Christian Social Care Under the Communist Dictatorship: The Persecutions of a Priest Rescuing Children

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Peer Review Report

Manuscript ID: religions-3791233

Type of manuscript: Article

Title: Christian social care under the communist dictatorship. The persecutions of a priest rescuing children

Ecclesiology in Context: Exploring the Historical, Cultural, and Theological Dimensions of the Church

 

1. Introduction

The submitted study addresses a topic of relevance to Hungary, yet it also possesses a broad international perspective. The primary focus of this study is the issue of Christian child protection in the early period of the communist regime in the post-war Hungarian state. Simultaneously, the study examines the experiences of social protection during and following the First World War. Additionally, it focuses on the life and persecution of the Catholic priest István Regőczi. In doing so, the author also provides insight into the survival strategies of Christian education during the era of communist religious persecution and state oppression.

The present study is directed towards the international professional community and is chiefly based on Hungarian sources and literature. Consequently, it can be regarded as a highly promising endeavour to broaden the professional discourse on the issue, which has hitherto been conducted primarily in Hungarian, to initiate international comparison, and to present a hitherto lesser-studied aspect of the period.

 

2. General assessment

The study is pertinent to a variety of aspects of historical research, as it provides innovative insights from the perspectives of church history, social history, and political history. It is imperative for the foreign professional community to develop a more profound comprehension of child protection, the role of the church under the communist dictatorship, and the history of international aid efforts in Hungary. These subjects align closely with the scope and focus of the journal Religions.

The second part of the study poses significant questions regarding the manner in which the communist state regarded the charitable activities of the church and the strategies employed by church actors to maintain autonomy in the face of considerable adversity. This is further compounded by the question of how child rescue was achieved through international cooperation during a period of closed borders and diverging ideologies.

The author's novel contribution is twofold. Firstly, he presents and morally frames István Regőczi's activities. Secondly, he interprets this work in the context of the confrontation between Christian solidarity and communist ideology. This interpretation contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the role of the church and individuals in civil society during this period.

 

3. Critique of content and methodology

The study has an adequate professional foundation. The author has made extensive use of serious primary sources, including the Historical Archives of State Security Services, court records, and memoirs, as well as secondary sources such as specialised literature, studies, and books. The number of sources is sufficient, and the documents used are relevant and authentic. Furthermore, the references are accurate and consistent, and the footnotes and archival references are properly documented.

Concurrently, it should be noted that the author provides insufficient insight into the methodological framework of the study. It is unfortunate that the reader is only able to discern the theoretical or historiographical approach adopted by the author implicitly (e.g., microhistory, social history, church history). In my opinion, the introduction to the study would benefit from a concise methodological reflection, which would serve to strengthen its scientific character and also present the Hungarian and international source base. In summary, the author employs a more straightforward historical methodology, namely the reconstruction of István Regőczi's activities through the comparative analysis of memoirs and archival sources. The paper reveals that the work is predominantly of a case study nature, yet it endeavours to contextualise the subject of the second part within the broader framework of child protection and political conditions prevalent during that historical period.

The historical narrative is logically structured, with the author moving chronologically from the subject of child rescue operations between the two world wars to the suppression of church-based child protection under the communist dictatorship. The author consistently argues that Regőczi's activities stemmed from Christian social commitment and that the communist regime persecuted him for ideological reasons.

It is my considered opinion that the English text of the study is free from grammatical error; the structures are clear, the use of scientific vocabulary is rich and precise, and the employment of terminology is accurate. Accordingly, the author's style is characterised by a combination of scientific rigour and readability. The historical narrative outlined above is accessible and coherent throughout the work, with the author demonstrating a commendable ability to transition seamlessly between descriptive and analytical sections. In terms of scientific language, the author employs historical terminology consistently and maintains value-neutrality, refraining from journalistic or emotional exaggeration.

 

4. Recommendations to the author

As previously stated, it is this reviewer's opinion that the study's introduction is deficient in its theoretical foundation, which is essential for elucidating the methodological and source issues.

