U članku je riječ o pojedinim aspektima nama suvremenih tema što ih je Mardešić otvarao još od 1991. Točnije: riječ je o načinu na koji je to činio, otvoreno i beskompromisno se dotičući neuralgičnih točaka u životu Katoličke Crkve. Sintagma „otvoren govor”, odnosno parezija (grč. parrhēsia) spominje se u Novom zavjetu četrdesetak puta i odnosi se na: 1. pouzdanje; 2. svjedočenje i 3. otvoren, jasan, nedvosmislen govor uperen protiv prijetvornosti u vlastitoj sredini. Ovdje je posebice riječ o pareziji kao autokritici kakva je uglavnom zanemarivana u povijesti života Crkve, a u Mardešićevim tekstovima pojavljuje se kao dobrohotno prepoznavanje i propitivanje kriza religije te kao „skidanje maski”. Mardešićevu pareziju obilježavaju intelektualno poštenje, dijalogičnost te senzibilnost za znakove vremena. U usložnjenim odnosima i problemima našega današnjeg svijeta, pedesetak godina nakon Koncila, postalo je očito da Crkva u nas biva izložena opasnosti da zaglibi u političkom katolicizmu ili da, za razliku od Koncila, osuđuje sekularizam, a pritom sama preuzima njegove mehanizme, što se može čitati i kao znakove krize u odnosu religije i vjere ili čak krize autentične vjernosti Evanđelju u Crkvi. Mardešićevu pareziju, međutim, karakterizira stilska odmjerenost, znanstvena suzdržanost i ljudska obzirnost pa njegovi tekstovi zahtijevaju pomno čitanje i razumijevanje. Inače, može doći, kako to nerijetko, nažalost, biva, do skraćenih pa i iskrivljenih tumačenja ili do tumačenja bez oštrice parezije.The article is focused on certain aspects of contemporary topics which Mardešić had opened up since 1991. More specifically, it is about the way he did it, openly and uncompromisingly touching the neuralgic points in the life of the Catholic Church. The phrase „open speech” or parrhesia is mentioned in the New Testament about forty times and refers to: 1. confidence; 2. testimony and 3.open, clear, unequivocal speech directed against hypocrisy in one’s own environment. The article is particularly focused on paresis (Gr. parrhesia) as auto-criticism which was usually neglected in the history of Church, and in Mardešić’s texts it appears in the sense of benevolent recognition and questioning of the crisis of religion and of „removing masks”. Mardešić’s paresis is fraught with virtues like: intellectual honesty, dialogicality and sensitivity to the signs of the times. In the situation of complex relations and problems of our world today, fifty years after the Council, it has become apparent that Church in Croatia is exposed to dangers that have bogged down in political Catholicism or, unlike the Council, condemns secularism, taking its mechanisms herself, which can be read as a sign of crisis in the relationship between religion and faith, or even of the crisis of authentic fidelity to the Gospel in the Church. Mardešić’s paresis is characterized by stylistic restraint, scientific reservations and by human circumspection, therefore his texts require careful reading and understanding. Otherwise, they may be, as unfortunately happens, exposed to shortened even distorted interpretations, or to interpretations without sharpness of his paresis
