* The research for this paper was made possible through support from the University of Pittsburgh, including a scholarship from the Czechoslovak Nationality Room Committee (1996), the Thomas Kukučka Memorial Fellowship from the Slovak Studies Program (1997), the Cho-yun Hsu Fellowship from the Department of History (2000), and several travel grants from the Center for Russian and East European Studies.Google Scholar

1. Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 1, 1990.Google Scholar

2. Čarnogurský had been arrested on 14 August 1989, along with four other Slovak dissidents, for planning to lay flowers the following week at the locations in Bratislava where Slovak students had been killed during the Warsaw Pact invasion in 1968. The police charged him for editing Bratislavské listy, a samizdat periodical that he had founded in the summer of 1988, instead of this plan to lay flowers.Google Scholar

3. Stehle provides an excellent analysis of the Vatican's policies in Czechoslovakia, but his only paragraph describing secret consecrations in Slovakia contains several inaccuracies. Stehle, Hansjakob, Eastern Politics of the Vatican 1917–1979 (Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1981), p. 274. Alexander Tomsky maintained close contacts with many religious activists in Czechoslovakia during his tenure as a researcher for the Keston College (now named Keston Institute) news and research center in the 1980s. From the Czech-orientation of his reports, most of his contacts apparently lived in the Czech Lands. Alexander Tomsky, “Der Katholizismus in der Tschechoslowakei,” in Paul Lendvai, ed. Religionsfreiheit und Menschenrechte (Styria: Graz, 1983), pp. 120–149.Google Scholar

4. See Nemec, Ludvík, Church and State in Czechoslovakia (New York: Vantage Press, 1955); Kaplan, Karel, “Church and State in Czechoslovakia from 1948 to 1956—Part I,” Religion in Communist Lands, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1986, pp. 59–72; Karel Kaplan, “Church and State in Czechoslovakia from 1948 to 1956—Part II,” Religion in Communist Lands, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1986, pp. 180–193; Karel Kaplan, “Church and State in Czechoslovakia from 1948 to 1956—Part III,” Religion in Communist Lands, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1986, pp. 273–282; Pedro Ramet, Cross and Commissar (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987); and Dennison I. Rusinow, “Churches and States in Eastern Europe: A View From Vienna,” in UFSI Reports, No. 37, 1983, pp. 1–8. Rusinow's typology places the situation of religion in Czechoslovakia as one of the most repressive in East Europe.Google Scholar

5. Skilling, H. Gordon, Charter 77 and Human Rights in Czechoslovakia (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1981), p. 55.Google Scholar

6. Sabrina Ramet's 1991 survey of independent activity in Czechoslovakia concludes, “Until the blossoming of democracy in the closing weeks of 1989, independent activism was the preserve of a small minority.” Ramet, Sabrina, Social Currents in Eastern Europe (Durham: Duke University Press, 1991), p. 112.Google Scholar

7. Miklos˘ko, Frantis˘ek, Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit'z osudov katolickej cirkvi na Slovensku v rokoch 1943–89 (Bratislava: Archa, 1991).Google Scholar

8. S˘imulčik, Ján, Svetlo z podzemia: z kroniky katolíckeho samizdatu 1969–1989 (Pres˘ov: Vydavetel'stvo Michala Vas˘ka, 1997); S˘imulčík, Ján, Zápas o nádej: z kroniky tajných kn˘azov 1969–1989 (Pres˘ov: Vydavetel'stvo Michala Vas˘ka, 2000).Google Scholar

9. Archives containing religious samizdat cited in this paper include: the samizdat archive at the Christian Democratic Movement headquarters, Bratislava, Slovakia; the Libri Prohibiti Samizdat Archive, Prague, Czech Republic; the Czechoslovak Documentation Center, Dobr˘ichovice (Prague), Czech Republic; the Keston Institute's archive, Oxford, England; and the research archives of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in the Open Society Archives, Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar

