kassa tanulmány ii en-final

Aranka Sápos – Mikulaš Jančura

Characteristic features of anti-Semitism in the period of the first Czechoslovak Republic

(based on some contemporary political and ecclesiastic press publications and

documents)

Introduction

The domestic politics of the Czechoslovak Republic before Munich was mostly

characterised by conflicting interests of the Czechs and Slovaks. The conflict of the two

nations constituting the state stigmatized the ‘non-Slav’ national minorities living in the

country. The Slovak political life between the two World Wars was characterised by

autonomy efforts and the reduction of the rights of the national minorities although the peace

treaty signed in St. Germaine in 1919 obliged the new Czechoslovak State to ensure their

rights.

Assumed or real inequalities, grievances, advantages provided to the historical territories as

opposed to the periphery of the country and preference of companies close to the ruling

political parties when government orders were allocated, … etc. led to increasingly strong

conflicts.

The contradictory part played by Slovakia had become in the focus of domestic policy. After

the Parliamentary elections in 1925, the strength of the Slovak oppositional parties could

already be seen. The highest number of mandates was acquired by the Slovak Popular Party

fighting for autonomy, which entered the government in 1927 led by Andrej Hlinka. They

achieved their goal, the ‘acknowledgement’ of Slovak autonomy in 1938.

In the first period of its ‘independence’, the Slovak nation could not find a place within the

framework of the common state, it expected the new state to provide more than it was actually

able to.

The common state comprised of two partners unequal economically and socially. The Czech

party was conscious both of its leading role and the backward position of the Slovak nation

and abused its power on more than one occasions.

One of the reasons of conflicts between Czechs and Slovaks was the presence of over 100

thousand Czech civil servants in Slovakia. The Slovak population disliked the leading

positions and well-paid jobs held by the Czechs. They objected to the further ‘superfluous

inflow” of Czech administrators into different government agencies and expressed

disappointment because ‘ almost all Slovaks retire from several offices and now people from

Czechia are invited to fill the vacant positions.’ They did not only object to the Czech

administrators but ‘to Germans, Hungarians and Jews more compliant with the present

government.’1 The Czech employees coming from a better, more stable social environment or

the national minorities (Hungarians, Germans or Jews) mostly irritated the better educated but

unemployed or poorly paid Slovaks. 2

The different economic standards and cultural features of the parts of the country resulted in

major conflicts. The differences of religion and lifestyle of the two nations also caused

misunderstandings and discord. Some Czechs were insensitive to the traditional Slovak

lifestyle, religious beliefs, customs or emotions.3

Religious intolerance had been present in the attitudes of Czech and Slovak immigrants in

America even before the common state was declared. 4 The Catholic Slovak immigrants in

America had reservations regarding the common state established with the Czechs, because

the progressive Czech movements considered the Catholic Church to be the greatest enemy of

the Czech nation, so they wanted to ‘get rid of it’.5

Catholic Slovaks, on the other hand, were displeased by Czech liberalism. They believed its

open, profane lifestyle to be superficial and materialistic. They found it difficult to accept that

Czech historic personalities were taught at schools because they considered them foreigners.

The Slovak Catholic Church had to face several difficulties in the new state, such as:

- the Slovak Roman Catholic Church did not have a Slovak bishop immediately after

the declaration of the republic6

- open appearance of anti-Catholicism via Czech teachers who had removed the cross

from the walls of some Slovak schools

1 Žiadáme aby zbytočný príliv českých ľudí orstal. In. Slovak. Vol. XV., issue 147 (2 July, 1933) 2 ŠKVARNA, Dušan. Slovensko-české vzťahy v medzivojnovom (1918-38) období ovplyvnila

asynchrónnosť vývoja. ( Online access: www. voltaire.netkošice.sk) 3 ŠKVARNA, Dušan. Zvláštná cesta slovenských dejín a nachádzanie vlastnej identity. Od polarizácie

k sôpčasnej diferenciácii. http://blisky.cz/art/12796.html 4 The foundations of the common state were laid by Czech and Slovak immigrants in America. The

public at home was little aware of the movements in America. The Slovak political life was activated in May

1918 led by Andrej Hlinka Catholic priest. 5 HIŠWM, Cyril. Cirkev v novovzniknutej Československej republike. In. Církev v české a slovenské

historii.Spoločnosť pre dialog církve a státu. Olomouc, 2004. p.13. 6 The bishops at Nyitra, (Nitra) Vilmos Battyányi and Besztercebánya (Banska Bistrica), Wolfgang

Radnai were expulsed by the government due to their Hungarian sympathies. Bishops Sándor Parvay at

Szepesség (Spiŝ) and Lajos Balász at Rozsnyó (Rožňava) had died. Bishop Dr. Augustín Fischer-Colbrie of

German-Hungarian descent alone remained in position in Kassa (Kosice).

- the Czechoslovak Government introduced several measures rejected or considered

inimical by the Catholic Church, for instance: the termination of mandatory religious

education, which was changed later and remained in effect at every school in Slovakia

- the nationalisation of the schools of the Catholic Church 7

- termination of some Catholic church holidays 8

Despite the anti-Church steps of the state, the Slovak Catholic PM-s were able to achieve that

a move on the separation of the Church from the State submitted to Parliament was rejected.

The Slovak Roman Catholic Church did not only ‘fight a war’ with the state but also with the

Lutheran Church. The Lutheran Church played a leading part among Slovak intellectuals, but

lost that position in the first decade of the 20th century. Its place was taken over by the

Roman Catholic Church, which was, naturally, difficult to accept . „ … using his Pharisee-

Jesuit logic, Hlinka was unable to distort the fact that 95% of the Slovak patriotic

intelligentsia was Lutheran when the takeover of power took place and the majority Catholics

only made up a ridiculous 5% of the Slovak patriotic intelligentsia. …’9

Squabbles and accusations had been common between the two churches even before the first

Parliamentary elections (1920). Both sides had been trying to influence their followers and

present a positive image. ‘We, Lutherans do not take religion into politics, we do not establish

political parties on religious basis, we do not make a difference between Slovak Lutherans

and Slovak Catholics. An honest Slovak Catholic is better for us than a Hungarian Lutheran.

