Statement by Bartłomiej Sienkiewicz on Catholic Magazines – Another Step Toward Discrimination Against People of Faith

On March 14, a press briefing was held with the participation of Minister Bartłomiej Sienkiewicz¹. The briefing concerned the recently published list of magazines that will receive funding from the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage. During the briefing, Sienkiewicz made the following statement:

“There will also be no subsidies for denominational magazines run by dioceses, meaning, in essence, magazines of bishops or religious orders. The funds allocated to this program come from citizens, from taxes paid by Poles—believers, non-believers, those of various faiths, agnostics, Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and those with left-wing views. Therefore, the mission of the state is not to spread faith or salvation. This is a secular state, and the funds it allocates to foster public debate are not meant to serve as a form of apostolate. Apostolate is the domain of churches, not the state. For this reason, in this edition of the program, these magazines were not included among the beneficiaries.”

This statement is fraught with misunderstandings. First and foremost, magazines associated with the Church, including those linked to religious orders, are not merely photocopied parish newsletters. Catholic magazines that applied for funding in this program are often periodicals with decades of publishing tradition, featuring articles that address—often, though not exclusively, from a Christian perspective—issues outside the ecclesiastical sphere, such as philosophy, culture, social life, economics, and many other fields. It is worth noting that articles on secular matters often present diverse viewpoints, even within a single publication. For example, in the realm of economics, one magazine might feature both pro-market and pro-social perspectives. One example of a Catholic outlet that did not receive funding is the Dominican monthly “W Drodze”. Let us give voice to the editors of this distinguished magazine, who responded to the minister’s allegations as follows: “We are not a religious order newsletter. We are a nationwide monthly that has been published for fifty years and has endured the harsh censorship of the communist era. We take pride in the fact that our pages have featured contributions from Kazimiera Iłłakowiczówna, Ernest Bryll, Adam Zagajewski, Władysław Bartoszewski, Gustaw Herling-Grudziński, Stanisław Barańczak, Dariusz Rosiak, Małgorzata Musierowicz, Jarosław Mikołajewski, Paulina Wilk, Stefan Szczepłek, and hundreds of others who, with their names, have endorsed or continue to endorse our mission of dialogue. The founders’ vision, to which we remain faithful, was to seek ethical and worldview models that could resonate with both believers and those still searching”².

The views expressed by the minister are all the more perplexing given that, during the rest of the briefing, he declared his commitment to increasing pluralism in public debate, citing, among other things, the funding of conservative magazines such as Krakow’s “Arcana” or “Kronos.” Catholic magazines did not demand privileges or special treatment—they sought to be evaluated on the same terms as other magazines, including those openly declaring their worldview (whether liberal, conservative, or social-democratic). Rejecting their applications solely because they are Catholic is certainly not a step toward broadening discussion or a decision made in the interest of greater pluralism. How, then, can we explain the support for select magazines that are neither left-wing nor liberal? It appears that such actions may serve as a smokescreen. After World War II, the so-called “people’s government” did not attack all fronts simultaneously; it initially focused greater efforts on anti-communist partisans and political opposition, only to later turn to direct confrontation with the Church. The current government seems to be following a reverse sequence.

The minister’s reference to the fact that the funds allocated to magazines come from taxpayers also fails to withstand scrutiny. It is always the case that some taxpayers will disagree with certain expenditures, just as some segments of society oppose funding liberal, conservative, or socialist magazines with taxpayer money. Others, with libertarian leanings, might criticize the very idea of funding magazines at all.

It seems that the minister’s reasoning rests on a flawed assumption that addressing various issues (including secular ones) from a Christian perspective is somehow inferior to approaching them from the standpoint of liberalism, conservatism, socialism, or another ideology—that it is merely an expression of “apostolate,” an irrational “faith.” However, every decision, including opinions or judgments, made in the absence of complete and definitive knowledge is based on a form of faith. This element is present in every secular ideology. For instance, can advocates arguing that their demands (e.g., legal abortion) constitute “human rights” provide conclusive arguments that do not rely on a form of “faith”? The same applies to economics—economic discourse is not pure mathematics; it is significantly shaped by convictions rooted in philosophical anthropology, ethics, and social philosophy.

As noted by Remigiusz Okraska, editor-in-chief of “Nowy Obywatel”³, the list of funded magazines includes publications associated with Catholic-liberal circles—likely referring to outlets like “Znak” or “Magazyn Kontakt.” Both periodicals have long been associated with left-wing liberalism in the political sphere and with the so-called “Catholic left” or “open Church” (particularly progressive liberalism) in the ecclesiastical sphere. Could it be that a declarative “Christianity” or reference to a specific denomination does not provoke the new government’s aversion as long as these outlets align with the current administration’s agenda? Such an approach, however, would be unconstitutional, undermining the principle of impartiality explicitly enshrined in Article 25 of the Constitution.

What strategy should the Catholic community, affected by the ministry’s declared discrimination, adopt? Above all, this issue cannot be ignored or relegated to the realm of “Catholic newsletters,” as some might imagine it. Silence will only embolden those who employ economic coercion. The government’s actions should serve as a warning for the future, particularly for those who believe that the inclusion of a few conservative titles on the list of supported magazines indicates the current administration’s impartiality. In post-war Polish history, left-liberal circles once leveraged the Church’s support, only to turn against it, at least from the time of Pope John Paul II’s fourth pilgrimage to Poland (1991)—these issues have already been discussed on our blogosphere⁴. In the current context, it is worth recalling the insightful observation of Professor Andrzej Bryk from Jagiellonian University, who exposed the essence of contemporary liberalism: “It seems to me that Christianity today is the only enemy of the liberal religion (…) as a monistic system that comprehensively encompasses all levels of human existence and tolerates no competitors. Christianity is such a competitor—and that is unbearable because, fundamentally, it is a realistic way of viewing reality.”

Religious Freedom Laboratory Team