Ca dinal Józse Mindszen y
P o ec ing he Pe secu ed (1945–1948)
Pé e Miklós
Ca dinal Józse Mindszen y, a chbishop o Esz e gom and he las p ince p ima e
o Hunga y spoke ou mo e han once in de ense o human igh s and in a o o
hose who we e pe secu ed o hei eligion, na i e language, na ionali y o e hnic-
i y. “Józse Mindszen y ully used his au ho i y and i s mo al impac agains iola ions o
human igh s”, as his biog aphe Ma gi Balogh w o e.1
Al eady as bishop o Veszp ém, he and Józse G ősz, a chbishop o Kalocsa called
he p ime minis e ’s (o he In e im Go e nmen ) a en ion o he illegi imacy o de-
po a ions o Ge many, o he poo condi ions in he Russian p isone camps, and o
abuses agains a es ed cle gymen. On 10 Oc obe 1945, he sen ale e o p o es o
Béla Miklós de Dálnok and a gued agains he depo a ion o Ge mans in Hunga y
on he p inciple o collec i e guil . Wi hou success, hough, as he dec ee o elo-
ca e he Ge man-speaking popula ion o Ge many was issued on 29 Decembe 1945.
(12.330/1945.M.E.) Via his le e da ed 17 July 1946, he was he only Hunga ian public
au ho i y o in o m P ime Minis e Fe enc Nagy abou he agg essions (mu de s,
la ge-scale o ced expulsion) agains Hunga ians in Dél idék commi ed by he Ti-
ois pa isans.2
Be ween 1945 and 1948, Mindszen y spoke ou se e al imes agains he disen an-
chisemen and expulsion o Hunga ians in Czechoslo akia.3 As ea ly as 15 Oc obe
1945, jus one week a e his inaugu a ion in he o ice o p ince p ima e, he issued
apas o al calling he a en ion o Ca holics and he en i e Hunga ian publici y o he
despe a e si ua ion o he pe secu ed Hunga ians in Csallóköz. In he pas o al, he
explained ha dis essing news we e coming om he no he n pa o his diocese,
ecen ly e u ned unde Czechoslo akian ule. The complain s came om Ca holic
Hunga ians “wi h whom we ha e li ed oge he o mo e han 900 yea s in he dea com-
muni y o he sac ed ai h and di ine adi ions”.4 He in o med abou he a acks agains
1 M. BALOGH, Mindszen y Józse , Budapes 2002, p.115.
2 Ibidem, pp.111–113.
3 Fo de ails, see: I.JANEK, Mindszen y Józse e ékenysége a el idéki magya ok megmen éséé
1945–1947 közö , in: Századok, Is.1, 2008, pp.153–182.
4 J. MINDSZENTY, Hi de em az igé . Váloga o szen beszédek és kö le elek. 1944–1975. Váloga -
a Közi Ho á h Józse , Vaduz 1982, p.76.
130 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2017
Hunga ian Ca holic educa ional ins i u ions, schools, and chu ch membe s, epo -
ing “a as se ies o expulsions, imp isonmen , agg ega ion camps and injus ice.”5
Acco ding o he p ince p ima e, he pe secu ion o Hunga ians wea s done “by
means ied and es ed on he poo Jews”6 and hese measu es iola ed bo h basic human
igh s and eligious eedom. He concluded his public ci cula le e wi h he ollow-
ing: “Why am I elling you o his pain ul si ua ion, Omy ollowe s? No wi h he pu pose o
spa king ha ed in you. The e is enough ha ed al eady! This is an ou ageous and e ible
example o ejec ing eedom igh s and o abusing he weake , which b ings i s own a e
upon i sel . I is ce ain ha anew o de ha g an s ali e wi hou ea and mise y has ye
o come. The goal is, howe e , a he o e oke compassion in you hea s, and neighbo ly
lo e owa d he ic ims o he a oci ies, who a e no only you b e h en bu you b o he s
in ai h as well.”7
On 24 Janua y 1946, Józse Mindszen y w o e o P ime Minis e Zol án Tildy (one
week a e Tildy had been elec ed p esiden and one mon h be o e signing Czechoslo-
akian-Hunga ian popula ion exchange ea y). The ca dinal a gued ha he Czech-
oslo akian go e nmen would in end o eloca e he Hunga ians in Czechoslo akia
in he place o he Ge mans eloca ed om Hunga y. “As he unila e al expulsion o
Hunga ians in Slo akia is o be conjoined8 wi h he expulsion o Ge mans in Hunga y by he
Czechoslo akian au ho i ies, hus he Hunga ians a e igh ly conce ned ha he eloca ion
o Ge mans in Hunga y is sugges ed by he Czechoslo akian pa y o he Russians so ha his
could make place o he Hunga ians who we e o be unila e ally eloca ed om Slo akia.”9
The p ince p ima e ad ised he P ime Minis e ha he Hunga ian cabine could
ask o gua an ees a he Allied powe s and he Allied Con ol Commission ha
he Ge mans we e no ansloca ed because o he Hunga ians expulsed om he
Fel idék. In case he Allies could no wa an his, hen, as Mindszen y a gued, he
Hunga ian go e nmen could in o m he in e na ional communi y ha hey ca ied
ou he ansloca ions unde coe cion om Russian, hey could hinde and slow down
he p ocess o e en discon inue.