We dislike the Popular Party because it incites conflicts among Slovaks just because one of

them is Lutheran and the other is Catholic. Since we do not have our own Lutheran political

party, we have to think twice which political party to support as Lutherans.’10

The Lutheran Church had no confidence in the politics of the Catholic Popular Party ‘ ... the

Popular Party is led by Roman Catholic priests headed by Tiso who has proved several times

7 While all 20 Catholic grammar schools were nationalised, the schools of the Lutherans remained in the

management of the Church. Only 3 out of 17 Catholic teacher training institutions remained in possession of the

Church, one of them teaching in Hungarian. Church-managed elementary schools were not nationalised, but

lacking support, more and more Catholic schools had to close their gates and continued operating as government

schools. 8 The Prague Parliament terminated certain church holidays, e.g.: Days of Mary - 2 February, 25 March

and 8 September. On the other hand, 6 July, the Day of burning Ján Hus was declared a holiday. 9 Dr. SLÁVIK, Michal. Vallási gyűlölet. [Religious hatred.] Cirkevné listy. Vol. XLIII. , issue 17 (30

September, 1929) 10 Cirkevné listy. Kit választanak a szlovák evangélikusok? [Who should Slovak Lutherans vote for?]

1920

being a real Jesuit vis-à-vis the Lutherans and hostility is in his blood. The whole politics of

the Party is led in the same spirit. ... ‘11

The Slovak autonomy and then the declaration of an independent Slovak state further

accentuated the animosity of the two churches. The winner Slovak Popular Party of Hlinka

took every opportunity to underline the importance of the Party and the Catholic ideas in

achieving Slovak independence. The Lutheran Church, on the other hand, was also persistent

to criticise self-praise, Catholic hegemony and the cult of Hlinka. ‘ The Pribina festival was

again an occasion to celebrate the victory of Catholicism. The way Hlinka behaved joined by

the adorations of the Catholic hierarchy present, their attitude was to the detriment of

mutuality and the good reputation of the Republic. It was not the tradition of the first Slovak

prince or his historic past in focus but the Catholic conquest and victory. .... Pribina was

monopolised and the Lutherans were ignored. The Ludák (Popular Party) paper Slovak wrote

Pribina was Catholic just as the first church. – Pharisee! He was a Christian and belonged to

all Christians.’

There were some within the Lutheran Church, who ‘…, indirectly support Ludák politics via

the Popular Party; they believe Hlinka would provide the Lutherans with the advantages of

autonomy if achieved, but they are mistaken. Hlinka has never acknowledged anybody but

himself, Jesuit Catholicism and is even willing to plough through dead bodies to achieve his

goal. It would happen in the same way in the case of the autonomy.’12

The articles of contemporary ecclesiastic papers also reflect the conflict between the two

churches.’ 13 The two churches tried to take any opportunity to express their inimical feelings,

mutual accusations and to discredit each other ‘As a witness in the Tuka trial, Andrej Hlinka

said under oath that the whole issue against his Catholic Party had been triggered by the

‘Lutheran-liberal faction’ and he repeated it without any grounds.’14 They kept pointing

accusing fingers at each other, reiterating when, where and what positions were filled in

public administration by priests and ministers of one or the other church. Andrej Hlinka said

the Protestants ‘… took all positions. Except for Medvecký, Šrobár and Houdek, everybody

11 Kit választanak a szlovák evangélikusok? [Who should Slovak Lutherans vote for?] In. Cirkevné listy.

1920 12 MIKLÁŠ, Štefan: Veszélyben a szlovák evangélikusság! Hol kell keresni a hibákat? [Slovak Lutherans

in danger! Where to look for the mistakes?] In. Cirkevné listy, Vol. XLVIII, issue 18. (1 September, 1933);

Address of Ján Vojtaššák Chatolic Bishop at the Pribina festival: Pribinovské oslavy majú byť prejavom

úprimnej radosti…In. Slovák, Vol. XV. issue 147, (2 July, 1933) 13 Most of them were national, but important ecclesiastic papers were also published regionally such as

Evanjelický východ (Lutheran East), Evanjelická Bratislava (Lutheran Bratislava) or Košické katolícke cirkevné

správy (Kosice Chatolic Church News). 14 Dr. SLÁVIK, Michal. Vallási gyűlölet. [Religious hatred.] In. Cirkevné listy. Vol. XLIII, issue 17.

(30 September, 1929)

was Protestant.’. And the Lutherans answered ‘And what was reality? Ever since the take-

over and also at present, the Catholics hold most of the offices, most of them being Moravians

or Czechs - just to mention the bailiff, there were Catholic priests among them.’ Ironic

remarks on the origin of the riches of one or the other church were not infrequent, either:

‘There are hardly 300 Protestants at Rózsahegy and an excellent Luther portal, a church and

school and parsonage were built. There are no more than 50 Lutherans at Nagyszombat and

the nicest business building was built. Using what funds?’ 15

The articles published in church papers and other documents reflected well that the

churches consciously used the media to influence their followers. Rivalry between the

churches, despising each other’s religious belief and rancour poisoned the society. That

society incited and affected from several directions was unable to understand and accept the

non-Christian religious community that had been living together with them for centuries.

The Slovak society could not face either itself or its problems, and passed on responsibility

for the situation to the national minorities, mainly to the Jews. Whatever steps the Jewish

community took, they were rejected by the contemporary society; the Jews could only play

the part of the perfect scapegoat. ‘We have had and we still have reason to look at the Jews

with reservation and contempt, and we have a right to accuse them for all the failure and

catastrophe hitting our nation … therefore, the anti-Jewish fight and a radical solution of the

Jewish issue must be considered unavoidable, furthermore, it is necessary if we want to save

our nation.’ 16

The Jewish community had to find a place in such a society full of sometimes latent,

sometimes open conflicts there and then when the constituent nation – the Slovaks - survived

the most contradictory and most decisive period of the development of their national identity.