10. Linz, Juan J. and Stepan, Alfred, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), pp. 7–8.Google Scholar

11. Szakolczai, Árpád and Horváth, Ágnes, “The Discourse of Civil Society and the Self-elimination of the Party,” in Lewis, Paul G., ed., Democracy and Civil Society in Eastern Europe (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992), p. 16. For the argument that independent groups, such as Charter 77 and Solidarity played a leading role in the formation of civil society and contributed to the collapse of Communism, see Vladimir Tismaneanu, Reinventing Politics (New York: The Free Press, 1992), pp. 170–174.Google Scholar

12. Šimečka, Milan, “Adaptation,” in The Restoration of Order (London: Verso, 1984), pp. 139–140.Google Scholar

13. Michnik, Adam, “A New Evolutionism,” in Letters From Prison and Other Essays (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), p. 139.Google Scholar

14. Benda, Václav, “Parallel polis ,” in Skilling, H. G. and Wilson, Paul, eds, Civic Freedom in Central Europe (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991), p. 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. Benda, Václav, interview with the author, 24 July 1996, Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar

16. Havel, Václav, “The Power of the Powerless,” in Wilson, Paul, ed., Open Letters (New York: Knopf, 1991), pp. 148–151.Google Scholar

17. Konrád, György, Antipolitics, translated by Allen, Richard E. (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1984), p. 70.Google Scholar

18. Korec, Bishop Ján of the secret church in Slovakia repeated this assertion in a 1983 letter to the editors of Smena in response to one of its attacks on the secret church. The text of his letter was republished in samizdat. See Una Sancta Catholica, Advent 1983, p. 25.Google Scholar

19. The results of this study were republished by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) in 1988 without an explanation of how the researcher defined religiosity. Peter Martin, “Church State Relations,” RFE/RL, 27 December 1988, pp. 19–24.Google Scholar

20. Votruba, Martin, “The Geography of Slovakia's Religions in the 1991 Census: Maps,” manuscript, Slovak Studies Program, University of Pittsburgh, 1995.Google Scholar

21. Kolakovič, traveled to the West after the war and told his story to an American, Gretta Palmer. These memoirs of his experiences in Croatia, Slovakia and Soviet Russia during and after the Second World War were first published in English in 1949 under the pseudonym “Father George.” See Father George (as told to Gretta Palmer), God's Underground (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1949).Google Scholar

22. For a description of the Russicum by a graduate who made it into Russia, see Ciszek, Walter J., With God in Russia (New York: The American Press, 1964), pp. 9–10. Also see Stehle, Eastern Politics, pp. 129–130, and Robert A. Graham, The Vatican and Communism During World War II (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1996), pp. 131–139.Google Scholar

23. For a brief description of Krčméry's first meeting with Kolakovič, see “Dr. Silvester Krčméry 60-ročný,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 4, 1984, p. 19.Google Scholar

24. Memoir accounts contain much of the information about Kolakovič's work in Slovakia and the early history of the secret church. See Krčméry, Silvester and Jukl, Vladimír, V s˘l'apajach Kolakoviča (Bratislava: Charis, 1996). Miklos˘ko interviewed Krčméry and Jukl for his own history of the secret church. Miklos˘ko, Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit'.Google Scholar

25. Krčméry, and Jukl, , V s˘l'apajach Kolakoviča, p. 12.Google Scholar

26. Palmer, , God's Underground, pp. 24–25.Google Scholar

27. S˘imulčík, Ján, “God's Underground: Catholic Church in Slovakia, 1943–1989,” Keston Institute archive file (hereafter KI): SL/ROM.Google Scholar

28. A footnote indicates that this appendix is not a complete list of members. Miklos˘ko, , Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', pp. 159–161.Google Scholar