The leade o he Hunga ian Ca holic Chu ch spoke openly abou his hope ha
he Fel idék could ully o pa ially (along e hnic bo de s) e u n o Hunga y. He
poin ed o s opping he depo a ion o Ge mans as being ameans o his, and he also
opined ha he Hunga ian cabine could e e o he ac ha hey could no ecei e
he Hunga ians o be expelled om Czechoslo akia. “[…] I is wo h conside ing ha
would i no be p ac ical i Hunga y would ask he g ea powe s o an exemp ion o he
ansloca ion o Ge mans in Hunga y. In his case o example, he Hunga ians in Slo a-
kia could no be ansloca ed o Hunga y, as he e would be no oom o hem and hus he
Hunga ians would s ay in Slo akian e i o y. I he egion we e no e u ned o Hunga y
imminen ly, u u e demands could be based on he Hunga ian popula ion esiding he e. I
would su ely be ad an ageous o Hunga y i he Ge mans would s ay esiding in Hunga y,
5 Ibidem.
6 Ibidem.
7 Ibidem, p.78.
8 Connec ed in pu pose and o ganiza ion.
9 Magya Nemze i Le él á Magya O szágos Le él á . Tildy Zol án minisz e elnök i a ai.
XIX-A-1-d. (425/1946. e .no.)
MAREk OkOUN 131
ins ead ha ing he Hunga ians om Slo akia ansloca ed in hei place, in which case his
aluable land wi h ancien Hunga ian e hnic oo s would be los o e e .”10
As ea ly as 10 Oc obe 1945, Mindszen y wa ned he p ime minis e abou he
injus ices agains Ge mans, and he Ca holic episcopal s a also issued apas o al
aweek la e , calling agains he collec i e punishmen o he Ge mans in he coun y
and s a ing he inhumane and un-Ch is ian na u e o he expulsions, and ha he
new poli ical powe made scapegoa s om he absolu ely innocen as well.
Jus as he had done no long be o e agains he depo a ion o he Jews, Mindsze-
n y also p o es ed agains he depo a ion o he Ge mans.11 F om he Csanád diocese
unde Bishop End e Ham as, Elek, Almáskama ás, Kübekháza and Újszen i án we e
in ol ed in he eloca ions. To him Mindszen y w o e on 8 Janua y 1946: “On my pa ,
Ihad all Icould in due ime o p e en he depo a ion o he s a e-loyal Ge man-speaking
populace om hei places o esidence. Un o una ely, wi h no much success.”12 Due o
simila expe ience, P esby e Mihály Reibel, p ies o Ge man-inhabi ed Elek w o e
in ape i ion ha “only hose should be in e ned who can clea ly be iden i ied as Volksbun-
dis o he ina y commi ee judged hem as such. These days i is enough ha one has a ine
house o es a e and he is o be obbed o his o une.”13
Józse Mindszen y pe i ioned o eign minis e János Gyöngyösi in ale e da ed
22 July 1946. He wa ned he poli ician abou a o ce ul e-Slo akiza ion endency and
he Czechoslo akian o icials’ measu es ha iola ed igh s o ee language use and
ee eligious p ac ice. “O he 750,000 Hunga ians in he e i o y o Czechoslo akia,
200,000 we e coe ced, by expulsion, con isca ion, in e nmen and h ea s, o claim hem-
sel es Slo aks.400,000 a e in ended o be expa ia ed, acco ding o o icial communica ion.