Anti-Semitism in Czechoslovakia (based on articles in the contemporary press)

The Czechoslovak Republic between the two World Wars opened new perspectives

for its Jewish citizens and provided an environment (not restricting them with different special

measures) that allowed the Jewish community to become part of the social life of the country,

but it could only prevent the open political appearance of anti-Semitism for a certain time. It

15 Dr. SLÁVIK, Michal. Vallási gyűlölet. [Religious hatred.] In. Cirkevé listy. Vol. XLIII, issue 17. (30

September, 1929)

16 Cited: KAMENEC, Ivan: Vyústenie „konečného riešenia“ židovskej otázky na Slovensku. In.

JUROVÁ, Anna – ŠALAMON, Pavol (eds.) Košice a deportácie židov v roku 1944. Svú SAV a Oddelnie

židoveskej kultúry Slovenského národného múzea v Bratislave, 1994. p. 10.

was the period, when there was hope to build fair relations - anti-Jewish attacks were pushed

into the background. As a result of Masaryk’s liberal and democratic politics, no open

political anti-Semitism could be present in Czechoslovakia until the middle of 1930s, which

does not mean that it did not poison the society in ‘latent and hidden’ form.17

The anti-Semitism in the period of the first Republic did not cross the borders of politics; the

opposition had no strength or power to implement its propaganda in practice.18

In the first decade of the Republic, the Jewish issue was not in the focus of the interest of the

papers, it was a topic on the periphery. In the Slovak papers, the attacks against the Jewish

communities and the Jewish policy of the first Czechoslovak Republic were reported for

information only with a certain ‘distance held’. From time to time, news were published

about events in the Jewish communities, e.g., on the appointment of new rabbis, on financial

matters, Jewish customs, on the religious and ethnic differences between Slovaks and Jews.

The traces of anti-Semitism could not be found in those papers in the 1920s. 19

In the second half of the 1920s only a minor part of the articles published incitement against

the Jewish community but articles warning the people about the cunning of Jewish people

were also published. ‘A Jew lives at Rózsahegy in Német street. Nobody knows where he

comes from. One thing is sure, he is ingenious and cunning. All the papers are on display on

his ramshackle house. He is not afraid to display ‘Denník’ or ‘Rudé Právo’ side by side with

‘Slovák’. He will happily sell you both ‘Národní Listy’, ‘Autonómia’ or ‘Vôla ľudu’. He

ordered 200 pieces of the first issue of Autonómia. His son is a permanent correspondent to

Hungarian papers at Kosice and Prague.’20

17 The first Czechoslovak fascist organisation RODOBRANA was established in 1923.

The omnipotent governor of

Slovakia, Šrobár and his subordinates launched an anti-Semitic campaign under the pretext of

reviewing trade licences with the slogan ‘Buy from Christian merchants only’. 3,300 out of

4,600 Jewish trade licences were rejected; the German students at the Bratislava University

organised an anti-Jewish campaign; organised demonstrations took place at the Prague

German University against foreigners; the youth organisation of the Slovak National Party

broke shop windows in 1936; physical abuse after the launch of the film GOLEM; 35 Jewish

families driven away from Nagymihály. 18 , MIKLO

ŠKOVÁ, Alena. Antisemitizmus regionálnych periodikách v rokoch 1918-1938 v Košiciach. In.

Úloha kníh a periodík v živote v mnohonárodnostný Košíc. ŠTV, Košice, 2013. p. 233. 19

In the 1930s, articles were still published that were free of open anti-Semitism ...the film in addition to

propagating and describing the beauty of our capital, is a cultural film of eminent Jews, emphasising the values

of Bratislava Jews mostly in the religious sphere. Everything is captured in this film from the sports

achievements of Jewish gyms to Boy Scout organisations, interesting Jewish buildings or old religious

memorials. The efforts of Dr Neumann and of those who produce this film from their own funds and with their

own work has noble intentions. .....dr. Neumann’s film will be successful among the people he produced it for.’ Jewish cultural film in Bratislava. Slovák, 8 December, 1930, issue 275. 20

Zsidó találékonyság. [Jewish ingenuity.] Slovák, Vol. X, issue 26. (1 February, 1928)

Several articles were published that were translations of writings of foreign authors. They

were mostly trying to reflect on contemporary social problems touching upon the Jewish issue

as well. For instance, a paper by Gisle Johnson was published in Slovak translation,21 which

was trying to find an answer to the indifference of European people. ‘Europe is surviving a

cultural crisis. People are tired of the events survived they could not process. They are tired

of their feelings, they are tired to think, they are tired to want something and they are tired to

become themselves. And so they run into the arms of those who promise peace, security and

new experiences to their disheartened, languid spirit.’ The author regarded Catholicism and

the Jewish community as the two powers with the greatest influence over people: ‘We have to

start out from the source of two powers who could be the judges over the humanity of our

days, and they are Roman Catholicism and the Jewry.’22 The article also speaks about the

strengths of the Jewry, which „ … is not in their diversity or energy. They are not in majority

in one or the other. But their spirit and the power of their have developed differently from

other people. First you could name shrewd patience and last intensive perseverance. Their

strength is mainly in being intuitive people first of all, which can be said of few nations in

Europe.’23

By the end of the 1920s, anti-Jewish articles published in the papers had become almost an

everyday feature. The papers also reported on Jewish related events abroad. A regional

Lutheran paper reported on an event related to Hungarian Jews ‘In Hungary, a new Jewish

religious community is expanding ‘Jews believing in Christ’. They are headed by Dr Dezső

Földes, attorney. The members of the new religious community respect Jesus Christ and

acknowledge him as Messiah. They advocate that the acknowledgement of Christ is not in

opposition to the Jewish religion. They do not reject their church. There are followers of this

new religious community also in Slovakia; they state it is spreading in other countries as well,

mainly in Western Europe. It is true; it is a phenomenon worth attention. We want to know

whether or not the members of the new religious community embrace the only and eternal

truth related to Jesus: ‘You are Christ, the son of the living God.’24

Most of the above articles expressed their dissatisfaction with and expectations of the Jews in

a nicer, more sophisticated form.