29. Krčméry, Silvester, interview with the author, 3 July 1996, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

30. Ramet, , Cross and Commissar, p. 76.Google Scholar

31. Kaplan, , “Church and State—Part I,” pp. 60–69.Google Scholar

32. Kaplan, , “Church and State—Part II,” pp. 181–182. Ján Korec, a Jesuit theological student in Slovakia during this period, describes this subjugation of the Catholic Church by the state in his memoirs. Originally written in 1976, they existed in the underground until they were officially published in 1990. Ján Ch. Korec, Od barbarskej noci (Bratislava: Lúč, 1990), pp. 55–57. A second volume covers the period from the Prague Spring to 1989. Ján Ch. Korec, Od barbarskej noci na slobode (Bratislava: Lúč, 1993).Google Scholar

33. Kaplan, , “Church and State—Part I,” p. 69.Google Scholar

34. A samizdat article by Dr Karel [last name illegible] describes the secret police's repression against the Catholic Church between 1948 and 1958, including “Aktion K” in “StB Včera a dnes: procesy s katolickou Cirkvou,” Výber, No. 4, 1984, pp. 27–28. See also Kaplan, “Church and State—Part II,” pp. 185–187.Google Scholar

35. See Korec, , Od barbarskej noci, p. 48; Tomsky, , “Der Katholizismus in der Tschechoslowakei,” p. 125.Google Scholar

36. Krčméry, and Jukl, , V s˘l'apajach Kolakoviča, pp. 81–93. Miklos˘ko's appendixes contain an extensive list of priests and laymen arrested and sentenced between 1949 and 1954. A comparison of these names with his list of Rodina members indicates that at least 35 were arrested during this time frame. Miklos˘ko, Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', pp. 161–178.Google Scholar

37. Kaplan, , “Church and State—Part III,” pp. 275–279.Google Scholar

38. Corley, Felix, “The Secret Clergy in Communist Czechoslovakia,” Religion, State and Society, Vol. 21, No. 2, 1993, p. 172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

39. Graham, , The Vatican and Communism, p. 131. Secret ordinations were most common in Czechoslovakia, but the Vatican also permitted them in Romania. Corley, , “The Secret Clergy,” p. 173.Google Scholar

40. Stehle, , Eastern Politics, p. 273.Google Scholar

41. Some of these later ordinations extended far beyond the scope of what the Vatican had originally envisioned. Corley examines the controversy revealed after the Velvet Revolution, when many married secret bishops (at least eight) and even women secretly ordained as bishops, came forward seeking official recognition from the Vatican. Several of these consecrations were the work of secret Bishop Felix Davidek. Before his death in 1988, Davidek secretly ordained hundreds of priests, many of whom had little or no theological training. Corley, , “The Secret Clergy,” pp. 181–184.Google Scholar

42. In the preface to Šimulčík's study of the secret priests, Korec reported that he secretly ordained about 120 priests up to 1989. S˘imulčík, , Zápas o nádej, p. 9.Google Scholar

43. Father Tomás˘ Halík reported that he secretly studied to be a priest in the Czech Lands, but was actually ordained during a visit to Erfurt, East Germany, in the 1970s. In addition to Erfurt, many went to Krakow, where Cardinal Karol Wojtyła ordained them. Tomás˘ Halík, interview by the author, Pittsburgh, PA, 14 September 1999.Google Scholar

44. Krčméry, and Jukl, , V s˘l'apajach Kolakoviča, pp. 93–94.Google Scholar

45. For more on the situation of the Greek Catholic Church, see Reban, Milan J., “The Catholic Church in Czechoslovakia,” in Ramet, Pedro, ed., Catholicism and Politics in Communist Societies (Durham: Duke University Press, 1990), pp. 150–151; “The Ups and Downs of the Greek Catholic Church,” RFE/RL, 14 July 1976, pp. 10–12.Google Scholar

46. Korec, , Od barbarskej noci, pp. 87–89, 153–163, 216. Korec, in a five-page letter to the Czechoslovak Federal Assembly, recounts his secret ordination and consecration in 1951 and the persecution by the authorities that followed. Bishop Ján Korec to Czechoslovak Federal Assembly, 27 April 1980, KI: CZ ROM 8/2 Korec, Jan.Google Scholar

