Content for Poland

This was a “convention”, not a concordat, as it was signed by a Polish Archbishop and not by a representative of the Vatican. This ill-timed agreement was “annulled” ― ostensibly due to  socio-political changes, to which the Church “wished” to adapt ― when the Church realised that it could soon get a far better terms after the collapse of Communism.  With this, the Convention was regarded as void.

This draft concordat remained unpublished until it was leaked more than ten years later. Shortly after it was drawn up it was replaced by a new draft which was also kept secret ― even from the members of parliament who were to vote on it ― until it had already been signed.

The final step before the signing was the “power of attorney”, the papal authorisation of the nuncio to Poland to act on his behalf. For this was no unofficial “protocol”, like the 1950 Modus vivendi between the Polish episcopate and the Communists, but rather a full-fledged concordat.

Lauded by Pope John Paul II as a model for other post-communist countries, this concordat was drawn up before the new constitution. Thus the Polish legal framework had to conform to the concordat, not vice versa and there could be no constitutional separation of church and state. 

This is a timid unilateral attempt by the Polish Government to “interpret” some of the more politically controversial items in the concordat. In the debate in the Polish parliament it was said that the Vatican promised orally to include this Polish contribution in the concordat text as a standard “protocol”, but later declined to do so.

This is not a concordat with the Vatican, but an agreement with the Polish episcopate, which shelters under the concordat. This pact between the Military Bishop and the Polish Border Guard enumerates the privileges for the Church but fails to itemise the costs for the taxpayers.