21

Gisle Johnson. Napjaink zsidósága. [Jews in our days.] In. Cirkevné listy Vol. XLII, issue 7. (7 April,

1928) 22


1928) 23


1928) 24

Új vallási közösség. [New religious community.] In. Evanjelický Posol zpod Tatier. 1928., Vol. 18,

issue 1-12.

In Slovakia, the Jews were mainly expected to be loyal and to assimilate as soon as possible,

i.e., ‘to achieve Slovak awareness’. ‘The objective of the ‘Organisation of Slovak Jews’

established a few months ago is to organise the Jews, to promote their national i.e., cultural

and economic identity by ensuring the use of the Slovak language in Jewish schools; to

promote Slovak culture among Jews and finally to encourage adjustment to the consolidation

processes of the country. So it is a pure assimilation programme. Even if it is a programme of

the Czech Jews translated into Slovak, it might be attractive for the first sight for the believers

of Jewish assimilation.’25

Both the political and the ecclesiastic elite recognised the opportunities provided by the press

early enough as the simplest and most influential means to influence public opinion and

utilise emotions. In addition to nationwide papers, mainly regional papers provided by the

political parties with connections to their members and sympathisers. There were no political

parties without their own media. In the last decade of the first Republic, the independent press

had become a trumpet of the parties and an instrument of political power and the state.

Playing the ‘Jewish card’, anti-Semitism proved to be the best instrument for political parties

to divert attention from the problems accumulating in the society. In Slovakia, it was also

used to release the tensions due to national frustration.

When Hitler took power (1933), the media devoted even more attention to the Jewish issue.

First of all, the consequences of the anti-Jewish measures in Germany were followed with

attention. They focused on the impact of the immigration of German Jews into

Czechoslovakia. Although it mainly affected Czech cities, the Slovak regional press was also

seriously interested. The press presented Jewish immigrants as parasites, non-desirable

elements of the society. ‘If Hitler retains power, it can be expected that whole nations will

move in Germany’. But where to? To Palestine? There is no place at all for ‘unsere Leute’.

Or to Poland? There are enough Jews there. The Jews can best find a place in

Czechoslovakia mainly in Slovakia and in the Trans-Carpathian territories. So we can hope

that if events turn to the worst in Germany, the Cains, Moses, Elias and other sons of the

Israeli tribes will take the road to the promised land - Czechoslovakia. This is happy news!’ 26

In addition to Jewish immigration, other Jew-related events were also reported on, such as: ‘A

25

Szlovák (?) Zsidók Szövetsége. [Federation of Slovak Jews.] Slovák, Vol. IX., issue 3. (3 January,

1927) 26

STAVAROVÁ, Monika. Prejavy antisemitizmu v regionálnej tlači na východnom slovensku v 30.

rokoch 20. storočia. (online access: http://www.pulib.sk/elpub2/FF/Chovanec1/pdf_doc/46.pdf)

http://www.pulib.sk/elpub2/FF/Chovanec1/pdf_doc/46.pdf)

war was declared on the Jews in Germany’ or ‘Prayers are said in France for the persecuted

German Jews’, etc. 27

The strongest anti-Jewish articles (you can call them primitive) were published anonymously,

which was not surprising in Czechoslovak press publications between the two World Wars,

because so-termed mandatory anonymity was introduced by several publishing houses.

Journalists were not allowed to sign their articles mainly if they were published in papers

owned by different parties. Unfortunately, anonymity opened the way to the dirtiest,

groundless accusations, mockery and misinformation.

The social atmosphere was also affected by anti-Jewish measures in Germany. Several articles

were published in which the authors welcomed the events in Germany ‘ The Jew is not only a

race but it is a mysterious creature by its nature which needs a hard hand and nothing else.’28

The domestic political elite viewed the open anti-Jewish politics of Germany and the

measures implemented there as a confirmation of its own anti-Jewish politics. Anti-Semitism

had become an organic part of both Slovak and Czech nationalism.

Ecclesiastical papers were not left out of ‘discussing’ the Jewish issue. They followed

events related to the Jewish issue with attention and expressed their opinion. Lutheran papers

did not only report on anti-Jewish measures but also criticised the political part played by

church leaders and warned about the consequences ‘Political blindness and hatred often

results in bad things - unfortunately in the field of religion too. We read a short article about

the well-known dr. Al. Raffay, Hungarian Lutheran bishop, who is the main representative of

the Hungarian Lutheran Church at international ecclesiastic fora. He degraded himself due

to his political blindness so much that as a member of the revision delegation of peace

conditions went to kiss the slippers of the Pope. ….’ German churches were also criticised

for their political role ‘ … The followers of Hitler commit not less assaults and unfortunately

Prussian Lutherans greatly help them there. There are cases bordering on blasphemy. A

priest, Leuthäuser wrote the following in a political paper ‘We can see Adolf Hitler

permeated with the same power that had been given to Jesus Christ our Saviour earlier.

Resurrection comes after the Golgotha! We hand our souls to you, we are happy to die for

Adolf Hitler.’ The attention was called to the blindness of German priests too ‘A series of

articles can be found by major ecclesiastic officers in which Hitler is placed above Jesus and

politics above religion. They are mitigating their statements hiding behind Luther ‘Hitler

27



28



works in the spirit of Luther - one of the priests, Teitisch writes - if he values religion less

than the state and the nation. There is nothing like a Christian state, there are only Christian

residents in the state, and therefore, we cannot request the state to make its politics in line

with Christian principles.’29

The articles also addressed German Christians warning them not to follow the ideology of

Jewish racial theory ‘ In other words, ‘German Christians’, why do you commit the same

mistakes you have been criticising and cursing the Jews for. You preach water but drink

wine. Why are you attracted to the God of the people who cannot save their people from your

hands? Why do you idealise the Jewish beliefs and their racism? Why do you think racism is

only hideous if it is anti-German but it is acceptable if presented by you? …. ‘German

Christians’, do not bow to a God that has fallen with another nation, do not want to transform

Jewish racism into German racism. There is only one power to help you: Jesus Christ that

you have sold. Return to him. Racism for you is the bishop’s courtyard where you denied the

Lord with Peter…’ 30

Anti-Semitism in Czechoslovakia

In the period between the two World Wars, anti-Semitism can be traced as a national trend

(the Jews are not Slovaks), as an economic trend (the Jews are exploiters), as a political trend

(the Jews are liberals, Bolsheviks and Judo-Bolsheviks) and as a religious trend (the Jews are

the murderers of the Saviour).