47. Korec, , Od barbarskej noci na slobode, pp. 37–41.Google Scholar

48. Tomsky, Alexander, “‘Pacem in Terris’ Between Church and State in Czechoslovakia,” Religion in Communist Lands, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1983, p. 277.Google Scholar

49. S˘imulčík, , Zapas o nádej, p. 54.Google Scholar

50. Kuhajdová, Andrea, a member of the Movement of Christian Education for Children in Bratislava in the late 1980s, explained this division of the communities by age. Kuhajdová, Andrea, interview by the author, 2 August 1996, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

51. S˘imulčík, , “God's Underground.”Google Scholar

52. S˘imulčík, Ján, lecture text, 19 April 1996, samizdat archive, Christian Democratic Movement, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

53. Miklos˘ko, , Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', pp. 131–136.Google Scholar

54. Vfber, No. 2, 1984, pp. 11, 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55. Murdza, Peter, lecture text, 19 April 1996, samizdat archive, Christian Democratic Movement, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

56. Lesn˘ák, briefly describes 452 Slovak samizdat books in his catalog. Rudolf Lesn˘ák, Listy z podzemia: súborná dokumentácia krest'anskej samizdatovej publicistiky na Slovensku v rokoch 1945–1989 (Bratislava: Vydalo Vydavatel'stvo USPO, 1988), pp. 218–257.Google Scholar

57. Ibid., pp. 31, 181–183.Google Scholar

58. Publishing figures based on S˘imulčík's estimates. S˘imulčík, , Svetlo z podzemia, pp. 261–274.Google Scholar

59. Slovak political samizdat periodicals in the late 1980s include Altamíra (1985–1987); K (1986–1987); and Fragment (1987). In 1988, the editors of K and Fragment combined their efforts to publish Fragment K. Kontakt, the other samizdat of the political opposition, was published between 1980 and 1983. Kusá, Jolana, Kopsová, Raisa, Fundarek, Frantis˘ek, Z˘ivot v slove a z˘ivot slovom: zjavné a skryté súvislosti Slovenského samizdatu (Bratislava: Nadácia Milana S˘imečku, 1995), p. 125; Martin S˘imečka, interview by the author, 25 June 1996, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

60. Those involved in samizdat production suggested the importance of this combination of factors to explain the increase after 1985. Čarnogurský, Ján, interview by the author, 16 July 1996, Bratislava, Slovakia; S˘imečka, interview by the author.Google Scholar

61. “Glasno—ale nie o Bohu,” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 2, 1988, pp. 33–35.Google Scholar

62. Výber, No. 2, 1984, p. 70.Google Scholar

63. Skilling argues that samizdat helped develop and protect a second or independent culture in Central Europe. Skilling, H. Gordon, Samizdat and an Independent Society in Central and Eastern Europe (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1989), p. 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

64. Krčméry, interview with the author. For a brief description of Krčméry's first meeting with Karol Wojtyła, see Miklos˘ko, , Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', p. 125.Google Scholar

65. Slovak religious samizdat contained many guides to pilgrimage sites. See for example “Mariánske pútnické miesta na Slovensku,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 1, 1988, pp. 27–29.Google Scholar

66. Výber published an invitation from Moravian Catholics on the back cover of a spring issue. Výber, No. 4, 1985. Miklos˘ko, though referring to the Moravian Catholics plan, credits Vladimír Jukl with pushing the idea of a night program at Velehrad. Miklos˘ko, , Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', pp. 128–130.Google Scholar

67. “Velehrad ‘85,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 3, 1985, p. 17.Google Scholar

68. “Boli sme na Velehrade,” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 5, 1985, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