On hei 21 July mee ing, he Hunga ian bishops p o es ed agains bo h inhumane condi ions
be o e he ci ilized wo ld, pe i ioning ha he a oci ies be ceased agains people whose an-
ces o s had li ed on he land since he 9 h cen u y, also ha ing human igh s, as hey a e
human. Now hei mo he ongue is banned in chu ches as well. The ac ha hey we e glad
abou e u ning o Hunga y back in 1938, wi h which hey o m a90%-Hunga ian block,
his canno be held agains hem. Which indi idual and na ion would no ejoice when being
able o ejoin his ances al home?”14
In he le e , he p ince p ima e p oposed ha he Czechoslo akian s a e could,
wi h he medi a ion o he ic o ious Allied g ea powe s, e u n hei Hunga i-
an-popula ed e i o ies o Hunga y, which would ins an ly ge id o he undesi ed
mino i y. Acco ding o Mindszen y, “As Czechoslo akia does no wan his block oge he
wi h he human igh s, i and i s land should be elinquished back o Hunga y. Injus ice and
su e ing ceases on he espec i e sides, b inging peace o Eas e n Eu ope. Simila ly, he Hun-
ga ian bishops also speak ou o he human igh s o all inhabi an s o he old Hunga y.”15
10 Ibidem.
11 L. TILKOVSZKY, Nemze iségi poli ika Magya o szágon a20. században, Deb ecen 1998,
p.129.
12 Szeged-Csanádi Püspöki Le él á . Püspöki hi a al i a ai. Egyházigazga ási i a ok [ u he
only SZCSPL PHEI]. I1. a. 35/1946.
13 Ci ed by Á.TÓTH, Telepí ések Magya o szágon 1945–1948 közö , Kecskemé 1993, p.83.
14 Szeged-Csanádi Püspöki Le él á . Hagya ékok. Balogh Is án. IV. 8. 149.
15 Ibidem.
132 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2017
The p ince p ima e’s idea o ejoin he mos ly Hunga ian-inhabi ed Fel idék wi h
Hunga y was no unhea d o in he Hunga ian poli ical li e. On he 6 May 1946 in-
e -pa y session leading up o he peace nego ia ions, Aue Pál o he smallholde s’
pa y and Fe enc Fa kas o he na ional peasan pa y also p oposed demanding he
“ egions wi h compac Hunga ian majo i y” back. Bo h he Communis s and he So-
cial-Democ a s declined. Gyöngyösi, asmallholde ’s pa y membe a gued ha in
esponse o he agg essi e Czechoslo akian na ionalism, Hunga y should accep he
Hunga ians o m he Fel idék, bu only oge he wi h hei e i o ies. I he P ague
cou did no a o his, hey should also abandon hei assimila ion policy. As he
minis e ’s e o s we e no suppo ed by he labo pa ies, he Hunga ian Commu-
nis Pa y and he Social-Democ a Pa y, he conside ed his esigna ion and le he
mee ing.16
The Pa is peace ea y o 10 Feb ua y 1947 concluded ha he e we e no bo de
changes a o ing Hunga y, and h ee Hunga ian illages (Dunacsún, O osz á , Ho -
á já alu) and hei 43 squa e kilome e s we e e en annexed o Slo akia.
To p o ec he Hunga ians in Fel idék, he w o e o F ancis Spellman, a chbishop
o New Yo k on 30 No embe 1946 and eleg aphed o Be na d G i in, a chbishop
o Wes mins e .17 He epea ed his p o es s agains he Czechoslo akian ac s agains
Hunga ians on 5 Feb ua y, 1947: he sen eleg aphs o King Geo ge VI, o Ame ican
p esiden Ha y ST uman and he ca dinal Gio anni Ba is a Mon ini, he u u e
pope Paul VI. The e we e no esul s. This did no come as asu p ise, since he del-
ega es o he English minis e o he ex e io had al eady explained he Allied a i-
ude abou he Czechoslo akian-Hunga ian bo de and he ansloca ions. One o
hem s a ed ha he B i ish go e nmen would no e en conside a emp ing o ha e
a ic o ious powe ( he Czechoslo aks) o ei e i o ies o ade ea ed coun y, Hun-
ga y. He added: “The Czechs ha e bad expe iences wi h hei mino i ies, which canno be
igno ed.”18 The second delega e claimed: “A e Munich, His Majes y’s go e nmen is no
in aposi ion o be a e he Czechs.”19
On 2 Oc obe 1947, he p ince p ima e add essed he ai h ul Ca holics on behal
o he whole Hunga ian episcopal s a . In apas o al le e on he depo a ion, he
ca dinal likened he depo a ions again o Hi le ’s pe secu ion o he Jews: bo h ha
o Hunga ians in Czechoslo akia and o he Ge mans in Hunga y. He conside ed bo h
o hem unjus and leading o u he e hnic ensions. He was especially ou aged a
he se e e and iolen na u e o he expulsions.
