82 IVO BANAC
longed, from the new generation that lives “in the world of im-
age and the domination of associational thought.”18 Be that as
it may, the Council made possible for the Catholics of Yugoslavia
the revival of a religious life in which the renewed Church press
played the main role. Živko Kustić, a longtime editor of Glas
Koncila, noted that “We availed ourselves of the Council’s com-
mencement so that we could have a newspaper at all, since the
beginning of the Council somehow corresponded chronologically
to somewhat changed relations between the socio-political state
community and the Church. Until then, it was practically impos-
sible for our Church to have its own newspaper that would be
printed in a state printing press, our printing offices having been
sequestered, and that would be distributed with the knowledge
and permission of the state authorities.”19
In addition to conciliar liturgical renewal—the introduction of
Croatian and Slovenian vernaculars, the turning of the altars to-
ward the faithful—the revived Church press was part of the “new
face of the Church,” which the Communist authorities decided to
tolerate. This included not only Glas Koncila, but also Glasnik sv.
Antuna Padovanskog (Herald of St. Anthony of Padua), the jour-
nal Služba Božja (Divine service), and other journals and bulletins.
Kustić himself felt that the “authorities somehow understood that
it does not pay or that it cannot be managed to keep the Catholic
community completely tied up in the area of public communica-
tions, leading to the introduction of newspapers that expressed
the conciliar moment of the Church.”20 Still, Kustić felt that this
was not the decisive aspect in the renewal of Church press:
Struggle for the liberty of the Church, the same struggle that was
fought in the postwar decades without the benefit of Church press,- Šagi-Bunić, “20 godina poslije II Drugog vatikanskog Koncila,” 38.
- Živko Kustić, “ ‘Glas Koncila’ u pokoncilskom vremenu,” in Jeka jednoga Kon-
cila, 121. - Ibid., 122.