohamed.” Today, in an interview, he went so far as to claim that what “we consider sin [the Muslims] consider virtue.” Even Miklós Beér, bishop of Vác, who occasionally says a few nice words about the downtrodden, announced the other day that he will vote “no” at the government-inspired referendum. As he put it at a recent international conference on “Reconquering Europe” held in Vác, every time Europe has abandoned its Judaeo-Christian moral heritage, Europeans were led astray. Thus, any dilution of that Christian heritage is dangerous and must be avoided.

September 14, 2016

Pope Francis and his Hungarian critics

Traditionally, the Hungarian Catholic Church has been led by extremely conservative prelates known for their symbiotic relationship with the state. This conservatism solidified during the communist period, when the church was cut off from all the modernizing trends that were taking place in the West.

After the return of parliamentary democracy in 1990, the Catholic Church allied itself with the governing right-of-center MDF, a Christian Democratic party. On the other side were the former communists who now called themselves socialists and the liberals with their unacceptable ideas of a secular state and their insistence on limiting the church’s role to spiritual matters. The left was obviously no place for the conservative church hierarchy. So, after the demise of MDF the Catholic Church became a steadfast supporter of Fidesz. Priests delivered propaganda sermons on Sundays before the 1998 election, urging their flock to vote for the right party. When Fidesz lost the election in 2002, they worked on the party’s behalf throughout the party’s eight lean years. In 2010 the Catholic Church became one of the greatest beneficiaries of the Orbán government’s largess.

Pope Francis

Their support for Fidesz is unwavering, even (or especially) when it comes to the refugee question. While Christian teachings would call for charity toward those in need, the Church’s humanitarian activities were minimal when thousands of refugees were stuck in Hungary for a while without any government help. Moreover, the two largest denominations, the Catholic and the Hungarian Reformed, have not criticized the hate campaign being waged against the refugees. On the contrary, some of the prelates have spread the most incredible theories about the people who are fleeing civil war and Islamic terrorism.

There are quite a few arch-conservatives in the Conference of Bishops, but perhaps the most extreme when it comes to the refugee question is Gyula Márfi, archbishop of Veszprém. In his opinion, these men, women, and children are not refugees. They come to Europe as conquerors. Millions of Muslims realize that Europe abandoned its Christian faith or, as Márfi puts it, “Europe removed the gentle yoke of Christ” and thus became a target for the yoke of Mohamed. He doesn’t care what Pope Francis says about Christian love and charity. Francis comes from Argentina and therefore knows very little about Europe.

This was Márfi’s opinion in October 2015, and with time he has become increasingly confident that he was correct in his appraisal of the situation. He even added that “migration doesn’t have causes but only purposes.” Anyone who denies this is either lying or gravely mistaken. For many of us this kind of language sounds crazy, but we mustn’t forget that Viktor Orbán himself often talked about the possibly organized nature of the refugee flow.

Not all Catholic bishops are as outspoken as Márfi, but he was not the only one who criticized Pope Francis for his welcoming attitude toward the refugees. László Kiss-Rigó, another conservative or right-wing bishop, told a journalist of The Washington Post that “they’re not refugees. This is an invasion.” He added that he was in total agreement with the prime minister. The pope, by contrast, “doesn’t know the situation.” Later, Kiss-Rigó tried to blame The Washington Post for distorting his words.

Gyula Márfi, Archbishop of Vác

Gyula Márfi, Archbishop of Vác

The relationship between the Hungarian Catholic Church and Pope Francis is strained. Most of the Hungarian church leaders think that he is naïve or, worse, perhaps even a liberal-socialist misfit within the body of the universal Catholic Church. And then came a conversation between the pope and journalists on the plane between Krakow and Rome after he spent five days in Poland at the end of July, which seems to have further upset the Hungarian clerics as well as the Hungarian political right. The conversation took place after the murder of an 85-year-old priest in western France. The pope said: “I don’t like to talk about Islamic violence because every day when I look at the papers I see violence here in Italy—someone killing his girlfriend, someone killing his mother-in-law. These are baptized Catholics. If I speak of Islamic violence, I have to speak of Catholic violence. Not all Muslims are violent.”

The first reaction in the Hungarian media came from Zsolt Bayer, the foul-mouthed journalist who works for the far-right Magyar Hírlap but also writes a blog in which this article appeared. Bayer was one of the founders of the youth organization out of which Fidesz emerged. In fact, he is the proud owner of the #5 membership card. I believe Kövér’s is #1 and Orbán’s #2. In this article Bayer tore into the pope, who in his opinion is “either a senile old fool who is totally unsuitable to be the pope or a scoundrel. Momentarily, I can’t think of a third possibility.”

A day after Bayer’s post the pro-government Magyar Idők published an article about the pope’s controversial statement but opted not to express any opinion of its own. The journalist simply quoted two English-language publications, The American Conservative and The Catholic Herald. 888.hu was less circumspect when it made fun of the pope, who thinks that “Christ might live in one of the rejected migrants.” 888.hu quoted Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, according to whom a war of religion is being waged at the moment. Islam, he claims, calls “for our destruction.” Graham argues that “what’s sin in Europe, is virtue” in the Islamic world. So, the war is on. The pope is wrong.

György Stoffán, a far-right journalist with a dubious biography in Wikipedia, went so far as to demand the pope’s resignation. According to Stoffán, Pope Francis is “not a bad man, just not a European and not a Catholic.” The pope is not only being manipulated by Jews but is a Jew himself, a son of Jewish refugees from Italy. Yes, Stoffán belongs to the lunatic fringe, but it is enough to do a quick internet search to discover that he has company: “Pope Francis is a Jewish impostor,” “biblical prophecy from book of Obadiah reveals pope’s shocking Jewish agenda.” These stories are most likely inspired by Pope Francis’s renunciation of Jewish conversion at the end of 2015. Fundamentalists immediately protested, saying that the Vatican is wrong because Jews do need Jesus. Some of these fundamentalists even said that his teachings are heretical and that he is an anti-pope.

Given Pope Francis’s views, I’m not surprised that many conservatives inside and outside of the Church find him unacceptable and would love to see him disappear as soon as possible. And once he is gone, the Church should forget about his heretical social liberalism. As for the Hungarian people, given their attitude to the alien culture of the refugees, I’m sure that they wholeheartedly agree with the critics of Pope Francis.

August 13, 2016