https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GeOGCibqjLwJuraj Batelja
The patriarch of Porphyry would have done well if he had mentioned, in his TV interview on March 19 2021, the places that he considers to be deeply problematic. And if he leaves it unsaid, the impression of division in the Croatian public and among the Catholic faithful remains.
I do not believe that it can be the patriarch's intention to create mistrust between Catholics in Croatia and Peter's successor in Rome, and between Catholics and the blessed Alojzije Stepinac - much less that he wants to deepen mistrust between the Croatian and Serbian people.
On the content of all the letters of Archbishop Stepinac to Pope Pius XII. experts have said their judgment - theological and historical. There is nothing in any letter against the Christian faith and morals. There are no problematic places in them; they do not give rise to controversy - much less to doubt the clear conscience and saintly significance of Alojzije Stepinac.
Is Archbishop Stepinac wrong when he begs the Pope to be close to the Catholic faithful in Croatia ?! Is it problematic that he informed the Pope about the opportunities that are fateful for the Church in his people ?! Did he betray his vocation by asking the Pope for protection for the Croatian people and help in preserving their religious and national identity ?!
Letters sent by the Archbishop of Zagreb Alojzije Stepinac to Pius XII., are a reflection of his faith and love for the Croatian people. If it is deeply problematic that a Croat wants his country, and loves his country, then every Croat who builds and loves his country is also deeply problematic.
His Holiness Patriarch Porphyry would have contributed much more to the trust and reconciliation if he had mentioned that the bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church stayed in the court of the Archbishop of Zagreb until 1935, whenever they came and from wherever they came to Zagreb.
Or that he took into account that Archbishop Stepinac went to the Orthodox Metropolitan of Zagreb to congratulate the great holidays, and the Metropolitan would return such congratulations at the Archbishop's Palace.
Or that in the villages through which Archbishop Stepinac passed by car, Orthodox Serbs made triumphal arches, took to the streets and shouted at him. He would even get out of the car and, accompanied by the parish priest, socialize with Orthodox believers.
In particular, the patriarch would have contributed to a clearer picture of the situation in Croatia if he had mentioned that some Serb intellectuals in Zagreb had lost their jobs or suffered humiliation, including his predecessor Bishop Emilian, because they wanted to testify about the love and help the Archbishop of Zagreb provided to the Serbs in the Second World War.
The patriarch would have contributed more to historical truth and reconciliation if he had mentioned how the Serbian Orthodox Church fought against the equality of Catholics and Orthodox in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia;
that the Serbian Orthodox Church advocated the abolition of the Banovina of Croatia; that the Serbian Orthodox Church in the coup d'etat in 1941 itself helped to overthrow the state when it felt that it was losing its previous position in it.
Aware that the Catholic Church can be free only in a free state, Archbishop Stepinac and his people were in favor of establishing an independent state. He did not determine its political framework or economic direction, but he demanded that divine and human rights be respected in it, that both Catholics and Orthodox have the proximity of their own Church, their people, their believers.
And that is the pride of every Catholic, every well-meaning man. That is why St. John Paul II and called him the brightest figure of the Church among the Croats. We can only be proud of him and look brightly into our future.
https://narod.hr/kultura/msgr-batelja-o ... i-piju-xii