1. Economy

In some small towns of Slovakia, the Jewish shops were only patches of colour among

other local shops but in other places, the economic and business life of the city depended on

Jewish merchants. The reason for the part they played in the economy should be found in the

tradition of commerce and the success of operating their shops, and not in the demagogy

advertised in the Slovak State ‘Slovak companies, Christian factories, plants and lands are

mostly owned by non-Christians. Insurance and other corporations and finance are mostly in

the hands of Jews.’31

29

Politika és vallás. [Politics and religion.] In. Cirkevné listy. Vol. XLVII., issue 3. (3 February, 1933)

30

EDREFFY, Ján. Mire a kakas megszólal. [When the cock cries.] Cirkevné listy. Ročník XLVIII., 2

March, 1934, issue 5

31

MIKLOŠKOVÁ, Alena. Antisemitizmus regionálnych periodikách v rokoch 1918-1938 v Košiciach.

In. Úloha kníh a periodík v živote v mnohonárodnostný Košíc. ŠTV, Košice, 2013. p. 233.

http://www.pulib.sk/elpub2/FF/Chovanec1/pdf_doc/46.pdf





The majority nation was jealous of the part played by Jews in business life. The majority of

Slovak Jews belonged to the middle classes. In addition to a high number of Jews in cities and

towns, quite many of them lived in the countryside. There they were mostly present in local

enterprises, such as small shops, pubs, etc. Among rural residents, the Jew was the

embodiment of the exploiter, the usurer.

Slovaks also felt their national riches to be threatened by the Jews ‘The forests and woods are

among the greatest treasures of Slovakia. Profits of several million have been reached in the

logging industry and timber trade. And Jewish companies usurped our greatest Slovak

treasure, our forests, with many of their shareholders not residents here but in Budapest or

Vienna, where they are the majority shareholders and send the millions of profits there.

Things are as in the saying: Slovak woods - Jewish gold.32

The economic position and influence of the Jews was a topic of attention for every social

stratum, therefore the political elite also approached the topic with gratitude and used it to

increase the support and popularity of its party.33 Jozef Tiso emphasised in an address given

to foreign journalists that ‘In Slovakia, the Jews may only have as much power as is in

proportion to their numbers compared to the total population of Slovakia. Slovaks will be

given such education as to allow them to fully find their place in the economic and industrial

life and to take over the positions filled by Jews.’ 34

2. Politics

The political representation of Jewry was active in the liberal and leftist parties. Right wing

political propaganda also accused the Jews with spreading the idea of Socialism. ‘… the

Socialist - Communist politics found its major supporter in the Jewry. We can see armies of

Jews in activities dangerous to Slovaks, which breaks down and damages the Slovak nation';

On the day the autonomy was declared on 6 October, 1938, the politicians of the Popular

Party (Ludáks) expressed in their article ‘Manifesto of the Slovak nation’: ‘we take side with

the nations that fight against the subversive, violent Marxist-Jewish ideology’35

32

In the end, the law (Slovak woods - Jewish gold) will apply in Kysuca In./Slovák, Vol. XII. Issue 237,

17 October, 1930

33

This also was true to opposition politicians. János Eszterházi delivered a lecture at the Debrecen

summer university on organising the life of Hungarian national minorities. In his address, he also discussed the

difficulties arising in the economy, one of which was the economic presence of Jews, ‘… the Jewry flooded the

free professions and the financial institutions we would need are in their hands.’ János ESZTERHÁZY.

Cselekedjunk mindannyian egyetértésben és szeretetben. [Let us all act in agreement and love.] Cseh-szlovákiai

magyar fuzetek. Pannónia konyvkiadó. Pozsony.

34

ŠTURÁK, Peter. Spoločensko-náboženská situácia v Československu v rokoch 1918-1927

http://www.zoe.sk/pub/doc/theologos/t_spolocensko_nabozenska_situacia_1918_1927.pdf)

35

Národné noviny, 1933.












3. The national perspective

Even after the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was dissolved, the Slovak population was still

convinced that the deprivation of poor people and the ‘Magyarization’ of the Slovaks were

due to the Jews. The Národné noviny (Paper of the Nation) wrote the following in 1933:

‘Before the political change of power, the Jews had been the most ardent and most effective

means of ‘Magyarization’ and after the change of political power we can see them as

conspirators against the nation. In Slovak towns, the Jews are supporters of the Hungarian

language even today, they are the most loyal subscribers to Hungarian newspapers. /…/ It is

a historic fact that our towns had become ‘Magyarized’ so quickly because the Hungarians

had found the social instrument in the Jews that had carried out the work of de-

nationalisation linguistically, economically and culturally and not to our benefit.’

Taking the Jews responsible for the ‘Magyarization’ of Slovaks had already appeared in the

press earlier. In a publication at the beginning of the 19th century, Škultéty regarded the Jews

as the servants of Hungarians ‘in Slovak villages, the public notaries and the postmen were

usually Jewish - that is why the Jews were in the service of ‘Magyarization’ ‘36

The political elite built effective propaganda on the fact that after the establishment of the

Republic, the Jews used German, Yiddish and Hungarian as a language of communication.

The Jews were attacked for knowing and speaking Hungarian. A few years after the

establishment of the state, the majority of Jews publicly used the Hungarian language, which

was regarded as treason by the Slovaks.