69. Religious samizdat periodicals reported this range of pilgrims in attendance. There is no information regarding how many of the pilgrims actively belonged to the secret church. See “Boli sme na Velehrade,” p. 8; “Velehrad ‘85,” pp. 17–18; “Velehrad 1985,” p. 17; Vzkr˘ís˘ení, No. 2, 1985, p. 15; and “Velehrad nas,” Informace o církvi, No. 10, 1985, p. 6. Photographs of the pilgrims gathered around the Basilica at Velehrad on 7 July indicate that the pilgrims filled every inch of the square and support the magnitude of the size of the crowd reported by religious samizdat. KI: photos #1793, #1876.Google Scholar

70. “Velehrad ‘85,” p. 18.Google Scholar

71. Attendance at Slovak pilgrimages in 1989 was also quite high, but there is much less information about that year's pilgrimages in samizdat. This is probably due to the fact that reports of the summer pilgrimages usually appeared in late fall samizdat issues, by which time the Velvet Revolution had already begun.Google Scholar

72. “Pútne slávnosti na Slovensku v r. 1986,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 1, 1987, pp. 17–19; “S˘as˘tín—September 1987,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 5, 1987, p. 11; “S˘as˘tín—'88,” Katolícky mesačník, No. 5, 1988, p. 1.Google Scholar

73. “Gaboltov ‘85,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 3, 1985, p. 20; “Pútne slávnosti na Slovensku v r. 1986,” pp. 17–19; Ján Čarnogurský, “Message from Ján Ćarnogurský to Keston College,” KI: CZ ROM 7/4 pilgrimages; “Pút’ v Gaboltove,” Voice of America (VoA), 24 July 1988.Google Scholar

74. “Pout’ R˘eckokatolíku v Lutine 1986,” Informace o církvi, No. 10, 1986, p. 10; also see the figures that Čarnogurský sent to Keston College. Čarnogurský, “Message.”Google Scholar

75. “Pilgrimage at Topol'čany,” Summary of World Broadcasts (SWB), 13 September 1988.Google Scholar

76. “Levoća 1986,” VoA, 12 July 1986; “Record Numbers Attend Slovak Pilgrimages,” Keston News Service, No. 280, 23 July 1987, p. 19; Čarnogurský, “Message”; “Levoča pút’ 1987,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 4, 1987, p. 7; “Mariánsky rok na Slovensku,” Katolícky mesačník, No. 4, 1988, p. 1; Peter Martin, “The Pilgrimage to Levoča,” RFE/RL, 14 July 1988, p. 19; “Mys˘lienky z Levočskej pute,” Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 3, 1988, p. 3.Google Scholar

77. Čarnogurský, , interview with the author.Google Scholar

78. “Pútne slavnosti na Slovensku v r. 1986,” pp. 18–19.Google Scholar

79. “Pút’ v Gaboltove”; “Mariánsky rok na Slovensku,” p. 1.Google Scholar

80. Father Karel Martinec, interview with the author, 4 July 1996, Senica, Slovakia.Google Scholar

81. “S˘as˘tín—'88,” pp. 1–3.Google Scholar

82. Western news organizations reported many unsuccessful police attempts to deter pilgrims, such as blocking roads, turning dogs on pilgrims, and taking pictures of pilgrims. See “Police Break Up Catholic Pilgrim's Rally,” Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), 14 August 1986, p. D3; and “Slovaks Mark End of Marian Year,” Keston News Service, No. 308, 8 September 1988, p. 7.Google Scholar

83. Čarnogurský, Ján, “The Underground Church and Pilgrimages in Slovakia,” Salisbury Review, June 1988, p. 36.Google Scholar

84. “Open Letter of Slovak Catholics to President Gustav Husák,” FBIS, 6 June 1983, pp. D1–D2. A Vatican report indicated that this letter was dated and sent to Husák on 15 April 1983. FBIS, 6 June 1983, p. D3. Miklos˘ko and Krčméry composed the letter and collected the signatures. Miklos˘ko, Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', p. 144.Google Scholar

