1. The best known work of Wojtyla, Karol is The Acting Person, Translated by Andrzej Potocki (Reidel, Analecta Husserliana, 1979). Among his other works in which he deals with those issues are “Osoba: podmiot i wspolnota”, Roczniki Filozoficzne, (XXIV, 2, 1976); Sign of Contradiction (New York, 1979); and “Humanizm a eel czlowieka”, Tygodnik Powszechny (31, 1957).Google Scholar

2. Nemec, Ludvik, Pope John Paul II. A Festive Profile (New York, 1979), pp. 38–40. Also Tadeusz Karolak, John Paul II. The Pope from Poland (Warsaw, 1979), pp. 7ff.Google Scholar

3. Nemec, , Pope John Paul II, p. 53.Google Scholar

4. Ibid., p. 44.Google Scholar

5. Ibid., pp. 61–62.Google Scholar

6. Wojtyla, Karol, Paul, Pope John II, The Acting Person (Dordrecht, Boston, London, 1979).Google Scholar

7. Nemec, , Paul, Pope John II, p. 79.Google Scholar

8. Letter to the Editor by Ehrenkreutz, Andrew S., The New York Times, June 19, 1979.Google Scholar

9. Wojtyla, Karol Cardinal, “Participation or Alienation”, delivered at Harvard University, Summer 1976. A Xeroxed copy of the lecture has been secured by the courtesy of Rev. Professor Francis J. Lescoe, Saint Joseph College, West Hartford, Conn.Google Scholar

10. Ibid., p. 18.Google Scholar

11. Ibid., pp. 18–19.Google Scholar

12. Ibid., p. 17.Google Scholar

13. Wojtyla, , The Acting Person, p. 297.Google Scholar

14. Ibid. Google Scholar

15. Redemptor Hominis, Supplements to The Catholic Transcript (March 23, 1979), National Catholic Reporter (March 23, 1979) and The Wanderer (March 29, 1979), 17.Google Scholar

16. Ibid. Google Scholar

17. Divini Redemptoris was issued on March 19, 1937. It discusses Communism, contrasting to it the doctrine of the Church, and it calls for a defensive, constructive program against the evils of Communism.Google Scholar

18. Hartford Courant, October 4, 1979; also The New York Times, October 4, 1979. For complete addresses of Pope John Paul II during his historic visit to the United States, October 1-7, 1979, see The Pope in America (The Wanderer Press, 1979).Google Scholar

19. The New York Times, June 6, 1979.Google Scholar

20. Redemptor Hominis, 17.Google Scholar

21. Nemec, , Pope John Paul II, p. 99.Google Scholar

22. Staar, Richard F., “Soviet Policies in East Europe”, Current History, October, 1979, p. 122.Google Scholar

23. Parsons, Howard L., “Human values in Marxism and Christianity”, World Marxist Review (vol. 22, No. 7) July 1979, pp. 30–33.Google Scholar

24. Ibid., p. 32.Google Scholar

25. The two priests in question were Msgr. Jan Šrámek, the former Prime Minister of the Czechoslovak government-in-exile in London during World War II, and Rev. František Hála. Msgr. Šrámek was the leader of the People's Party, one of the four Czech political parties participating in the National Front government established in Košice, Czechoslovakia, in April 1945. He and Rev. Hála assumed that the Communist party was “just another policital party” and that a modified pre-World War II regime would be reestablished in Czechoslovakia under the presidency of Dr. Eduard Beneš. This belief in the possiblity of coexistence of democratic and Marxist-Leninist forces was shattered in February 1948, after which events both Šrámek and Hála attempted to escape abroad, were apprehended and spent the rest of their lives in detention. After the February 1948 putsch the country's bishops instructed priests not to take an active part in politics. Rev. Josef Plojhar, however, refused to obey his bishop and held a post in the Communist government of Czechoslovakia. For a detailed explanation of the Marxist-Leninist strategy and tactics in Czechoslovakia see Chapter X, “The National Democratic Revolution and the Socialist Revolution” in Josef Kalvoda, Czechoslovakia's Role in Soviet Strategy (Washington, D.C., 1978), pp. 199–218.Google Scholar