‘They failed to notice 13 years later that they had been settled in a new state due to the

circumstances. That from the Hungarian town of ‘Kassa’, where Hungarian was the official

language, they moved into the Slovak city of ‘Košice’, where the Slovak language is the

official one.’37

The Slovaks would rather tolerate the use of the Hebrew language than of Hungarian. A Jew

who wanted to live in Czechoslovakia could not speak Hungarian. ‘Were they to use Hebrew

or its jargon, we would have no right to stop them for cultivating a national language, but due

to the circumstances of the past, we have to ask whether Hungarian is the national and

official language of the Jews?’38The Slovak population expected full linguistic assimilation of

36

ŠKULTÉTY, J. :. Turčiansky Sv. Martin, 1931, issue 19.

37


In. Úloha kníh a periodík v živote v mnohonárodnostný Košíc. ŠTV, Košice, 2013, p. 236.

38








the Jews. ‘If the Kosice Jews want to live among us, they must convert completely before we

lose our patience. Because Kosice must be a purely Slovak city where Slovak is the official

language.’39

According to articles published in the press, the Jewish community was responsible for the

forced ‘Magyarization’ in the past, for the factors preventing the development of the Slovak

national conscience and, last but not least, for a permanent feeling of national oppression.

Such accusations had grown in intensity by the end of the 1930s and the Jews were made

responsible for historic failures the Slovaks could not face.40 So, the Jews were to account for

the consequences of the Vienna Awards (2 November, 1938), which was shameful for the

Slovaks: ‘We know well who these patriots are. We remember the days when their youngsters

of a beastly language were sent to the streets to protect the Republic. We also know that

foreigners wanted to lacerate the body of the Slovak nation. It was not enough that the nation

had been harmed in the field of agriculture. The whole lot should be taken out from there;

they had moved in from foreign lands and we should not feel sorry for the fast departure of

those who yearn for other homes.’41

The articles of the daily Slovenská sloboda (Slovak Liberty) owned by the Slovak People’s

Party (1941) fully reflected the Jewish policy of the Slovak Government. The paper had a

preference to deal with Jewish-Hungarian propaganda, mainly with different ‘Jewish

atrocities’, in addition, it monitored and commented on the events in Hungary. ‘There was no

other country in Europe where that issue had to be solved so fast and so thoroughly as in

Hungary. … the average annual pension of a Hungarian Jew (1930) was 2,506 Pengo, while

of non-Jews, 427. …. The Jews served the enemy not only in internal subversion but ... they

also actively participated in denunciations and sabotage…’

4. Christian - based on classical anti-Judaism.

The articles in this group were built on the classical confessional anti-Semitism: ‘Israel

should have been among the nations of the world as the carrier and guardian of the divine

idea used by God to prepare people for salvation. In the life available to him, he should have

participated of the greatest good. But ever since ancient times Israel had often failed to

39



40

Immediately after the Vienna Awards, on 4 November, 1938, Tiso ordered the deportation of poor

Jews, which was changed to the deportation of refugee Jews of foreign citizenship.

41 Slovák, 29 October, 1938, issue 247.






understand the divine idea and in the end when the world was preparing for salvation, it

resigned its historic task and became the murderer of the One sent to the world by God.

Israel’s historic mission had been to prepare for the reception of the Saviour. By crucifying

the Messiah, that nation rejected all its previous history and said judgement over itself. Its act

killing the Messiah meant a religious and national suicide, and with that, all its previous

history both as a nation and as a religious group had lost its meaning... That is the greatest

tragedy in the history of the nations.’42

Slovakia in 1939-1944

National minorities constituted a significant part of the total population of Slovakia,

although the figures of referenda during the first Czechoslovak Republic (in 1919, 1921 and

1930) indicated a gradual decline of their numbers. According to the census in 192043 and

1930, 2% and 39% or 2.01% reported to belong to the Jewish national minority, while 4.53%

and 4.11% said were of the Israelite confession. According to the summary figures of the

1930 referendum, 136,737 residents of the Jewish religion lived in Slovakia making up 4.11%

of the total population.44 Of the Israelite population, 44,019 (32.19%) reported to belong to

the Czechoslovak, 9,945 (7.27 %) to the German and 65,385 (47.81%) to the Jewish national

minority.

After the Vienna Awards, both the ethnic and religious composition of the population of

Slovakia changed significantly. According to the figures of the 1940 census, the new

independent country had 2,650,000 residents. Of that 2 million reported to belong to the

Slovak nation (83 %). The most important national minority were the Germans of 130,000

people and the Jews of 90,000 people (they could only report to belong to the Jewish national

minority at that time). In addition, 80,000 Czechs, 80,000 Rusyns-Ukrainians, 65 thousand

Hungarians and 30,000 Gypsies (migrating Gypsies only) were reported in the census.

42 Dr. ZLATOŠ, Štefan. Čo hovorí Písmo sv. o židovskej otázke. (Mit mond a szent Írás a zsidó

kérdésrol) [What the Bible says about the Jewish issue] In. Duchovný pastier. Vol. XXI., 1940., issue 1-2. (a

paper of Christian clerics) 43

After 1918, approximately 135 thousand residents reported to belong to the Jewish national minority or

the Israelite confession in Slovakia. The number slightly increased in the 1930s due to immigration. Jewish

refugees arrived to Slovakia mainly from Germany, Poland and Austria. (cf. KAMENEC, Iván. Spoločnosť,

politika, historiografia. Bratislava, Prodama 2009., p. 35.

44

ZEMKO, Milan. K problematike výskumu dejín národnostných menšín na Slovensku za prvej ČSR

(online

http://www.shs.sav.sk/smolenice2001/Smolenice/Zjazdove%20rokovanie/Diskusne%20prispevky/Zemko.htm











From a religious perspective, the majority of Roman Catholic believers was clear (almost 2

million people), 400 thousand belonged to one of the Reformed Churches and 90 thousand to

the Israelite confession.

The national minorities were present in the life of Slovak towns as constituent factors.

During the war and after the years of the war that historic role (constituents) was finished for

German and mainly for Jewish citizens. The events of the war and of the post-war years

changed the ethnic and religious composition of different towns (Jewish Holocaust, the

deportation of German residents, expulsions). The Jewish community, which had been

playing a decisive part in the social and economic life of the towns, was exterminated by the

political power helped with the indifference of the society and human jealousy.

