In the October edition of Artuma, the columnist Antanas Gailius – a prominent poet, translator and recipient of prestigious National Culture and Art Prize –warned of the success of Remigijus Žemaitaitis, notorious for anti-Semitic rhetoric, who he said was “trying to bring together the darkest of the darkness of Lithuania”.
Gailius said President Gitanas Nauseda had not responded to this danger but instead acted like a “capricious damsel”, pursuing petty quarrels with the ruling coalition over its policies during the pandemic and the war in Ukraine.
Archbishop Kestutis Kevalas of Kaunas learned of the article while the edition went to press, and ordered its removal from the magazine.
In a letter to the editors of Artuma, he said that the publication of this article could be interpreted as a “violation of the principles laid down by the founder and acting against the founder's will”. The magazine is formally owned by Caritas Lithuania.
“[The commentary] is alien to church culture because the article discusses two personalities who are active in the political life of Lithuania, and makes a public and insulting assessment of their spiritual and moral stance,” the archbishop wrote.
In the final printed edition, the editors substituted a poem by Gailius titled “The Last Psalm” for his column.
After the first round of elections on 14 October, Lithuanian National Television and Radio published the original commentary on its website lrt.lt, under a red-lettered alert of “forbidden text”. Archbishop Kevalas’ intervention prompted discussion of ecclesial censorship – unknown since Lithuanian independence in 1990.
“This is certainly the first time in my life that I have encountered censorship specifically, when a text has been accepted by the editorial board and was already in print. Everybody knew of censorship during the Soviet times, but I never encountered it personally – however, this move by the archbishop brings back precisely such associations,” Gailius told The Tablet.
“In my view, the bishops' decision is clearly politically motivated. The ban to express my understanding of the elections and our politics is a clear endorsement of the other side.”
Prof Paulius Subacius of Vilnius University said the archbishop’s intervention was unjust. “Things that are legal are not necessarily right,” he told lrt.lt. “All wise people, including those who are being criticised, should be able to make a very clear distinction between the opinion of the commentator and the general position of the Church.”