Moreover, it is evident that the study can be divided into two significantly distinct parts. It is this author's opinion that the presentation of child welfare measures during and after World War I does not contribute to the understanding of the developments in the second part, the communist period. The welfare measures of the 1920s and 1930s merit a separate study, and although they are extremely interesting, they provide rather general information, with the author not linking the lives of the key figures active at that time with the presentation of the later period. For instance, in the case of the evangelical Gábor Sztehlo, it is not emphasised that he organised a folk high school in the 1930s and actively participated in the saving of Jewish children during the Holocaust. Subsequent to the Second World War, the establishment of the Gaudiopolis "children's republic" was initiated. This section of the study sets out the efforts of Hungarian and international organisations, most notably church and charitable groups, to address the plight of children who were orphaned and destitute in the aftermath of World War I. It reveals that the organisation was mostly a non-state civil initiative grounded in religious affiliation, but it had to face a multitude of political and logistical challenges during the years. Concurrently, the chapter underscores the pivotal role of social solidarity and religious communities in safeguarding children, and the cooperation of state authorities, a phenomenon that starkly contrasts with the persecution delineated in the section on the aftermath of World War II. If this constituted the author's deliberate intention, then it would be necessary to emphasize it more strongly.

With regard to the image painted and the configuration of the study, it is apparent that an outline of the broader framework of the child protection system is also absent. While the author's primary focus is on the subject of war orphans and the work of István Regőczi, it is crucial to demonstrate the functionality of the Hungarian social network during these periods. A substantial corpus of professional studies on this subject is available in English, not only by Hungarian authors (Eszter Varsa, Andrea Pető, Éva Bicskei, Zsuzsa Millei), but also in Jennifer Rasell's book, among others. It is argued that a more specific focus on Regőczi's life and career, as well as on other church initiatives and civil society connections of equal importance in the new political system after 1945, would be a worthwhile avenue for future research. In order to achieve this objective, it is essential to provide a comprehensive overview of the prevailing state framework and the social sphere.

In view of the aforementioned points, it is recommended that the author reconsider the structure of the study. It is the reviewer's opinion that the section on the period after World War I does not provide a sufficient basis for the chapter on the period after 1945, as the institutional framework, legal provisions, and political environment were fundamentally different. Moreover, a valid comparison between the two sections is precluded by the fact that the first chapter presents organised child rescue efforts, while the second section focuses on the individual efforts of István Regőczi. It is this author's opinion that a more fruitful line of enquiry would be to focus on the period after 1945, presenting the state and organisational frameworks, highlighting the key points of the persecution of Christian organisations, and placing István Regőczi's work and martyrdom in this context. In this context, reference could be made to his own childhood and the broader context of his experiences during his years as a refugee in Belgium as historical antecedents. The author's endeavour to juxtapose the disparate perspectives of Christian solidarity and communist ideology is commendable. However, it would be beneficial to accentuate the values ascribed by the state socialist system and the rationale behind the persecution of devout adherents of Christian education, such as István Regőczi, by the communist dictatorship.

The summary of the study is of an appropriate length, is comprehensive in content, synthesises the key findings, and is stylistically consistent with the study as a whole. The ideological objectives of the communist dictatorship were shown to exclude church education, and the case of István Regőczi is presented as an exemplar of the persecution of church figures during this period. Furthermore, it reflects upon the historical significance of the study's protagonist, highlighting that his activities, which had initially been persecuted under the dictatorship regime, were subsequently recognised and acknowledged. At the same time, it is my opinion that a sentence could be appended here to refer to the limitations of the research or further directions for study, in order to supplement the earlier methodological discussion. Furthermore, a concise reflection on historical memory or the contemporary relevance of the topic, and Regőczi in particular, would also be beneficial, as his work has already gained recognition not only at the state president level in Hungary, but a public square has been named after him, and he has been honoured with memorial plaques in several places.

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We are very grateful for the lecturers' opinions and constructive criticism, which we have carefully considered and incorporated into the study wherever possible.