The Slovak society was jealous of the economic part played by the Jews and made them

responsible for its own failure. Most people accused the Jews for the spread of Bolshevism,

made them responsible for the forceful ‘Magyarizing’ politics prevalent before World War 1,

and questioned the loyalty of the Jews to the new state.

The relationship of the Catholic Church and the Slovak State

The Catholic ecclesiastic leaders welcomed the establishment of the first independent

Slovak State in a pastoral letter (24 October, 1939). They requested wisdom and God’s

blessing on the leaders of the State and warned that only a state founded on Christian ideals

could ensure well-being for all its citizens. The Slovak Constitution adopted in 1939 was built

on the principle of every power and rights originating from God and supported it already by

its first sentence: ‘The Slovak nation had been staying on the land due to Him from the

beginning under the protection of the Almighty God where it established its own independent

state with the help of Him who is the origin of all power and law.’

The clerical-Fascist Slovak State (1938 – 1945) was a perfect example of state power

and church entwined. The state ensured the Roman Catholic religion a privileged position in

the life of the society and also in the operation of the state (the church had become part of

public administration and participated in the implementation of government policy). So the

fate of the Catholic Church was one with the fate of the clerical-Fascist state. That entwining

cannot be disputed (the majority of Slovak historians do not argue it, either). The priests of

the Church actively participated in the political life of the state. The Catholic priest, Josef Tiso

filled the highest government positions; he was first the head of the government then head of

state. Three Catholic priests, Ján Vojtaššák the Bishop of Spiš, Ján Pöstényi - curator of

Saint Béla Society and Andrej Marsina Papal Prelate were members of the Council of State of

the Slovak Republic. 7 out of its 8 ministers were Catholic and 1 Lutheran. 2 out of 6 county

presidents were priests and 16 of 60 district presidents were priests as well. In the Slovak

People’s Party of Hlinka priests were mainly secretaries or presidents. 45 5% of MPs also

belonged to the Catholic Church. According to the results of the 1938 elections, 11 Roman

Catholic priests, 1 Greek Catholic and 1 Lutheran clergyman were members of Parliament.

The clergy continued to retain its 20 % ratio among MPs in the following years as well.

The political elite in power and the groups around them playing different parts in

political life accepted the leading position of the Catholic Church in issues related to national

minorities, in the political and economic and spiritual life. The Slovak State advocating

Christian ideas tried to shape its citizens to its own image on an ideological basis.

On 4 November, 1938, the autonomous Slovak Government carried out its first openly anti-

Jewish step. With the help of the Hlinka Guard, it collected and evicted the refugee Jews who

did not have Slovak citizenship from the country. With that step, the Government launched

an open political attack against the Jews (discriminatory decrees, contempt, arizáció,

deportation), although the leaders of the state emphasised, ‘nobody should be afraid of the

Christian regime.’ 46

Anti-Semitism was present in every group of the society; sometimes openly and sometimes

latent and the churches were no exception. Anti-Semitism appeared in ecclesiastic circles

with different strength and intensity. The Lutheran Church and the minor churches tried to

distance themselves from anti-Semitic manifestations but there were clergymen among them

who could identify with that ideal and voiced their opinion openly.

Summary

Although the entwining of the Catholic Church and the State and so the responsibility

of the Church in the actions of the Slovak State during the war is undisputable, the majority of

the Slovak society has been unable to face the events of the past and the responsibility of its

Church to date.

The Catholic Church itself is unable to face its responsibility and the part it played ‘it cannot

interpret Church history and theology as an open scholarly branch searching for the truth,

without trying to justify and support what has happened. Traditionally, the problematic

45 KAMENEC, PREČAN, ŠKORVÁNEK. Vatikán a Slovenská Republika. Bratsilava, HÚ SAV – ÚSD

ČAV, 1992, p. 45. 46

Cited: KAMENEC, Ivan: Vyústenie „konečného riešenia“ židovskej otázky na Slovensku. In.

JUROVÁ, Anna – ŠALAMON, Pavol (eds.) Košice a deportácie židov v roku 1944. Svú SAV a Oddelnie

židoveskej kultúry Slovenského národného múzea v Bratislave, 1994. p. 11.






periods of Church history are attributed to certain individuals while the system as such is

considered to be good.’ 47

To this we can add that ‘the fate of the Jewry in Slovakia was somewhat veiled by the

fact - not only during but also after World War II - that Slovakia had not been an independent

state before 1939 and it returned to the Czechoslovak Republic in 1945.’ 48

Researching

the problems of conversion requires investigations in several directions

The churches mainly expressed their opinion regarding the Jews and the relevant events in

pastoral letters. The Catholic Bishop’s Bench expressed its opinion on the solution of the

Jewish issue in its pastoral letter dated 23 April, 1942. It pointed out the harmful influence of

Jews on the social, economic and political life, but emphasised the Jewish issue cannot be

solved in the spirit of revenge; it is self-protection within the framework of God’s laws and

the laws in effect. That meant that according to the principle of justice, the property obtained

unjustly could be taken from the Jews. Exploitation by the Jews and demoralisation of the

nation can be prevented if Jews are relocated to other countries in a humane manner.49

In the same way, the Roman Catholic Church rejected the accusation of the press on the mass

baptisms of Jews in a pastoral letter (26 April, 1942). The Church admitted that as a result of

the circumstances Jews applied to be baptised in the Roman Catholic confession but when the

conditions of Baptism were explained to them, many stood down.

47 Miroslav Kocur, former Catholic priest

48 Sas Andor. A szlovákiai zsidók üldözése 1939–1945). [persecution of Jews in Slovakia]

http://www.kalligram.eu/Kalligram/Archivum/1993/II.-evf.-1993.-januar/A-szlovakiai-

zsidok-ueldoezese-1939-1945

49 HODÚR, Ján. Rubrika: Cirkev http://nss.sk/178/postoj-katolickej-cirkvi-k-zidovskej-otazke-pocas-1-

slovenskej-republiky






The Church also responded to the deportation of baptised Jews in a pastoral letter (16

February, 1943). The following was said:

1. The Church makes no difference among its followers on the basis of nationality ‘because

there is no difference between Jew and Greek, because the same is the Lord for all who calls

and believes in Him.’ (Rim 10, 12)

2. Slovak Catholic people would accept with difficulty if the Slovak Catholic Government

should send away Christians - Catholics.

