Search

In this article a short biography of Dr. Mihael Toroš is presented as an illustrative example of the broader history of the Slovene clergy in Primorska during the period starting before WWI, spanning the time between the two wars, and ending after WW2 in the late nineteen-fifties. The first part of the discussion focuses on the position of the Slovene clergy in the Julian March under Fascist rule during the time between the two world wars, while the second part outlines the fate of the Slovene clergy in the Yugoslav part of the Archidiocese of Gorizia in the period between 1945 and 1955. The article exposes the dominant directives among the majority of Slovene clergymen in Primorska between the end of WW1 and the end of WW2. These directives had a major influence on the activities of the clergy following the end of WW2, and are discussed through the prism of Dr. Mihael Toroš. Within the scope of Mihael Toroš's biography, the author discusses Church history in Primorska as perceived through the relations between the church, the state and the individual. He finds that between 1918 and the end of the fifties, clergymen from Primorska found themselves in a certain "legislational vacuum", where Church legislation, state legislation, ethical norms, and current sets of values underwent radical changes and were subjects of loose definitions and even looser interpretations. It is impossible to understand the fate of Dr. Mihael Toroš or the fate of the majority of the clergymen Primorska in socialist Yugoslavia after 1945 without first understanding the circumstances within the comprehensive time period previously mentioned. The biography of Dr. Toroš confronts us with the complex history of the Catholic Church in Primorska during one of the most complicated periods of history. In this sense, the biographical contribution is a source of questions which we will only be able to answer after new archive sources are analysed in more detail.

Upor Slovencev v Julijski krajini, kot prvi organizirani antifašizem v Evropi,je v Italiji se danes pogosto označen kot "terorizem", tudi v nekaterih strokovnih krogih. Definicija "terorizma" ostaja namreč težko določljiv termin in je predmet najrazličnejših interpretacij, s katerimi se skuša perfidno prikriti tako bistvo fašizma kot bistvo antifašizma. Temu je namenjen tudi poskus definiranja prvega evropskega antifašizma, ki ga predstavlja tudi antifašizem Slovencev v Julijski krajini v dvajsetih letih, za terorizem - seveda z uporabo okleščene jezikovne definicije, po kateri je vsak oborožen upor vsaki formalno legalni oblasti, ne glede na njeno legitimnost, na metode, ki jih uporablja, kršenje osnovnih človekovih pravic itd., razglašen za terorizem. S tako rekoč enakimi dilemami se ubadamo že vse od antičnega poskusa uboja diktatorja Hipiasa leta 514 p.n.s. do Tomaža Akvinskega. Po opisani spervertirani paradigmi bi bila teroristična vsa narodnoosvobodilna antifašistična gibanja v okupirani Evropi, ki so se upirala- formalno legalni - okupaciji nacistične Nemčije in fašistične Italije.

The author presents the activity of the Congress of European Nationalities between 1925 and 1938. In the period between the two world wars, the Congress was the main international body dealing with issues concerning national minorities. The Congress' Main Office was in Vienna while its sessions were normally held in Geneva. The Congress dealt with issues concerning the protection of European national minorities, the establishment of joint cultural areas as well as striving to secure the adoption of general European legislation protecting minorities. Two Slovenes, Josip Wilfan and Engelbert Besednjak played a key role in the Congress. The existing documentation shows that the Congress dealt with issues that are still topical today. The ideas expressed by its participants were of exceptional ideological and intellectual height and can undoubtedly be compared with the current thought and processes regarding minority issues. The Congress of European Nationalities was able achieve this in spite of the fact that, at the time, the politics and societies in most European countries were becoming increasingly authoritarian and totalitarian., Kongres evropskih narodnosti (1925-1938) je bil najpomembnejše mednarodno telo v Evropi v času med obema vojnama, ki se je na mednarodni ravni ukvarjalo z manjšinsko problematiko. Kongres je imel sedež na Dunaju, zasedal pa praviloma v Ženevi. Ukvarjal se je z vprašanji zaščite evropskih narodnih manjšin, skupnimi kulturnimi prostori, generalizacijo evropskega manjšinskega prava. V njegovem delovanju sta ključno vlogo igrala Slovenca, Josip Wilfan in Engelbert Besednjak. Iz njegovega gradiva je razbrati, da se je ukvarjal z vprašanji, ki so še danes aktualna. Zamisli in ideje sodelavcev kongresa so dosegle izjemno idejno in intelektualno višino, ki jo brez dvoma lahko primerjamo z današnjimi aktualnimi razmišljanji in procesi v zvezi z manjšinsko problematiko. Kongres evropskih narodnosti je to dosegal kljub temu, da se je v času med obema vojnama politika in družba v večini evropskih držav usmerjala v avtoritarno in totalitarno smer.

In the paper the author deals with the question of the ideological accommodation of political Catholicism in Slovenia, from the end of the nineteenth century to World War II. He presents the attitude of two leading Slovene ideologists of political Catholicism (Anton Mahnič and Aleš Ušeničnik) towards some crucial social questions (those regarding national identity, sovereignty and value theory), exposes their common features and strategies with regards to modernization, and arrives at a conclusion that their views were changing and even became self-contradictory. The process of accommodation was conditioned by individual political interests and ideological disorientation in the Catholic camp caused by rapid modernization., Avtor se ukvarja z vprašanjem idejne akomodacije ideologije političnega katolicizma na Slovenskem v času od konca 19. stoletja do druge svetovne vojne. S predstavitvijo odnosa vodilnih ideologov političnega katolicizma (Antona Mahniča in Aleša Ušeničnika) do nekaterih bistvenih družbenih vprašanj (nacionalnega vprašanja, vprašanja suverenosti ljudstva in teorije vrednosti) prikazuje avtor splošne lastnosti oziroma strategijo ideologov političnega katolicizma na Slovenskem pri njihovem soočanju z modernizacijo. Ob tem ugotavlja, da se njihova stališča spreminjajo in prehajajo celo v svoje lastno nasprotje. Proces akomodacije je ob tem pogojen tako z vsakokratnim političnim interesom kakor z idejno dezorientacijo, do katere je zaradi pospešene modernizacije prihajalo v katoliškem taboru.