People in political circles were surprised by a TVN report that was framed as an attempt to aid the opposition. One veteran Polish politician, a PSL member and former agriculture minister, voiced disbelief about the timing and motivation behind such a move, calling it a sign of poor judgment in the current moment.
Today in the culture committee, two resolutions concerning John Paul II were on the table. One came from the ruling party, the other from PSL. The question arose why PSL chose to take a stand in this issue at all.
The PSL representative explained that their resolution was meant to honor a remarkable Polish figure. In contrast, the PiS version was viewed as fueling a confrontation. He candidly suggested that the PiS side relied on TVN’s report to back their stance. He also emphasized that just as a conservative group once questioned Lech Wałęsa using archival security documents, some in the liberal post-Solidarity camp are now arguing against John Paul II by urging the removal of monuments. He warned that while physical monuments can be destroyed, the memory and influence John Paul II holds in Polish hearts cannot be erased.
Sharp critiques and accusations about John Paul II were directed at members of the left, including Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus and Joanna Senyszyn. Yet it appeared that the Civic Platform politicians adopted a different approach, choosing to respond rather than stay silent. How did he evaluate these attitudes?
He noted that attacks on the church by left-wing figures resemble tactics used in the past by the communist authorities, a comparison he said was not new to Polish politics. He criticized the apparent hesitation of the conservative PO, which chose not to comment and seemed reluctant to engage. During a culture committee session, when the version produced by the Polish coalition was on the agenda, PO members reportedly left the chamber, preventing the neutral text from being processed and drawing attention to John Paul II’s merits within the Catholic Church. He claimed that the PO allowed PiS to frame the parliamentary debate around the Pope for political purposes.
Asked whether the TVN report was a political instrument for PiS, he replied that while the left side might benefit from the discussion, the media outlet itself did not commission the report for PiS. He suggested that even if no political aim existed, the report could still produce that effect. He recalled a prior dispute before European elections between groups allied with the left and right, noting that in 2019 PiS proposed threatening forest privatization; now a different kind of opportunism had emerged, with PiS voters rallying around defending the church and Polish values.
The discussion then turned to previous European Parliament elections. PSL participated within a broader coalition alongside PO and a rainbow bloc, a decision he described as a mistake at the time. He recalled being the only member of the PSL’s supreme council to vote against joining that European coalition.
According to him, the current stance differs from that period: PSL, in defending John Paul II, is effectively aligned with PiS on this issue, but not fully. He argued that PSL’s resolution highlights John Paul II’s historical contributions to Poland, sovereignty, NATO and EU membership, and the Catholic Church, without tying the figure to current political events. By contrast, the PiS resolution entwines the Pope with contemporary politics, which is where their positions diverge.
Both sides, however, acknowledge the important role of John Paul II in Poland’s history. He estimated that a significant portion of non-believers in Poland still recognize the Pope’s contribution to national history and the country’s status among free nations. If this assessment holds, the dispute may not advance the opposition’s aims to protect John Paul II, though it remains a live issue in the political arena.
He asserted that those on the left who attack the Pope risk lasting political losses. He reiterated that physical monuments can be removed, but John Paul II’s spiritual legacy endures in Polish society.
Asked whether the dispute over John Paul II would be a central topic in the upcoming elections, he suggested it already is part of the campaign. He observed how both the left and PiS are leveraging the issue, with any tactic that helps PiS not serving the democratic opposition’s broader goals.
When asked if PiS could secure a third term through defending John Paul II, he answered candidly that predicting electoral outcomes was beyond him. He preferred to wait for the results after the vote and noted that he speaks as a plain countryman rather than a prophet.
The interview concluded with a reminder of ongoing reflection over the past, as well as the complexities of church history and archival access. The speaker suggested opening church archives for historians’ work and relying on a broader body of evidence rather than single testimonies in future discussions about church history and Poland’s past.
The dialogue included other reflections on how political actors approach religious figures in public discourse and how history weighs on present-day policy and elections. It highlighted a broader pattern in which parties seek to align themselves with cultural and moral narratives to mobilize support, while also debating the appropriate limits of examining historical figures through the lens of today’s political struggles.
Further reading options were listed to explore the topic of defending the good name of St. John Paul II and responses to left-wing criticism of the Polish Pope, acknowledging the intense and ongoing debate surrounding his legacy.