Ca dinal Mindszen y ejec ed he idea o collec i e esponsibili y, iewing i as
going agains he di ine unw i en (na u al) and w i en ( e ela ed) law. “The Hun-
ga ian bishops ha e been o long igh ing asys ema ic and ha d s uggle, in an o ganized
and du i ul manne , agains any pe secu ion o people on acial o collec i e basis. Jus as
i was wi h he Jews in Hi le ’s ime, many a e now emo ed om hei e en cen u ial esi-
dence, home and p ope y, and o ced o mig a e in ha dship; ahund ed housand and e en
millions o people a e abused o hei na ionali y and na i e language only. This is called
16 I. ROMSICS, Magya o szág ö éne e aXX. században, Budapes 2000, pp.295–303.
17 BALOGH, pp.114–115.
18 ROMSICS, p.298.
19 Ibidem.
MAREk OkOUN 133
eloca ion. I is conside ed o be ap ima y mode n me hod o acili a e peace, and i is o ce-
ully ca ied ou and execu ed.”20
The pas o al named he Czechoslo akian ansloca ions and he emo al o he
“loyal people o Ge man e hnici y”21 om Hunga y “abu ning would o he Hunga ians”.
“In Czechoslo akia, exac ly 700,000 Hunga ians a e being depo ed o d i en ou om he
land whe e hey had li ed as sepa a e block o nea ly a housand yea s abo e he Danube,
which egions was only annexed o he new s a e a e WW1, ame e 25 yea s. The anslo-
ca ion, e en i by some emba assing ag eemen o he s a es, is ac ually an expulsion and
ci cums ances a e o en c uel. This is one bu ning would o he Hunga ians.”22
Due o he o ganized e en s o he Má ia days a he Ma os Ri e , on 23 May 1948
Józse Mindszen y isi ed Makó and me he Fel idék Hunga ians eloca ed o Csanád
coun y.23 When he lea ned ha hund eds o Ca holics who we e eloca ed o Pi a os
had a ended his mass in Makó, he decided o isi hem. Mo e han 700 welcomed
he ca dinal. Acco ding o he p ess o he ime, “ he p ince p ima e u ged he belie e s
o become apos les o exempla ily i uous li es and pu e amily home, commi ed o he
ai h and he chu ch”.24
In he No h Csanád egion, in Pi a os, Amb óz al a, and Csanádalbe i, he ma-
jo i y was adi ionally Lu he an (and Slo akian na ionali y). No Ca holic, only Lu-
he an pa ish ope a ed in he wo la ge se lemen s, Pi a os and Csanádalbe i.25
The spi i ual needs o he Ca holics in he illage was aken ca e o by he p esby e
o he neighbo ing Csanádpalo a, Fe enc Ha adi and his chaplain, Béla Gyu ko ics.26
In Ap il 1947, Bishop End e Ham as ins uc ed Fe enc Ha adi, he p ies o Csanád-
palo a, o make su e ha he newcome s “ ecei e ap ope welcome and pas o al a en-
ion”.27 In his le e o he bishop, he p ies men ioned he Hunga ians who a i ed o
Pi a os a e ha ing los hei homeland. “The se le s came in a uly sad mood. Idid my
bes o console hem, as hey a e e y dishea ened.”28 Then he explained ha hose who
a i ed i s had mo e eedom o b ing hei belongings, bu hose who we e ans-
po ed la e could b ing only some ools o equipmen . Taking he impo ance o he
issue in o accoun , Bishop Im e Csep egi appoin ed he pas o in Makó as he episco-
pal commissione o inwa d and ou wa d eloca ions and he expec ed egula epo s.
