Voltaire’s statement (allegedly) about the need to defend the right to an opinion, even if I do not agree with that opinion, could also be modified to the right to invite to my home even someone with whom I would never want to find myself in the same room. This is because people have different reasons for hanging out with different people, even those you definitely wouldn’t hang out with. Judging others by their acquaintances is of course possible and one cannot avoid it, one should just be careful that someone does not do it with them afterwards. First of all, he doesn’t really care about the kind of acquaintances and guests he has.
A week ago, a number of sensitive people were outraged by the fact that Cardinal Duka received company in the lounge of the archbishopric, which, according to the offended, should not be received. It was about the former president Zeman and his team, which is, between us, a good camaraderie, yes, I might have calmed down when I met them, but they don’t invite me anywhere either. There, ex-president Zeman presented the book Conspiracy, which is said to be about how the conspirators allegedly tried to deprive him of his autonomy. The very nature of the thing gives the impression that it could have been quite a jolly affair.
Miloš Zeman has a specific kind of humor and one can imagine that there are people for whom such a company is attractive, it has its own charm and they would be happy among them. These things are always very subjective. For example, among those scandalous guests was a famous actress, I dare say, beloved by the people and the nation, who will undoubtedly raise the mood in any society. Are the critics who wouldn’t want to give the cardinal even a little distraction sure they wouldn’t have a good time by her side? Maybe not, but then they should have thought for themselves.
But we know what it’s about. Cardinal Duke upsets some people because he says different things than they think he should say, behaves differently than they think he should behave, and hangs out with people they would he was not supposed to associate with: for example, the former president. In an open letter created in response to the case, the event was called “strange” and the people who participated in it “questionable”. The cardinal says that by doing so “inflicts wounds that may never heal”. It is probably meant that the cardinal is harming the Catholic Church and trust in it, perhaps even threatening faith in God. It is said to be in contrast to the behavior of Cardinal Tomášek and his call to “Stand up and raise your heads!”.
Of course, this is possible and it can really affect someone that way. But another interpretation can be imagined, that on the contrary, by the way Cardinal Duka interacts with whoever he wants, he demonstrates… courage. The courage to disregard other people’s ideas of how a clergyman like him should behave. For example, he behaves in an evangelical way: he does not even avoid “dubious” people and does not exalt himself above them. Maybe he has a reason for it. It’s ultimately up to him. And maybe he is somehow comfortable among them as a human being. Maybe he wouldn’t have to be among the complainants. What do we know? In the end, the modified Voltaire applies. But it is always better to say than to follow.