3. The Catholic Church only allowed adult people to be baptised, who had a true intention to

become Catholics, who had learnt the Catholic truth and broken all links with Jewry.

4. Our future generation would understand it with difficulty if it should hear in explanation of

universal history that converted people had to leave our Christian State just as they were

admitted to the Holy Church.

On the other hand, the Lutheran Church expressed no opinion but issued a law on conversion

and the new members of the Church in November, 1938. 50 It informed and guided its

ministers in a pastoral letter on how to behave with the Jews applying to be baptised.

The law of the Lutheran Church triggered aversion or fear in some of its followers and

ministers and some hard-boiled anti-Semites complained their Church would become a shelter

for the Jews.

Who is a Christian and who is a Slovak51

Some Jews in Slovakia believed conversion to Christianity was the chance for their survival.

Conversion involved that the Jews had to comply with different conditions and requirements.

Some members of the Slovak Catholic society linked the issue of conversion with the

assimilation of the Jews and raised the question ‘will conversion make a Slovak out of a Jew?’

50 Cf.: Baranová, Daniela. Postoj evanjelickej augsburského vyznania cirkvi k riešeniu židovskej otázky

v rokoch 1938- 1945. In: Holokaust ako historický a morálny problém v minulosti a v súčasnosti = Holocaust as

a Hitorical and Moral Problem of the Past and the Present. [Ed.]: Vrzgulová, Monika - Richterová, Daniela. Br.,

ŠEVT pre Ůrad vlády SR a Dokumentačné stredisko holokaustu 2008, s. 15-34, v angl. issue 222-243.

51 Ješajahu A. Jelínek. Krstenie Židov na Slovensku v období holokaustu. Online access:

http://www.druhasvetova.sk/OLD/view.php?cisloclanku=2012080006







…. how many generations are required to make a Christian out of a Jew so that he should

become the useful member of the Slovak Christian community?’52

Those questions arose among Catholics because they considered themselves responsible for

the future of the Slovak nation.

Even the Council of State was trying to find an answer to the question. An argument arose on

who was Christian and who was Slovak. When would a Jew become a non-Jew and when he

would become a ‘normal’ Slovak?

The public opinion was also interested in the answer.

The dispute highlighted the contempt and aversion felt towards the Jews not only among

average people but also in the highest clerical and political circles.

The Churches and conversion53

Some Roman Catholic priests believed the conversion of the Jews was a ‘final solution once

and for all’ of the Jewish issue. Several of them regarded the process that pagan Jews were

managed to take up the yoke of the Church.

The Lutheran Church was more open in handling the problem, but worried voices were also

heard, some feared their Church would be flooded by Jewish ‘refugees’.

Minor churches such as the Greek Catholic were not so dismissive or unyielding towards

Jews applying for conversion.

The question rises why there were obvious differences among the churches with regard to

their relationship to the Jewry?

The process and time-scale of Baptism

The process of conversion was not the same for everybody. It was strongly affected by

subjective reasons such as sympathy or antipathy. In that way the process could be fairly fast

but also lengthy. There were priests who had an aversion to Jews and made efforts to

lengthen the process, striving to achieve perfect preparation (they gave homework to write,

they made tests to pass, etc.). It occurred in several cases that the candidate could not be

baptised for lack of time; the process was not facilitated, although everybody was aware what

was going to happen to the Jews.

52 Ješajahu A. Jelínek.

Krstenie Židov na Slovensku v období holokaustu. Online access:


53 Ješajahu A. Jelínek. Krstenie Židov na Slovensku v období holokaustu. Online access:






Behaviour of the population

Complaints and police reports of baptised Jews occurred fairly frequently (they do not

regularly attend church service, they converted out of comfort, ... etc.) .

Clarification of the position of baptised Jews 54

Christian Jews were also obliged to wear the yellow star. Initially, the Church bodies and

priests were perplexed on how to regard the events; however, despite objections later on, they

did not achieve the cancellation of the obligation to wear the yellow star. They were most

disturbed by the presence of Christian Jews wearing the yellow star in the church, so they

could achieve that Christian Jews were exempted from wearing the star in the church.

Accusations against Churches and their priests

The accusation of accepting money from Jews for baptism was the most frequent. Also filling

the forms for money was attributed to the Churches several times. Baptising priests were

accused to perform baptism ‘at an industrial level’.

Accusations against the Jews applying to be baptised

The Jews were accused of bribing priests to be admitted into the Church. Mainly the minor

churches were attacked. Mainly the Ludák paper dealt with such cases.

What was achieved by Baptism?

Those baptised were also put in the transports despite objections.

The problem of the deportation of the baptised Jews

There were some Church leaders who were worried about the fate of the baptised Jews

deported. To reassure worried priests, the German administration promised to provide special

circumstances for the converts at their new homes, to allow the visit of priests and to provide

opportunity for them to practise their religion.

Those promises were never kept; they were only used to convince the Slovak civil servants to

support the deportation of the converts.

54

Ješajahu A. Jelínek. Krstenie Židov na Slovensku v období holokaustu. Online access:




The number of baptised Jews55

The exact number of converted Jews is unknown, we only have estimations partly by Slovak

government agencies and partly by Jewish officers. Approximately 10,000 people are

estimated to have been baptised.

55

The following figures are known: 2 February, 1944: out of 12,812 Jewish people in Slovakia (by law)

3,988 were of the Israelite confession 31.12 %; 3,269 were Roman Catholics 25.51 %; 905 Greek Catholics

7.06%; 3,160 Lutheran 24.66 %; 976 Reformed 7.61%; 168 Greek Orthodox 1.31%; 51 Other 0.39 %; 285

Universalist 2.22%.





kassa tanulmány ii en-final

Documents