Ala ge numbe o Ca holic Ge mans had o lea e he a ea o he Csanád diocese, and
he lea ing Lu he an Slo aks we e eplaced by Ca holic Hunga ians.
20 MINDSZENTY, p.161.
21 Ibidem.
22 Ibidem.
23 Fo de ails, see: P.MIKLÓS, Acsehszlo ák-magya lakosságcse e Csanád á megyei ö éne éhez,
in: I.T’TH (Ed.), Múzeumi ku a ások Csong ád megyében 2007, Szeged 2008, pp.93–100;
N.M.PELESZ, Acsehszlo ák–magya lakosságcse e ö éne e és kö e kezményei Pi a oson, in:
Bel ede e Me idionale, Is.5–8, 2007, pp.88–94.
24 Új Embe , issue 20 May 1948.
25 Fo de ails, see: P.KOMOLY, Pi a osi anulmányok, Szeged 1992, pp.178–217; J.KUGLER,
Lakosságcse e aDélkele -Al öldön, Budapes 2000, pp.113–159.
26 J. PÁL, Ham as End e csanádi püspök és a el idéki magya ok. 1945–1948, in: Szegedi Műhely,
Is.1–4, 1993–1994, pp.93–105.
27 SZCSPL PHEI I. 1. a. 888/1947.
28 Ibidem.

134 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2017
The Hunga ians who had been d i en ou om Gú a29 and hen ese led in Pi -
a os we e isi ed by hei p ies , he Gú a pas o László Bel o szky and he spen
weeks o se ice among hem. In he summe o 1947, he local Ca holics d a ed ale -
e o demand aCa holic p ies o hei illage and Ca holic eligious educa ion o
hei child en. “We ha e been, agains ou will, sepa a ed no only om ou ancien home
bu also om ou p ies s and ou chu ch. We wan o s ay ue o ou Hunga ian na ionali y
and o ou eligion as well. Ou b o he s and sis e s who we e expelled wi h us bu a i ed
o o he illages now ha e achu ch and aspi i ual a he o lead hem, bu we, who a e he
mos in one single block, we ha e no chu ch. In he p esen si ua ion, eligion is ou only
consola ion. On Sundays we a e able o a end Mass, because an hono able minis e comes
o us, bu many o us used o ake he sac amen daily.”30
On Augus 10, End e Ham as isi ed his ollowe s in Pi a os, and he was
con inced abou he se iousness o hei eligious commi men . Soon a e , on No-
embe 1, 1947, he ounded apa ish in Pi a os. He appoin ed Kálmán Deb eceni,
a o me ield p ies , as he i s minis e , who was no popula wi h he ollowe s
coming om he Fel idék, and he esigned in he Ap il o 1948 and le he illage in
May. F om May 1948, he was succeeded by ayoung pas o om Makó, Fe enc Kiss,
who quickly go along wi h his new cong ega ion and keenly began o o ganize he
communi y and o build he chu ch and he pa ish building.
The p ince p ima e’s e o s in he p o ec ion o Hunga ians in Czechoslo akia has
been b ie ly p esen ed, his le e s o Zol án Tidly and János Gyöngyösi we e ci ed and
we ha e also p esen ed his ac o pas o al ca e owa d he Fel idék Hunga ians ese -
led in Pi a os. I is my hope ha hese p o ide u he suppo o Ma gi Balogh’s
wo ds on Mindszen y: “In shocked and ou aged one, he pe i ioned and demanded, again
and again calling ou o go e nmen membe s, a guing wi h a ional p oposals and ac ing
on human conscience and compassion as well.”31
Ca dinal Józse Mindszen y’s un i aled de e mina ion o p o ec he pe secu ed
was, howe e , me wi h dis ega d, due o he o ma ion o So ie - ype dic a o ships
in Cen al Eu ope.
Pé e Miklós | Uni e si y o Szeged, Gyula Juhász Facul y o Educa ion, Ins i u ion o Applied So-
cial S udies and Mino i y Policy, Boldogasszony sg 6, 6722 Szeged, Hunga y, miklospe @gmail.com
29 C . B.ANGYAL, Gú a: 1945–1949, Dunasze dahely 2007, pp.81–138.
30 SZCSPL PHEI I. 1. a. 888/1947.
31 BALOGH, p.115.