85. An article about the abortion reform preceded the text of the letter and reported that the Slovak signatures had been collected in only “a couple of days.” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 3, 1986, pp. 18–20. Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost' reported that more than 6,500 Slovaks had signed the letter. Náboz˘enstvo a súčasnost', No. 3, 1986, pp. 21–22.Google Scholar

86. “Podpisy na obranu Ivana Polanského,” Informace o církvi, No. 9, 1988, p. 16.Google Scholar

87. The full text of the petition is six pages in length, and in addition to the 31-points, it briefly explains nine concrete problems of the Catholic Church in Czechoslovakia. “Podne˘ty katolíků k r˘es˘ení situace ver˘ících občanů v ČSR,” KI: CD ROM 11/3 Protests, p. 2.Google Scholar

88. “Dopis otce Kardinála Tomás˘ka,” Informace o církvi, No. 2, 1988, p. 7; “Ries˘it’ situáciu veriacich v ČSSR,” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 2, 1988, p. 13. Father Halík, one of Tomás˘ek's advisers in the Czech secret church, cites Tomás˘ek's approval of this petition as evidence of his desire to take a stronger position. Halík, interview by the author.Google Scholar

89. “Podpisová akce ver˘ících,” Informace o církvi, No. 2, 1988, p. 7.Google Scholar

90. Kr˘est'anske obzory reports that 95,000 signatures had been collected after 2 weeks. Kr˘est'anske obzory, No. 7, 1988, p. 27. Bishop Korec also writes that Slovak Catholics collected up to 100,000 signatures in the first two weeks. Korec, Od barbarskj noci na slobode, p. 404.Google Scholar

91. “K podpisom zo Slovenska,” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 2, 1988, p. 16.Google Scholar

92. Krčméry, one of the individuals personally responsible for collecting signatures in Slovakia, reported that more than half of the total came from Slovakia. Krčméry, interview with the author. Kr˘est'anske obzory's tally in the September 1988 issue gave 300,000 of 500,000 total signatures to Slovakia. Kr˘est'anske obzory, No. 7, 1988, p. 28.Google Scholar

93. Miklos˘ko, Frantis˘ek, interview with the author, 16 July 1996, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

94. Korec, , Od barbarskej noc na slobode, p. 403.Google Scholar

95. Kohutiar, Juraj, interview with the author, 14 August 1997, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

96. Krčméry also reported the success of this strategy of waiting by the doors of churches. Krčméry, interview by the author. One young Catholic teenager from Eastern Slovakia not involved in the secret church remembered that she felt comfortable signing the petition outside the church because so many other people were doing so. L'udmila Buzgová, interview with the author, 6 August 1996, Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar

97. “K podpisom zo Slovenska,” p. 16.Google Scholar

98. Čarnogurský, , interview with the author. For his earlier analysis of the secret church's organization, see Čarnogurský, “The Underground Church,” pp. 34–37. Also see Ján Čarnogurský, “O pútiach a o inom,” July 1988, in records of the research institute of RFE/RL, East European Archives, Open Society Archives, Budapest, Hungary, 300, Czechoslovakian Unit (subfonds 30), subject file: dissent/personalities, Čarnogurský.Google Scholar

99. Čarnogurský, interview with the author; Miklos˘ko, interview with the author.Google Scholar

100. Čarnogurský, interview with the author. The Czechoslovak authorities apparently did not take note of this distinction. In a 1989 interview, Vladimír Janků, the Director of the Central Committee for Church Affairs, stated that “this so-called underground church is in reality identical to Charter 77.” FBIS, 2 March 1989, p. 12.Google Scholar

101. The text of this letter was republished in samizdat “Verejne zhromaz˘denie,” Bratislavské listy, No. 1, 1988, p. 9; and “Výzva k verejnemu zhromaz˘denia,” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 2, 1988, p. 42.Google Scholar

102. Čarnogurský, interview with the author.Google Scholar

103. Miklos˘ko, interview with the author. For the 23 March Vatican Radio announcement, see SWB, 28 March 1988.Google Scholar

104. Samizdat editors later published these signboard announcements. “Výzva k účasti na zhromaz˘dení veriacich 25 Marca o 18:00 hod,” Bratislavské listy, No. 1, 1988, p. 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

105. Kohutiar, interview with the author.Google Scholar

106. Korec, , Od barbarskej noci na sloboda, p. 409; Miklos˘ko, interview with the author; Krčméry reported that the police refused to let him leave his home. Krčméry, interview with the author.Google Scholar

107. Members of the Western press who witnessed the event estimated that 2,000 people attended the demonstration. “Police Break up Bratislava Church Demonstration,” FBIS, 28 March 1988, p. 9.Google Scholar

108. Ponická, Hana, “Hodina Bratislavy,” 25 March 1988, typed account from the private collection of Vladimír Man˘ák, Bratislava, Slovakia. For an extensive collection of documents, eyewitness accounts, and photos of this demonstration see Korec, J. Ch., ed. Bratislavský vel'ký piatok: zbierka autentických dokumentov o zhromazdeni veriacich 25. Marca 1988 (Bratislava: Lúč, 1994). A Slovak documentary film contains footage of this demonstration. Dus˘an Hanák, director, Papierové hlavy (Slovakia: Ales, 1995).Google Scholar

109. “List Otca Biskupa Korca,” Rodinné spoločenstvo, No. 3, 1988, pp. 29–30.Google Scholar

110. “Bratislava Believers Protest to Premier Strougal About Police Action,” SWB, 13 May 1988; “Kosice Priests Protest to Slovak Premier Against Police Attack,” SWB, 13 May 1988.Google Scholar

111. Miklos˘ko, , Nebudete ich mǒct'rozvrátit', pp. 148–149.Google Scholar

112. “Police Break Up Bratislava Church Demonstration,” p. 9.Google Scholar

113. They also explain that civil society's development is encouraged by the legal guarantees established by the rule of law, by a state apparatus that can enforce the rights of civil society, and by an economic society that can support the autonomy needed by civil society. Linz, and Stepan, , Problems of Democratic Transition, p. 14.Google Scholar

114. “O Slovensku a o Slovacich,” Alternativa, No. 2, March 1989, p. 46.Google Scholar

115. “Deputy Premier Čarnogurský on Political Position,” FBIS, 15 December 1989, p. 25.Google Scholar

116. “Programové vyhlásenie Krest'anskodemokratického Hnutia,” Kr˘est'anske obzory, Nos 1–2, 1990, pp. 8–10.Google Scholar

117. “Prejav na zakladajúcom sneme KDH,” in Čarnogurský, Ján, Videné od Dunaja (Bratislava: Kalligram, 1997), p. 220.Google Scholar

118. Kuhajdová, interview with the author. A brochure that HKSM distributed in the mid-1990s described its programs and explained that although the organization had been founded formally in 1990, its work had begun decades earlier through the efforts of Kolakovič, Krčméry, Jukl, and Korec. Brochure, , Hnutie krest'anských spoločenstiev mládez˘e, private collection of the author.Google Scholar

119. Fisher, Sharon, “The Slovak Democratic Coalition and the 1998 Elections,” paper written for the 1998 AAASS annual conference, Boca Raton, FL, 24–27 September 1998.Google Scholar

120. “Kováč to Head Slovak Opposition Petition,” RFE/RL Newsline, 24 March 1998; and “Mass Protest Demonstration in Bratislava,” RFE/RL Newsline, 26 March 1998.Google Scholar

121. “Slovak Speaker Refuses to Accept Petition,” RFE/RL Newsline, 14 May 1998.Google Scholar

122. “Slovakia Opts for Political Change,” RFE/RL Newsline, 28 September 1998.Google Scholar

123. “Dzurinda Appointed Slovak Premier,” RFE/RL Newsline, 30 October 1998.Google Scholar