Бањалучка епархија од 1953. до 1961. године

Abstract

From the accession of the new government (1945−1961) several time phases with different intensity of attacks and pressures on the clergy of the Diocese of Banjaluka could be observed. The first phase, which commenced during the war, continued later with different intensity. In that period priests were prisoned and condemned on long term punishments with no specific reason. Attacks on the clergy of the Diocese of Banjaluka continued during 1950’s with increased intensity during 1952 and culmination in 1953. In the mid 1950’s and beginning of 1960’s number of broils was reduced as well as number of punished priests. Beside priests Church property had also been at the stroke of the new governance. Apart from repressive measures, the state government intended to differentiate clergy within the Church by creating the Association of the Orthodox Priests. However, interest for becoming a member of the Association was different in each parish. In the Diocese of Banjaluka interest for membership in the Association was the weakest comparing to other dioceses in Bosnia and Herzegovina. One could say the reason for that situation was the attitude of the archpriests as well as the age of priests who were uncommitted to the new organizational form of the Association. From the presented research, we could draw a conclusion that the aim of the state was primarily the reduction and then complete elimination of the impact the Church had in society, and control of its hierarchy on all levels. Complete state apparatus was involved in the achievement of that aim, which was actually putting pressure successfully on the whole Serbian Orthodox Church, hiding behind attacks on particular bishops. The similar situation was on the regional level and in the Diocese of Banjaluka, since because of the Bishop Vasilije, the pressure was put on other priests and therefore any progress within the Diocese was prevented. Intentional dragging definition of the status of the Serbian Orthodox Church led to misunderstandings and broils against its members. The state government dexterously relied on positive laws and people, which was apparent on the state level where the authority bearers were using out-institutional means. Such a hidden policy enabled running of a “double track policy”, that is to say, one was written and presented to the people and the world, and other was done on the field. Any breach of the legal regulations was interpreted as inexperience and non-expertise, and therefore not a simple government representative ever answered for his/her acts but was awarded for them instead. One kind of the protection of such a system was provided by regional and republic authorities. In order to emphasize loyality and desire for promotion, local authorities often created their theories and laws, which were opposite to the state ones. Problems with the state that remained after accession of the new Bishop in 1961, referred to the Church property, association of priests, celebration of religious holidays, health insurance of priests, registrar books, free collection of voluntary contributions and other.