Based on the lecturers' suggestions, we supplemented the introduction to the study with a concise methodological reflection, in which we emphasized that our study focuses on one person, István Regőczi, so our historiographical approach to our topic is essentially a case study related to micro-historiography.

In the supplemented introduction, we also described the sources we relied on, emphasizing the role and importance of source criticism, as in the study we compared subjective descriptions of the events experienced with documents generated during the operation of the repressive organization of power.

Based on the editor's opinion, we also expanded the summary section of the study, highlighting the importance of the topic and Regőczi's historical memory, and we also pointed out possible new directions for research.

We have also briefly supplemented the paragraphs on Gaudiopolis created by Gábor Sztehló, but we would like to note that a comprehensive, detailed presentation of the child rescue organizations presented in the first part of the study would have exceeded the scope of the study, so we just wanted to give a glimpse of the diverse activities carried out by several organizations in the field of child protection in the periods following the world wars.

Similarly, we believe that the institutions operated by the Hungarian state and the legal environment it provided between the two world wars, and especially after 1945, when child protection sought to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe in a country lying in ruins, warrant separate research and could be the subject of a separate study. At that time, the legal framework was still based on pre-war rules, but in reality, local committees and civil aid organizations performed the most important tasks. After the communist takeover, child protection came under the complete control of the state. Private and church institutions were abolished and nationalized. The legal framework emphasized the exclusive responsibility of the state, with an emphasis on ideological “re-education” in foster homes and large institutions. Legal regulations were aligned with the new ideology, and the education and protection of children became the responsibility of the socialist state. All this was ensured or enforced by countless lower-level legal regulations. The presentation and content analysis of this legal environment, the mapping of the state institutional environment, and the description of the broader framework of the child protection system could therefore be the subject of a longer research project, which we did not undertake in the present study.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research illustrates the attempts made in Hungary after the First and Second World Wars to address the issue of orphans caused by the war events. The author focuses in particular on the events of István Regőczi, a Catholic priest who organized several orphanages, but clashed with the communist regime that did not tolerate interference in the education of young people. The article is based on firsthand documentation and addresses a theme that has not been widely explored by historiography. Some references to similar experiences in other countries would have made it all the more interesting.

Author Response

We are very grateful for the lecturers' opinions and constructive criticism, which we have carefully considered and incorporated into the study wherever possible.

Based on the lecturers' suggestions, we supplemented the introduction to the study with a concise methodological reflection, in which we emphasized that our study focuses on one person, István Regőczi, so our historiographical approach to our topic is essentially a case study related to micro-historiography.

In the supplemented introduction, we also described the sources we relied on, emphasizing the role and importance of source criticism, as in the study we compared subjective descriptions of the events experienced with documents generated during the operation of the repressive organization of power.

Based on the editor's opinion, we also expanded the summary section of the study, highlighting the importance of the topic and Regőczi's historical memory, and we also pointed out possible new directions for research.

We have also briefly supplemented the paragraphs on Gaudiopolis created by Gábor Sztehló, but we would like to note that a comprehensive, detailed presentation of the child rescue organizations presented in the first part of the study would have exceeded the scope of the study, so we just wanted to give a glimpse of the diverse activities carried out by several organizations in the field of child protection in the periods following the world wars.

Similarly, we believe that the institutions operated by the Hungarian state and the legal environment it provided between the two world wars, and especially after 1945, when child protection sought to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe in a country lying in ruins, warrant separate research and could be the subject of a separate study. At that time, the legal framework was still based on pre-war rules, but in reality, local committees and civil aid organizations performed the most important tasks. After the communist takeover, child protection came under the complete control of the state. Private and church institutions were abolished and nationalized. The legal framework emphasized the exclusive responsibility of the state, with an emphasis on ideological “re-education” in foster homes and large institutions. Legal regulations were aligned with the new ideology, and the education and protection of children became the responsibility of the socialist state. All this was ensured or enforced by countless lower-level legal regulations. The presentation and content analysis of this legal environment, the mapping of the state institutional environment, and the description of the broader framework of the child protection system could therefore be the subject of a longer research project, which we did not undertake in the present study.