26. “Differences in Outlook and Political Cooperation. Meeting of Marxists and Catholis”, World Marxist Review (vol. 17, No. 6) June 1974, pp. 74–84.Google Scholar

27. Ibid. Google Scholar

28. World Marxist Review, May 1979. p. 58.Google Scholar

Among the proponents of Christian-Marxist dialogue have been Harvey Cox, Juergen Moltmann and Roger Garaudy. In reviewing their thinking and the ideas of the various forms of Gnosticism which preceded “dialogical Christianity”, Dale Vree noticed that there has been more enthusiasm for dialogue on the part of liberal religionists than Marxists. He also noticed that just as some Christians attempted to reach understanding with the Nazi regime in Germany, dialogical Christians are eager to accommodate the Marxist regimes. In his book On Synthesizing Marxism and Christianity (New York, 1976), Vree concludes that a synthesis between Marxism and Christianity is not possible, for they are belief systems which are not mutually compatible. The attempt at synthesis on the Christian side results in heresy and on the Marxist side it leads to revisionism.Google Scholar

29. Kalvoda, Josef, “Communist Strategy in Latin America”, The Yale Review (vol. L. No. 1, Autumn 1960, pp. 32–41). Reprinted in: foreign publications of the U.S. Information Agency, publications of the U.S. Air Force University, Congressional Record, June 14, 1961, and in several other periodicals.Google Scholar

30. Ibid., p. 40.Google Scholar

31. In contrast to Poland, pupils attendance of religious classes has declined considerably in Czechoslovakia. While in Slovakia during the years 1968–1977 appr. 70 per cent of pupils attended religious instructions, their number declined to some 20 per cent in 1979. In the Czech Lands during the years 1968–1977 some 50 per cent of pupils attended religious instructions, but the number shrunk to merely 5 per cent in 1979. A parallel situation exists with the Protestants. After 1968, as a consequence of the relaxation, about 5,000 pupils attended Protestant religious instructions in Prague, while in 1979 the number declined to merely 480. The regime prohibits the giving of religious instructions outside the school premises — in churches. Religious instructions in schools are permitted only once a week and are under state supervision. See Hlas Nárada (Chicago), November 3, 1979 and Nový život (Rome), Nos. 7–8, 1979.Google Scholar

32. Wojtyla, , “Participation or Alienation”, p. 18.Google Scholar

33. The Catholic Transcript, February 2, 1979; also The New York Times, January 29 and 30, 1979.Google Scholar

34. The Catholic Transcript, February 2, 1979.Google Scholar

35. The New York Times, June 4, 1979.Google Scholar

36. The Pope in Poland (Radio Free Europe Research, 1979), p. 47.Google Scholar

37. Ibid., p. 77.Google Scholar

38. Ibid. Google Scholar

39. Nový život (Rome), No 12. December, 1979.Google Scholar

40. Ibid. See also “350 Czechs Said to Send Protest to Pope about Religious Arrests”, The New York Times, November 1, 1979.Google Scholar

41. Hlas Národa (Chicago), May 24, 1980.Google Scholar

42. The Wanderer, August 28, 1980.Google Scholar

43. The Hartford Courant, October 20, 1980.Google Scholar

44. The Wanderer, May 1, 1980.Google Scholar

45. The Hartford Courant, June 24, 1980.Google Scholar

46. Granma (Cuba), August 3, 1980.Google Scholar

In mid-October 1980 a conflict between the Sandinista government of Nicaragua and the country's seven bishops came into the open. The bishops charged the regime with “manipulating” religious sentiments and promoting “class hatred”. In addition, the Bishops Conference ordered the priests in top government posts to resign by the end of December 1980. See “Church-State Ties Sour in Nicaragua”, The New York Times, December 10, 1980. Despite their being ordered out of top government posts, the four priests refused to obey, remained in the government and were suspended subsequently.Google Scholar

47. The New York Times, July 7, 1980.Google Scholar

48. Ibid. Google Scholar

49. The Hartford Courant, July 11, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar