In mid-August, the Archbishop of Prague Dominik Duka blessed the column, which returned to Old Town Square in Prague after 102 years. Duka reiterated that the memorial should not be an expression of the prominence of the Catholic Church, but an expression of gratitude for helping in the wars.
Proponents of the return of the column consider the work, which was destroyed in 1918, to be a symbol and memory of the defenders of Prague during the Thirty Years’ War and an important Baroque work of art. However, according to opponents, it is a symbol of Habsburg domination and intolerant re-Catholicization of the country.
“From the beginning, I thought that the whole case around the column should be more a matter for art historians and urban planners, so that we, as theologians, do not get too involved. Because I am deeply convinced that even if there is or will not be a pillar, the Czech nation will not be a bit more pious, more Catholic or more Marian. And even the fear that the Catholic Church will get some great power when there is a pillar is, of course, nonsense, “says Tomáš Halík.
He himself appreciates the efforts of the sculptor and restorer Petr Váni and the form of the copy. “That column suits the square, it belongs to the architecture. I do not see as an objection that it is a replica, after all, old statues are being exchanged for replicas everywhere on Charles Bridge. And in a way, one barbaric affair from 1918 was atoned for. But I have always been aware that there are unpleasant historical associations, “he continues.
–
“We live in different worlds”
In addition to the resistance of evangelicals, for whom the column may be a reminder of the violent re-Catholicization of the country, it draws attention to other controversial associations. During the Second Republic, the fascist part of right-wing Catholics used the symbol of the destroyed pillar in their hate attacks on the First Republic.
“I am afraid that this type of fascist Catholicism without Christianity is something that returns a little to our reality. And that’s what I’m afraid of. Those people who suddenly join the Catholic Church, even though they have recently been in a completely different field, “said Halík.
According to him, this also shows the current division of the Roman Catholic Church, which is also reflected in the split between the followers of Pope Francis and his vocal opponents. “The division today is not between churches, but within churches. I think the reason is not theological, the theology is an extension there, but psychological. This applies to people who look to the past and people who look to the future, “he says.
–
“Once upon a time, such very serious psychological research was carried out, which verified the hypothesis that religious people are rather conservative, rigid and authoritarian. And the big research ended with some saying yes and some not, “he explains, adding that there are two different psychological types of religiosity.
“People who see religiosity, religion as an instrument for something else, for example, to maintain some social status, some conservative values, these are rigid and authoritarian people. And then there are people for whom faith is the path, the path of search, the path of depth. And those people, on the other hand, are far more open than the average population, “says the theologian.
According to him, these two psychological types clearly stand out in the current situation of the Catholic Church. “And I’m afraid it’s insurmountable that we just live in different worlds,” he adds. According to Halík, the church needs a radical transformation. “We really need deep reforms, but not in the sense of some cheap modernization, but a spiritual deepening,” he suggests.
According to him, there are still more and more so-called seekers in society who have a real interest in spirituality, but the current approach of the Catholic Church cannot address them.
–
Freedom and responsibility
In connection with the current protests in Belarus, Halík also considered the need for freedom in an interview. “There are people who can’t work with their fears, who need firm security, they don’t have the courage to enter an unsecured space. And then there are people who can’t live without freedom. But he also feels that freedom is associated with a certain responsibility, “he said.
“I hope that the people who (in Belarus) are fighting for freedom will also show that responsibility. There was a huge desire for freedom in our country, but then it turned out that a lot of people imagined under that freedom more freedom from something, from an oppressive regime, but they didn’t see much freedom towards something. There is such an animal, animal freedom of people released from the cage, and then there is a truly human, humane freedom, “he emphasized that such freedom is also a commitment.
– .
